V ; ^ !» v.^ , \ FROM THE LIBRARY OF REV. LOUIS FITZGERALD BENSON. D. D. BEQUEATHED BY HIM TO THE LIBRARY OF PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY sec A VINDICATION > O F T H E D I S S E N TE RS: In Answer to Dr. Willmn Nichols's Defence O F T H E Dodrine and Difcipline O F T H £ Church o^ E N G L A N D, In Three Parts. Written firft inlatuh and now Tranflated into f«^///j,wirh large Additions. €t)e SeconQ €Dttton> Co^cecteD. '^^T;^ « ^pMT^j ffltOK T* «AAct i'zre/xo/'oft^y ft^. Cecum, in Rom. xiv. LO ND 0 N: Printed for John Clark at the f>lhk and Crown »■» th Poultry, vtar Cheapfide, J 7 1 8. A -jniiqi ! A JL cinl koiiTtris.'iT woe ni iliri «*> Wi rf**U'.^ f Scotland? If there is ^ there are not fufficient grounds for a feparation^ and he ?nuft co?idemnhis dear Epifcopal Brethren on the other fide Tweed. In JhoYt^ if there is any fenfe in what he fayx^ he mtifi be a Papifl in Italy, or a Presbyterian in Scot- land. J thought finful terms of communion had b 3 hiim The PREFACE. been a fufficient ground for feparation^ e^ventho^ there might be a pojfjtbility of f ah at ion for thofe who ignorantly comply d with them. However I will (iddy that I think a frodigious degree of weaknefs and Ignorance^ or a very bitter fubfequent repen- tance^ mufl be neceffary^ to make mens fixing the terms of co7nmunion according to the heart's dtfire pf a Fopilh Tnnce confident with fahat ion. In the next Paragraph he fays : There are fucli flrid obligations in the Gofpel of Chrift to unity ( I mean Uniformity) in the worfliip of God j that a good man would think hipifelf bound to join with the eftablilli'd Church in any Chriftian country^ wherever he fliould happen to fojourn or travel, except in cafes of luch dangerous errors aforefiid. Thi^ is a frejh injiance af his great penetration. There's an obligation to unity j but not one word in the Gofpel of Chrijl to oblige lis to Uniforniity in humane devices. Who told him^ that unity and Uniformity a^e one and the fame thing ? if they are^ then there Jloouldbe an Uni- formity^ not in an eflabliJJod National Church only^ ff which not the leafl mention is made in the Gofpel ^ but in the whole Catbdic Chmxh^ the unity of which fsfo often fpoken of. So that according to this argu^ vient^ the Church of England has a^ied contrary to pje obligations of the Gofpel of Chrift^ by making her wqrfhip not mifor?n with other parts of the Catho^ lie Church; ' He wUl oblige m^ by telling //5 where thofc places^ herefers^ointhe Gofpel of Chrifiy are.^ that require theUnifdrmiiy of an e ft ablif^)d Church. JVe- know not whereto look for them^ except in the J(f of Untfmniiy^' which -i^e ho^eis-not become Gofpel by beins, put ihto0 Ccmiiihn Fr^^ycr Book. The PREFACE. lie [ays' ^ he knows we will defend our feives by the cxa-mples of many celebrated perfons of old, who thought it their duty to feparate from the Church of England. But he is inijlakcn again. We reverence thofe good vten^ ivhom his a?iceJiors perfecuted y but we 7io further follow thern^ than a^ we fee they folbw'd Chrifl. We dont ap- prove the feparation^ becaitfe they pradifed it -, but we approve of their pradice^becaufe we fee it war^ ranted by Scripture, hi jljcrt^ we call no man maf- ter^ or father^ on earth ; our avowtd only rule is the Scripture j by that alone we will be convincd^ by that alone we walk^asby that alone weJJoallbeyudgd, He will now anfwer this argument ^ which he need 7tot^ fence it is none of ours^ but his om?2. However let us hear him : But then there were greater num- bers on the Church's fide^ as conliderablej (jc. Were it fo^ yet we think they did evily and we are not to follow a multitude therein. Several of great repu- tation among the DilTenters have been reconciled to the Church : A?2d he might have added^ that feviral of them carried the wounds^ they thereby ?na'de in their confciences^ to their graves. ^ But thefe ihings all tend only to JheWy that vQe cannot m^^ke, any good mens principles or praCiices a rule for myfmcethey differ fo much from one another ^ and tkat.we mitfi therefore confider things as they are in themfelves. feveral others have been withheld from conforming^not fo much out of fcruple at the doc- trines and ufages of the Church^as the confcience of obligations they lay under from the Covenant^ Enga,gement5 and other oaths, w^iich had paiVd upon them to the contrary ^ which obligations die with the particular men that were bound by b .^ them. The/ P R E F A C E. them. '*T^f Engagement 7?^/c^ with ?io?ie^ that I know of. T/je re?touncwg the Covenant was an infuparMe ohje^iioH ro 7nany, But I hardly think any ferfon ever dedard^ he had no other objection againjl the terms of Conformity. Nor if the- bufi- nefs of the Covenant foiight a matter- ^ as he would make of it. For if the renouncing the Covenant was an unlawful term of Conformity^ (as 'tis with me fafi doubt it was ^ in the terms they were required to da it) their all Minifiers were bound in (Ofifcicnce to have refiis'd'it .^ and confequently^ they who impofdJt were Schifmatkal ; and they who refused it zs}e}'e the only rightful and Catholic PaJiorSjQftU Churchy according to the principles cdmmon^j lai'^i down by our Adverfariei. Now if the QjUrtMicn were Schifmatics at the beginning of th^'^kcioi 'tis nop the death., of the Catholics y iMt cMd^^ guilt ofSchifm. They' ';S%t> Jdf once Schifmatics y mufi continue fo till their repentance and reconciliation. IJfjall not take this Gentleman s wordy for what he fays ma- ny of them/ towards theit latter end^ exhorted their intimate friends and acquaintance to. I dare fay he was not their Confeffor. Tho if it be truey and they p)ere not doting at the timey it fignifies little to u^y who judge by quite another rule. We know' what mean arts have been pra^fis'd upon fome particular per fonsahroady and what falfereprcfcntations ban)e'been made to them to per -^ fuade t}:feffi tb' ctnfti^'tUs fear not the ]udg- inent of^dnyy'ibho wilt now hear whafs faid on both fides. "And 1 can ajfure hiniy upon my own certain knowledge^ that fey efal of our Brethren abroad^ upon reading the Dcr^fcr's Defence of the Church The PREFACE. Church of E^^/^^r/, rt;/^ ;//)' Vindication of the Dilfentersj have afp'oi)d our pra^tice^ and in- courng'd us in it. TJje reader will find an anfwer to the next Para- graph in the body of the Book. And therefore I JJmll here content ?nyfelf with only telling the JVri-* ter of the Preface^ the eyes of the nation are too cpen ?iot to fee ^ that the little religion left in it lies mofily among us^ notwithflanding their "Daft fute^ riority in nu??ifjers. And 'tis a fign the beji edifica-- tion is there to be had ^ zvhere men edify moft. We are zvillingy the impartial fhould here judge. Trjis Gentleman is pleas' d to tell us : There is no truth in that common pretence^ that Men of different fedls of religion may^ not- withftandingj live very fociably and friendly with one another. Take a right High Church bigot indeed^ and the thing is impo^ible. If men ha'vefo little fenfeand manners^ as to be condemning all thofe to the pit of hell that are not of their mindy and muji needs bring in their peculiari- ties in religion upon all occafionSy and impofe thern as healths upon e^very company^ there's no living fociably and friendly with fuch ^ nor can J fee the Dijfenters have any great reafon to de- fire their confer fat ion. But what difficulty is there really in the thing it felf for fober jnodefi vien^ that differ from one another in fome mat- ter s^ to conveife freely together about other things; nay^ and to talk friendly with one another concern-- ing the points in controverfy between the?n ? For my own party I can't find any backwardnefs to allow another man as much liberty of differing from mey as I expert to be allowed me of differing from The PREFACE. frO??i him. 'Tis therefore the eafieji thing in the world for me to cowverfe with fenfible and civil people of all perfuafions ; and I have met zvith thofe^ who I am perfuaded found ?io ?nore diffi- culty m it y than my felf. The contrary to this, he fay^y is notorious by the woFuL experience of the pre lent, and former ages. He may fee an in fiance of the contrary in PoJycarp, and Pope Anicetus, mention d in the Epifile of Irena^us to Pope Vidor, who indeed feeind to have been of this Gentleman s mind^ but W(is 'very much blanid for it. And who does not prefer the^ temper of Cyprian ^ who zvas for allowing every man to follow his own opinion without any breach of friendjhip and commujiion^ to that of Pope Stephen, who renounced communion with all that differ d fro?n him ? And really I can't fee but that he ?nufl take the liberty of accufing the Apoflle of a grand impertinence^ in giving Chrif tians advice to live fociably and friendly together y .notwithjlanding their differing about ineatSy and drinks y a?id days. For he ?nay as well tell hinty as Wy that the thing is impojjiblc. And tho' fonie menj fays /??^^ jiave art and dexterity enough to civx^2. fair and phufible outiide ^ yet the ve- •ry\ Countenances of others fpeak that animo?.* lity which they harbour .in their breafts :. X}m .kdike enough to be true of fnriot^ bigotry Jbt(:f^^ atbers need no art rr dexterity to enable them Pa he eafie and free in converfing with perfons of It different vpinion. and .a$ for children and fervantSv they never . fa^iuto own that ftrong difaftedtion, which they. :contra(^ from wliat; they , coaunonly hear faldf|^^inft, the contrary, party. 4 The PREFACE. party. The truth is^ ?iot onlj the fewants^ but the Lhilcben of High Church are brought up to Yudenel) and ill manners'. They are taught to be ih'veterate and abujive to Dijjenters. For my own part I can fay^ what I belienje moji among Its can [ay for themjihcf ; that tho' I endeavour to make my Children fenfible of the reafo?iablencfi cf oicr dijjentfrom the Church of England ; yet J firidly charge the?n never to begin difcourfes of that nature with any of another mind. And this I caution them again ft as a piece of ill breed- ing ; for fo it mariifeftly is. I wiJJj High Churchy whcfe Children are eafily to be diftingjiiJJod^ would imitate us herein. But what will he infer front all this fine argument ? becaufe men of different opinions can't live fociably together^ therefore they jhould be all of one opinion ? Very well^ with all viy hearty provided he and his party zvill come over to us. But I fuppofe this is ftarted to ftir up men to advance the glorious zvork of perfecutiony that all may be brought to one opinion^ in order to their living fociably together. If the true reafon of mens animcfities again ft one another be obfervdy -twill be eafy to find a much better way to put an end to them. When one feif of men is fufferd to opprefs another^ this naturally raifes animofities in both. The oppreffedar^ i?irag d^ upon the accoimt of the opprejjion they groan under : the opprefjors are mov'd at the impatience of thofe they trample npon^ and hate theWy becaufe they belie':e they would be glad to Jkake off their tingodh yoke. Now let every man enjoy kif niUural rights ^and Mberties^ and no one feff be fufferd to domineer ftvev another j and diff^erence in religion will be no hiur The PREFACE. hindrance to mens thing friendly and fociablyy as we fee 'tif not at this day in Holland. He tells us : He can bear with the warmth of the firft DilTenters but finds it harder to ex- cufe the moderns^ who have feen thofe confe- ci\\tv\CQs\of their zeal] to be dreadful^ and yet ftill continue to fay the fame things. Good Sir^ dont trouble your [elf : we neither ask^ nor lvalue your excufe; We are well afjurdy thofe badconfe- quences lie not at our doors^ but your own : and we fear not to give an account of our practice as Dif- fenters^ that willjujiify us in the fight ofGod^ and all reafonable and impartial men. And pray turn this upon your own fide : The firfi: impofers might not fee the confequences of their impofitions ; but who tan excufe the moderns^ who fee them^ and will not^ as they eafily may^ remove the caufe of them ? Certain it is^ that fo long as the public wor- fliip of God is among us^ there muft be fome modes and forms attending it : JVhat then? are there not modes and forms enough appointed in the Scripture ? Is there any necejjtty^ that they who are for inore^ mufl require all others to an Uniformity with themfehes ? and wife men have ever held it mofl: fafe and warrantable^ to keep to fuch as were in ufe in the firft and pureft times. Thefs wife m^n are him f elf and his party ^ th^ ingr offers of all wifdoju. 'Tis pity th^ir neighbours can have 710 Jh:ire with them. But pray which do you reckon the firft and pureft times ? Is the fourth Century purer than the firft ^or the twelfth and thirteenth purer than both .^ For whatever improvements have been made in humane arts and fciences by latei: inventions y yet in religion^ which always fuffers The PREFACE. by innovations^ antiquity is mod venerable^ and of I'lcred authority. This objhTation is worth all the Preface. Religion therefore^ as dcfcrib'd in the So'iptureSy without any of the inno'vations of after times ^ is to be prefer' d ; and this is all we contend for. Keep to this riile^ and our Contro'ver- fy will be foon aver. But the antiquity Dr. N. al- ledges^ and the Church of England goes upon^ is quite another things and takes in the inno'vations and impronievients of 7nany ages. This is what the Church of England always laid claim to, both in Doiftrine and Difcipline. Btit her claim has always been difallow'd by the Dijfenters. And as he adds^ fo do I too : How jufily^ let the following Treatife determine. And now he cornes to applaud the Doctor : The ability^ fays he^ of the Author, for a work of this nature, is well known to the world, by his learned and elaborate Comment on the whole Service Book of the Church of England. I ha^ve had the curiofity to look a little into that Piece alfo ; wherein are many of the fame colledions he had made for f^/V Defence. So that I am apt to thinky the reader may here meet with a confutation of the vwfi he has there alled^d^ in behalf of the Church of England, in any of the points of coniroverfy. As to theDo^fcry he was^ no doubt ^ a "very ingenious man^ and had gained no fmall reputation in the world by his writings. But whether he confulted his own credit^ and did not miftake his own talent^ when he undertook our Ccntro'verfy^ ?nujl be left to the judg-- jnent of the reader. I have always efteetnd it a vain thing to attempt to decide it by any^ but Scrips- ture arguments. Should we allow our Adverfa^ ries The PREFACE r/V.r had all the Fathers on their fide ^ in every thing they contend for , our caufe is ne^verthelefs fecurei This way of arguing does but needlefly lengthen out difputes ; which might be much JJocrtend^ if men would be content to keep wholly to the Scriptures. But when men will argue from Fathers^ they ought to do it zvith great fairncfs • 7nuch care /Jjoidd be ufed to rcprefent their true fenfe and dcfign : wherea^s this is almoft perpetually negMted in our Contro'verfy i and a bafe abufe is put upon us^ aiid the Fathers at the {ante time. As to the Do^for in particular I will fay nothings now he is dead^ more than what I did in the Book^ in the time of his life. There are many mifreprefejit anions of other Authors here confuted^ thd they are not named \ and the Dodor zva'i fometimes^ I believe^ led into miftakes^ by taking things upon trufl fro?n fuch writers as he had an extraordinary "valuefor. And he had his thoughts very much upon this piece^ as appears from the many corredions he had made in the margin of the Z.^r/V^edition/T/J pity the Tranjlation had not been made from the Doctor s corrected copy. There are abundance of faults^ zvhich I had taken notice of continued in the Tranjlation i which one would hardly expecf^ if it had been made from a book carefully correded by the Author. Thefe corredions feem to be only fome 7narginal refere?ices^ added between Page 25^ and 33- He had a defign to publifh it in EngliJJj^ and had tranllated the greateft part of it , but not living to finifli the whole, it is now compleated in his own method, by a Divine of the Church of England. Tis not nnlikelyy the Defter might The PREFACE. ha've fo??ie dcfign of tr an fluting it^ before he faw it anfwerd. But I bardly think he would be fo dif- ingenuous ^ as to continue that defign afterwards^ when he had refolvd upon making no reply. Nor can I belie^ce he had gone far in his Tranjlation. Being d(fiOus to fearch a little into this matter^ I thought of this way to do it : I confider'd, the Dcdor made ufe of federal Books ^ which were not "very common , and which the Tra^^f- lator might probably not ha^ve. The Do^fo/s own Tranjlation would^ I was fatisfied^ run exactly in the language of the Englifh Authors he had turnd into Latin ^ which 'twas probable the Tranflatcis inight not. I therefore refolvd to compare the Tranf- lation withfuch of the Authors themfehes^ as I had by me. The firji I light upon was the Dochr's cita- tion out of Bp, Hooper, ^. 1 7 8, 1 7 9 j which 1 wa6 fure was made from the Latin, and not taken from his own Englilh words. I then look'd back to p. 1585 andcompard the two paffages of Gilby with BancroftV Dangerous Poiitions, p. 56, from whence they are cited , and the fame Jiill appear d. Ijlill went further backy and compard the pretended words of Barrow, fet down p. 37, zvith the original in dir George PaulV Life of Whiigifty p. 67 ; and found they were a tranjla- tion. I went yet further back to p. 2 8, and com^ pard the words there cited with the Admonition : and here I found theTranJlatcr had r^^ Englifh book before him. I then tryd whether the Admo- nition was cited in the latter part of the Book with the like exaHnefs^ and compared it zvith the quota- tion zve meet with^ p. 246 : and there I found the Tranjlator had not the Admonition. So that between The PREFACE. between 3 o and 40 pagey^ at jnojl^ are here reckon d the greateft part of the Book^ I will not conteft with the Waiter of the Preface^ what commendation the Book deferves. If it be the compleatejt of any of its bulk that is extant y as he feems to think ; if it contains the fum or chief of thoje arguments^ that can be brought for the caufe it defends i 1 think the caufe it felf?mijt be a "very bad one^ which needs fo much ?mfreprefentation a?2d fal- lacious arguing to difguife it. And this confirms me in my t>erfuafion^ that the other^ which I de- fendy has Jo much of truth and goodnefs in ity as will fecure it^ that the Gates of Hell JJjall never prevail againfi it ; that it jhall never be fo van^ quifJody as not to revive againy and triumph over the malice of its enemies ^ that itfloall be own'dand applaudedy when human inventions in the worJJjip pf God Jhall be utterly abolifh'd. CONTENTS. Part. L Containing the hiftory of Nonconformity* THE Dijpnters join with DoBor Nichols in appealing to Foreign Divines, ^^g^ ^ His motives to undertake the defence of the Churchy and the jiuthor^s reafons for writing this an- fuer. 3 Wicklief'/ opinion : wherein the Dijpnters agree with him, 4 Ks followers perfecnted^ 6 MCCCLX. MDIX, King Henry VIII. coming to the crown, con- tinues the perfecution. ibid MDXXXIII, Cranmer attempts a Reformation. 7 MDXXXIV. T^he Pope's fupremacy aholtjh'd, and the King's ejlahlijh'd. ibid MDXLYII. jQng Edward VI. his acceffion and Reforma- tion. lO OhftrnHedhy the Bijhops and Cleygy. ix DoBor Nichols*^ panegyric on the Church exa-- min'd, 1 3 Reformation abroad vindicated, 14 Pretence of antiquity conjider^dr, iS Mr, Calvin vindicated. 20 Bijhop HooipeT perfecuted. 29 Many then of his mind, 2 x Two fad inflances of perfecution , 3 3 MDLV Troubles at Frankioidy with reflections themn. ^^5 f Re- MELVIII. MDLXII.. MDLXIV. A.DLXV. MDLXVL MDLXVII. MDLXXI. J^ILLXXII. 57 . ?« ibid. CONTENTS. Reformation under Queen £/rWj7fr??i'* 4** Hinder'' d by 1. bfr fxrr^x-dg^wr authority. 45 2. //^r endetx^cour to j)leaje the Pa* ftjis. . 48; 5. Their fuhtle trickj, 51 ^ Convocation reviews the Articles.^ EarneR Jimmies tb^iin y6r reforfnatiori. ^ ' ' ' Bifioff uithoiUm'W re^\(irefuyi:ri^io>A^^ Tbe ^eeytjiirs up the Btjhops to perfecute. The courle they took, Sampion deprived. His and Knvnfrys'sfubmijfltve Letter. Whitgift dhd other Cambridge Doctors Letter againjl perfecntion. 60 Correfpondeme betiveeh the Foreign DHlAel Knd \he Englifh on hothjides. ibid. Perfecution in L,onAor\. , 6 1 A Declaration oj the Minijlers of London, and its defence. ibid. Churches Jhut up for ivant of Preachers. 6% Parker -UY^ry of perfecuting. . 6^ Letterfrom the general Ajjemhly ih S'Cotland to the Bifjops defended. ibid . A reltgiotps Ajfembly diJlUrh^d. ibid. Forgeries of Cummin and Heath. 6 5 ' C.(^troverly about Chriji's defcent into hell. ibid. The Articles confirmed by Parliament, ibid. Minijiers turned out, • 66 Beza ^nd Marty r'5 jttdgment ' covcemhg Confirm mity, 6"] TsAidwives alloiv^d to baptize. 69 Cartwrisht vindicated againfi Dr. Nichols ani SirG. Paul. 71 Grindal/^^rj up perfccution. 78 \J\i\tg\h^s judgment and humanity. 79 The two Archbijhops perfecute. 80 The troubles of Mr. Deeding, ibid. ^>;^ Mr.Johnfon. 82 Admonition to the ParHa>ner)t dtfertdid : 8? Begets a nevj Qjiarrel bet'iieen^Giit'^Xi^t and Whitgift. : 85 Attempts in Parliament for Reformation. 87 Accoimtofthejlate of religion. 88 Mmifters MDLXXIH. '^lui^fie/i hroKght iefo^ the Cmrjcfl and Ecclef. CormnijlJiOH 3 and im^Ti^Q^id. 88 Mr, Deering vhidu^ttidy . • 89 And Car^wrighf , ^tid the:,fif(ritfn CLiJP's. ^o AipLXXVI. An account of l^roiphc()\ngS(.'\ 9- Q^ Eliz. ana Archb^ . '\^^jf$^^^^^^miesy hut Grindal a fritndto thm,^ ->^ t:. 9^ Grindal'; Lt tier concur nlng^itgL^ ^ 94 > yt^ti^MeandfiibfftJlfifiiK_,-,-, ^ 95 Troubles of Ga W tpp,.; jjciyriO ^^ ^w^ Greenham. /r*- '= 97 Aylmer, jB/?. 0/ Londt>l^i(j'^/:/^f«^^^ • ^'^^ ttm^er. ibid. MDLjC5^X«f. Jdrckhp'. Whitgift afuriom Perfecufer. r iqp MDIXXXIV, Sets uf? an inqulfition. ■ . ibid. :i^r&Wr.Gartwright'y<^/«;m;?g//;^RhemIfts. loi GifFard'i trouhhs, 103 Attemjpts in Parliiianeitt fUrmw^y oppos'^dhy /irchhp. Whkgift.. :-/7.\;ti>t'>i .-^ ^ 104 The Min'ifrers prefent a Petition^ and reafons for not fuhfcr'th'tng^ id ihe Conxocaiiort: 105 . ! n Stifled in the BififOps houfe . \ , , . X u/> Minijiers urged to a ftricter .fub^crjption than the Law required. -v*':^ ibid. Tbf diforders ofthofe times, 107 Cr«^/ dealings with Minjfiers, 1 08 'AfliLXXXVI. Babington'y^/or a^ainji the Queen and Puritans. ' ' . . " V . . ^'5 Minijiers prefent a Latin petition to theConxoidtian. \\6 MDLXXXVII. The Commons attempt a reformation : ibid. Hindered hy the Bfhops, ' ' 117 Bp. Burnet'i judgment of fo)p€ things difliked hy them. ibid. R'Xartin fAsLr-frehte^sivrittngsdifap^prov'd by the Puritans, '" 1 18 Dr. N'i in^cidiom turn given to the Puritans ixords. Leicefter, Walfingham, and Knollis vindicated. 120 Character of Keylyn^s 'wrttin;zs. '. 122 MDXC. Whitgift'; tyranny^ ^iW^CartwrightV faferings. IZ y c z K. James'^ C ON TENTS. K. James'^ Letter in his and Udal's behalf, 127 Vd^Vstryal, 1 29 Travers fiUnc'J. 139 The Jiory of Hackct. Puritans not concern d wtth htm, 14.0 Some account of Rob. Brown. 145 ^ Law azainji Conventicles. ibid. Browntfls per/ecuted. 1 44. The Execution of Thicker, Copping, Barrow, Greenwood, 145 Penry, 148 ^wflf Denny Se 151 MDCir. Puritans prefait the Petition with 1000 hands to K. James, I 52 Hu Account of the Hampton Court Conference : ^ viuirii^^. , ibid. T)ifferent fromB3.Ylo\v's, I 54 B/?. Rudd'^ S^ei'ch in Convecation ahoxt the Crofs. jLefuBtons ufon tt. 16^ MDCBT.^' 'i '^P^^fi^^^^^^ ^^ l*ngland and Scotland. x 54 The Efifcoparians _ tealou^ to obtrude their Hierarchy and ceremonies^ \^^ Grown ix'orje lince, 1^7 jifcotint of the Scots Bijhoj^s. 15 3 Archhj^. Bincvoh'^s fly Proceedings. 16^ IklDCVll. Mr. 'S^tktr's troubles for hn treatife ef the Crofs. 170 Dealings uith the Scots, particularly the two Mei- vins.' 171 Bancrpfr'^ hypocrify and cruelty. 175 MDCXX. Father PaulV account of Chelfea College. 175 - Liberty for f^ort son the Lord^s day. ibid. Afr. Calderwood'^ Altare Damafcen. ibid. ji>^d^ trouh(dS, I y 5 MDCXXV. Troubles ip"K. C^^r/fj's reign. ibid. - Leighton^^;o/iW^^. 177 i^IDCXXXIII. Di/p«f^^ ^^*^4{^'^4^?r!^'^ ^y^.'^A fr^^^Jiination. ..;■;/■ ..' "\. V . V ,-• V ' ^^^ MliCXL. Dilp^^^^ ahetiiihe'iirerolaiiv/. The Clergies fault sbereh^ ^' * X85 Their MDCXLI. MDCXLIU. MDCXLVm. CONTENTS. Their innovations, ^rticlef a7^ainJ}Bp^ren» 1 89 Bailwick, Burton, and Prynne'^ troubles, ii>o The Irifh MaJJacre. 194 Marq. of Antiim' cleared hy K. Charles the Se- cond. 195 Burgefs 1: indicated, 1 98 Ld, DigbyV Speech concerning the Prelates. 199 Efe^s of the Civil TVar. 20I Solemn League and Covenant, 205 Epifcoffal Minijlers ejeB^d^ 204 W eAmin^er y^Jfembly. 205 Ki/i oy the Independents* 206 Mr, Cotton vindicated, ibid* u4Rs of the Jjpmbly, 208 Why the Presbyterian Government is mojl readily received in cities. 211 Cafe of Epifcopal and Presbyterian 'Minifiers at this time, 212 Presbyterians hadno handin theKing^s death. 215 Concerning the Herefies of the Inter-regnum. 217 Presbyterians attempt K. Charles the Second^: rejioration. 219 King Charles the Second voted home. 220 His diffembling ivith the Minijlers. ibid. j^n account of the Chnrch of England *5 golden days. 221 Savoy conference. 225 The Convocation has little regard to peace. 2 30 u^B of Uniformity. 231 Presbyterian yfjfemblies : A barbarom Law againjl them, 235 The plague. Oxford Oath. z^6 The King^s indulgence accepted byT>iffenters, 240 A bill paffes the Commons in favour of Diffenters. 242 Bijhops advife the King to perfecute. ibid. The Clergy endeavour to ridicule the Dijpnters. 245 Controverjy between Shctlock iind Owen. 245 Jenkyn and Grove. 247 MDCLXXVIII. The Pobijh Plot difcover'd, and the Parliament dijjolved. ibid. Another .D'- MDCLX. MDCLXII. MDCLXV. MDCLXXI. MDCLXXIII. MDCLXXX. UDCtXXXll. CO N T E N T $. Another called, ^47 Af^am Presbyterian Plot, 248 ]Wr. Rich. Thompfon cenfur'Ahy Pari, ihid* Tb^ bill of Exclujion opbos d hy the Church. 249 Commons declare againjf perfecution, 251 Tb^ perfecHtion very fever e. 252 Vincent condemned, ibid. MDCLxxxiii. Rye-houfe P/ot. 255 Mr. Carftairs%/wj3^r/«j^ . 2.55 .' ^ The Liondon Cafes. >; 1 258 jMr.De h^\xne fii;0erSi f Of 4^f^^ring one of them. 259 Treatment fif the French fiefagees. z6o MDCLXXXV. K. ^amescQm^^ to the Crowij. 261 i;: MonmouthV J^^^^'/i^^t ibid. T^DCLXXXVn. X<>/ii^«g'?.^^^/^^;^<^/«r Hyerty of Confdence. T}^ Pijfmters hehav^ouf vindicated. ibid.. l^ii:)CLXXXViii. The Parliament give the Crown to K. ; William and Q- Mary. 271 Tfc^ Dijfenters addref^ them. ibid. c ;. :: T/5^ y^l? €f liberation. . > ■>2_7 ^ ^ Con^reheafion hinde^r'd hy tin quarrels of the (jonyocation: \- -' . . . 272 j; And not hy the Dijfenters. ihta. Sir H. Edwin defended in carrying the Mace to :iryiajl4e^tipgy wh*^ Lord Mayor of London- ^^^ ;. \ Tfce Anfwer^fQ Mr. Burlcough defended. 279 *!ix:cL Q^^»r fticceeds. 2S1 j^r. Calamyi ^trii^^mi^wf : ibid- S^egets a Controversy hetu-een him arj Uosidly and Oily ffe. ' 282 Cancery4i2g Ocrafional Commtmion > 28 5 wi^ Caution to our Arhitratoy)^ 28 5 PAKt CONTENTS. Part IL^ Concerning the DoiSrine of the Church of England. TNirdduilion. JL Dljjenters need no colour for their Separation^ P« ipi KefUBions on the writers upon this controverfy : ibid. And on the DpSar^s encamiwn upon the Church. i^z C H A P. I. Of Papery charged on the Church of England. General ohfervations coyjcerning this accujatiofi. 294 Puritan writers vindicated in urging it. z^6 Dijpnters favoured not Pafifts, 298 The weaknefs of Dr. Nichok'i pleas from the Paptjis putting the Bifiops to death, 299 Tb^ gunpowder plot, 300 K. James V proceedings, 30 1 The forgeries of Cummin and Heath • ibid. The Clergies fuhfcriptions. 302 The Diffenters opinion ef fymholiting with Papijis. ibid. Their praHice 'vindicated : ' 503 By the example o/Hezekiah. 304. Some Bifiops and Presbyters popijhly affeSfed, ^06 Dr, N's excufe for them frivolous, 3 1 1 CHAP. XIII . Concerning Nonrefifiance- Nonrejijiance the doHrine of the Clergy^ 313 And Convocation^ 3 14 Deferted at the Revolution, 3 1 5 DiJJenters vindicated in accepting K, James V liberty, 3 1 (^ Dr. N'i apologies for the CUrgy examin'^d, ibid. Keafons why Diffenters ftded with fome Courtiers indifgrace. 318 The power of the magifirate^ how from God^ and how from the people. .. 319 The original contraB defended, 3^20 The Clergy incouraged tyranny, hfot excused in preaching Non* rejijiancey by the time ^ 322 Or the Parliament's requiring them to f^thfcuubt it ^^ ^ir their ignorance of the laws, 3^5 P-A R T CONTENTS. Part IIL Concerning Difeipline, and Modes of Worlhip. CHAP- I. Of the government of Bifliops, The opinions of both Jides. p. 527 The Epifcof^al order not injiituted hy Chriji. 5^9, The Jpojlks not Btjhops. 532 Of St. James'i being Bijhop of JerufaleiHi 335 jind Stephen'^ bein^ his Deacon. 337 Epaphroditus no Btjhop. iVhat 'A'jiroh&Jjgnifes. Vr.^ Whitby'; opinion examined. 338 Jerom'5 notion of an Apojile, 34 1 Titus not Bifiop 0/ Crete, 345 Nor Timothy of Ephefus. 34(^ jiigumentsfrom antiquity without Scripture infuffcient. 349 Tejiimonies of the antients conjider^d, 3 5 1 Dr. N'; Defence of the Bijhops civil honors and offces exa- mind. ^66 Thefe condemned by the antients^ 3(^8 By TindaJ, Cranmer; 3 70 Latimer, Hooper, 371 And many others, 375 Dr. N. mijiaken. about the extent of antient Churches, ibid* - Jerom no defender of Epifcobacy. . 378 CHAP. II. Of Deans and Chapters. Thetr jurifdiHion intrenches upon the pretended rights ofBiJhops. Thefe Dignities ivhy held by fome Puritans. ibid. Nor jujlified by antiquUy. 38a . Otloer reafons for them examined. 58 1 Their rife. CAwin^ s judgment of them. 384 CHAP. III. Of Singing and Mufic in Churches. Difjhiters no enemies to xo cat miijic. 385 What the virtue of injlrumental mufic is. jVhy ufed in the Temple^ 38o/f from the ciifiom of nations^ 48 1 And from arttif]tuty. 482 Nor amiently piled. 48 5 What it Ji^nljies. 486" CHAP. IX, Of the Ring in Marriage. What our controverfy here is, 487 Teftimomes 0/" Tertullian and Auftin examlnd* 488 The fenfe of thofe Words^ With my body I thee worfhip. 489 C H A P. X. Of Kneeling at the Sacrament, State of the controversy, 489 Example of Chriji and his Jpojlles, 49O Whether Church rulers may require kfteeUn^, ibid. The diffennce between Chrift^s fitting and ours, 49 1 Commimicants may he more than twelve, 49 i S'ttin^ not an indecent pojiure, 495 Whiit pofture kefi refemhles afaji, 495 Charge of fymholiung with Socinians retorted, 496 Kneetiytg not r e qui fit e in token of kumihty, 497 The praBice of the antients, ibid. CHAP. XL Of the obfervation of Holidays. The D'ljf enter s opinion i 5OI The DoHor^s argnrnent s from Scripture refuted, 505 No fuch Holidays in the three jirjt ages, 507 Of the numher of Fejiivals, 508 'B.ife of the feaji of A^nMkriation^ Nativity^ 509 Circumcifion^ 5 12 Purification^ RefurreWon^ 5 1 5 Afcenfiony Whitfunday^ the Ap(jjiles^ 514 Chriji.^ the Martyrs^ " 515 John Baptf, 51^ Stephen, Converfion of St, Paul 3 Marjc^ Luke, Mi- chael 517 CONTENTS. T/'f Fajis^ particularly the Evis^ f i8 Lent^ 511 Ember iveeks^ 529 Kcz^at'ion days. 530 jVhether thffe days are not contrary to the fourth Command- ment ibid. CHAP. XII. Of Bowing at the name of :}efM. The Dijfenters opinion. 55I The Churchmens pra^ice formerly ^ and now^ different, ibid. The argwmnt an fiver' d from civil refpeBy 5^2 From the worfiip due to Chrift. ibid. This ctiftom not charged ivith idolatry : 533 By v^'hom ufed. ibid- The meaning of Philip, ii. 10. 534. of ivorfirijfing toward the altar. 535 CHAP. XIII. Of reading Apocryphal books in the Church. The ftate of the quejlton. 537 Difference between the Articles and the Homilies. ibid. The ill effeB of reading them publicly. 538 The fenfe of the antients. 539 A frixooltK excufey that they are not read on Sundays. 542 Whether they exclude a part of Canonical Scripture. 543 Whether Bell and the Dragon is a piom allego-y. 545 The Hiftoryof Sufannah count edfabulom by Jerom j 54^ Not quoted by Clement. ibid. CHAP. XIV. Of the Church's Homilies, and Miniflers Sermons. Homilies now feldom ready and why. 548 Dr. N. nnrtafonahly condemns all earnej}nefs in preaching. 549 The Churchmen inconjianty fometitnes commending u6yfometimes our predeceffors. 551 We honor Mr, Baxter, and our own Divines, j 5 2 CHAP. XV. Of the Faults found with the Englijh Liturgy. The frequent repetition of the tardus Prayer. 554 The Prayer^ to be delivered from fornication, and all other deadly fin. 555 The Office of burial. ibid. The Coyifefjion toojhort and genera!. 557 The C O N t E N T he alternate reciting the Pfalms. Repeating the Creed. The Litany, T S. CHAP. XVL Of the Difcipline of the Church of Engl an A. The great ivant of dtfcij^line acknou^ledgd. What divijions hinder dtfcipline, J The defers of difcipline with reference tO 'MiniflerSj j4nd Parijhhners. .. Concerning ^rchd^aconSy . ' . :. u^nd Archhtjhops . ; >i Specimen of the Churches laws : Mid toward the Papijis^ fever e upon the Puritans, Of Excommunication y u4nd commutation of Penance^ The Conclusion. A VIH- ii.v f^fJl. i J ^i''.Lair. [.. ;:GAi: O'-F/.-iT/ii E > Jl*. IJ.l N O Rj AN A P P E A L TO For Et6^ Drvi n^s, Fro fesS^o rs, and all other Learned' M e n_ of the Refdrmed; Religion^ PART I. Reverend and Dear B R e rntE n, N reading Dr. Nichols's book^ % could riot but often wonder, cur Epifcopariansfhould^ at length, ap-^ peal to you. And when I ccnlider \ how very differently laey have • been accuftom^d for a long time to treat Foreigners, 1 cannot for- bear congratulating you /tlxis new- friendihip. Wewifliit may prove lafting, not being appreheniiVe of ^^Ji/Jconlequence from fuch Arbitrators. We have ahx^av^ delir d th^tArifimatkalforrw of ChurcIiGovernment^which E vou S j4 V I N D I c A T I d N (/ Part I. you have dcfervedly made choice of, as mod confonant to the hoiy Scriptures: we have earneftly pleaded for the abro- gation of thofe rites and ceremonies, which you have of your own accord laid afide: and we are well affur'd of your approbation of thofe articles of faith, which the Dillenters have always teflified a regard to ; but which our Conformifis (tho' they fubfcrib'd to them) have mife- rably rack'd and tortured, to make them favour the Armi- tiian and Jefuitical fcheme, in fpight of the fenfe of the compofers of them, and the plain fenfe of the words in which they are exprefs^d. You therefore. Brethren, muft firl^ quit your old fentiments, before you can honeftly cen- fure us. However we can't but take it a little amiis of thefe gentlemen, that they fliould hypocritically endeavour to beguile and impofe upon our Brethren abroad. ^Tis well known,' they who chufe Arbitrators pretend, thejt are wil- ling to refer the whole matter in controverfy to their ar- bitration. But we are well affur'd, our Adverfaries are de- termined to abide by their old refolution, which they have been long accuftom'd to exprefs in the words^of our antient noble Barons, Nolumus leges Anglia: mutari: We will admit of no alteration in the EngliQi laves?" And tho^ fome few excel- lent perfons in the EftabliQiment, maybedefirousof having our controverfy determine by your judgment ^ yet they will never be able to perfuade their brethren to refer the matter to you. Dr. Nichols freely acknowledges. It has been in z^ain, when they have try^d to luring their party to a healingtemper,] And thereafon is,becaufe the High Churclx always oppofes the advice and counfel of the Low, who are much the feweft in number. And truly I can't fee, that any great matters can be expeded from Arbitrators. For if they will vouchfafe to give a verdift according to the hearts defire of the Conformifis, they will look upon it as decifive of the controverfy; but if they fhould chance to determine any thing in our favour, they will right or wrong contemn their judgment, andinfult the Arbitrators. But for our parts, we promife to ftand to the choice they have made, only upon this one condition, that we be under- ftood to ^eferve the fame power of judging of the arbitra- tion, which we are very fure our Adverfaries will never part with. And I am much miflaken, if we have not ftronger ; 5fr£>r,Nich,p. 121, fijMPag. m. Parti. f/?^ D isSfeNTERS. j ftronger reafons than they to infift upon this. For, arc not thofe things accounted indifferent by our Adversaries, which \^ eltcem grievoully finful ? Let any man then jud^i,e between us. What fhould hinder the abolifhing fuch things, which, if tolerable, and however unlefs ? If the peace of the Church, and brotherly agreement may be promoted by fuch an alteration,- what hurt could there be in it ? But as to us, every one mult fee, 'tis not in our pow- er to hearken to any Arbitrators, who would perfuade us to worfhip God in a way ourcgnfciences difapprove ; and U^e are' fatisfied our Brethren abroad wijl never put us upon it. However, fince Yir. Nichols^ under the m.ask of friendfhip, has endeavour^'d to expofe us to the hatred and cenfure of our Foreign Brethren, equity and juftice require they fliould hear what we have to fay in our own Defence. Di. Nichols ispjeas'd to fay, "Thatzvhichprevairdmth hinty in payticUla)'y to fet about this vjorky was the earrnejlpe.'juafi' ms ojfome 'very worthy per/cm '^; nor can it be any great won- der, if foiTie fuch fhould have put him upon v/riting,- how- ever, many are apt to thinJc^ he was forward enough him- felf in the undertaking. This I am well affur'd, a very eminent Bi(hop deceased, and a learned Dr. in Divinity, ftill alive, had his Book put into their hands to perule, before Was-printed, and both of them earneftly dilTuaded him from, printing it, but could not prevail. But for my own part, I can truly fay, I was earneftly folicited to the work, which I was utterly av^rfe to, and endeavoured all I could to perfuade feveral, who put me upon it, to un- dertake it themfelves, knowing they were much better qualified for fuch an undertaking, However, finding they wanted either leifure or inclination, I at length yielded to their requeft, altho I was very fenfible under what dif- advantages I undertook the work ; and more particularly becaufe I knew long difufe had renderM me more unfit to write in the learned language, ^vith the politenefs and e^ legancy, which fuited both the caufe I was to defend, and the reputation and charader of the perfons to whom I was to addrefs my felf. But this was my ftedfaft refolution from the firit, that how much foever I fhall fall fhort of Dr. Nichols (the Latin Secretary to the Society for the Pro- E 2_ pagation p. 5;» 4 -^ V I N p I c A T I o N of Part I. fagation of the Go/pel) in elegancy of flile, I would abundantly make amends for in the exadnefs and faith- iulnefs of iny accounts of matters. And fince truth is not to be difcei n'd by the Hnenefs of the language, but by the weight and flrength of the arguments which are urg'd ; our Brethren are earneftly defired rather to regard the forcfe of the arguments than the manner in which they are ex- prefs'd. Dr. Nichols has perfix^'d an Hijlorkal InnoduSiion to \i\s. Defence. I fliall hrft corred the miftakeshe runs into in that part; and then try the f{rc?ngth of thofe arguments, whereby he endeavours to -defend hiscaufe: and, upon the whok% any of our brethren abroad may te able to form a true notion of that Church, /which fome are pleas'd fa highly to extol, and give a more exaft and jufl judgment about our Controverfy. If any regard is to be paid to the judgment of McccCLX. Wkkliefy * whom our Author highly arid defer- vedly commends, "'twould be but decent in our Adver(aries to treat us with more moderation ; fmce ^tis certain he agreed with us, in the chief matters in dif- pute between us and the Conformifts, as thefe following Teflimonies will abundantly prove. 0/ the Degrees, and Offices of Miniflers. ' ^^ The holy dodors were of opinion, that 'tis fuper- ^' fluous in the facrament of Orders to allow more than " two degrees, njiz,. Deacons or Levites, and Presbyters *^^ or Biftiops i for thefe two degrees were thought fuffi- " cient under the old law, which more abounded with ^' facraments. In Paul's time, two orders of Clergy- ^^ men were thought enough for the Church, viz.. Prielts ^^ and Deacons : the other degrees are the inventions of *' imperious pride, f " Civil government fliould not be committed to the ^^ clergy. II " ""Twould be good fpr the Church, if there were " neither Pope, nor domineering Prelate; and that the *' Church were free from their traditions, as it will be after the day of judgment. + '^ Con- • Pag. 2. t f'-'fc'c. rer. expet. & fug. Turn. 1. '269. Thorti. WaTd /VTulIer^ jfi HiCdiuL. Te,}, Tom 2. p. 8 lo. II Caial. Te^* ibid. ^ Eafde, 270, Part I. f/y^ Di s s E N T E R s. 5 ^' Confirmation, the giving orders, and the confecra- " tion of places are rclervM to the Pope and Bifhops^ for " the fake of temporal gain and honour. '^' That the Holy Scriptures is the only Rule ^/Faitli, and Worfhip. ^ *' Liet a Chriftian hearken to reafon and Scripture, ^' and not fuch extravagant, and groundlefs fables concern-, " ing the power of the Prelates, f '^ All human traditions, which are not taught in the ^' Gofpel, are fuperfluous and wicked.— 'Tis not law- *' ful to ufe, learn, or teach any other law, than that of, " Chrift; and whoever ufesany law, that does not lead, ^' diredly to happinefs, expofes himfelf by fuch ufe to ^' damnation. 'Tis not lawful for a ChrilUan, after the " full publication of the law of ChriJt, to devife himfelf *^ any other laws for the government of the Church. II , " That wife men leave that as impertinent, v/hich is *^ not plainly exprefs'd in Scripture. — 'That he flighted the '^^ authority of GeneraKCouncils. i^ Of Rites, ^;;^ Ceremonies, ^^ He wholly rejected all human rites, and new fha- ^^ dows or traditions.-c — He thought Cathedrals, and all *^ that pomp of the Pope's worfhip, together with the va- ^^ rious degrees of the Clergy, ought to be abolIihM.^ '^ That all beautiful building of Churches is blame- " worthy, and favours of hypocrify. f " 'Twould be very much for the advantage of the " Church, that the building of Cathedrals, and fl^tely " churches, and the feveral religious Orders, Ihould be " laid afide, as they will be done in the day of judgment.!! ^' That Chrifme, and other fuch ceremonies, are not " to be us'd in baptifm. ^ '* If the ceremonies of the old law were to ceaie under " the law of grace, becaufe of rheir burden fomenefs and " number i how much n:iore fhould luch traditions of E 3 '' men - • ^rtic. d^ifr,ft]ohn Wi-kKef ?n theOnnc o/C^nft. Ssfs. s. ^rt, 28. 5.<'<'F jHer dlf. t F/'. P, 274. r lb a. p. 276. 1: V/.Vid ir> b'/il. « Caul, T^iK t Wali* in EaU. li T-^y:. p. 270. ^ Wiia, "» Full. 6 '.^ V I N D I c A T I ON of Part I. " men, as are devis'd without any Scripture foundation, *' ceafe in the time of that law of grace?- — -Circumcifion, " and the ceremonies of the old law, are not to be obfervM *^ by Chriidans, much more the modern ceremonies, in- " troduc'd contrary to both the, old and new law. * Of Vigils, a^d Forms of Prayer. ^^ That to bind men to fet and prefcript forms of " Prayer, doth derogate from that liberty God hath given '^ them.' — That men are not bound to the obfervation *' of vigils or Canonical Hours, f " ''Twould be an advantage to the Church, to be re- ^^ Ptor'd CO her antient liberty; and that all the folemni- *^ ties of additional Mafles, and the prayers for Canonical [^ Hours might be laid afide. 11. Of Predeftination. ^^ He defin'd the Church to confift only of perfons *' predeftinated. + The followers of Wicklief w^ere always vexM with a moil: grievous and cruel perfecution. And "'tis eafy to obferve, the things they were troubled for, were fuch wherein they perfectly agreed with us : fuch as their fpeaking againft Holidays, the obfervation of Lent, Plu- ralities, the finging Service, C7c. as may be feen in Mr. Fox's Matyrolcgy. MDix. " "^^^ perfecution ceas'd not in King Henry the Vlirs time, who was an implacable enemy to the Reform.ation, and wrote fliarply againft Luther^ wherein he fo pleasM the Pope, that he beftowM upon him the title of Defender of the Faith. But being a moft lafcivious prince, and weary of his wife, he fludied how to put her aw^ay, that he might marry one whom he better liked, and grievouily refented the hindrance he met with, from the Pope, in his defign. And when he was wearied out with the intrigues and delays of the Papal court, he refolved at the infligation oiCranr/ier (afterward A. B. oi Canterbury) to (liake oft" the yoke, and to get the Pope's power vefted in his own perfon. After this, by the help of his own Bifliops, • Fafc. /7. V70. t Wald. in Full. H Fafc. p. 2G9, ♦ WaW. in Full. Part I. the DissE^tiTEKS. 7 Bifhops, appointed judges in his affair, he, without any difficulty, got rid of his wives, juft as he pleas'd. We can never enough adore that inhnitc wifdom, which overruled his wicked difpoJition, and tum'd it to the advantage of religion, and the deftru6tion of Papal tyranny among us. Nor can the Fapifts have any great caufc to upbraid the Reformation with his chara6:cr, when they conlider, to what a monfter of an Emperor their head is indebted for the title of Umverfal Bijhop, However, King He?7y) con- tinue a deadly enemy both to the Reformation and the Papal tyranny ; and they, who avow'd either of thefe, fuft'er'd death in his reign. Cranmer being made Archbifhop o^Camerh'jry^ mdxxxih: gladly embrac'd all opportunities of promoting the Reformation; and hisintereftin theKing'sfavourmight have been more fcrviceable, had it not been for the intolera- bly fuperflitious and obftinate temper of the King, the craftinefs of Gardiner y Bp. of H^inchefter^ and his own timoroufnefs. Had not Cranmer been chargeable with timoroufnefs, he v.'ould not have had a hand in putting martyrs to death. Dr. Fuller tells us, the Archbifhop argued with LainbertyXhough civily,fhrewdly again ft the truth, and his own private judgment. '^ But I muft own, I think Mr. Stryfe clears him of that, and fliews that at that time he himfelf believ'd the do6:rine of Tranfubftantiation. f But 'tis eafy to obferve much of this temper appearing in that account, which he gives of him. However this is certain, that the fiate of religion was very deplorable during his reign, as appears by the Six Articles y eftablifhing Tranfub^ flantiation^Communion under one Kindy the Celibacy of the Cler" ^, Vows ofCha/iity, Private Majfes^ and Auricular Confejjion. Our author next gives an account of the taking ^^.5^™,^. away of the Pope^s Supremacy, il To which I would add, that King Henry always ftudied how he might inlarpe his authority, and increafe his treafure ; and upon thefe motives, chiefiy, dilFolv'd the religious houfes, and pit an end to the Papal tyranny among us. And if the tem- per of the man be confiderM, "'tis no great wonder, he fhould endeavour to poflefs himfelf of that pov.'er and authority, v/hich he took away from the Pope. But \'.s neceffary to look a little farther into this, that we may the E 4 better • church Hjicrj^ Bttk, <> f. 22p. t S{t Cranajcr'j Ufe^ p. 66, ^j. i f. .8 ^4 V I N p I c A T I o N of Part L better underfland the fupremacy of our Kings^ which is a matter of great moment in our Controverfy, however llii^htly and fuperficially the Dr. afterwards treats of it, p, 347. In the 37th year of his reign, a law v/as made which declares : '^ That Archbijiops, Bifhops, Archdea- *^ cons, and other eccleiiafucal perluns have no manner ^^ ofjurifdiction ecclcliaitical, but by and under the King's ^^ Majefty , the only undoubted fuprcme head of the ^' Church of EngLi/idj to whom, by Holy Scripture, ^^ power and authority is given to hear and determine all *^ manner of cauf^s whatfoever, and to correct all fin ^^ and vice whatfoever. *' Hence fpran.:^ thcfe offices of Chancellors, Commlfla- rles, arid the like, who were never heard of in that pri- mitive Church, about which our Adverfaries make fuch a continual ilir. tor l^ing Hja/y being refolv'd to Iliew his fubjects, what authority he iniended to allume, and that he might try their obedience, committed the moft important eccleriaflical judgment to Laymen. Our Ad- verriries continually tell us, that Chriit committed the govcinment of the Church only to the Bifhops. Let them then (hew us, how, confiilantly with that notion, they can allow the povv-er of excomm.unication and abfclution to belong to fuch officers as are not Bifnops, but perfect Laymen ; and who proceed, not by the direction of the Bifhops in what they do, but act upon their own heads, and oftentimes a.?ainil: the will of the Bifhops.* The King therefore, according to our Englijh laws (which in fome refpects they would have to be unchangeable, like thofe of the Medes and Perjians) is the only fountain of ^1 ecclefiaflical authority and jurifdiction ; nor have the Clergy, of whatfoev^er order qr degree, any other power th^n what they have deriv'd from him ; and the Bifliops fule the churches, ordain and adminifler Sacraments as his miniilers. Whence alfo Bifhops are chofen by the King, and confecratcd upon his command. He may or- dain if he pleafe, or appoint whom he will, Presbyters or Laymen, to perform that office ; and can, Vv^henever he has a mind, refume that power, which he delegated to any of them. If any object, the King's power i§ bounded by the laws of the land : I anfwer, 'tis true ; nor do I pre- tend ' Set £{. Cioft's Nailed Trnth^ p. 64. £p, Buinet'j Ufc of £j>^ Bwdelj p. 88, 89. part I. the Dissenters. 9 tend he can do any thing, but with the confent of liis Parliament , who alone can let limits to him in thefe things. Whence in the reign of King IViliiamy not only Presbyters, but Bifhops, and among them rheArchbifliop of Cantcbury hin^ifelf, were, by an A6t of Parliament, de- prived of their fundiions. 7 his power feems to have been .given to our Kings, from the beginning of the Reforma- tion, with the approbation and advice of Archbifhop Cramner. That he w^as himfelf of this opinion, appears by a manufcript of his, ilill preferv'd, and by the account given of his proceedings. The fame eccleriaftical power of our Kings was con- firmed in the reigns of King Edvcard the VI. Queen Eli- SL-jkthy King Ja?nes the I. and King Charles the II. ex- cepting that in Queen Eliz.abeth's time, the title of Su^ fie7ne Head w^as changed to that of Supreme Gouernour. JKay farther, all Clergymen of whatever order, before the late happy Revolution, were oblig'^d to fwear to the truth •hereof, hor thus run the w^ords of the Oath oj Suprema- cy : '' I J A. B. do utterly teftify and declare in my con- " fcience, that the King's Majefly is t!ie only fupreme ^^ governour of this realm, arid of all other his Highnefs^s 5* dominions and countries, as well in all fpiritual and •'^ ecclcliaftical things or caufes, as temporal. -^ And ^^ therefore I promife from .hencefprthT fhall bear faith '^ and true allegiance to the*King;'s Highnefs, his heirs " and lawful fucceilcjrs, and to my power fhall affift and f^ defend all jurifdi&ions , priviledges , preheminences f^ granted, or belonging to the Kings's Highnefs, his heirs " and fucce/Tours, or united and annexed to the imperial " crown of this realm. So help me God, &c. Whe- ther our Tiirliaments have rightly determined in thefe mat- ters, let eveiy one judge as he £2^% caufe: I w^ould only make this one remark by the by ; that our adverfaries can have no great caufe of objefting againft us a want of authority. For if the King's Majeliy be (b^Dth according to the laws of the land, and the oath which they ufed formerly to take) the only fountain of all ecclefiauical authority and jurifdiCtion W'ithin his dominions, and can delegate eccleliafdcal authority to whom he pleafes ; it W'ould be very ftrange, if that fhould not be valid autho- rity and jurifdidion, which v/e ufe in our Congregations, by his permiiTion and approbation. - That io ^irf V I N D I c A T I o N ^ Part !• That book of "the Injiitution of a Chriftian Many which our Author fo highly commends, * is intircly on our fide, in acknowledging only two orders of Minifters inftituted by Chrift ; nor can it in any other refpedt be interpreted to the difadvantage of it. It was at firft composed, or ^t leaft approvM by thofe men, who, in the reign of King Edwardy drew up the Articles of religion. If there- fore there were any confiderable difterence in the doctrines contained in thofe two writings, in the latter they muft certainly be thought to give their judgment more freely, becaufe in the reign of King Edward ; and more exadtly too^ becaufe it was upon farther deliberation. King Henry was fucceeded by his fon. King WDXLVii. Edward the VI. a prince of a moft excellent and pious difpofition, who, being but ten years old at his father's deceafe, was free from his preju- diceS;, obftinacy, and fuperflition, and was more forward to hearken to Archbifhop Crannier, and the duke of Somerjety who put him upon advancing religion. Under his reign therefore the Reformation made a more con- fiderable progrefs, than it had done before. The grofs ignorance of the parochial Clergy put our Reformers not only upon drawing up Hcmiliesy (as the Dr. ac- knowledges t ) but Forms of Prayer alfo ; they being fenfible the Clergy were incapable of compofing them- felves either prayers, or fermons. And as they intended, by little and little, and without any difturbance, to wean the people from their fuperftition ; they fo ordered the matter, as that they might fcem to have tranflated the antient forms into their mother tongue, rather than to have wholly laid them afide. And fo at length camer out the Englijh Common Prayer y taken out of the Mafs Book : abundance of the Fopifh fuperftitions were indeed left out 5 but, if we will fpeak the truth, feveral were continued. This will not feem ftrange, if we confider, that the firft difcoveries in fearching for the truth, and the firil: elfays in any noble work, are ufual- ly moft imperfect. Thus the hrft edition of the Com- mon Prayer retained Anointing, the very frequent ufe of the fign of the Crofs, the commending the foul to the divine mercy in the burial Office, the Popifli Garments, and p. 6. t p. 10. Part I. /^^ D I S S E N T E R sJ 11 and Tome other fuch things. But yet every one muft acknowledge , that imperfed alteration of the publick worfhip, was a very confiderable advantage to religion. Nor do I find, the Dillcnters ufe to blame thefe excellent perfons, for the pains they took in compofing Homilies and forms of Prayer, for the help of the then miferably ignorant nation. Our Reformers were far from thinking their own work abfolutely perfect : and w^e are told by one, they left in their preface to the Book, a pafl&ge, fig- nifying, " They had gone as far as they could in re- ^^ forming the Church, confidering the times they liv'd *' in, and hoped they that came after them would, as *^ they might, do more. "' ^ I have not had an opportunity of examining the truth of this pafTage ; but however am fatished, they efteem'd their work capable of improve- ment, becaufe they adually, in the fame reign, fet forth another edition of the Book, much more free from fuper- flition than the former. However it flill retained the Po- pifli Veftments ; the fign of the Crofs in baptifm ; and that manner of Prayer, which they receivM from the Pa- pifts, and muft feem odd to thofe, who compare it with the Liturgies of the Foreign Churches. ""Tis not unlikely they would have altered thefe things, if they had had another opportunity of doing it. And indeed, Bifliop Burnet tells us, Cranmer and Ridley defignM to have pro- cured an act, to abolifh the Popifli Garments. : The Conformifts differ very much in their fentiments about our firft Reformers. Dr. Heyliriy Mr. A. iVood, and thofe of their ftamp, reckon them to have defacd rather than reform d religion ; others unmeafurably extol their work, as the moft compleat and every way perfect, being composM by fuch excellent and pious martyrs and confefTors; laftly, others (with whom the Dilfenters a- gree) go a middle w^ay, and think, as God is to be great- ly prais'd for raifing up fuch perfons, fo they have de- ferv'd much commendation, not only that they happily advanc^'d the Reformation fo far as they did, but that they had an inclination and dcfire of carrying it on much farther. They think too, if there are feveral things amifs, and that needed alteration of fuch as came after them, great allowances fhould be made for the darknefs of the times * TfittghtQns Apol. p, 4«: 18 -^. Vi'ND icATio N^ Part I: times in which tloey liv'd, and the common infirmity of mankind, (who are, all liable to mifiake) and the many diifitulties and difcouragements they met with from the PapiiU, and Ibch as were popilhiy arfecited, or wretched- ly indiiierent about the matter, 'lis certain, they who openly declared themlelves for Popery were very turbulent at that time, and ftir'd up a rebellion in feveral parts of the nation ; others who were in diiguife ad:ed more co- vertly, endeavouring to get as much as they could of the old liiperilition retained, hoping, by this means, to keep open a backdoor for the return of the relL The unhappy' influence of their counfels appear'd too plainly in the fait of the noble duke of Someyjet^ a molt hearty friend to the Reformation, and who deferv'd a much better fate. Nor can it be wondered, if fuch perfons could embarrafs the affairs of religion in King Edtoard's time, fince they could do it in Queen Eliz,akt//Sy as I fhall have occasion to fhew from Bilhop Burnet. T he oppofition and indifference our pious King Ed-' ivard met wdth, was a great difcouragement to him. Sir John Ellyot, a worthy gentleman in the Parliament, An. 3 Car. I. {aid : " That he had feen in a diary of King ^* Edward the VI. that the Bifhops at that time, fome ^^ for lloath, fome for age, fome for ignorance, fome for ^^ luxury, and fome for Popery, were unfit for difcipline " and government. ''' '^ Mr. Strype has likevvife pliblifh'd a letter of Peter Martyr^s to i?/^f^>', wherein he writes : " That Archbifhop Cramner told him, it was refolvM in *^ a conference of the Bilhops, that many things fliould ^^ be alter'd. But w^hat, fays he, they particularly were, ^^ he did not declare, nor dar'd I ask him. But what Sir ^* ^ohn Cheke told me, dees not a little comfort me, that ^^ if the Bifliops would not alter the things that needed ^' alteration, the King would do it himfelf, and interpofe *^ his own authority at the meeting of the Parliament, ""^f And truly I can fee no reafon to queftion the truth of v^hat is related in the Hillory of the troubles of Frank- fort: " Th^t Cramner^ Bifhop of C^7//6''/'7rr5 had drawn " up a Book of prayer an hundred times more perfect " than this that we now have; the fame could not take " place, for that he was matched with fuch a wicked " Clergy. * Rufhw. CAUQ. P:. I, p, ^49. t Ufc of ^. Bp, Cranmcr, App. p. I54« Part I. tfje D issEi^T ekS. i^ ^^ Clergy and Convocation."^' Which paflage Mr. Strjp§ fpe^s of, as pretexided to be the words of Buiiinger^ anJ handed about, as iuch, by the difcontcnted exiles at Fraiik.jorty\ whereas it was really the report of one of Cox's fide, and he reported it upon his own Jcnowlcdge, ami nut upon the telamony of Bulinigeyy as is plain to hun who looks into the book it felf. ^ . .' Tpafs over what he fays of the Articles, and the re- fiecrlons lie makes upon the doctrine of the Cahin/Jisy ic not belonging^ to our Controverfy as Diflencers ; though JC am well allur'd the Dr. did not ferve his purpofe, by men- tioning thoie things in the manner he has done, as Tome of the Foreign Divines let him know in their letters to him. , r Let " us now come to the Drs. panegyric upon his Church : And noijjy fays he, our Church jbone forth iJjith ahift fi Jwpeiior to any other branch of the reformaticnA\ JBut the Dr.fhould remember he is too much a party con- cern'd to be a judge in this caufe. And fince he has cho- fen our Brethren abroad to be Arbitrators between us, 'tis but decent to leave it to them to give judgment between us. 'The Papi/Is look'd upon us i^ith a greater degree of envjy than upon the reft of the Protefiants, The expret- fion is here better qualified tlpn in the Latin edition, wherein he reprefents the Papifis as envying the Church of England alone. But the cafe is plain, that they envy all.Proteftans their liberty, and feek to deprive them of it. And if the Dr. thought, they envied them the per- fection of their model, he feems to have been much mifta- ken. They have ufed to deride them for retaining lb, much of Popery as they have done, and have triumph'4 therein (and truly I think juflly) as a vindication of fe-- veral of thofe things, which they have laid afide. And all other Refonn'd Churches admir'd us. And without doubt fo did the Church of England, them. And the Re- formed Churches then, as dear fiflers, heartily lov'd one another. And if the Epifcoparians, fince Archbifhopji Laud's time, have accuftomM therrifelves to defpife the form of government in the Foreign Churches; they hav^ no great reafon, on the other hand, to flatter themfelves, that their own is in any great reputation with cur Bre- thren p. 60, t Cranm. L7/>, p. 266. li page 13. 14 ^Vindication^/ Part !• thren abroad. But our Author fubjoins the reafons of ■ their admiration ; afferting "twas, Becaufe our Refdrma-- I tivn was not carry'd on^ as in other placeSy by the mad I vLeal and tumults of the peopky zvhen ojtentimes fedi-* I tious meny under the pretence of piety y gave difiurbance to the jiate. But our Refor?nation ivas quietly advanced by the wife counfels of both Houfes of Parliament and Convocation ; who maturely conjtde/d how they might re- fiore that purity to religion, which the primitive ages enjoyed ; how they might free it from that heap of ceremo- nies with which Popery had loaded it^ and yet not, by ftripping it of eveyy graceful rite, to leave it too poor and lean.^' Hearken now, our learned Judges ! Behold now the vile original of your Reformation 1 See v^hat a poor and lean thing you have made of your religion^ by ftripping it of every graceful' rite ! Can you be at i lofs for a verdift ? Don t you fee plainly, you have no- thing elfe to do, but to condemn that poor lean religion, which is Jirifd of every graceful rite, fprung from tl>e tnad zeal aud tumults ef the people, and the deceitful pretences of feditious men: I lay, that you fhould con- demn that religion, though it be your own, that you niay with a good grace give judgment on our Adverfaries fide ? Good Sir, Is this your mannerly way of pleading the caufeof your Church of England? What? Do you yourfelf firfl appoint the Foreign Divines Arbitrators in our Controverfy, and then plainly and fcurriloufly abufe them, and their religion, and that before they have given judgment? The Papifts indeed commonly upbraid us, that cur Englijh Reformation fprung from Y^ingHenrfs breech- es : but what true Proteltant, nay who but a rank Pa- pift, ever openM his vile mouth before, to utter fuch things againft the Foreign Churches ? Such vile calum- nies are only fit to come out of the mouth of a malicious, fuperflitious, and lying Jefuit : but are utterly unworthy of a Presbyter of the Church of England, But where, I pray, did the people break out into this ;;/^i xi.^'^^/.^ In what quarter of the world are we to difcover thefe un- godly tumults ? What feditious men do you talk of ? What flirs did they raife ? And what were their feign'd pretences? 1{ the dates of our realm fet themfelves to reform Part I. r/;^ D I s s E N T E R s* l^ reform religion among us, that muft be eflcem'J an in- flance of our happinefs, rather than the perfe(^tiun and purity of our Reformation. And if in other places they not only declined, but endeavour'd all they could to hin- der that Welled work, will this rare advocate of the Church of Ei^gland venture to blame the people, for at- tempting it by themfeives? What an impudent, foolifh, anJ wicked people then muft the followers of IVichliej have been, who ventured upon a reformation, without either Houfe of Parliament or Convocation to lead theml '^ How- much more pious and wife were the people, who in the reign of Henry the VIII. waited the Parliament's and Convocation's leifure, contenting themfeives in the mean time with a fuperflitious and idolatrous v/orfliip ! What a vile and ungodly generation were the primitive Chrifti- ans, according to this man's notions j that received a new religion^ without the encouragement of any of the flates ? How much more prudent were they, who em- braced Chriftianity in the fourth age of the Church, at the command of publick authority 1 I Vv^ould fain know, why the common people are to take no care to fave their fouls ? What hurt is there in it, if the common people endeavour to worfhip God without fuperPiition, and' in that way which is pleafing to him ? Certainly the antient Chriftian writers did not ufe to defpife the people after this fafhion. Cypian^ whom our Adverfaries frequently commend, was of quite another mind : " I refolv'd, fays ^^ he^ from my firfl being Bifhop, that I v/ould do nothing *^ of my own head, without your [/. ^. the Presbyters *^ and Deacons'] advice, and the confent of the people,! And elfewhere thus : " Nor let the people flatter them- '^ felves, as though they could be innocent, who commu- " nicate with a wicked Priefl, and give their confenr to \^ the unjuft and unlawful adminifterarion of tUeir go- vemour. '' I! And having cited Hof. ix. 4. and N:^7. xvi. 26. he immediately adds : " Wherefore the people, in *' obedience to Code's commands, and the fear of GoJ, *^ muft feparate themfeives from a wicked ruler, and not *^ concern themfeives in the religious a£ts of a facrile- gious prieft; " {and if the Popijh Pr lefts are net fiich^ t}:)€re are none in the world) ^' fince the people efpeciailv '' hav^ ^Sfe Dr. KUhoh, p. 2, f EpiH, 14. p 33, l) Eprji. 6S. p. ]'ji. ^ i6 ^Vindication^/ Pkttlr. *' have the power lodged in them of chufing fuch Priefts " as are deferving, and refuling fuch as are not. ^^ But our Adverfarics will perhaps rcjedt this holy Father's authority in this cafe, as they do when they pleafe, and appeal to moreantient teftimonies. By all means : I am fenfible whit antiquity they muft have recourfe to. I acknowledge this doctrine of theirs, of defpifing the common people, is derivM to them from the moft antient times, even from their ve- nerable predecelfors. For this Difcourfe of the Doctor^s is exactly of a piece with that of the Scribes and Pharif^es : Have any of the rulers helieu^d on him ? but this people^ [this rabble rout] which knows not the laWy is curfed. ^ Oh but, fays the Dr. Both Houfes of Parliament and Convocatioh ma- turely confide/ d how they might rcftore that purity ofr^ltg^rriy which the primitive ages enjoyed. Very well : and what did they maturely confider abroad, but how that purity mrght be TeftorM to religion, which it enjoy'd in its rirft inPiitution? Without all doubt, if purity muft be determine by anti- quity, the more antient any thing, the purer it is ^and therefore the Reformers, in foreign parts, were beft adX^is^'d, who took the Holy Scriptures for their only rule and guide in the work of reformation. But farther I wouli remark, that our Author's aflertion is utterly faife. The Conformifts retain many ufages, of which there are not the leaft fortfteps in the antient writers. Nor does Dr. A^/- chols deny this afterwards, when he comes' to treat of par- ticulars. On the other hand ; there were many things in ufe among the primitive Chriftians, which they have' re- jected. Whence Dr. Whitby taxes them with hypccrify in makitig fuch a pretence, f Finally, I deflre our Arbitrators would take notice that religion is reckoned by the Dr. a poor and lean thing, when 'tis firipp^d of, what he calls, its graceful rites. I confefs, I could not but wonder, how fuch an exprefTicn could drop from him. Our Adverfaries ufe to talk of their rites, as indifferent things. And when from the words of our Saviour, /;/ vain do they worjhip me^ teaching for doEirines^ [viz,, about worfhip] the command- ments (fmen^ Matth. xv. we clearly demonftrate, that it i^ unlawful to worfliip God with any rites, however indiffe- rent in themfelves, if they are not prefcrib'd by God; they ufed to fhelterthemfelves under this poor evafion, that the Scribes ' John vii. 48, 49. t ProteJ!^ Reconciler^ ?4rt I. p. 297,298. Part I. r/;^ D I s s E N T E R s. 17 Scribes and Pharifccs prelcrib'd their rites as necefTary ; whereas the Church oi Eu^Jiind preilribes not hers as ne- cellary, but as indiriercnt, upon the taking away of which, religion it itrlfimmediately becomes ^ poor and lean thing. Whence it plainly appears, the precepts of the Pharifees, and our Gentlemen of the Hierarchy, are both built upon the fame foundation, and delerve equal refpeit and obe- dience. And let not our Brethren wonder, we are ftiffabout thefe things. Experience convinces us, when men have brought into the worfliip of God, vain and trifling cere- monies of their oVv'n de viiing,they prefently dote upon them as their own oftspring, even to the negledt of the far greater and \x:i:ightier things of the lavj. Thus we have feen drunk- ards, whoremongers, prophane Iwearers and curfers, (who, in imitation of the Jevcs^ have been continually cry- ing, 7?;^' Churchy the Church '''') fondly carefl: by them; while fober and virtuous men have been grievouily vexM, and perfecuted for their averfion to the Englijh ceremonies. But the Dr. goes on : 'This extraordinary prudence of our Reformers "JO as y uponmany accotintSyCommendedby all good men : but upon this more efpecially, becaufe they thought fit to retain the difcipline and ceremonies ivhich were us'd mi'fi antiently in the Churchy and to abrogate thofe only ivhich vjere introduced under the Papal ufurpation. Several of the ceremonies, retained by our Adverfaries, were never us^'d in the antient Church. They are not able to alledge any tolerable antiquity for the Surplice, the Crofs in Baptlfm, kneelifig at the Sacrament, their Saints Days, and many other Holidays. I wifh wt were certainly apprizM, what that antiquity is, which is fo venerable in the eiieemof our Adverfaries. Sometimes it ftretches it felf to a monftrous extent, and reaches from the firft beginning of the Church to almoft our own times ; at other times again it is fo cur- taii'd, that you have hardly any number of years left to be dignified with the name of antient. When our Adverfa- ries think ^tis for their purpofe, it fhall come down as far as the tvv^elfth or thirteenth age of the Church : I am fure, our Author pretends no greater antiquity for the Feafts of St, Alar k and Luke^ p. 311. The fourth and fifth Centu- ries are very commonly taken in, as parts of this venerable antiquity : alcho^ our Adverfaries cannot deny, that the F groflell ! J^L yii; ^ i8 ^Vindication c/ Part I. groflefl fuperflition about the Martyrvrelicks, and innu- merable ceremonies (complained of by Anguftiaey gYt\N up at that time in the Church. I cannot, upon this occalion, omit the words of the learned Mr. Whijloriy in his excellent Rjjay on the Revelation : " Any plea from antiquity, which " yet reaches not earlier than the beginning of the corrupt " and Antichriftian times, is of no value in the difputes " about religion ; but rather a fign and argument that ^' thofe doctrines and practices, which can be trac'd no *^ higher, are Antichriftian and falfe, or at leaft fuch as '' made way, by degrees, for what was moft certainly of *' that character.!' ^ And in another Piece, which he pub- lifli'd foon after that, he Ipeaks more fully thus :" Generally " we pay the greateft deference to thofe later Fathers of " the fourth and fifth Centuries, which liv'd not till near *' the times of Antichrift, and at fomewhat remote diftan- *' ces from our Saviour and his Apoftles; and fo are more " properly to be accounted as the lirft and moft valuable of *^ the modern writers, than among thofe who are of great *^ authority for their truly primitive antiquity.^' II 1 confefs this author has publifhM an odd judgment of feme of the antient writers, but thefe two pieces were written and cited by me, before he fell into that opinion ,* and there appears fuch good fenfe in the paffages fet down, that I could not be willing to leave them out. But what a different opinion have our Conformifls of this matter ? Thus when Mr. Da^lle pafs'd a complement upon the Church of En- glandy declaring, ^^ He judged the Confirmation fhe us'd, ^^ was more prudently order 'd, and better agreed with the ^^ nature of the Chriuian religion, than what we find, by ^^ the writers of the fourth and following ages, to have " been then prafitis'd in the Church :"" What fays the lear- ned Bp. Beveridge in anfwer ? " Truly this is more than " the Church of England ever afTumM to her felf, +" But farther, as to the antiquity of our Adverfaries ; fometimes they are fo ftrait lac'd, that they will not allow that honour to the third Century, which, upon other oc- cafions they are free to give to the fourth and fifth. Thus when we argue : They may as well bring in Infant Com- munion, as many other things in ufe among them, fince it * Epift. ad Januar. t f • 202. \ Accomgj. ofSiript. Prn^'^-f- H* ♦ ^^* Ctn, E;cl.Pamic. vind. in Proam. A Parti. the D issEii T EK$. 19 it appears to have been pradis'd at leafl from C)pfians time, thro' many ages of the Church : they anfvvcr us : That C)- pyiaii is not an author antient enough fur fuch acuftom to be brought in upon his authority. Nay, fometimes they mull exclude thefecond Century from beingany part of the antiquity they pretend to pay fuch a deference to. Why elfe have they laid afide the mix-ini^ water and wine in the cup in the Lord's Supper, which J'ifliri Martyr^ whoflou- rifh'd in the middle of the fecund Century^ tellifies was in ule in his time,- and which Cyprian^ in the next age, labours to prove to be abfolutely neceffary ? Nay, if they will be coniillent with themfelves, while they pretend to be di- rected by antiquity, in reflorlng purity to religion ; they muft not allow themfelves to take the very firfl Century into their antiquity. I forbear to mention the twofold Order mention^'d in the Holy Scripture, and by Clement of B.07ne, I only defire to know where we (hall find that pu- rity, which Clement^ who liv'd in the Apoftles days, wit- nelles was in the Churches of his time ; that Biftiops and Deacons were appointed with the confent of the whole Church?* But fqme perhaps may imagine I bear too hard upon the Dr. hnce he feems to conhne the antiquity he regards, to the times that preceed the Papal ufinpatim. But I an- fwer : The Doctor feeks to impofe upon his readers : for if that be the only valuable antiquity in his efteem, to what purpofe has he heapM up, in his Book, fuch a multitude of teftimonies of authors, who liv^'d under the Papal ufurpati- on ? Befides, I would fain know, how antient he reckons the Papal uftirpation to have been ; and whether he thinks it fprung up in an inftant, or by little and little ? If we fup- pofe it was come to fome maturity in the year 606, when the Emperor Phocas declared the Pope the Unruerfal Bijhop; yet we muft be ftrangely unacquainted with the Ecclefiafti- cal Hiftory of the two foregoing Centuries, and particular- ly of the times of Pope Leo I. if we can believe there was no Papal ufurpation before Boniface III. in the Days of Phocas. But let us for once imagine that the Papal ufurpation is only to be dated from the year 6q6, and that all the preceed- ing ages are to be reckoned venerable antiquity ; yet with F 2 what ! E^ift, 59 th^ Corimh: c» 41 ^ 20 ^Vindication (?/ Part I. what face can men pretend the Church of Eyigland is go- vein'd by a re;Tard even to this forry antiquity ? Kneeling at the Sacrament, mufical Inflruments in the worfhip of C Jod, and feveral other things in ufe among them, are the inventions of later and worfe times then that beginning of Tapal ufurpation. But let it be granted (lince our caufe will aliord our being liberal) that all the ufages of the Church are warranted by the bell and moft antient of un- infpir'd writers. What earnings can they make of fuch our concelFion? Can even fuch an antiquity be the rule of our faith, or worfhip ? Nay does not that very antiquity commend to us the Holy Scriptures, as our only rule for both ? Let Cyprian be judge in the cafe : " The cuftom " which has crept in among fome, muft not hinder truth ^' from prevailing ; for cuftom, without truth, is but " the ftalenefs of error. And that Chrift only is to be '^ heard by us, the Father witnelfes from heaven, faying, '^ This is my belo'ved Son^ hear him. Wherefore, if Chrift: '^ only is to be heard, we muft not regard what another ^^ perfon, before our time, has thought fit to be done ; but ^^ we are to confider what Chrift has firft done, who is ^' himfelf before all ; for we are not to follow the cuftom ^^ of men, but the truth of God."^"^-^ Let us hear I'crtulUan likevvife to the fame purpofe: '• We cannot lawfully bring '' in any thing at our own pleafure, nor chufe what any '^ one elfe has brought in after that rate. We have the '^ Apoftles for our vouchers, who never chofe to bring in ^' any thing according to their own fancy, but faithfully *' deliver^ to the nations that difcipline, which they them- '^ felves received from Chrift ?''t Well but, may fome fay, does not antiquity recommend that form of government which our Reformers retain^ ? Certainly Chancellors, Commiffaries, Deans, Archdeacons, Prebendaries^ and the exorbitant power of Bifliops, arenottobedifcover'din any antiquity worth regarding. No, nor yet the Monarchical form of ecclefiaftical government, if we judge by the re- nioteft antiquity, as will be evidenced in its proper place. Our Author, in the next place, falls hard upon Mr. "John Calvin^ II a bright ornament of the Reformed religion, and the age in which he liv'd. Nor is it any wonder he fhould, by litde ftories and pitiful mifreprefentations, endea- vour ♦ Epift, ad Pomp. p. 2x5. t I^cPrcfa. c. 6. 212, Hf. 15. Part I. the Di s ? r n t r r s. 'St vour to blacken his pious memory ; tor thefc Gentlemen hcive accultom'd themfelvcs to treat every body, who \v:ll venture to vary a hair's breadth from theni, after that man- ner. Whether Mr. Cahihfet the Meinbers of the Lhin ch oj Hni^land a qun; yelling rcith oyie anvther^ according; as he ai- Icrts, 1 will enquire prelently, when I come to examine what is alledg'd concerning Bp. Hoojper. Let us now follow the Dodtor. T/j/j learned man [Mr. JiM Calvin] feeindtobegrie^'d^ that the difcipline which he had Jet up at Geneva, could not be jo much valued^ i^hen a Rejornid Epifcopacy ix:as ejlabhjh'd in England, xu/jA/; wouldrujmmend itjelj to other Prote/iants beyond his form '^ efpecially nhereas his invention could only be excused fro?n the particular neceffities which the city of Geneva lay under ^ but our Epifcopal government was war) anted by the pr aid: ice of all antiquity. But how could the Dr. know- that Calvin was griev'd upon any luch account ? Calvin fays no fuch thing of himfelf^nor do any figns thereof ap- pear. '' How then comes this notable inquifitor (that I *' may ufe his own words elfevv^here) to know w^hat ^^ Mr. Calvin hid in the fecret receffes of his heart ? This ^' can be known to God only, to whom all hearts are open ; *' for any mortal to pretend to fuch knowledge, is an impl- '^ ous invafion of the divine prerogative/'* "'TIS pretty odd too, the Dr. fhould reprefent Calvin as grie v'd to think, that the Englijh Epifcopal form of government would re- commend itjelf to other Protejinnts beyond his form. This is an improvement of the Englijh Tranfiation, there being no fuch claufe in the Latin edition. But why may not Mr. Calvin be allowed to have as good an opinion of his form, as any of the friends of the Hierarchy have of theirs? If this form of government was, as our Author pretends, Mr. C^/^:;/Vs invention ; he would, without doubt, have been as ready as others to perfwade himfelf it would meet with approbation, till he faw plain evidence to the conn a- ry. And had there been fo much as one little hole or cor- ner of the Reformed world, befide the King of England's dominions, that had ever (lie w'd itfelf enamour'd with our Epifcopal form of government, as long as Calvin liv'd, this paffage might feem to have been inferted with a better grace. But when Proteftants every where prefer'd his F 3 fcheme^ 'P' i7U 27 !i4 Vindication (?/ Part I. fcheme, to that of our Reformers on this fide the water, this grief, he would father upon Cahin^ muft feem unac- countable ; and if ever he had any fuch grief, I muft own he was not by far fo great a man, as I ufed to take him to be. Farther, our Author, in tranflating this paflTage, has put hiswvemioriy inltead of //;^ mve/ty of his ir^vemion; for which I blame him not; for had it been Mr. Cahins in- wentioriy it muft have been new. But 1 would fain know what new invention he would charge upon Mr. Calvin ? Lay Chancellors, to whom the judgment of the wcightieft matters is committed, are indeed a new inventicn^ never heard of, I fuppofe, before the time of Henry VIII. But the Ariftocratical form of Church government can in no other fenfe be calKd nevoy than that, in which the Tefta- ment of our Bleffed Saviour, is fo term'd. KJerorns opi- nion of the identity of Bifhops and Presbyters be reproach'd with novelty, not only muft Mr. Calvin^ and the reft of the Reformers abroad, but all our Englijh Reformers too, fall under that guilt. For I am apt to think, "'twill not be eafy to find one of them, who held Bifliops were by divine appointment fiaperior to Presbyters. And when they re- tainM the Epifcopal government, they never pretended to do it as a thing of neceffity, by virtue of a divine com- mand, but only as a matter of prudence. But perhaps the Dr. had his eye to Lay Elders parti- cularly, as the novel invention of Mr. Cnhin. But not to alledgei//7^);v the Deacon, who, by very learneed men is thought to mention them: Cyprian informs us, that in his time the aHairs of the Church were orderM, not only with the advice of theBifhop and Presbyters, but of the People : nay even Mr. Dodwel^^ themoft zealous advocate for Epif- copacy, proves there were fome Presbyters in Cyprians time, who were not Teachers or Preachers. And indeed I think it muft be evident to anyone, there were in the antient Church many Presbyters, who did not ufe to preach, or teach publickly in the afl^embly; and yet this diftinction did not make any difference among them, as to their right of voting, or as to their intereft in the government of the Church. But let that matter be as it will, the Church of Erj^land oughinoty forfliame, to upbraid Mr. C^//^/;^ with his •Differt. Cypr. VI. $. 4, 5, 4. Part I. ^/;tf D I s s E N T E R s. 23 his Lay Elders, as long as they allow Lay Chancellors, Commillaries, and Officials. Nay the belt of our Refor- mers fcem to have cjuite another opinion than our Author of thefe Elders, and to have only wanted an opportunity to bring in the ufe of them here in Engla:id, Cranme,y and the reft of the CommidionersinK. Edward the Sixth's time, drew up a Body of Laws, which, if they had been ratified, would have bid fair for the bringing thefe Lay Elders, or fomewhat equivalent, into ufe among us. To which purpofe is this law of theirs : " After even- ^^ ing Prayers, on which all fliall attend in their own pa- " rilh Churches, the principal Minifter or Parfon, and the ^' Deacon, if they are prefent; or, in cafe of their abfence, the ^^ Curate, and the Elders^ fliall confider how the money gi- *^ yen for pious ufes may be beft laid out ; and then let difci- *^ plinc be exercised: for they, whofe fm has been public, ^* andgiven oftence to the whole Church,fhould be brought ^' to a fenfe of it, and publickly undergo the punifhment *' ofit,that fothe Church may be the better for their corre- ^^ ftion. After that the Minifter fliall withdraw with fome *^ o( the Elders, and confult, how all other perfons, who *^ are diforderly in their life and converfation, may be talk'd *' with ; firft by fome fober and good men in a brotherly '^ manner, according to the direfiion of Chrift in the GoJ- ^^ pel ; and if they hearken to their advice, God is to be " prais'd for it ; but if they go on in their wickednefs, they " are to be reftrainM by that fevere punifhment, which is *' in the Gofpelprefcrib'dfor fuch obftinacy. '' '^^ And fmce this was their opinion, there is more reafon to think they were hindred, by particular necefjities^ from appointing Lay Elders, than that Mr, Cahin was from fettingup Epif- copacy. And indeed I would fain knov/ what w^ere thole particular neceffities^ ivhich the city oj Geneva lay under, which were the only things could excufe his irrjention ? Our Author is not confiftent with himfelf, for he prefent- ly tells us : Mr. Calvin managd the afairs of religion in his oivn country with an uncontr out able authority, whereby he be- came impatient of any contradiBion in thefe inatters. What pa ticular necefjtties could hinder him, who managed the af- fairs of religion with an uncontroulable authority ? If Mr. Cal- vin had fo great an authority, what neccjjity could force him F 4 ' to ReforffsK, leg. E*c!.^, 45, 24 '^Vindication^/ Part I, to change the form of government among them? Could not our Author fee, that thofe neceffities, whatever they were, would rather have ingagM him to have made as little alteration as pofiible, fince they would render the fet- ting up an intirely new form of government a much more difficult thing, than the retaining and mending of the old. I could never yet guefs, w^hat were thofe laws of ncceflity, which our Adverfaries majce fuch a per- petual noife about ; and which (I am forry to fay) fome have at length been found in Geneva willing to acknow- ledge. And indeed tho' they talk of them, in the genera^ yet they never care to mention them in particular. Mr. Cal- win himfelf never pretended any fuch neceifity for what he did. " Befides, fays he^ that our own confcience acquits *' us in the fight of God, the thing it felf will anfwer for *^ us in the fight of men. No body has yet appeared, ^' that could prove we had alter'd any one thing, which '^ God has commanded ; or that we have appointed any *^ new thing contrary to his word ; or that wx have turn a *^ afide from the truth to follow any evil opinion. On the *^ contrary, ^tis manifeft w'e have reform^'d our Church *' meerly by God's w^ord, which is the only rule by *' w^hich 'tis to beorderM and Jav/fully defended. ' Tis in- *^ deed an unpleafant work to alter what has beenformer- ** ly in ufe, were it not that the order which God has " once fix'd, muft be efteem'd by us as facred and invio- *' lable; infomuch that if it has for a time been laid afide, *^ it muft of neceflity (and w^hatever the confequences *' fhould prove) be reft or 'd again. No antiquity, no pre- *^ fcription of cuftom may be allow'd to be an obflacle in ^^ this cafe, that the government of the Church, w^hich *' God has appointed, fhould not be perpetual, lince the *^ Lord himfelf has once hx'd it.'' * Nay, \i}Ar.Cahin had been fo yielding to neceflity, as our Author pretends, he muft have took quite another courfe than he did ; nor would there have been any occafion for him, and his two Collegues, to be commanded within two days to de- fart the city, for refujingto admini (lev the Lor d^s Slipper.] Mr. Cahin often withftood, not only the people, but the Senate, and fome of his Brethrem in the miniftry ; and be- ing reftcr'd to the Church of Genezuiy he defir'd ncthin^ J Letter to a certain Cur ace, f. ^52, t Beta's Life cf CaJv. Part I- /A^ D I s s E N T E F. s. 25 fo mucby as that ccclefiaftical laws^ agrcecible to the vjord ojf God, might be ejhiblijh\l -jjith the cuiifcnt of the Senate. ^ And who can doubt, but that Mr. Calvin could have eafi- ly perfuadcd the ilhuxd^oi Geyieva to rcilorc EpKcopacy ? Certainly it inufl have been ealier for him to obtain that, than it was to perfwadc them before to iet up the Presbyte- rian form. In ihort 'tis falfe, that Mr. Cahin was^ con- ftrain'd by any other necelfity, than his own apprehenfion of a divine command, to abro?^ate Epifcopacy and edablifh Presbytery in the city oi Geneva, And 1 wifh our Adver- saries, iniiead of dunning us with the alFertion of this necelTity, would produce fome credible witnelfes^ or clear arguments to prove it. But our Author goes on : And perhaps the mind of that otherwije very holy man u^as Jone/d t^'voards usj by fome particular rcjentments with relation to hinifelj. For Mr, C2[- viv\yii:hb7nanagdthe afiairs of religion in his cwn country ix)ith an uncontroulable authority ^vchereby he becaine i?7Jpatient oj any contradiBion in thefe matters, therefore cou/d not eafily digejiy that the afffiance, vchich he hado-^e/din carrying on the Re- formation in England,ti;(^y not accej^ted by Archbijhop Cranmer. . For that moft judicious perfon didzuith very great vcifdom think, that our Englith people vcould more eafily bear the faults in the Church to be amended by their oven Bijhops, than by a Foreign Divine, eff^ecially by one ivho ivas byfo?ne thought too officioufly to have cffer'dhisfervice therein, \ Mind this now, ye Fl" reign Divines, and beware ye do not too ojfcioufly offer yotr fervice. If that was the mind of the Hierarchical Gentle- men in Mr.C^/i;/V5time,rilfecure you they are no change- lings now ,• nor will they ever endure to have any one fingle error of their Church amended according to your judgment. Nor does it fignify, that they themfelves ask your advice; for they aited the lame part of old with Mr. Calvin, By this you learn what fort of Arbitrators you are like to prove. Our Author has indeed done very great injury to the memory of thofe great and good Men, Mr. Calvin and Archbifhop Cranmer, In reading the works of Mr. Calvin ^ and particularly his Epiftles, one every where dilcovers a great deal of candour and moderation. Archbifhop Cran- mer and our other Reformers were never afhamM to defire the inu, t p. 15. 26 .^ViNDicATioN(^ Part !• the advice of Foreigners: they invited therefore thofe famous Divines, Bucer and Matyr^ made them Profellors in our Univerfities, and gave them handfome falaries. Nor did they confult only with them, but with feveral other Divines abroad, and particularly Mr. Calvin, Among his Epiflles there is one of the Archbifhop's to him, refpeCiful enough, for ought I fee. ^ But by' Mr. Calvin s anfwer it appears the Archbifhop wrote to him feveral times, f But neither the Archbifhop, nor any one of our Refor- mers, ever laid Mr. Calvin was too officious in oftering his Service : this is the bafe device of fome of our modern Churchmen. How kindly and refpedtfully Mr. Calvin's letters were received in England^ appears by the account which he wrote to his friend ,• and it being a full detection of the falfhood of thefe mens pretences, I will tranilate the beginning of the Letter. '^ Nicholas^ fays he^ is at ** length returned from England^ he tells me, he " was fo kindly received there, that I have good reafon to ^^ congratulate my felf in the pains I have taken : w^hen *^ he had deliver^'d my Letters to the Duke of Somerfety *^ and told him he had others for his Majefty, he of his ^^ own accord otterM to deliver them to him, and accord- " ingly went to court the next day. Unlefs I am great- ^^ ly deceived, my prefent was acceptable to His Majefty's ^' Council, and very m.uch rejoyc'd the King himfelf "The '^ AychbijJ)oj) of Canterbury fent me wordy that I could not ^' do any thing more ufeftil^ than to v:rite frequently to the ^^ King. This pleafes me much better, than if I had a *^ great fum of money beflow'd upon me. '^ II Who now will believe, that the ajTiJiance uchich Mr, Calvin offered in carrying on the Reformation in England, v:as not accepted by 'Archkijhcf Cranmer? Nay, if Mr, O/fc/Vs Letter to the Protecior be compar'd with the alterations made in the fe- cond edition of the Liturgy in King Edvcard^s time, it will plainly appear, our Reformers paid a great deference to his judgment. Praying for the dead at the Lord^s Sup- per, Chrifin, and extreme Unction, w^ere very frankly blam'd by bim in that Letter ; and all thefe were left out in that fecond edition, according to his advice. And Dr. Heylyn declares, thofe alterations were made upon his in- ftigation. / 268. t Sat, ^r. f Epift» ad Farcll. /?. 240. part I. /iS'^ D I s s E N T E R 5, %y ftic^ation.^ Nor does Dr. AT/V/jo/j elfewhere himfelf deny it.*^ tor thus he fpeaks of the latter edition of the Litur,9;y in King Edward's time: ^' Fcur years afterwards, the " Book of Common Prayer underwent another review; " wherein fome ceremonies and ufages were laid alide, and ^* feme new Prayers added, at the inflance of Mr. Cakin ." of Geneva^ and Bucer^ a Foreign Divine, who was in- *^ vited to be a Profeflor at Cambridge, t ^' M'\ Calvin taking ojfence at theje things, in his letters to fome of his friends y made ufe of fome very hard expref- ftons "with relation to the Church of Eng^znd,, and u^hich did not fo well become the mouth of a Divine, H Mr. Calvin fpake his mind freely, as became an honefl man. And perhaps his harfheft expreffions are thofe men- tioned elfewhere by the Doctor, that the Englijh Liturgy contained many tolerable fopperies y which he alfo called tJje re licks of the dregs of Popery, And certainly this was a very mild cenfure, in comparifon of that fcurrilous and abulive way, in which the Dr. as w^e have feen already, treats the Foreign Churches. Thefe expreffions of Mr. Cal- vin did not become the mouth of a Divine : but w^e muft imagine theDodors reproaches were worthy of a Divine, and a Presbyter of the Church of England: That the poor lean religion, of Proteftants abroad, ftrip^dof every graceful ritey was owing to the mad z>eal and tumults of the fedi- tious people, who under the pretence of piety gave great difiurbance to the fiate. I wi(h thefe men, who make fuch a fplutter about antiquity, would a little better guard againft the antient proverb : Phyftcian heal thyfelf. And in one to Martin Bucer, a very mcde/i and peacea- ble man, who was then coming into England, he z'jarns him againji being the author or approver of middle counfels ; by which zcords he plainly fir ikes at the moderation (bferv^d in the Enzlifh Reformation, ''Tis evident, Bucer was aftu- ally in England when Calvin wrote that Letter to him ; and the Tranflation here is in that refpeft worfe than the original. Now lince Dr. Nichols juftly reprefents Bucer as of the fame opinion with Calvin in do6trinals, p. i8o. he mull: neceffarily be underftood here, as fuppoling that Calvin had a refpecc to ceremonies and Church govern- ment in this pallage of his Letter. But herein the Doi ^/ .Part I. Contradicts Dr. Heylyn^ who, from this very fentence, pre- tends that thofe two Reformers were not agreed in. their dodtrinal opinions. To whom Mr. Hickman gives this anfwer : '' Bucery by his very bed friends, had been " charged at Zurich^ An. 153^, for fpeaking too doubt- ^^ fully in the dodtrine ofche Sacrament, thro' a deiire ^^ to appea'e Luther ; he then and there made fuch an ^^ apology for himfelf, as was accepted. If, at his coming '^ over into Englandy he fell into the fame fault, Mr. *^ Calvin did but the part ofaChriltian to admonifli " him. " ^^ And that Mr. Hichncm beft underftood Calvinh mind is confirmed by Bez^a^ who fays : " That when Bucer was /^ in Englandy Calvin hondily advis'd him to write aixl ^^ fpeak more clearly concerning the Lord's Supper; and " at the fame time gave the Duke of Somerfet (who was ^^ afterwards moft unworthily put to death) fuch advice, '^ as, if it had been followM in that kingdom, would ^' probably have freed the Englijh Churches from abun-- .'' dance of calamities. ■"' f Nay and Calvin himfelf, in that Letter to Buce/y fufEciently clears his own mind. *' In this matter, fays hey I difter from you, that you ^^ think thofe of the contrary opinion are wrongM and " mifreprefented. For while you can^t think they could ." ever err fo grofsly, as to think Chrift was prefent in ." all places, you don't confider what BrentiuSy among /^ others, has written; that Chrift, while he lay in the ^^ manger, was glorious in Heaven, even with refpect to *^ his body. What means that adorable Sacramenty Luther /' talks of, but that an idol is to be fet up in the temple " of God ? Concerning placej you feem to me to dif- *^ courfe too curioully. Others are oftended at that ob- /^ fcurity, which they think you craftily and induftriouQy *^ ufe. I know thefe are in the wrong : but I don't fee *^ what reafon you have fo much to avoid what we '^ profeft, that when Chrift is faid to have afcended . *Mnto heaven, hereby is iignihed a diftance of places. '"" I would not fufpect our Author as a friend to the[e middle counfels : but fuppoling that Calviny in thofe words, had a regard to Church government and cere- monies, what harm is there then in them ? T^hcfe iniddle conn-- *ri • HiHior. Qiiinijuart. ExwtiCe £^471. f ^f^ 9f ?*lyi^' Fart L r//e D i s s e n t e r s. 29 cvtwftls, whoever was the author of them, have been for trom doing fervlce to the purity of religion, or peace of the Church. And if the Church of England had quitted thofe middle counfels at the Revolution, our Au- thor himfelf tells us, he could net find ix: hat hurt cr pre- judice 'tivoiild have prcv\i to the Chw, ch^ thu he had often con/iJe/d the matter. Which palFage is in the Latin edi- tion, tho' for the moderation of it, I fuppofe, "'tis left out in the Englijb, But let us proceed with our Author : Dr. Hooper, a 'very learned and pious man, being buoy'd up by Jo great an authority as that nj Mr, Calvin, 'xhen he vjas nominated to be Bijhop of Glocefter, rtjus'd to put on the habity rchich the Canons didprefcribe to be ivorn by thofe of his ovjn order. But Archbijhp Cranmer, and Bijhop Ridley, pofi- tively /'e us\i to Cardura him^ unlefs he vjould conform him- felf to the habits^ zuhich the laws of the Church requir^dj 'as well as the refi of the reformed Bijhops ; and this they refolutely pe. ftft in^ nctwithflanding a letter from the King was pYOcurd in his behalf. "^ But how does it appear. Hooper was buoyed up by Calvin's authority in refufing the habit of his order. Cah'ra himfelf declares the contrary. '^ I have xtc^Wd. fays he^ " the fad news, that Hooper is thrown into prifon : I " was afraid of it fome time ago. Now I fear, left the ^^ Bifhops, coming oft w^ith the victory, fhould grow the " more infolent : wherefore, as I commend his conftancy ^^ in refufmg Unftion, fo I had rather he had not fo ^^ eameftly contended about the Cap and the Linnen Gar- ^' ment, (tho" I don't like thefe things my felf } and fo '' I lately advisM him. " j I defire the reader farther to remark, from the Doctor's own words, that the habits have, from the very in- fancy of our Reformation, been an offence to^'6'/7 learned and pious men. How then can they excufe themfelves in impofing them ? If the fault lay in them, that their confciences were weak ,* yet while they thus fin againfi their Brethren^ and wound their weak confciences^ do they not fin againfi Chrift ? II And Dr. Hooper, being as fliff en his fide^ was for fome time imprifond for his dflinacy. And tho\ Mr. Calvin wrote \ Life of Calrlo, f. li. t l^i^^i to ^nliing, », ^o, I i Qor, viu^ i2» ^o ^Vindication e?/ Part L wrote prefjingly to the ProteEicr on his behalf^ he could not obtain his liberty , before he promised to be hereafter more con-- formable to the ecclejiafticallazvs. * And thus, by the Popifh argument of perfecution, was eftabli&'d the Church's tyranny over the confciences of men : belides HuoVer tefUhed, he refused not the habit out of tbjiinacy^ but inerely becaufe he judg'd it unlawful. Hoivezer a compliance vsas made Jo far ^ in honour offo very dejerving a man^ that he Jhould iirar the Epif copal habit only ivhen he officiated in the Churchy at other times making ufe of ordinary apparel. Indeed fome perfons will be apt to think that this dealing with Hooper ivas toofe-' verey Sec. ' How that matter was adjufted, and with what bit- ternefs the Bilhops perfecuted that good Man, is related by Fox in his Latin Book of Martyrs. The paflage I fliall tranflate, becaufe FoXy out of his too great tendernefs towards that party, has left it out of all the Englijh edi- tions. " Thus, Jays hey ended this Theological quarrel " in the vicSory of the Bifhops, Hooper being forc'd to " recant ; or, to fay the leaf!:, being conftrain'd to ap- " pear once in public, attired after the manner of the *^ other Bifhops. Which, unlefs he had done, there are " thofe who think the Bifhops would have endeavoured ^^ to take away his life : for his Servant told me, the ^' Duke of Suffolk fent fuch word to Hooper^ who was ^' not himfelf ignorant what they were doing. ^' \ Hor- rid barbarity ! Who ever was thrown into prifon before, or endangered his life, becaufe he refused a Bifhoprick ? The Bifliops may perhaps be excused in fome meafure, that they would not confecrate Hooper contrary to law ; but there can be no kind of excufe for their imprifoning him, and confpiring to take away his life. Why Ihould not they have yielded to Hoopers defire of being excusM from accepting the Bifhoprick ? Was there any law to conflrain a man to be a BiGiop, whether he would or no ? Mr. Hickman did not, I think, without good ground imagine, there was another reafon for the Bifhop's flifl- nefs, and particularly for Ridley's who was mofl rigid. For if Ridley made conlcience of not ordaining Hooper^ but in the prefcrib'd habits ; why fhould he not have made • Life «/ CaJrin, f, 17. fp. 2«o. Part I. f/;^ D I s s E N T E R s. j t made as much confcience upon other occafions ? Why did he ordain Bradford^ 2indy 1 think, Ibme others, with- out the habits of their order? ^Tis not improbable^ that Ridle}y tho' a good man, and a pious Martyr, might be a little envious at Hooper^ for his being fo very popular as he was, and mif^ht think, by forcing him ta yield, he (hould cool the aliedtions of the people to him ; as Bifliop Bill net tells us his yielding had that etfeCt. ^ And notwithftanding what our Author may lay to the contrary, that ieverity of the Bifhops was very difplealing to all good men, both abroad and at home. Nay Ridley^ when at length he himlelf was caft into prifon, repented of what he had done, as appears by his friendly letter to Hoofer : and indeed he feems toward his latter end to have altered his opinion of thefe garments. For when Brooks, the PopifhBifhop of Giuejler in Queen Mary\ time, came to degrade him, he refus'd to put on the Sur- plice ; and while they were putting it on him, whether he would or no, ^^ he vehemently inveighed againft the *' Romifh Bifhop and z\\ th^tfoolijh apparel, calling him *^ Antichrift, and the apparel foolijh and akmnable, and " too fond for a Vice in a play, '' f 'Tis to be obferv'd, that among the mofl emjnent of our Martyrs, Cranmer and Ridley, who had the greateft hand in this affair, fell the moft gfievoufiy in the hour of temptation. Cranmer^'s Recantation is known to every body. And Bl^op Rid- ley, when he was at hrit put into the Tower, went to Mafs there of his own accord ; but beino; better advis'd by Bradford, abftain'd afterwards. And if I might be allow^'d to imitate Dr. Nichols in his refleftion upon Broiin, ii I might fay, that God perhaps defign'd in thefe two perfons to give us warning, what a dangerous thing "'tis to have fellowfhip with idolators, either in their ceremonies, or their tyraiiny. Hovcever by this timely feverity thus much vjas effecled^ that the Church gover mem, uuhich then began to ftandmore loofely, ivas hereby more fir 'mly fettled; no one afterzvards, throughout the whole reign of King Edward, daring to ^violate the authority of ecclefiaftical laius. So that Church govern- tncutfiands in a vtxylodfe and tottering condition inEngland^ if any one prefumes to omit a fingle ceremony. But (ince fuch ! tJift.EcfQrm./4ftia 1 20^. t Fox, rff/.irr. /. 500. i: p, 57* ^2 ^ViNDiCATi ON of Part I. fuch trifling impertinences are the chief things about which their Church government is concern'd, who can wonder at its being fo eagerly defended ? The reader will be deceiv'd, if he concludes from the Dodtor's words^ that Hooper was the only man, who in King Ediiw/crs days refus'd the habits. John Roge-rs, amoft excellent Man, and the Hrft Martyr in Queen Ala- rfs Days, is join'd with him by Fuller^ who fpeaks of him and //(x;/?^r, as heads of the party. Dr, Heyf)n alio tefliries, that he refus'd the habits. ^ Nay, he politively refus'd to wear the habits, unlefs the Popiih Priefis were injoin'd to wear upon their lleeves a Chalice with an Hott. The fiune he aflerts concerning Philpot^ a very eminent Martyr ; and concerning one Tyms^ a Deacon, who was likewife martyr'd in Queen Marys Reign. Bi- fhop Latimer derided the garments ; for when they pull'd oft his Surplice at his degradation : Now^ fays he, / can make no more Holy Water. \ In the Articles againft Bi- Ihop Farrar in King Edward's Reign, 'twas objefted, j^rt, 49. " He has made a vow that he would never " wear a Cap ; for he faith, "'tis comely wearing of a ^' Hat, and fo he cometh in his long gown and hat into '^ the Cathedral Church, and to the beft towns of his " Diocefs, fitting in that fort in the King's great feflions " and in his Confiftory, making himfelf a mock to the " people. '' II Nor does he deny it, but fays, " That *' when he goes abroad in winter, he wears a Hat to ^' beat oft' rain and fnow ; and in fummer to fhadow " him from the fun, without any vow of fuperftition or *^ oftence to the People, t '' That Dr. Taylor, the Mar- tyr, was no friend to the habits appears at his degra- dation. When the Popifh veftments were put upon him, " he ftrutted about with his hands by his fides, faying, ^' How fay you, my Lord, am I not a goodly fool ? '^ How fay you, my matters, if I were in Cheap, fhould " I not have boys enough to laugh at thefe apijh toys and *' toying trumpery ? ^' '^ And when the Surplice was puird oft': Now, fays he, I am rid of a fool's coat. And at another time, when fome one had fent him a round cap : I thank you, fays he, for my Cap ; I am fomewhar proud • Hlftor. Reform, part J p. 9Z- t AbnJgaient of tincolnlhire Minifters Book, Z'. 28, II Fox, W. lU. f, £04, f f , ac«. • Fox, f. 174. - Part L //?^ D I s s E N T E R s. ^ j proud of it, for 'tis one flep from the Clergy in thefe days. That Byadjuyd was ai;ainft thefe habits I had oc- cafion to mcnti( n before. And not cnly did Ridley feem to have changM his mind about them, but Cranmer too; for when they were pulling otl their trumpery at his de- gradation, he (aid to them : J! II this needeth not ; I had my felj done with this genre long ago. ^ The Profeflors ofour two famous Univerlities, Martyr znd Bucer^ were both of them ai^ainlt the habits. Dr. Heylyn reflects upon Martyr for bein.^i; ofiended at them, and never wearing them, t And the fame is confirmed by Martyr''^ own words : *^ When I was at Oxford.^ jays he^ I would never ufe " thofe white garments in the Choir, no, tho"* I was a " Canon of the Church ; I w^as fatisfied in my own rea- *^ fons for what I did. " And in the fame Letter he calls thofe holy garments, mere relicks of Popery, And that Bucer was difpleas'd with feveral things in the EnglijH Liturgy, is attefted by Dr. Heylyn^ and by Bez,a. This lat- ter, in his anfwer to Baldimiy Ipeaking of Bucer ^ fays: " It cannot beexprefs'd, how bitterly he bewailed it, that " when the Gofpel began to be fpread in England^ a *^ greater regard was not had to difcipline and purity of " rites in conftituting thofe Churches/MI And being ask'd, why he did not wear ajcjiiare Cap\ heanfwerM, Be- caufe his head "^as not fquare. I might farther alledge many other Confeffors^ who fled abroad in Queen Mary's days for the fake of their religion, and were of the fame opinion about thefe things : but becaufe it may be ob- jefted, that they carried not this opinion with them, but took it up firft abroadj I fliall chufe rather to refer them' to the following times. I cannot willingly leave this reign, without tating no- tice of two fad inftan ces of perfecution, which is the great wickedncfs I defign all along in this Hifliorical Part to expofe : they are both to be met with in Fox's Latin Book of Martyrs; but are left out in his Englijh, out of a tender regard, I fuppofe, to the reputation of the Mar- tyrs. In King Edward's reign fome were put to death for herefy; among the refl:, one Joan Bocher, or Joan of Kent. Mr. StryPe tells us, her herefy was, that ^* She G '' be- * fp», f . 66;, t Hiftor. Reform. /» 6j^ \\ Park, Life, w/f/f. f. 41? / / 34 ^Vindication^/ Part L *^ believ'd that the word was made flefh in the Virgin's *^ belly, but not that he took flefli of the Virgin. '' * Now, fays Mr. Fox : ^' When the Proteftant Bifhops had ^* refolv'd to put her to death, a friend of Mv.yohn /' Rogersy the Divinity Reader in Paul's Church, came *' to him ; earneflly deliring him to ufe his intereft with *^ the Archbifhop, that the poor woman's life might be *^ fparM, and other means us'd to prevent the fpreading *' of her opinion, which might be done in time ^ urging *^ tho', that the while flie livM, fhe infeded fev\-' with her *^ opinion, yet fhe might bring many to think well of it ^' by furtering death for it : he pleaded therefore, that *^ 'twas better fhe fhould be kept in fome prifon, without *^ an opportunity of propagating her notion among weak ^' people ; and fo {he would do no harm to others, and *• might live to repent herfelf. Rogers, on the other *• hand, pleaded, fhe ought to be put to death. Well '' then, fays his friend, if you are refolv'd to put an end ^' to her life, together with her opinion, chufe fome ^^ other kind of death more agreeable to the gentlenefs '^ and mercy prefcribM in the Gofpel, there being no need ^^ that fuch tormenting deaths fliould be taken up in imi- ^^ tation of the Papifts. Rogers anfwer'd, that burning *^ alive was no crue! death, but eafy enough. His friend *• then hearing thefe words, which exprelsM fo little re- *^ gard to poor creatures fufierings, anfwer'd him with ^* great vehemence, and flriking Roger's hand, which ^' he before held faft, faid to him ; Well, it may perhaps *^ fo happen, that you your felves fhall have your hands •• full of that mild burning. And fo it came topafs, and " Rogers was the tirft man who was burnt in Queen ^^ Mary^s tim.e. This Rogers was a Nonconformifl:, and a very exxellent man, and dy'd nobly in the caufe of Chrift, but this bar- barity of his deferves to be exposed : and the rather, be- caufe God in his providence feems to have fhewn his great difpleafure againft it. I am apt to think Roge/s friend was no other than Fox himfelf. As to the other inftance, Mr. Strype tells us, that in the year 1552, ^^\Sept. 27. a Letter was fent from the " Council to the Archbifhop, to examine a fed newly '^ fprung r Cf?!*^?Lf J-if^i /• r^! Part I. /^^ D I S S E N T E R S. J { *^ fpruns up in Kent, '' '^' He fays it appears not what this I'ett was ; he fuppofes they might be the tainily of Love, or David Georges fed. But thefe conjectures of his have no good foundation : I am perfuaded, this fe6t was no other than fome good honeft Diflenters, who be- ing griev'd to fee fo much of Popery (till retained, at- tempted a farther reformation themfelves, which would be a very difpleadng thing to our Bifhops, who expected all men (hould wait their leifurc. Now this 1 ground up- on a ftory, which Mr. Fox immediately fubjoyns to what I juft now mention^ from him. " Much fuch another inftance is reported concernmg " one Hujnphry Middleton (who was afterwards burnt ^^ in Queen Mary's days) that when he, with fome " others, had been kept prifoners in the laft year of ivlng ^' Edzvard by the Archbifhop, and had been dreadfully " teaz'd by him, and the reft in comniinon with him^ *^ and were now juft upon being condemned, in opea " court, he faid to him : Wel/^ reverend Sir, pafs iLhatJen- " tence you think fit upon us ; but that you may notfayyotc " was not forewarn dj I teftify that your own turn will be " next. And accordingly it came to pafs , for a little '^ while after King Edward died ; upon which they were ^^ fet at liberty, and the Bifhops caft into prifon. ^^ This Middleton \vd,s afterwards, in Queen Af^rj'^s reign, burnt at Canterbury ; Co that the commiffion, Mr. Strype mentions^ agrees in time and place and all circumftances to this ftory. And this may the more confirm what I have be- fore related from Fox ; that the Bifhops would have at- tempted to take away Hoope/s life, if he had not con- formed to their humour. Our Author next comes to the Hiftory of the Troubles at Frankfort , which I fhall a little more mdlv, fully relate, that the temper of the Gentlemen of the Hierarchy may the better appear in a true light. When the moft grievous perfecution ragM here in Eng-^ land J in the reign of Queen Mary, againft the Proteftants, many of them favM themfelves by flying abroad ; and coming into various Proteftant countries, they were every where kindly received of their Brethren ; but in no place were they more happily fettled, than at Frankfort : the G 2 Senate ! ?r*5»5E*| h^f^i t* ^?*f ^6 .^Vindication t?/ Part I. Senate gave them a Churchy, but upon condition they fhould not vary from the F. ench Church^either in rites, or in doc- trine, that fo no oifence might be taken. Hereupon, ac- cording to the conditions of the grant, they drew up a new Liturgy more agreeable to thofe of the Foreign Churches, leaving out all the trifling ceremonies that were in that of Ef-igland, They chofe Mr. yohn Knox for their Pallor, who was an eminent Divine, had been Chaplain to King Edwardy and in good efteem in the court for his gift of preaching, and was fent into the North as the King^ Preacher, to fpread the Gofpel among them. He had refused to accept of a Biflioprick otier'd him, and Bifliop Ridley could not but commend him as a man of much good learning, at the fame time he was blaming him for finding fo much fault, as he did, at Frankfort with the Englijh Liturgy."^' The Englilh Con- gregation, being thus fettled with a Paftor and a Liturgy, liv'd very quietly and happily, inviting their Brethren to come and partake of their happinefs. But Dr. Richard Cox^ who fled with fome others out of England^ foon broke in upon their happy fettlement : for quickly after he came to Frankfort^ he wickedly overthrew all the good, order they had fettled among them. Not content with the kind entertainment he met with, as a gueft, and a Brother, come to fojourn with him, he fet up himfelf to rule them in an arbitrary and tyrannical manner : infifting upon it, that their whole fervice muft be orderM accord- ing to the Englifi Liturgy. One, if not the chief, reafon of his fo great fondnefs for it was, that he had himfelf had a hand in compofing it. But when the man's intereft was fmall, and he defpairM of carrying his point by the votes of the Congregation, becaufe his propofal was dif- agreeable to the greater part of them, as well as contrary to the conditions upon which the magiflrates had granted them a Church ; he attempted the compaffing his defigns by the bafeft fraud and treachery : and firft he and his faction anfv^er'd aloud after the Minifter, contrary to the Church's determination. 'Tis to be obferv'd, that, where- as in the Englijh Liturgy the Minifter and the people di- vide the Prayers between them, the one faying one part, and the other the other ; the Englifi exiles had laid afide this H Strype*5 Life of Grindal, /'. \$, 2; part I. r^^ Di s s E N T E R $. 57 .this ufage in their Liturgy in conformity to the Frcmh Church, wherein the Miniilers voice only is heard in uttering the Prayers. When Dr. Cox was ad'nK}ni{li*d of this by the Elders of the Congregation, he with the reft that came with him, made an(\ver. That they would do as they had done in Englandj and that they would have the face of an £;i^////j Church. All this was done by him, before he was allowed a vote in any of the afiairs of the Church. The Sunday following, one of l\is com- pany got up fuddenly into the pulpit, read the Litany, and Dr. Cox and his company anfwer'd aloud. Krioxj as became a faithful Paftor, feverely reprovM thefe difor- ders in his fermon in the afternoon. After much contention the Senate of Frankfort inter- posed their authority, and Mr. John Glauherg^ by whofe favour and afliftance efpecially the Englijh exiles had .ob- tained luch privileges, declared he would fhut up the Church, unlefs the Reformed order of the Congregation was obferv'd. Dr. Cox, being thus difappolnted, ,lias re- courfe to another fort of treachery ; and joining with the accufer of the brethren, charged Mr. Kmx with high treafon againg the Emperour. The ground of this charge was, that Mr. Knox preaching a fermon (after- wards printed) in England^ when he was no way fubjeft to the Emperour, (hould fay of him. Thai he was no lefs an enemy to Chrift^ than ever was Nero : which was moft undoubtedly true ; nor w^ould any Reformed Divine have fcrupled to aflert the fame. Peter Martyr did not ftick to call him jeverijjlmam Dei vhgam^ God's mojl fevere '/o^. * However, by this villanous treachery Dr. Cox gain'd his point ; for Frankfort, being an Imperial City, could not fafely harbour aperfon fo obnoxious to the Emperour. The Senate therefore, tho' they abhorrM the bafe trea- chery of the accufers, yet Vv^ere forc'd to order Mr. Kmx to leave their city ; and fo Cox's fadion got the whole power into their own hands : and thefe new tenants, having taken full poffeffion, turned their old landlords out to range about in the wide world to find new quarters. Then did the Coxian faftion triumph in accomplifhing their purpofes by their crafty, but perfidious and wic- ked counfels : then did they infult their Brethren, over- G :? come • Stryp.L^ gf fraBS. ^^{^ f, i;;; gS 1^ Vindication t?/ Part 1 come by fuch arts, and now opprefs'd with a fecond per- fecution. But the triiiinPhing of the zvicked isjhort. For having now got all in tneir own hands^ and there being none left to oppofe them in their impertinences, they (as 'tis the way of that furious kind of men) fell a quarrelling with one another in a moll: dreadful manner : nor could that little fchifmatical Affembly, that was left at Frankfort^ ever after be at reft^ but by their perpetual quarrcllings and contentions, made themfelves ridiculous to all men, both Froteftants and Papifls. And thus I have given a fhort, but fair account of thefe froul^.'es^uponwhich I fhall crave leave to make a (ewremarh. I. The temper of this Dr. Cox, the ringleader of the faftion at Frankfort, deferves to be taken notice of That he was fufficiently fuperftitious, we may learn from a Let- ter ofCaJfander's to him. Dr. Cox, being made Bifhop of ply in the reign of Queen EUz^abethy had written to Caf- fander : the Letter is indeed loft ; but however by CaJJan- ^fr*s anfwer it appears, that one defign of his letter was to beg his advife, in what form, efpecially they fhould ereft CrolTes. '* That Cox was like enough to write in fuch a manner to Cajfander^ appears to me from what is faid of him in a Letter of Bifhop Jewel's to Peter Martyr^ where- in he writes thus: ^' The controverfy about CrofTes is now *' grown very warm. You would hardly believe how mad ^^ ibme, who feemM v/ife men, are in a foolifli matter. " Of this fort are none of your acquaintance but Cox. To *^ morrow a difputation is to be held upon it. Some Mem- ^' bers of Parliament are chofen to be arbitrators. The ^' difputants on that fide are the Archbiihop of Canterbury ^' and Cox \ on the other fide Grindal Bifhop of London^ *^ and myfelf The event lies at the mercy of our arbi- ^^ trators. However I can't but laugh, when I confider ^^ with what folid and weighty arguments they will defend *^ their brave Crofs. I will hereafter give you a full ac- ^^ count, let it go v^hich way it will : for at prefent 'tis ^^ depending ; yet as far as I can guefs, I (hall never more ^^ write to you as a Bi.liop. For 'tis come to that pafs, ^^ that the filver and tin CrofTes, which we had every ^^ where broke down, muft be fet up again, or we muft ^^ leave our Bifnopricks.'* \ Whether Cox vrzsfo pious a Divine •^r*Cafrander*S2othEpift./'. mo of his Works. Nich. ^ 8. f Colled: « Kec. at ihe end of B.Jbe^ Burnet* s HiJft. of the Eeform, farj III. f. 254. parti. //pf Dissenters. ^9 JDfuine as Dr. Nichols reprefents him, is doubted by Dr. Fuller^ a writer of his own iide, who ufes thefc words concerning him : *^ I am forry fo much is charged on his " memory, and fo little can be faid in his vindication ; and " would willingly impute it, not to his want of innocence, " but ours of intelligence. It moves me much his accu- " fation of covetoufnefs, '^ dilapidating (or rather delig- *' nating hisBiflioprick, cutting down the woods thereof) ^^ for which he fell into the Queen's difpleafure. But I am " more offended at his taking (if true) the many Mfs. ^^ from Oxford^ under the pretence of a Vifitation : ^^ j That was in the third year of the reign of King Edward VI. when Dr. Cox was Chancellor of the Univerfity, as Sir John Harrington^ from whom Fuller has it, relates this matter. II I muft confcfs, fince I wrote what I have now fet down from others concerning Dr. Cox^ I am fomewhat more at a lofs for his charafter than before ; and I am apt to think he was a man of very little Iteddinefs. For during Hooper's troubles, he feemM to be much for moderation, and when BuUinger kr\t to him m Hooper's behalf, he writes thus in his anfwer : " I think all things in the Church ought to ^^ be pure and fimple, removM at the greateft diftance from ^^ the pomps and elements of this world. But, in this our ^^ Church, what can I do, in fo low a ftation ? I can only *^ endeavour to perfuade our Bifhops, to be of the fame " mind with my felf. This I wifli truly, and I commit *^ to God the care and conduft of his own work.^^t But no fooner was he got to Frankfoyty but he appeared quite another man, as we have feen before. And however fond he was of CrofTes, when he wrote to Cajfander ; yet after- wards he was unwilling to officiate in the Queen^s Chapel, becaufe of the fuperftition retained in it : and therefore wrote a Letter to her, in the beginning of which he ufes this expreffion : " I moft humbly fue unto your godly " zeal, proftrate, and with wet eyes, that ye will vouch- " fafe to perufe the coniiderations, which move, that I " dare not minifter in your Grace's Chapel, the Lights and ^* Crofs remaining.'' And he argues earn eftly againft them. G 4 2. My • Sdid tofeedhisfervants with powder* d vemfon (jhrervdlj hurt) to fave other meats. Sir J. Harrington in his Addicion* to B. G. f Church Hiftory, Bt^K 9I p> HI. 11 Set Fuller. B. 7. p. i9i* :t^ Buirnet'i Hift, of the Reform, f^ III. '40 ,/^ Vindication^ Part !• 2. My next remark is: That whatever the Cox/^/^fafti- on did, they did contrary to all manner of right and e- quity. What reafon could be given^ why the Englijh ex- iles might not order their own worfhip, according as they thought fit? They were not then under the obligation of. any laws of Englundy as Mr. Calvin well remarks in his Letter to them. ^^ If the true religion, fays he^ had ftill *^ continued in Engl and y there would be fome occafion *^ to mend fome things, and quite abolifh many others. ^' But now when thefe beginnings of Reformation are. ^' quite overthrown, and you are to fet up a Church \n ^^ anotl:^er country, and are intirely at your liberty ta " chufe that form, which appears to be mofi: for the edifi- ^^ cation of the Church ; I can^t imagine what thofe men ^^ mean, who are fo delighted with the relicks of Popilh *^ dregs. '' And truly I can't fee how it can be pretend- ed, that the Englijh^ who were now abroad in a foreign country, fhould be looked upon as under obligation to obey the laws of England. Belides, thofe Englifi laws themfelves, which enjoin'd the ufe of the Liturgy, were now repealed by Queen Mary and her Parliament. And our Churchmen have oo manner of regard to the A&s pafsM in King Edward'^ time, if they were repealed in Queen M^r/s, unlefs they were revivM by the A6ts of Parliamentpafs'd in fome following reigns; as appears from the late controveriy they have had among themfelves, a- bout the rights of Convocations. :}. Who can wonder that no method of ending our unhappy controveriies could hitherto be found out, when he cbferves by what a fierce and turbulent fpirit our Ad- verfaries are acSed ? Thefe men, when in a ftate of exile, ftruggling with w^ant and many miferies, and groaning under the rod of the Almighty, could not command their own temper; but firft of all perfecutc their Brethren, who difter'd from them, and drive them from their fcttlement. And when they had loft the opportunity of teazing and harraffing them, left they (hould leem to have changed their temper, they fall a fcolding and fighting milerably with one another. And in this noble temper they hold on, for ought I fee, to this very day. So that our pre- fent Archbifhop frankly fays : " I am fully perfuadcd, that " nothing at this day preferves us from ruin and defola- ^^ tion, but that we have not power of our felves to do ^' the Church a mifchief ; and the Prince, who fees but • • " too part I. /^^ D I s s E N T E :?. $• 41^ '^ too much of our tempers, is too gracious to us, and has " too great a concern for the Church's good, to fuiier us " to do it. ^ 4. I think thofe words of our Author deferve to be taken notice of: Only the Church (?/' Frankfort degenerated from her mother's jpirit. For here they received, in lieu of the Englifli Liturgy^ a medly form of Prayer, made tip of fome of our Collects y and other Prayers out of the Geneva ferjice ; and ivhich being ftripp'd oj all our rites and ceremo-- niesy appea/da very cold and flat way ofworjhip. f See here the infolence of a zealot ! He thinks he may make a jell of every thing,which differs from the cuftom of the Church of England. So fatal is it to be carry^'d away with the fpirit of a party! All Prayers deferve contempt, unlefs they are ac- cording to the ufage of the Englijh Liturgy. "^Tis not eafy to exprefs, in our language, the contempt which this palfage carries in it in the Latin edition. He will not vouchfafe to give their Book the name of a Liturgy , but only d, pretended Liturgy ; which he reprefents as an hotch^ potchpifcraps oi Prayers. But if an hotch potchy or medly of fcrapSy deferves only the name of a pretended Liturgy ^ i can eafily direft our Author, where he may find fuchan one, made up of an heap of fhort Prayers, that have more by half of Preface and Conclufion than Petition in them^and difpos'd without any tolerable order or method. And what reafon could our Author have, to think the name of a Litur- gy is to be referv'd as facred to the Englifb Service Book ? But that Liturgy of Frankfort^ being ftripp'd of all our rites and ceremonies, appear d, as our Author fays, a "very cold and flat way ofworjhip. To you all. Gentlemen, whom he has appointed Judges between us, to you, I fay, I appeal: Whether a Liturgy, which retains all rites and ceremo- nies of a divine injftitution, and rejefts only thofe of hu- man device, appears to you a uery cold and flat way oj worjhip ? What an intolerable fondnefs for ceremonies do thefe men difcover ! One would think the old Pharifees were rifen again from the dead. How could our Author pretend to prove this? Surely he thought he had to do with very eafy Judges, who would take this, without a- ny proof, upon his bare word, and thereupon condemn their own Liturgies, that they might pafs the greater com- plement • Appeal, f. 12T, t Pmo. 42 ]^ V I N D I c A T I o N / defends them : ^' 'I hey • !^y noty Jays he, that the apparel is holy or unholy : *' but they may truly fay, the fame apparel of your part " hath been foully abus'd to filthy purpofes : they may " jully fay, they would not gladly in any appearance *^ Ihew themfelves like to them, who have fo untruly, ^' and fo long deceived the world. And herein they are '^ not without fundry authorities and examples of godly ^^ Fathers. '' \ And accordingly he produces feveral himfelf in favour of their opinion. And when fome matters, injoin'd by the Common Prayer Book, were chargM upon the Bifhops by Buliingery and fome other learned Foreigners of the Reformation, they reply^'d in their Letters : " That none of them were of the Par- " Jiament Houfe at the pafling of the Book : and that ^^ they had therefore no voice in making of the law. ^' But that after it was pafs^'d, they, being chofen to be " Bifhops, muft either content themfelves to take their *' places, as things were, or elfe leave them to Papiflsand ^^ Lutherans : but in the mean fpace they promifed not '^ to urge their Brethren in thefe things ; and when op- ^^ portunicy fhould ferve, to feek reformation of them. '" !l But they foon forgot their promife ; for in the year 1 564, feveral of them were concern^ in drawing up the tidier- tifements ; the defign of which was to trouble Minifiers for thefe things: and tho' they met with much oppofition herein, they at lafl got them, upon much importunity, authorize by the Queen. II Hence our Adverfaries may underfland, of whom we have learnM to call their ceremonies, remnants of Popery. And hence our Brethren abroad may perceive, how much the times are alter^'d with us. Our firfl Reformers never afcrib^d any holinefs or virtue to them ; nor were they fo fond of them as to think, with our Author, religion would be a poor and lean thing without them. I could add many other Divines to thofe mention^ by Bifhop Burnety who were very much of the fame opinion ; fuch as Whitehead^ who is faid to have refus'd the Archbifhop- rick • Parker's Life, /. 1 5 5 • t De^"- of ih? Apolcg, f. 3 ;5. H Life of Parker, ?. X54. ^/^{^, f. l}P,f^j>, X60. 46 -4 V I N D T c A T I o N ^/ Part L rick of Canterbury ; Ccverdaley who would not accept Oxford^ or any other Bilhoprick, becaufe he diflikM the habits ; Alexander Nowel, Dean of Paul's ; " who be- ^^ ing one of the Queen's Chaplains, and fpeaking lefs ^' reverently, in a Sermon pieachM before her, of the *' fign of the Crofs, was called to aloud by her, out of " her clofet window, and commanded to retire from that " ungodly digreHion, and return to his text/' * Our Churchmen therefore have no reaion to boaft, their cere-* monies were appointed by the moft pious and learned Di- vines, who made it their bulinefs to reduce all things to the ftandard of Scripture and antiquity. The contro- verted ceremonies were eftablifh'd much againll their minds, and to their great forrow, with a regard only to the pleafure of her Majefly, and not to antiquity. Bifliop Burnet has given us an account how the Queen came to be fo obftinate in thefe matters ; which I Ihall the rather fet down, becaufe it really accounts for one great fource of all our mifery. '' The Queen had been ^^ bred up from her infancy with hatred of the Papacy, ^' and a love to the Reformation ; but yet as her firft ^^ impreffions in her Father's reign were in favour of fuch *' old rites, as he had flill retained ; fo in her own nature ^' fhe lov'd ftate, and fome magnificence in religion, as ^' well as in every thing elfe. She thought, that in her ^^ Brother's reign, they had grip'd it too much of ex- " ternal ornaments, and had made their doSrine too nar- ^^ row in fome points ; therefore (he intended to have *^ fome things explained in more general terms, that fo all *^ parties might be comprehended by them. She inclined *^ to keep up images in Churches, and to have the man- ^^ ner of Chrift's prefence in the Sacrament left in fome " general words, that thofe who believ'd the corporal ^^ Prefence might not be driven away from the Church *^ by too nice an explanation of it ; nor did ftie like the " title of Supreme Heady flie thought it imported too " great a power, and came too near that authority, which •' Chrift only had over the Church. Thefe were her *' own private thoughts. She confider'd, nothing could " make her power great in the world abroad, fo much as ^^ the uniting all her people together at home. Her Father^s " and Heyl. Hiftor. of tb« Reform, /'i aj^. part I. //;(? D I s s E N T E R s- 47 <^ and her Brother's reign had been much diftrafted by the *^ rebellions within England ; and Ihe had before her eyes ^' the inlbnce of the coldnefs that the people had ex- *^ prefs'd to her Sifter on all occafions, for the maintain- ** ing or recovering the dominions beyond fea ; therefore *^ {he was very defirous to find fuch a temper, in which ^' all might agree. She obferv'd that in the changes for- *^ merly made, particularly in renouncing the Papacy, *^ and making fome alterations in worfiiip, the whole " Clergy had concurred, and fo (he refolv'd to follow ^' and imitate thefe by eafy ftcps.*' The more I confider her charafter, the more I wonder Ihe befriended the Reformation fo far as fhe did : for tho"* Cie w^as a very wife and politic Queen, and acted with the greatefi judgment imaginable for the good of her fubjeds in all ftate matters , yet fhe had but a very moderate fhare of religion. Dr. Heylyn tell us, that in her Sifter's time, " 'Tis certain fhe reforted toMafs, and feem'd *^ not a little difcontented, that ihe could not gain fa *^ much upon the Queen by her outw^ard conformity, as ^' to belive that fhe was catholicly affeded. '^ f And Mr. Stryj^e has informed us^ that fhe declarM to Arch- bifliop ParkeYy that had it not been for a claufe in the Ati of Uniformity^ which referves to her a power " To " ordain and publifh fuch farther rites and ceremonies, ^^ as fhould be moft for the reverence of Chrift^'s holy ^' myfteries and facraments, fhe would not have agreed to ^^ divers orders of the Book : '' II /. e. have pafsM the AB of Uniformityy or reformM religion at all. He gives us a hint too, that fhe feldom us'd to hear, fermons, ex- cept it was in Lent. + She was fo inveterately fet againft Priefts marriages, that fhe would never fufter any Ad to be made in her time for the allowing them ; and all the children of Priefts in her reign were baftards in the eye of the law ; and the Bifhops themfelves were forced to obtain particular Ads of Parliament to legitimate their children, that they might be capable of inheriting their eftates after them. ^ Nay, fhe feems to have repented, fhe had gone fo far with the Reformation, and to have threat- • Hift. Reform: fart II. p. 376: f Hift, Reform* f. »7o; K Parker's Life; 48 .4 V I N D I c A T I o N o/ Part l] thrcatned to have reftored Popery, at leaft a good degree of it. Thus Parker relates the matter in a Letter to Se- cretary Cecyl : " The Queen's Highnefs exprefs'd to me " a repentance, that we were thus appointed in office, " wifhing it had been otherwife : which inclinations be- ** ing known at large to Queen Marys Clergy, they *' laugh prettily to fee how the Clergy of our time is *^ handled, and what equity of laws be miniftred to our ^' fort : but by patience andfilence we pafs over, g^Tc. and *' leave all to God : in the mean time we have caufe all *^ to be utterly difcomfited and difcouraged. Her Ma- ^' jefly moreover talk'd of other manner of injunctions, *^ that ftiall hereafter follow. I truft God fhall flay her ^' heart. ^^ ^ What apprehenfions he had of her mean- ing appears by what follows foon after in the Letter : *' I Ihould be forry that the Clergy (hould have caufe to *' (hew difobedience, with oportet Deo obedire magis quam ^^ hominibusy we muft obey God rather than man. And " what inftillers fo ever there be, there be enough of this *^ contemptible flock, that will not fhrink to ofter their " blood for the defence of Chrift's verity, if it be openly ^' impugned, or fecretly fuggilPd. ''^ And certainly fmce our Englijh Reformation was fettled according to the fo- vereign will and pleafure of a Queen, who had fo little of religion or a true and hearty Proteftant in her, we need not be furpriz'd, that it fhould be fo very imper- feft. 2. Another thing, which was a great hindrance to the progrefs of our Englijh Reformation, was the great en- deavour then usM to pleafe the Papifts. And as fuperfti- tious people are commonly very fliff in their opinion, it muft at beft be a very imperfed Reformation which they will bear with. But our Reformation was carried on with fuch a defign, both in King Edward and Queen Eliz,a- beth's reign. Dr. Heylyn tells us of the Reformation in King £i- ivard's days : " That neither to lofe time, nor prefs too '"^ much at once upon the people, "'twas thought fit to '' fmooth the way to the intended Reformation, by fend- ^^ ing out fome preparatory injunftions — All which was " done to this intent, that the people in all places, being " pre- • Parkeff Life, %^//>, f, 30, Part I. the D I s s E N T E R J. 49 ^^ prepared by little and little, mi^ht with more cafe and " jefs oppolition, admit the ti)u\ alteration, in the face of " the Church, which was intended in due time to be in- *^ troducM. * Who then can think we are injurious to the memory of our famous Martyrs ? They, as well as we, wifh'd for a perfect Reformation. "1 hat it could not be broughc about in their time, provM a great trouble to them ; as it has to us, and to all learned and good men in the world, if wc except fome modern Eccleliaftics. Dr. Hey^ lyn^ who was a bitter enemy to the deiign of any farther Reformation, fpeaking of the untimely death of King Edioaydy which was fadly regretted by all the friends of the Proteiliant religion, tells us :^^ That he could not " reckon it for an infelicity to the Church of Eng-- But let us hear what he fays of the Reformation in Queen Eliz,abeth's time. He tells us : ^^ That an Act paf- *^ fed for recommending and impofmg the Bock of Com- '^ mon Prayer, and adminiftration of Sacraments, ac- *' cording to fuch alterations and corrections as were ^^ made therein, by thofe who were appointed to revife '' it. In the performance of which fervice, there was ^^ great care taken for expunging all fuch paffages in it, ^^ as might give any fcandal or ottence to the Popifh par- « ty. By which compliances the Book was made fa ^\ pafTable amongft the Papifis, that for ten years they ge- " nerally repaired to their parifh Churches without doubt " or fcruple ; nay, the form and falhion of our devotions " did fo far fatisfy the Pope, then being, that he fhew^'d " himfelf willing to confirm it by his Papal power : and " Parpalio was inftrufted to ofter,. in the name of his Ho- '^ linefs, that the Englijh Liturgy fliould be confirm^. " II He informs us, that leveral things, which King Edirard had abolifhM, were retained by this Queen, as they had been in her Father's time ; and that, '' For this fhe re- " ceiv'd both thanks and honour from her very ene- *' mies. '' And he particularly mentions Dr. Harding zs one of thofe enemies, who treated her in that manner.' But our Adverfaries, with Dr. Heylyn's good leave, have no great reafon to triumph in the commendations and H ap- ; Hift.ofR^grmtf. 34. t Ibid. Pref. P Ibid. f. 2%h 50' ^Vindication^/ Part L applaufes of the lapifts, who ufe rather toinfultand de- ride them for thcfe things. Thus Eduurd IVcfton^ a Po- pifh writer, girds them : '^ Other Protellants, that they " may not feem defperately wicked, make ufe of our ^^ Miilal and Breviary, culling out fuch things as they " like belt in them : and that their religion may appear " with fomewhat of a better grace, they have their Ca- " nons, forfooth, and their Archdeacons; and, according " to the fafhion of the Church of Romcj they have Caps '^ and Hoods, and fuch like attire, v;hich they fay they '^ found in the Synagogue of Antichrifr: by which it " appears the religion of Proteflants is guilty of theft: • — ^' or, if they don't like to be counted thieves, let them '^ go on to ape us and Antichrift. Thefe men, with all '• their fiate, are a derifion to thofe of their own fide, " as well as to ours/' '^ And then he adds this faying of one : " The Englijh drove the Pope out of the King- ^' dom fo haftily, that they forc'd him to leave his gar- '' ments behind him ; and now they put them on, and, ^^ like fo many Players adting their parts, they dance in ^^ them in away of triumph/' And when Bonmr\v2iS told, that our Parliament had thought fit to continue fome of the Popifh fuperflitions, he is reported to have made this anfwer : If they fup of our brcthy they will foon eat of our beef I cannot here omit a pafTage I find in an old Pamphlet to this purpofe : " We find, that, '' fome of the learnedll of our EngUJh Papifts (namely^ " Martial^ Bri/loiL\ and he that penn'd that Petition for '^ the Papifts, which D. Sutclif and M Poiiel have an- '^ fwer'd) have by this argument juftify'd their Church " and religion. That zee have borrowed our ceremonies from ^^ them. Yea, fome of them, as Harding^ Martial^ and " he that wrote the Apologetical Epiftle for our EngUJh " Papifcs, have profefs'd, that this was to them an evi- '^ dent argument, that Queen Eliz>abcth did in her con- '^ fcience well like of their religion ; becaufe flie liked and ^^ maintain'd their ceremonies. And the fuperflitious mul- " titude do defend the blefling themfelves with croffing ^' their breads and forehead, by our croffing of children " inBaptifm/'t 3. Our • Theatr. vjt, Civil. 5c S^cr, f iincoln's AW7, and if they would take that a- way, much good might it do them. But chefe perfecu- tors themfelves were afham'd to deal feverely with a man of his age and piety, and who had defcrvM fo well of our nation by his hiftorical writings. Towards him therefore they exercis'd an unulal forbearance, and permitted him to enjoy his Prebend. And when afterwards the Minifters were requirM to fubfcribe the Articles, fome of the Bi- fhops were fo very forward and officious, as to devife other Articles of their own head, and feverely perfecuted fuch Minifters who refused to fubfcribe them. It muft be own'd, that fome of the Bifhops at that time were more gentle and moderate ; but the farther we come into Qiieen Eli- z..abetl/s reign, the more rigid and fevere we generally rind them. But though I have put thefe things here briefly together, becaufe our Author skips from the Convocation, to the Parliament's pafling the Articles ; yet it will not be amifs to take a little more notice of fome particulars, be- fore we proceed to examine what he fays. Mdlxiv. It having pleas'd the Queen, to leave fo many cccafions of ofience in the appointed fervice, it cannot be thought there would not be many, v/ho would refufe to comply with the eilablifii'^d order. Abundance of Minifters us'^d that liberty, which they apprehended was broke in upon by the (late ; and fome were more ve- hement in their oppofition than others. Queen Eli^^bethy who feems to have been a Princefs peculiarly tender of her authority, was greatly difpleas'd that her commands were not more uniformly obey^'d, and that Ivliniflers ap- pearM in fuch different garbs in performing divine fervice. And this year (he ftir'd up her Bifhops to perfecute their Brethren. The Bifliops, nay, and the Queen her felf, 'would fcmetimcs make heavy complaints of the fcarcity of Preachers, and the mifchiefs of ignorance in the people^ which proceeded from thence. And yet now, when the fcarcity of Preachers was greateft, means are usM to flop theii' mouths. 1 or this perfecution fell ^Imoll only up- Part I. //;f D I s s E N T E R s. 57 on them. The Popi^ Clergy, who kept in at every chanf^e, and the Readers of Homilies, who were not Preachers, and knew but little of the matter, made no great difticiilty of conformity. 7'his render^ their pro- ceedings the more inexcufable. The perfecution begain in London^ and thefe fixBifhops ufually met (the four Hrft of which were upon the eccleiiaftical commiflTion) Parker ^ Arclibifhop of Canterbury; Gr7)idalyKi{hop of London; Cox, Bifhop ot Ely: Gue/i, BUhop of Roc/je/ier; Horn, Bifhop of H^lnc/je/ier ; and Bullin^^hamy Bifhop of Lincoln. The Mi- niflers being conventcd before them, were requirM, " To ^' promife and fubfcribe conformity to the habits ; and ^^ likewife to the rites of the Common Prayer, the xxxix " Articles, and the Qiieen's injunctions; or to be deprived " within three months. '' ^^ They likewife drew up a Book for Minifters to fubfcribe to ; and all this at firft, without the Queen's ratification of the Book, or any Aa of Par- liament to empower them to do as they did. And nothing could be more infolent than the Lay Chancellor's ufage of the Minifters, in the prefence of thofe reverend Commif- fioners mentic.nM before. " My mafterSj/r/jj he^ and the ^' Minifters of Loi^don, the Council's pleafure is, that ftricc- *^ ly ye keep the unity of apparel, like this man, pointing " to Mr. Robert Cole (canonically habited) as you fee him; " that is, a fquare Cap, a fcholar's Gown, prieft like, a " Tippet, and in the Church a Imen Surplice : and in- ^^ violably obferve the Rubric of the Common Prayer, ^^ and the Queen's Majeuy's injun&ions ; and the Book of ^' Convocation. Ye that will prefently fubfcribe, write, " volo. Thofe that will not fubfcribe, write, nolo. Be " brief; make no words. And when fome would have " {poken, the anfvver wzs. Peace, peace. Apparitor, call *^ the Churches : mafters, znfwer prefently ^fub poena con- ^^ temptm, and fet your names, "f I believe, none of our Adverfaries will be able to find any Lay Elder to match this Lay Chancellor. The confequence of thefe proceed- ings was, that fome yielded, others were fufpended and deprived ; and many of them, having wives and children, laboured under great poverty ; fome betook themfelves to fecular occupations ; fome had favour fhewn them, upon the requell; of noble and honourable perfons ; and fome were * Scrypc's Annals, f. 419. f Grinda:'$ Life, p. 98. 5S -^Vindication^ Part !• were afterwards put into prifons. And thus the poor men, juft return 'd home from a Itate of exile, for the fake of re- ligion, are by their mercilefs Brethren opprefs'd with a fe- cord perfecution. 1 hele Commiflioners fent up for Samp" Jon J Dean of Chrift-Chuych ; and Humjreyy Head of Mag- daltn^ College in Oxford ^ and when they perlifted in their refulal to comply, they were told by the Archbifiiop, that they muft depart their places, I can't but add what here follows in Mr. Str}pe : '^ While they thus ftood out, Horriy ^^ Bilhop of ^«(/;^y?^r, notwithftanding, prefented Hum- *^ frey to a living in the Diocefs of Samm. But "Jevcely ^' the Biiliop, would not admit him, and on this occa- *' fion wrote to the Archbifhop a Letter about it : T^hat '^ in refpeB to his "vain contention about apparel^ he thought '^ be(l to make a flay ^ till he tinder ftood his Grace's pleafure : *^ and thaty unlejs hejhould otherwife advife him by his Let" *^ ter^ he minded net in any zvije to receive him : adding^ that ^^ this longjuflerance bred great oflence. For Humfrey was " conniv'ci at for a good while, till at laft he confented. ^^ But Sampfon was deprived this year, and fucceede'd by ^' 'Thc7na5 Goodxviny D. D. '' ^' 1 can't but obferve, how very different Bifhop "Jevcel appeared to be, from what he was at fome other times ; and indeed, the fame obferva-* tion may be made of Grindal ciud feveral others; that the longer they were in their offices, the more fevere they be^ came. Sampfon and Humfrey usM all the peaceable and fub- miffive methods they could, to prevent their being fo fe- verely dealt with. Mr. Strype has publiTi'd the fubmiflive Letter they fent to the Bilhops, who fat in commiffion : Wherein they " proteft, before God, what a bitter grief it *^ was to them, that there Ihould be a dillention between ^' them for fo fmall a matter, as ijjodlen and linen^ " [ as they ftiled the Cap and Surplice.] " But that it comforted ^' them, that it was but an agreeing difcord, feeing they ^'' all, under Chrift, profefs'd the fame Gofpel, and the ^^ fame faith ; and that it was in things which were in *' their own nature indifierent,- that each followed their '^ own fpirit and opinion, where there might be room for •' liberty of ^em; but there ought to be charity ever. « If * Annuls 421. Part I. //^^ D I s s E N T E R s. 59 " if there were any reckoning to be made of fellowfhip " in Chrift, if there were any feJlowfeelingand compallion, " of which they doubted not, they hefeech'd them to per- '^ mit, nay, to promote that which Paul commended, and " Augujline yielded ; that every one might acquiefce in his ^^ own cunrident perfualion ; and tliat the unity of the *' faith might be kept in divers obfervances. That their *' reafons for this addrefs were many and great, "viz.. That " confcience was a tender thing, that ought not to be " touched or anger 'd. That they were neither turbulent, " nor obliinate, nor willing to fee the peace of the Church ^^ difturb'd, or Itudied novelty, or refused to be convinced. *^ But they v/ere taught by confcience, that things, in their '' own nature inditterent, do not always feem indittcrent " in the opinions of men^ and are chang'd by times and " accidents. That this law concerning the reftoring the " ceremonies of the Raman Church, is join'd with the " hazard of flavery, neceffity and fuperftition. Which, ^^ f^y ^^'^h ^^^^ ^^^ {^tm. fo to you, and therefore you are " not to be condemn'd by us ; but becaufe it does feeni ^^ fo to us, we are not to be vexed by you. That their " confciences told them, that iftheyfhould recollect to '^ their memories former times, God and Chrift, and the *^ faith of the primitive Church were on their fide. — ■ *' That learned m^en in our own age lived and died with " them in this faith and opinion. That they, the Bifiiops " themfelves, if they might have leave to appeal to their ^^ confciences, were of the fame opinion with them ; and ^^ that they could wi'ii, that all thefe {tones of otfence '^ were remov'd. They appeal'd to the purer Churches ^^ o{ Germany^ Frame ?,nd Scctlarid, — In fine, that them- ^^ felves were not ignorant what a great fcandal would " hence ariie. That the adverfaries would infult over them " in their affli6tions, and would laugh in their fleeves at " theBifhops, when they fawthem thus defending their " caufe, and purfuing that which they would have : and ^^ would be ftill more pleas'd with their own inventions, ^^ after they fhould fee them not only retained by them., " but by them obtruded upon their Brethren. Wherefore " they mod humbly praved, that a thing which was the *' care and pleafure of Papifts, and which the Bifhops had *^ no great value for themfelves; and laftly, what they did " not out of any contempt of them, but out of hatred of '' the 6o ^Vindication^/ Part L *^ the common enemy, might not be their fnare, or their " crime. ^' '^- This humble, Itrong and moving Letter, together with fome fuch applications to others, would not prevail in their lifhalf, to (top the Bilhops pro- ceedings againU: them. And fo they were loon clapt into Frifon. The perfecution of the Nonconformifts flill MDLXV. went on. And this year there being a delign of ifluing out a Proclamation, for injoining the wearing the habits, and forcing all the Members of the Uni- verfities thereto; a Letter was writ by fome of the chief of Ca7nb,idge to the Secretary of State, their Chancellor, to prevent it. Itiey fet forth : "^ That there was a mul- *' titude of pious and learned men, who thought in their " confciences, all ufmg of fuch garments was unlawful for *^ them. So that by the impolition thereof they mull: be *^ compelled to depart, and the Univerfity would then be ^^ left bare and deilitute. ^' f Among the fubfcribers of this Letter was JjImlVhitgifty one who afterwards prov'd a bitter perfecuter. But notwithftanding this Letter, the matters in difpute were prefs'd upon them with great rehemence, and they were put to abundance of trouble ; as were Minifters in other parts of the kingdom. About this time many Letters pafs'd between the Eng- lijh Divines on both fides, and feveral learned Foreigners. Matters were falily reprefented to them,and great arts were ufed on the Bilhops lide, to prevent fuch perfons writing, who, they found, would not write in their behalf; and what they thought made for them, they publiOi'd to the world in a way of triumph. The Foreigners were told, that unlefs they comply'd with the things injoin'd, they muft let in the Papills to fupply the Cures. Several Fo- reigners therefore dreading that, and hoping thefe things would loon be alter'd, fpoke more favourably of them than they deferv'd, and perfuaded the oppofers of them to fub- mit. But I cannot but remark, how partial thofe of the Bifhops hue always fhew'd them'elves, treating thofe only with refped who wrote in their behalf: and the fame me- thod continues to this day. Thus, while they applaud fome of thofe abroad, who meddled in our controverfy at that time, they cannot have a good word for Calvin^ AlafcOy and Paikefs Life, p. 162.163. t Parker's Life, f. 1^4. Fart I. r/;^ D I s s E N T E B. s. 6i and Zaiuhs: and Eez.a himfclf frequently falls under their cenfure. And if any (pake againft any of their iinpofitions, they mult be reprefented as not underftanding the cafe in difpute. 1 hus Zamhy Is treated by them. ^' They proceeded this year in this manner with the Lon^ don Clergy : Upon the Bifhops citation, '^ lixty one of ^' them promised Conformity : nine or ten wereabfent: *^ thirty feven denied ; of which number, as the Arch- " bifhop acknowledged, wxre the beft, andfome Preachers. " Thefe w^re fufpended, and put from all manner of Mi- ** niftry ; with lignirication, that if they did not reconcile **' themfelves within three months, then to be depriv'd. '' The ArchbifhGp,//yj wy^/zfAo/*, did expe(^c hereupon, " that their behaviour would have been rough and clamo- " rous ; but, otherwife than he looked for, they fhewed '^ reafonable quietnefs and modefty. He thought fome " would come in, when they ihould feel their wants. " Some he doubted were moved in confcience, which he " laboured by fome advertifements to pacify. "' f But how- ever he appear^ refolv'd to proceed, whether he could pa- cify their confciences or not : fo little regard did he pay to mens confciences. Mn Strype tells us, That the Book put forth mdlxvi: the year before, intituled : A DedarattGn of the Minifters of the City of London, foon received an Anfwer ; and feems to triumph in it, thinking it the Archbifliop^'s. II But he fhould have taken notice too, that foon after came forth a confutation of that piece; which I have now by me, bearing this title : An An- flier for the tyme to the Examination put in prints zuithout the Authours Name^ pretending to mayntayne the Appa- rell prefcribedy againjl the Declaration of the Ahnijiers of London. Printed i'^66. This author anfwers his adver- fary paragraph by paragraph, and in my mind, with a great deal of judgment : and I cannot but wonder Mr. Strype fhould fo applaud the Examination^ w^hich really appears flight enough. 1 will tranfcribe one paflage from the An- fwer, becaufe it fhews w^hat the temper of the Examiner was, and how he treated the Minifters ,• how little reafon he had to cite Bucer and Manyrfince he fo widely differed from them ; and that the fuperfiition about the habits was • Life of Grindal, p. 1 06. t Parkei'g Life, f. 215. li Annals, p. 4?:; 62 ^^^ViNDiCATioNt?/ Part I. was greater, than many car'd then to own ; which was a good reafon too, \\^hy thefe things fhould be the more Itifly oppos'd. l^hus then he : '' We delire the reder to " waye this man's writing with the Epiftels oi Bucer and •^ Alurt/y^ annexid to the end. And to judg whether the " fame fpirit be in them both. They bear with the things *' tollerable for a tyme, wilhing the utter abolifliing of " them. This man defendith themjas good orders, pro- ^' titable to ediHe, and therefore mete to be retayned llilK *^ They elleme the refiflers as godlie brethrene, he con- " demnith them as fchifma tikes, bellie-godSjdecevers, fiat- " terers, fooles, fuch as have been unlearnedJie brought up *' in prophan occupations: pufted up in arrogancie of " themfelves, chargeable to vanities of allertions: of whom ^^ it is feared that they make pofthaft to be Anabaptifls '^ and Libertines : gone out from us, but belike never of " us : ditiering not much from Donatifts, (hrinking and " refufing Miniflers of London : diflurbars: factious will- ^' full entanglers, and encomberers of the confciences of " their herers, girders, nippers, fcofters, biters, fnappers *' at fuperiors, having the fpirit of irony, like to Audianiy *^ fmelling of Donatiftrie, or of Papiflrie, Rogatianes, ^' Circumcellians, and Pelagians. '^ If that Treatife be Archbifliop Parker's^ he is a man of a far worfe fpirit than I took him to be. I queflion, wiiether the Po- pifh writers can furnifli out fuch reviling language, as is here gathered out of him. I will venture any one to compare thoi'e two authors, the Examiner and Anficerer together ; and I dare fay the latter,by any impartial judge, will be allow'd to difcover much more good fenfe and learning, as well as much more civility, in his language than the former. Many Churches now in London were fliut up, for want of Miniflers, in the room of thofe who were filencM. And this the Archbifhop, in a Letter to the Secretary, fays, " Was no more than he forefaw before he began ; " and that Vv^hen the Queen put him upon doing what " he had done, he told her ; that thefe precife folks, " [fo fcoffingly he calls them] would ofter their goods " and bodies to prifon, rather than they would re- '' lent.* The • Piirk<:r'i Life, f. 2 25» Part I. //;a and Buliingerj to which they gave their anl'wers : but the chief argu- ment urg'd againft them was, the authority of the Prince. And tho' thefe men anfwer'd with fome brisknefs, and perhaps fometimes a little rudenefs ; yet whoever will read the account, will fee, their judges treated them far worfe, ufing taunting language^^ and asking enfnaring queftions, and fcrewing their anfwers to the worft fenfe. Thefe poor men were threaten ''d to have their freedom of the city taken from them, befide other puni(hm*ent, unlefs they would conform. They were all, at leaft all but one, remanded to prifon, and there twenty four of them, befide feven women, WTre kept above a year. ^ In this year Mr. Strype places the (lory of Cummin^ a Dominican, his preaching among the Nonconformifts : w^hich is fo notorious, palpable, and filly a forgery (as has been abundantly provM f) that it is an intolerable Ihame for men of lenfe and reputation to mention it. But it happened to be a lie on the right fide, and there- fore muft by all means be maintained. Juft fuch another is the ftory of one 'Thorr.cu Heathy plac'd in the next year. This year another great controverfy arofe, which after- wards was the occafion of much perfecution ; it w^as about Chrift's defcent into Hell j and there were feveral of our Bifhops, who wTre for ruining thofe, who would not hold that Chrift went into the hell of the damnM. We are now come to the year, wherein the mdlxxe; XXXIX Articles were confirmed by A6: of Parliament ; concerning which Dr. Nichols has thefe words : By this AEi all MinifterSy of every quality , being chlig^d to fubfcyihe to thefe Articles y thei'eby obliging thenifehes to conform to the I rites * Grind. Life, f. I$6. t Anfw. to Dr. Scot. 66 A ViNDicATiONigf Part I. rites of the Churchy anil fubmit to Epifcopal government ; jeverul Puritayikal JWuiiJlers c/joje rather to be deprived oj their preferments y than to approve t/joje rites, and that form of government in the Chun/jy uhich in their fermons they had fo loudly inveigh'd againfl. Some of them, more fierce then the reji, began prefently to fet tip feparate Meetings. By this meansy theje very learned meny and ctherwife ijcell deferving upon account of our common religion, out of a nice funciilio of honour y or to gratifie apeevijh humour y did net flick to diflurb the peace of the Church in the moft egregious manner, and to fow the feeds of perpetual diftrabiion among us.'^^ But who can forbear wondering at thefe unreafon- able men, who blame us that we can't follow their ex- ample, and appear in as many fliapes, as difrerent times and feafons may require ? \Ve know well enough their art of approving thofe things, zuhich in their fermons they had a little before loudly inveigh' d againfl, ' Thus without {landing upon any nice punctilio cf honour y^ they relifted King jfames II. and tau^^ht others to do fo too , altho^ they had pretended in their fermons a little before, that no man could refill him, but upon the peril of eternal damnation. We own, \vt are of another principle, and judge of good and evil, not by Ad of Parliament, but by the laws of Chrift. And the things w^hich, with a good confcience, we affert are evil, we always efleem fo, WW the contrary is prov'd to us by arguments fetched from the Holy Scriptures, and not from the laws of the land. But I would fain know, how the Epifcopal party of that time can be faid to have had any regard to the peace of the Church ; while they prefer'd their ceremonies to it, and not only filenc'd, but grievoufly, and fometimes even unto death, punifh'd Minifters, whom they acknowledge to have been learned men, and vjell deferving, upon the ac- count of our common religion ? Befides, as it appears from what I have faid already, the beginning of this fepara- tion was before this Ad of Parliament, when the forward Bifliops required fubfcription, without being impower'd by the law of the land. But againft this feparation our Author, in the next place, produces the authority of Bez,a, whom upon good reafon w^e highly efteem : but yet we declare^ we pay not Page zi] part I. the D I ssEi^T EKS. 6j not that deference to the judi^inent of any man, however learned and pious, as to lurter ourfclves to be determin'd by it, in fpite of the dit^tates of our own confciences. And indeed how fliall we come to any conclufion at all, if we were to judge after this rate ? tor if Btz^a had hccn againft us, theie were other learned men who Vv ere on our hde. But if the matter be throu^',hly examined, our Adverlaries will have no great reafon co boali of i}f::.(/'s authority. He liv'd at a great diftance, and did not know the temper of the Queen, or our Adverfaries ; and the/efore flatter'd himfelf with hopes, that a farther Reformation of religion would foon be made: and if, thro' his eaineft defire of peace among us, any thing dr(-p\l from him unadvifedly, allowance fliall be made fur the goodnefs of his delign. I am fure, if our Adver- faries pay any regard to his authority, they mull: lay afide thole things which we contend about, iince he utterly difapprov'd them. That he thought meanly of our Re- formation may appear from his own words : " When you '' fay the Reformation in England was managM according " to the advice and defire of Bucer, you very much " wrong that good man • Whence fliall v/e better " learn what Bucer moft approv'd, and would have or- '^ der'd, if he might, than from the Church, at Straf- " hurg ? In the rites of that Church, where fliall ^^ we meet with thofe odious ftipulations, of which you ^'^ boafl:, or Exorcifm, or the fign of the Crofs, or " Chriiin ? ^' * If then Beza efieem'd the ftipulations, perfcrib'd in Baptifm in our Common Prayer, to be odi- ous; if he thought Bucer wrong'd, when they were fa- ther'd upon him ; how could he be confiftent with him- felf in advifing us to ufe them ? Can we think thrng^ odious are to be us'd in the worfliip of God, even wlpeii they are commanded by the civil magiftrate ? But wl)ile he was too eagerly delirous of peace, he give fuch 3^ vice, as poQibly he would not, upon a fuller examination of the cafe. Thus Peter Martyr advis'd H-'Oper to fub# mit to wearing the habits ; and yet afterwards was at^ leaft very doubtful what advice to give, if he did not \ give the quite contrary. " As to the habits, which '' are to be ufed, as holy, in public adminiftrations, " ' I 2 "Mr. • Anfwerto Balden, 68 u^ViNDicATioN^/ Part I. " Mr. Bullinger thinks, fince they carry in them a re- " fcmblance of the Mai's, and are mere relicks of Popery, " you ought not to ufe them, left your example fliould " encourage that which is the caufe of oft'ence. As to " iDy felf, tho' I always dillik'd the ufe of thofe orna- " ments; yet, becaufe 1 faw there was an immediate dan- *^ ger, left you fliould be iilenced, and there might be ^^ fome hope, that as Altars and Images are laid afide, fo ^^ thefe relemblances of the Mafs might be taken away '' alfo, if you and fome others, accepting of Bifliop- ^' ricks, us'd your beft endeavours to this purpofe ; which " might be very much hindered by the promotion of " fuch, who might not barely be indifterent, whether " thtife relicks of Popery were abolifli'd, but might en- " courage and defend them : I was the more backward ^^ in perfwading you to refufe the Biftioprick, rather than " fubmit to the ufing thefe habits; but when I confiderM, ^' that we are to avoid all manner of fcandals of this *^ fort, I eafily fell in with Bullinger's opinion. This is *' all I can fay at prefent ; do you, for your part, take " care to do nothing againft your confcience. '' * But let us hear what Bez,a fays, concerning our controverfy ; *' Certainly, as to our felves, we would not take the *^ funftion of the Miniftry on this condition ; no, thoMt '^ was ofter'd, much lefs feek it. Yet thofe, to whom ^^ the Lord this way hath openM an entrance to propa- ^^ gate the glory of his kingdom, we exhort ,• that they " hold out ftrongly in the fear of the Lord, yet on this '^ condition added : that they may holily and religioufly *^ difcharge their intire Miniftry; and moreover, accord- ^' ing to their office, propound and urge fuch matters, as " tend to put thefe things into a better ftate. [But nei- ^' ther of thefe were the Minifters ever allowM to do.] For '^ otherwife, if this liberty be taken from them, [as it *^ certainly and plainly was] and they are commanded af- " ter this manner to wink at a manifeft abufe, fo as even ^^ to approve of what, "'tis evident, wants to be amended; " what elfe may we advife, than that they chufe rather '^ to live privately, than to cherifh an evil againft their " con- * Letter to a Friend in Engl. Part I. /^^ Di s s E N T E R s. 69 " confcience, which, in a fhort time, will necefTariiy " draw with it the whole mine of the Churches ? '' * All impartial judges mull grant thcfe exprelfions of that learned man are too mild and gentle; for certainly when fuch an evil is breaking in, as threatens the -uchole ruine of the Churches^ it mull be the duty of Minifters, not fneak- ingly to withdraw themfelves, but to appear couragioufly againft it. A little farther in his Letter he has thefe words; " Altho"* we think, that civil and politic order is by no *' means to be difapprov^d, whereby not only the orders " of citizens, but of offices are diflinguifh'd ,• yet wx " think every difiinction is not to be approved. For what " if Minifters be commanded to wear fuch habits as Buf- " foons, or Stage players ufe? Would ic not be a manifeft ^' mockery of the ecclefiaftical function ? But in this cafe " we (eem to be guilty of a worfe evil; becaufe not only " hath the Lord rendered that prieftly habit ridiculous to ^^ many Papifls themfelves, but it appears polluted and ^^ defiled with innumerable luperftitions/' Hence there- fore, as well as by feveral other paffages of that Letter, it appears^ Bez^a was againft our fubfcribing to thofe things, which he thought we might bear with. But the ftate of our controverfy has been very much alter'd fmce that time : no fubfcription was then requirM by law, as it was afterward. Farther, he calls the fign of the Crofs, a moft execrable fuperjlition : the putting of quefl^ns to infants when baptizM, he favs, is needle f andjwlijh^ : kneeling at the Sacrament he reckons among thofe^^/^w^/7tr, -vjhich ought to be purgd avS'Uy : Baptifm adminiftred by Mid- wives, he fays, is intolerable : and he declares, that Mi- nifters fiould eavneflly reprove the retaining fuch an abufe; but by no means allew fuchfalfe Baptifm : and. yet Arch- bifhop Parker, at that time, allowed of it. Midwifery being a fpiritual imployment, the giving a licence for it belonged to him. Mr. Strype has given us the oath he prefcribM for fuch ; in which are thefe words : " Alfo '' that in the minifrration of the facrament of Baptifm, " in the time of neceffity, I vAll ufe apt and the ac- '^ cuftomM words of theTame Sacrament, that is to fay, ^^ thefe words following, or to the like efled: : / chrifien " thee in the name of the Father y the Son^ and the Holy " Ghcft, ! Strype} rtMnJl, c/Bez.a'f Letter, w^/>^ to Grind Life, f. yo !^ V I N D I c A T I o N (/ Part !• *' Ghojl : and nc^nc other profane words. And that in " fudi time of necellity, in baptizing any infant born, *' and pouring water upon the head of the fame infant, *' I vvilj life pure and clean water, and not any rofe or *' damasJv water, or water made of any confeCdon or *^ mixiuie : and that 1 will certify the Curate of the pa- " ri(h Church of every fuch baptizing/'' * And yet Giwdal and Hjih had the confcience to write BuUinger and Muilter word, " That they did by no means allow, *^ that women might or ought to baptize children. ^' \ Which 1 would have obferv'd, as an inilance of thofe unfair reprefetuations they made of the itate of our af- fairs, in order to procure Letters againft us from the Fo- reign Divines. But let us hear Bez^as judgment of our Ecclefiaftical Courts. This account of them, he tells us, had been gi- ven him: ^' That excommunications and abfolutions, ^' in fome Epifcopal Courts in England^ are executed, *^ not accordirjg to the fentence of the Presbytery, (be- ^^ catife ther^ is non-e there) nor according to the. word " of God ; but by the authority of fome Lawyers, and ^^ fuch others ; yea fometimes, of fome one man, and ^' indeed for mere mony caules, or matter civil ; and ^^ other things of that nature, as was wont to be done in ^^ Popery. "^ Thefe things leem'd incredible to that learned man,^Which yet every one in Eiigland knows to dc^Qii thefe things, if true, he thus gives his judgment : '^ Tru- be the pratric^oii tinned among us to this very day. Of ly VvT think, that, by fuch judgments, a man is not, anymore bound before God, than by Papal excom- m.unications : and as much we wifh this torturing '^ mens confciences, and foul profanation of ecclelialiical '^ and purely fpirjtual jurifdiviiion, were the very hrft op- ^^ portunity abolilhM by the Queen's authority, as the ^' corruptions of dodrine ,• and that Presbyteries and ^^ Deaconries were fet up, according to the Word of '' God, and the Canons of the pure Church. Which, ^^ unlefs it be done, w*e*fear in truth, lelt this be the be- ginning of ii\any calamities j which, however, 1 pray God avert. For it is certain, the Son of God will one " day cc • A;i:uls, /;. 502. t Purn. Ilift. Rcf. Tart III. Colled. Rcc. p. l\}i Part I. //^Dissenters. 71 €i €i day feverely reven;i;c from heaven fuch manifL^fc abufcs, " whereby confcienccs are dilturb'd, unlefs (omc remey *^ be ufed. In the mean time, we think, what is not '^ rightly done, is rightly born with, by thofe, who can- not alter the thing itfelf ; but yet only thus far, that ^^ they approuc not the thing itfelf, and ufe patience as a ** remedy againft an unjuft opprelfion. But if they be ^^ prell fo far, as to be compell'd not only to bear this " a)urfe, but to approve of this excommunication, as " lawful, and by fuing for unlawful abfolution, mani- *^ feftly to allent to thatabufc,- we advife them rather ^' to bear any thing, than aft againft their confciences/' All thefe moderate and healing counfels of that good man were owing very much to his hopes, than a farther Reformation would be made by the Queen and her Bifli- ops ; but he was fadly difappointed ; and fmce that time, all things have grown worfe and worfe. But by the paf- fages I have Tet down it appears, our Adverfaries have no occafion to triumph, upon the account of that Let- ter. Our Author next falls hard upon Mr. CartiirJght. But tho' the feparation was hindered theriy it luas begun fome few years afterivards by Mr, Thomas Gartwright, a Divine of the Univerjtty of Cambridge ; b^ing led on to thefe precipitate proceedings by a particular refentment of his ow?2y which was occafion d by the Qjieen's commending Dr. Prefton'i way of dijpming before Cartwright'j, who was his Antagonifiy in a public difputation before the Queens when JJ.'e came to fee that Uniierfity. For that reverend perfon, by the fweetnefs of his voice, and the mcdefty of his behaviour y did extraordinarily pleaje the Qyy.een \ while the other , by his natural haughtinefs and rcughnefs, feem^d to fpoil the force of his arguments. This dijgrace brre fo hard upon his proud fpi^''itj that he was refolv'd to leave the na- tioHy and to take a journey to Geneva. ^' When Dr. Fuller tells this ftory, he thus introduces it : If any author may be believd. \ The author, he means, is the fame Sir George Paul, cited by Dr. Nichols. He wrcte rather a Panegyric upon Archbifhop Whitgijt, that a true account of his life : and becaufe IVhitgift was always x 1 4 '-^-■- ! F^gi 2S* t Hift. of Cambr.f . 1^9^ 72 ^-1 V I N D I C A T I O N of Parti. bitter enemy to Caytu^yigbty he endeavours to magnifie his hero by perpetually abuling his adverlary. He fays, " Preftn^ ibr his comely gellurc, and plealing pronun- " ciation, was both liked^ and rewarded by her Majelly ; *^ but Cnrtwright received neither reward, nor commen- '^ dation. This, his no fmall grief, he uttcrM unto di* ^^ vers of his intimate friends That immediately after ^^ her Majefty's negled of him, he began to wade into " divers opinions, as that of the difcipline, and to kick ,*^ againft her ecclefiafiical government. ^* But Dr. ruller here honeitly adds : ^^ But Mr. Cart- " ivright's followers (who lay the foundation of his dit '^ affection to the difcipline eitablifhed, in his confcience, *^ not carnal difcontentment) credit not the relation : ad- *' ding moreover, that the Queen did highly commend, *^ tho^ not reward him. '^ Now who mod deferve credit, inveterate enemies, or friends? Certainly, if we pay any regard to juftice and equity, we muft pafs a more favourable fentence, than Sir George Paul does, upon Cartvjright : for if his account were true, and Cartivright had no other caufe of diP content; \Vho can imagine, fo very learned and good a man would plunge himfelf into fo many troubles upon fo flight anoccafion.^ Befides, ^is not probable, thatmoft politic Queen, who us'd her art to win the favour of the loweft of the people, would difoblige a learned man in the Univerfit}', by denying him his deferv'd praife ; and efpecially at a time, when flie was frrlving to ingra- tiate her felf with the Univerfity in general. None of our Adverfaries, who have any learning themfelves, will deny, that Carnvrrght was a very learned man : nor dees Fuller deny his being far fuperior to Preftcn in learning. But let us fuppofe, the Qiiecn did not commend, nay, that fhe defpis'd CaytvjyJgbt; Who can imagine he could be fo exceedingly difiurb^'d upon fuch an account.^ If he had been a Courtier indeed, there would be more of pro- bability in the flory ; but Academics, and efpecially fuch as have a natural haughzinefs and roughriefsy don^'t ufe to make much account of the judgment of a woman, who Ihould very much regard men for their comely behaviour ; which, Fuller aflui'es us, was Queen EUz^aheth^s manner. But if Mr. Clarkj the writer o( Camirighfs life, is to be credited ; Cartivright did not go to GenfVi^ ^^txht time pre- Part I. the D I s s £ 1^ T E K s. 73 pretended, nor 'till he was turned out of his ProfcfFor- Ihip : Which fliew s this is a downright forgery. ''Tis ceitain, he was chofen the Lady ALi/garet's Profeilor, af- te^- the Queen had been at Cambridge : By which, as well as many things beiides, it appears, how great a refpedt the Univerlity had for him : And if his mind had been dillurbM by his pretended difgrace; no doubt the honour tiie Univerlity did him, in chufing him Profeflbr, before he took his journey to Genenju^ would have fufficiently pacified him. And if 'twas true, that Queen Eliz^abeth had no great opinion of O/r^iur/^At's learning, when fhe was at Cambridge^ 'tis very probable (as I (hall elfewhere Ihew) fhe was of another mind afcerw ards. But Mr. St'i^fe has confuted this flory, whofe words I fhall tran- fcribe: " Reports have commonly been fpread, that the ^' caufe of Cartwright's letting himfelf fo openly againfl "the Hierarchy, as he did foon after, was from a dif- '^ gufl he took at this time ; as tho' the Queen fhewed " more countenance to the other difputants, than to him. " But by the Relatkn of the Queen's reception at Camr ^^ bridge (now in the hands of a learned member of that ^MJniverfity) there appears no clear ground for any fuch ^^ difcontent. For the Queen is there faid to have ap- " prov'd them all; only that Prejtcn pleas'd her moft, ^' and was made her Scholar, with the fettlement of a ^^ yearly honorary falary en him."'' But let us go on with the Dcdor, and fee what Mr. Cartucright did at Geneua: Being there fome timey to inji^rm himfelf of the Calvinian dccirines^ he Toon after returns to England. And having then conceiv a greater averjions to the Englifli ccnfhtuticny ixhich before he had not the kind- eft thoughts vf he begins nozu openly to declaim againfi 2t. If he had not before the kindeft thoughts of the Englifh Conftitution^ chey don't deferve much credit, who pretend he was led into the meafures he took, by a particular re- fentmevit of his cun. But of what doctrines could he be informed at Geneva^ which he might not have been fully taught here at home? The doftrine of the Church of England-, at that time, did not vary an hair's breadth from that of Geneva : The Epifcopal Clergy had then no con- • Anna!s| p. 403, 74 ^ V I N D I c A T- 1 o N ^/ Part J. controveify with the Divines of Geneva^ about any doii^rinal Articles: nor was there ^fiy frfch^ between ithe friends of the Hierarchy and Ccir^right^ or any of the Puritans. I challenge them to prodqce any Epifcopd approved writer, before Archbiflicyp Land's faction, who €ver charged Cartx^^ri-ght^ or any of the l^uritanj, with any error in doctrinal Ma^ters. Let Bilhop C/jarletonjnd^e of this : '' This uniformity, firs he^ of doctrine wa^ held *' in our Church, without difturbance, as long as thole ** worthy Bilhops lived, who were employed in the Re- *' formation : for albeit the Puritans difquieted our ^^ Church about their conceived difcipHney yet they ne- *^ ver moved any quarrel againft the doclrine of our ^' Church y which is well to be o^jferved : for if they *' had embraced any doctrine, which the Church of ^^ England denied, they would aflul-edly have quarrelled " about that, as well as they did about the difcipline. ^' But it was then the open confeffion both of the Bifh;- ■*^ ops, and of the Puritans, that both parts embraced '^ ■*' mutual confent in doctrine, only the difterence was in ^^ matter of Inconformity. Then hitherto there was no ^^ Puritan doctrine known. ^' '^' In like manner fpcaks Dr. Crackamhorp : " You never faw in England a Pu- " ritan, that was an Heretic : there is no quarrel between *^ us and the Puritans concerning faith, or any dottrines '' of taith : our jShurch and they contend about rites^ " and difcipline, but we confent and agree in matters of " faith. " t Mr. Richard Hooker, Bifliop Hall, and a great many other Epifcopal writers, are cited by Dr. Educards, as all faying the fame thing. Nay, Archbifhop IV/jitgift wzs Vveil informed in the fame Cahinian dodtrine with Cart- i^righty as appears by the Lambeth Articles ; and therefore we never find, that he twitted Cartivright with any doc- trinal error of Cahinifm. But on the contrary, I hnd "thefe words of his cited from him : " To traduce Calvin '" in pulpits, I can by no means like • neither do I allow " the fame towards Aaguftine, Jcrom, and other learned '' Fathers. II What * Exammation of chc Appeal, f.7, 8. f ^^^ E^w. Vedt. Redux, f. 5^o* PartL the Dissenters 7^ What Ciihinuiii Divwity could lie then learn at Cicr ,;rju ? Nay, what could he learn there, that Ihould put him upon doing any dillervice to the Church of Zi//^- LjhJ^ Who at Geneva was likely to exafperate him againii the Church o^ England f Calvin was dead before this time. Who was tliere then at Geneva to initruct him, ex'cept it was Bez.a^ who was the principal perlon both in their Church and Univerfity, after Calvin s death ? And indeed there was always a very particular friendlliip be^ tween Bex^a and Cartwright^ after they once became ac- quainted at Geneva : and Be^i-a gave him this commenda- tion, that he thought the fun did not fee a move learned man. But what hurt could the Church receive from any inilrudionsof-S^ZLY/ /" tor concerning him, our Author fpeaks thus honourably : But that they might not run intit the precipitate method oj fepar at iony they vjere hindered by a Letter of Mr, 7'heodorus Beza, that mcft eminent Divine (^'Geneva ; vjho^ a5 for his other eminent abilities ^Jv parti- cularly for this great aci of charity y deferves commendation to all pofterity. The converfation therefore of fuch a man could never exafperate C^rraT/g/;^ againft the Church. One would think, our Adverfaries were about to tell us, that Bez^a wrote inconfiderately at hrll:; and that after- wards, when Cartosr/ght had better informed him of the ftate of our controverfy, he changed his mind, and there- upon ftirrM him unto make a vigorous oppolition againft the Church. He publicly cafls out his refeciicns upon the order of BiJhopSy the Liturgy and the S7irplicey in his fermons zuhich he preactfd. Without all doubt, it was very commendable in CartiV'ighty that he found fault in his fermons with thofe things, which were amifs in our Reformation. And why fhould it not be as lawful to do fo in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, as in that of King Henry, her Fa- ther / Unlefs the corruptions, that are crept into the w^orfhip of God, be laid open and exposed in the fermons and writings of learned men, whence can we expect a removal of them ? Some of the Foreign Divines advis'd the di Satisfied Miniflers, ac that tim.e, to fubmit to the ufe of the habits ; but not one of them ever attempted to perfwade them to abftain from fpeaking ai^ainft them : on the contrary, they exhorted them to ufe their utmoft endeavours, publicly and privately, to get them abolifh'd. And therefore 1 can fee no reafon, TvTa* Carturighty cx anv 76 -^Vindication^?/ Part L any other MiniRers, fliould be blam'd for difcharging a good confcience in that refpect; Dr. Whitgift, who was Mafter of the fume College, an- fwcrd from the pulpit his fermons conflantlyy as he preached them, ucith very great ftrength of argument. If he did, he preach'd with a great deal more Itrength of argument, than he was ever able to write ,• as any one muft acknow- ledge, who will be at the pains of looking into the printed controverfy. But I had rather Dr. FuUevy 2l man of M^hitgijt's one fide, fiiould give judgment between him and his adverfary : " The refult, fays he, of the ^' difference betwixt them is this ^ that (leaving the con- ^^ troverfy itfelf to the judgment of others) if Cartiuright " had the better of it in his learning, Whitgift had the ^^ advantage in his temper ; and which is the main, he *' had more power to back, if fewer people to follow « him. He frequently invited him likewife to debate the fame matters in a public conference \ which he as often declining, and Jhewing an unwillingnefs to make any recantation of his doElrine, he expels him out of Trinity College, where he was Fellow. And the fame year, being Vice Chancellor of the Univerfity, he, for the fame reafons, procures his e- jeBion Ota of the Margaret Prof efforts place, which he en- joy d. It does not appear to be true, that Cartwright was ever invited to a public conference; but on the contrary, "^^ when he himfelf defir'd they might have one, he was bid to obtain the Queen's licenfe for it ; without which luch a conference could not be held, according to law. And by the pretty large account which Mr. Strype has given of this matter, it appears, that Cartwright and Whitgift had frequently conferred about thefe matters; but there is not the leaft hint, that ever Mr. Cartwright vj2lS invited to, or declined a public conference. After I had written this, I met with fuch palTages, as fully clear this matter, and conhrm what I have faid : that Whitgift never challenged Cartwright', but Cartwright him, to a public conference. Thus Cartwright fays, ^twas untrue, that he refus'd his conference : '^ For befide that " I anKver'd, that it was meet that the dodrine, which ^^ I had openly taught, fhould be defended openly ; and " befide ; See'EdW. H;ft. Cambr. /». 1 42. Part I. //;e D I s s E N T E R s. 7^ ^^ befide that alfo I went to two of the Univerfity Doc- '^ tors, to be conferred with ; 1 oiter'd my ieJf to his ^' private conference; which altho'' he had promis'd; yet '' under pretence that 1 was (as he faidj incorrigible, he " would not perform. The truth is, he oHer'd private " conference by writing, but having before experience of ^' his unfaithfulnefs many ways, I refused it/'* Wbitgijt infills upon no more than what Cartvori^ht owns, and fufficiently hints, he avoided a public confer- ence without the magillrates leave : " I have jays he^ ^' fundry times, both privately and publicly, as I am able " to prove by fufficient teftimonies, and you cannot deny, ^' ofter'd you conference by writing of thefe matters ; I " have earneftJy moved you to it, and you have always " refus'd it — Howbeit^ I refufe no way, that Ihall be " thought convenient to the magiftrate/^f I cannot here but take notice, how very differently Secretary Cec)l fpeaks of Cartwrighty from what our Ad- verfaries commonly do. " What mind^ fays he. Cart- " Wright had in the moving of thefe matters, by himfelf '^ in communication, I perceive the fame not to be much " reprehended; being, as it feemeth, not of any arro- " gancy, or intention to move troubles ; but as a reader " of the Scripture, to give notes, by way of comparifon, " between the order of the Miniftry in the times of the " Apoftles, and the prefent times now in this Church of " Englai7d. II The Secretary, who was the Chancellor of Cambridgey in the fame Letter order'd, the difpute fhould be ftop'd for the prefent on both fides ; letting them know, that Cartwright had agreed to it. But the forward Gentlemen of the Univerfity outrun their Chancellor, and inftead of forbearing difputes expell'd Cartwright. When Cartwright openly declarM his mind in certain propofitions, he fubfcribM this fentence to them: ^^ Every ^^ one ought to endeavour a Reformation of thefe things " according to his ftation. When I fay, according to " his ftation, I mean, that a Magiftrate by his authority, '^ a Minifter by his preaching, and all by their prayers " fhould farther it. ''* And this being his principle, he could not be blamed that he endeavoured in his own fta- tion. • Second Reply, ?ref. f. lo. t Defence, f, 3 54' i Annals,/', j 8^, 76 JViNDiCATio N of Part I. tion, asaMinifler, to promote the reformation he proposed. And cl'pecially, iince 1 hnd, by a Letter of Bifhop Griri' duly he added this caution : '' That whatever was done ^^ in this caiife, mult be done without tumult or fedi- ^' tion." " That Letter of Grindiil leads me to remark thefe two things farther out of it. 1. That Cartwright was in a very great efteem at that Ciine in the Univcrhty. He lays: ^' The youth of the U- **" niverlity, which is at this time very toward in learning, ^' doth frequent his Ledtiires in great numbers. " This may raife a fuipicion, that one great caufe of the rigidnels of fome in the Univerfity, who opposed him, was owing to their envy at his great reputation. Was there nothing of this, do we think, in JVhitgifts changing his mind ? that he, who a few years before, join'd witb fome others in a Letter, wherein they deiire the habits might not be imposed in the Univerfity ,* '^ becaufe there was a multitude ^' of pious and learned men, who thought in their confci- " ences, all uiing of fuch garments was unlawful for them; " fothatby theimpolition thereof they muft be compelled " to depart, and the Univerlity would then be left defti- '^ tute : — declaring^ that as far as they were able to " judge, the not laying this burden upon them (efpecially " in the prefent circumftances of the Univerfity) was " not likely to be attended with any hazard or inccnve- ^^ nience :'* -'^ that he, I fay, fhould now be fo eager in proceeding againft Carturigbt for thefe things ? 2. I can't but here obferve, how dangerous "'tis for men to flrain their confciences, and how eafily they then run farther than themfelves defign'd. Grwdal was difpleas'd that our Reformation was not more perfect, and was of that fort of Bifhops, who promised not to urge their Bre- thren in thefe things : and yet upon thisoccafion he wrote a virulent Letter to Secretary Cecyly to flir him up to perfe- cute Cartziright and his friends ; and complained of the Univerfity, as too backward in this aftnir. And this he feems to have done very ofEciouHy, when he had no man- ner of occahon for it. After this he runs throughout all the nation^ bitterly />/- veighingy in his jerinons^ againft the eflablijVd Church; and wbomfotver he could find to harue conceivd any diflike againjl the • Life, f, 162, t Parker's life, App; p. 6p, 70. part I. ///f D r S S E N T E R g. 79 the ecchfiiiftkal co:jjiitution^ he mver lejt them tell he had made them jioorn tyttrnies ^ ^^g^^i'^Ji the Hn^liffi Hteranhy, Ihis is a device, 1 fuppofe, of our Author's- at Ifall he neither jnentions, nor do I renien-vber, what authority he has for it. But there is a Itrange inclination in men, to^' al'i^erfe fuch, as they have already injured. I can't but here taken(itice of the bafenefs and inhumanity of IVhitgiftto- wards him ; who, after he had turned him out of his Pro- feiiorihip and FellowiJnp, talks to hini after this rater " What commoditiesyou want, that I have, I cannot con- " jetture : vour meat and drink is provided with icfs trou- '^ b!e and charges unto you, and in more delicate and dain* " ty manner, than mine is : your eafe and pleafure ten " times more; you do what you lifl", go when you lifl-> ^' come \\hen you lift, fpeak when you lill, at your plea- '^ fure. What would you have more ? I know not why ^' you fhould complain, except you be of the fame difpofi- ^' tion with the Francifcan Friars; uho when they have ^' hird their bellies at other mens tables, were wont to " cry out and fay : Hczv many things are vjeforc'd to endure? '^ Some men are delighted to be fed at other mens tables, " and prefer popular Fame before gold and [iWqy.'^'^ Let not any think fo hard of this man, as that he fpake out of envy, grieving that Mr. Cart^jcright^ when he was turn'^d our, Ihould m.eet with any kindnefsin the world : without doubt, he delign'd hereby to fet forth his ow^n great cour- tefy, and readinefs to do his adverfary a kind office ; and. purely for Carfu^right's eafe, and to make his life the more pleafant, he turn'd- him out. If IJ/hitgift truly thought the loofing preferments was fuch an advantage, and did not write thefe things with a bafe hypocrify, why was he himfelf fo greedy of preferments? Much fuch ano- ther paflage we meet with elfewhere: " But I mufe, with- *^ what face you can feek to deface true Paftors, that do ^^ good in the Church, though not fo mAich as you think " they fhould do ; feeing you your felf, and a number '' more, do no good at all in any place ; but only range '' up and doum, live at other mens tables, difturb the '' Church, and think that you have done your duties, " when you have defac'd other mens doings. lam verily " perfuaded that he which preacheth at his own Cure but " one • Defence, r. 2%i% 8o ^Vindication^/ Part L *' one fermon in a year, oftendeth God lefs, than you do, ^' that* have forfaken your calling. '' * This is the pro- found reafoning of this mifjny difputant ! He is for put- ting a gag in a man's mouth, and then is angry he does pot talk. Cartwright no otherwife forfook his calling, than as a man forfakes his money, when he meets with a highway man ; becaufe he can't keep it. This year the two Archbifhops were bufy in perfecuting the chief of the Puritan Minifters. Eight of them were fingled out by them, as objects of their fury, to be depriv'd, if they refus'd Conformity, f. Lever now rcfign'd his Pre- bend, and what was done to the rell is uncertain, li Befides the eight mention 'd before, Mr. Strype places the troubles of two other Minifters this year ; Mr. Eduoard Deringe^ and Mr. Robert yohnfon. The former of thefe was a younger Brother of a good family, and a man of a bold and couragious fpirit, and extraordinary pious. He wrote a Defence of Bifhop yev:el againft Harding. He preach'd fometimes before the Queen, who was much of- fended with him, and forbad his preaching in her domi- nions, as I find by his Letters. He was a ftrift Puritan, and the Bifhops fell feverely upon him ; and more particu- larly the Archbifliop o{ Canterbury ufed him very roughly, as indeed he was a grievous perfecuter. Mr. Strype cites fome Articles he fubfcrib'd before the Abp. and the other Commiffioners. One of them was : He did not believe that Chrift, either in body or fou^, w^ent down to the damned. Another: That the garments, juftly term'd Popifh, were full of oftence t. But in another book I find more of their proceedings againft him ^. Twenty Articles or queftions were propounded to him, and he requir'd to give his an- fwer to them in writing, as he did : fome of them, about ftate matters, feem to be defign'd to enfnare him : others were to draw him in, either to approve or condemn the corruptions then in vogue. And I cannot but much won- der particularly at the 14th, which is : " Whether any ec- " clefiaftical perfon, may have more ecclefiaftical livings ^^ than one, or not?" What could thefe Commiffioners de- fign by putting this queftion? Did they imagine 'twould be a crime to fpeak againft pluralities, which the Papifts blufh at? • Defence, f 241. t Grmdar* Life, p. 170. 11 Parker *» Life, /?. 325. Ibid, ^. 326. Part of a Regifter, p. jf. Part I. //;^ D I s s E N T E R s* 8i at ? In j^eneral all thofe Articles fecm to be put to wreck his confcience, and get lomewhat out of him, to make him an ortender by his ow n confeilion. tor my part, when I coniider the abominable tyranny of all fucn proceedingSj,^ and the barbarous wi.kednefs of fiftins the fecrets of mens hearts, about matters, of which perhaps they never Ipake any thing before ; 1 heartily blefs my God, that h^ did not cait my lot in fuch days, but referv'd me for times of more equity and freedom. They required him alfo to fubfcribe to four other Ar- ticles, which, I fuppofe, were generally infifted upon with all, at this time ; and therefore I fhall fet them down. 1. '^ I acknowledge the Book of Articles (agreed upon ^' by the Clergy, in a Synod, i ^6^, and conrirmM by the " Queens's Majefly) to be found, and according to the " Word of God. He refused to fubfcribe this Article, excepting againft the Article concerning the confecration of Bifhops and Arch- biftiops. And by what he fays of it, one would think, they urg^d a fubfcription upon others befide Minifters. *' To what purpofe, fays he^ is this Article put in ? Or ^' what reafon is there to make all, both men and women, " fubfcribe unto it ? Let him allow it, that hath pro- ^ fit by it : and he that liketh it not, let him have no ^^ Bifhoprick. " He excepted likewife againft the Article concerning the Homilies. 2. " The Queens's Majefty is the chief Governour, '^ next under Chrifl:, of this Church of England^ as well " in ecclefiaflical, as civil caufes. ^^ Of this he fays : ^^ The fecond Article I freely acknow- " ledge. ". 3. " I acknowledge, that in the Book of Common- ^^ Prayer is nothing evil, or repugnant to the Word of " God ; but that it may be Vv'ell us'd in this our Chri- ^^ ftian Church of England, " Several things hinderM him from fubfcribing to this, fome of which he mentions. I will fet down one, it being evidently a falfhood, and accordingly the Church has now altered it,- but that alone, while it remain^, was enough to convince them of unconfcionablenefs in re- quiring a fubfcription to it. Thefe then are his words : ^^ On Chriftmas-Day we fay : "Thou hafi given m thy Son^ ^^ this day. to be horn of a Vimn. The fame words we ufe K " all 8^ >4ViNDicATioNc/ Part I. '^ all the week after; as if Chrift on everyday had been " born anew. If we will fay, this is but a trifle ; the ^' lighter you make of it, the lother I am to write, that it ^' is according to the Word of God, or agreeing with it. '^ 4. " I acknowledge, that as the public preaching of " the w^ord, in this Church of England^ is found and " fmcere; fo the public order, in the miniftration of the *^ Sacraments, is confonant to the Word of God. '^ There is a pleafantnefs in his exceptions to this Ar- ticle, but yet fuch a flrength, that I defy all his adver- laries to anfwer him. " For the firft part, fays he, that *' all preaching in England is found and fincere, how can " I tell, when I hear not all Preachers ? And fometimes " thofe, that I do hear, preach neither fmcere, nor fo- ^^ berly: But this is the fault of man; for liberty in this " behalf (God be thanked) we have it ; and 1 humbly " confefs, the Preachers of this Church may preach the " truth with boldnefs. '' Againft the fecond part of the Article, the adminiftra- tion of Sacraments, he objeds the order for women to baptize, the queftions and Crofs in Baptifm, and laflly he fays: " The Wafer-cake in many Churches, is ^' thought intolerable ; and our own Adt of Parliam^ent, *^ for avoiding of fuperftition, hath appointed other ^^ bread : And what then, if I fliould miflike of it ? "' He adds: " Another caufe why I cannot limply fubfcribe : " In this Article and the firft are direct contraries. In ^^ the firfl: Article I mull: fubfcribe to all the Homilies j " in this to all the ceremonies ; and yet our own Homi- '^ lies condemn many of our ceremonies. '^ Here he alledges the words of the Book of Ho/mlies: " That the " cofUy and manifold furniture of vefiments, lately ufed ^' in the Church, is Jeiji^ijhy and m.aketh us the more " willingly (in fuch apparel of Chriftians) to become ^^ jfeivijh, In another Homily "tis faid of piping, " linging, chaunting, playing upon Organs, (jc. that ^' they greatly difpleafe God^ and filthily dehle his holy '' Church.'' This good man could not fubfcribe contradictions : but the (licking at that being a piece of needlefs precifenefs, the Biiliops thought fit to perfecute him. The other perfon, mentioned by Mr.Srryfey is MwRo— bert Jo/mfon^ Domeftic Chaplain to the Lord Keeper BacQn; who^ when he was rcquir'd to fubfcribe, refused, and k i Part I. r/;i? D I s s E N T E R 5. 8^ and was fufpendcd. Mr. Strype reprefents him as a f.ill^ accufer of the Provoft of his College; and as afterwards* in the year 1609, reviling the Puritans in a Sermon he preach'd and printed. But there feems to have been two perfons i^i that name : for I Hnd this remark added, at the end (jf an account of his trial at IVciiminfter Haily zo Fibr. 1575 • ^hat he died a prifoner in the Gatehouje at lfl/imm/ie,\ very Ihortly after, being in great neceffity. He \^•as tried for marrying without the Ring, which he fays he did for fome time ; but upon a complaint made ai^ainlr him, he took up the ufe of it again. Another part of his indictment v/as, that he omitted the lign of the Crofs. To w^hich he anfwers, owning, he had in- deed done fo : ^' But, Jays he, not upon contempt : but '' feeing that I have already fuftain^'d feven weeks im- '' prifonmcnt, with the lofs of my place and living, I ^^ befeech you be indifterent judges, whether this be not " a fufficient punifhm.ent for fo fmall a trefpafs. '' But his chief crime w^as^ that there happening to be too little Wine, when he was adminiftring the Sacrament, he fent for more, and reckon'd his rirft confecration was fuiEcient for what vras afterward applied to the fame ufe. The thing is difputable, whether he did well or no; but fure he deferv'd not to be indicted for it, and to be treated on his trial with fo much bitternefs, as he w^as, by the Bifhop of Londony Dr. Sandys, and other ecclefiallical perfons. Dr. Nichols, in the next place^ gives us an account of 'The Admonition to mdlxjju; the Parliament , of which he makes Mr. Cavtvcright the author. By the Book it felf it dp-»' pears, feveral were concern^ in it ,* but it does not ap-^ pear Canv^right was one of them, and Mr. Clark denies it. The Do^or fays : It -jjas a Pamphlet fiU'd with abo^ minable reproaches upon the Bijhops, and with extraorr dinar y mcomiums tipon Mr. Ccilvin's platfor?n of Church difcipline : ■:ihich government he dejtres may be by law efiablijh'd. * rhe fiile of the Admonition was indeed fomewhat fharp and fevere ,• but then it muft be confider^d, what provo- cation had been given before. The Bifliops had, for five or iix years, (as it is hinted in the Preface to thefirll Part) K 2 been f.27. 84 Ay INDICATION of Part L been perfecuting poor Miniflers for difcharging their confciences ; and let the expreffions us'd be ever lb hard, yet they are nothing, if compared with what the Mini- flers had endurM : and befides, the corruptions they fpake againft were fo very great, that fome feverity in expoling them was no more than they delerv'd: and the Bifhops themfclves had fct them an example, having be- fore ufed them with the coarfeft language, as I have al- ready fhevvn from a Treatife publifti'd by their diredtion, and composM, as Mr. Strype thinks, by Archbilhop Par- key himfclf But however, it is not decent in the Dodor to objedt againfi: fuch a ftile ; when he has himfelf plead- ed in defence of the ufe of it. Let him but imagine the writers on our fide to affume his words^ and he will not be able to deny them to be a fufficient vindication : ." There remains one thing, which we would deiire of " our Brethren, viz.. That whatever we have already " faid, or fliall hereafter fay, with freedom, they would *^ not think we are led thereunto by ill nature, or any '' malicious delign againft them : for we do moft folemnly " aflure them, that we do not bring againft them the " hand of an enemy, but that of a phyfician ; and that " we have not touch'd thefe wounds of the Church to '' the quick, with any other view, but only for fear that ^^ not being well healed, they fliould again break out. " Which Apology I deflre may be accepted, with reference to all the freedom I make ufe of, thro^ this my Anfwer to the Dodor. I can't tell, why he fhould be offended with the authors of the Admonition^ fr.r their extraordi- nary encomiu7ns of that platform^ which, they were per- fwaded, was agreeable to the Scriptures. "^Tis very true, as the Doctor obferves : The authors of the Admonition defird^ the government they defcrib'd might be by law ejiw blijh d. This, I think, was the greateft fault in the Book, or in any of the attempts they made. With unanfwerable evidence they exposM the corruptions of the EftablifliM ecclefiaftical Government, and particularly the perfecution and tyranny, by which it was upheld. But I fear, could they have obtainM their defire of the Parliament, the platform they proposed muft have been eftablifli^'d by fome perfccuting laws ; which I can never hnd Chrift ap- pointed his Minifters to make ufe of, in the advancement gf his kingdom. Their difcipline, had it been eftablifh'd, would, I doubt not, have been more ferviceable to reli- gion, I Part I. the Di s^'E'N t e r s. 8^ ion, and iefs tyrannical than the Epifcopal fchettle-^^bu^ that it would have been fettled upon a right 'fi)Ot, f ckn^ not believe: fori think, all compuHlon, and all enforcing of ecclefiafiical difcipline, by civil penalties, is quite con- trary, to the fpirit of Chriiiianity. But the Parliament give this atrogant Petition fadh a treatment^ as it defervd; and that they might not b^ trou- bled loith Juch ihjolent AddreJJes any muve^ they order the i'i2tyoducers of it to be taken into ciffl)dy, '-" •.'- ^ Our enemies are commonly very partial iri fheir-jiadg- incnts : they will not pafs the fame fentence uponthofe, who oppos'd the fuperlHtious cbrriiptions \nW\r\g' JTenyyh time : and why was ir not as lawful to oppofe thole in •Queen Elizabeth's? They did not like the fevere proceed- ings againfttheirownBifliOps, m King j^^;;/6'j the Second's reign, for addreffng their Princ-^ ; and why fhoujd they he ofiended with what was done by the Puritans^' who ap- peal'd to the higheft Court of Parliament^ from the4o.wer of the Bifhops and Commiffioners; becaufe they'f<:v6nd no equity at their hands, as they exprefs thomfeK^es? I cannot think our Adverfaries are confiftent with them- felves. If perfecution is lawful and commendaWes^-^'U'hy do they difclaim it, and pretend ^tis contrary t6 their principles ? If it be lawful, why do they commend the perfecuting pra(5uces of their predeceffors ? '^^ -^'""'* ^ But this feverity vjas fo far from giving a chetk'^o ihi Jiercenefs of their Jpirits ; that it did the rather irritate them, and vcas the cccafion of their pyefenti^ig A fecorid Admonition to the Parliament : and in this they do no't-he- [peak their favour^ as in the firfi^ by intreaties i hutihey perfetily infuh them by threats and reproaches : they plainly tell them, '* That the State didnct Jhevj itfelj uprnht, aUedge ^' the Parliament vchat it will, ^:. '' This is not a fair citation. I will fet down the pallage a little more largely ; by which the reader will fee, the Dodor has changed a conditional expreffion to an abfoiute one : " The mat- " ters, fays they, containM in xho Admonition, how true " foever they be, have found fmall favour : the perfons, " that are thought to have made them, are laid in no " worfe prifon than Newgate : the men that fet upon '^ them are no worfe than the Bifliops : the name, that " §oeth of them, is no better than rebels; and great ^^ words there are^ that their danger will yet pxove^rear< ^^ er. Well/ v/hatfgever is faid or done againft the:t K 3 86 -4 Vindication^ Part I. ^' or whofoever fpeak or work againft them, that is *^ not the matter ; but the equity of their caufe is the ^^ matter : and yet this I will fay, T'hat the ftate jhevccth *^ not itfelf upright y if it fuffer them to be mole fled jor ^^ thaty which was fpoken only by way oj Admonition to the ^^ Parliament : which was to conlider of any fuch Ad- ^' monition, and to receive ic, or reject it, without ^^ farther matter to the authors; exxept it contained fome '' wilful maintenance of manifeft rebellion, or treafon, ^^ which it cannot be prov'd to do. "' The two next pafl^ges are in like manner exprefs'd in the Book itfelf: That in cafe the Parliament did not deal juftly and righte- oully, and efpecially in fuch a caufe as this, the foreft yengeance was to be expedted. And as to the laft ex- preffion, take it even in the Doctor's words, I can't imagine how any man can find fault with it*. In thefe Admonitions were printed Letters from Beza^ and Gualter, in our favour; which Mn Strype reprefents as obtainM by falfe reports ; but is fo prudent, as not to mention wherein their reports were falfe. * And indeed, ^twould have been ftrange, if the Minilters fliould have had an occafion to amufe thofe Divines with falfe re- ports of the Bifliops and their perfecution, when the plain truth was too bad in all confcience. . Thefe Admmiticns begat a new controverfy between Cartwright and TVhitgiji. The latter pretended to anfwer them,- whereupon the Minifters coniulted about an An- fwer; znd Cartwright y by lot, was appointed to under- take it. His Anfwer came out very foon, and was com- mended by fuch as were adverfaries to the caufe he pleaded. Hereupon Whitgift wrote a Defence of his An- fix:er. And in that, as a compleat intire viftory, not only Dr. Heylyn triumphs, pretending Cartivright never dar'd to write againfl f; but Dr. Fuller ^ a more moderate writer, fpends many conjeciures upon the reafon of his lilence:!! whereas he really anfwerM him largely, in two confiderable Volumes; the former printed in 15755 ^he other in 1577. And which is ftrange, both thefe Doc- tors cite Cartwright's laft Anfwer; Fuller in the Page be- fore and Heylyn about three Pages after, they give this account. This • Park. X-ifc,i'. 348. f Hiftor. Pr^byt. p. 238. f Boch 9 f 103. Part I. r/;^ D I S S E N T E R s. 87 This year the Parliament fat, and the Houfe of Com- mons took the ftate of religion into confideration ; and brought in two Bills, relating to that attair. One was con- cerning Rites (ind Cerermriiey, ^^ In one of thcfe Bills fevc- " ral of the xxxix Articles were rejected, and complaint " feems to have been made of the inditting, and hard ufage " of many godly Preachers, when, en the other hand, Pa- *' pids had encouragement.'^' Whenfomeof theMcmbers- confer'd with the Abp. he figniried his dillike, becaufe " the ordinary courfe of redreHing matters amifs did pro- '^ perly belong to the Bifliops in Convocacion/'' But what a miferable cafe mult our poor nation be in after this rate ? The Convocation is feldom at leifure to reform any thing amifs ; and muft the Parliament be fo complaifant as to wait till they are willing ? But why might not the Parlia- ment undertake this matter ? All the laws about religion were of their making: and if they found any mifchief and inconvenience followM any of them, was it not their bu- finefs to alter them ? Farther, when the Abp. ask'd them ,• Why they left out the Articles concerning the M- miliesy the Confecration of Bijhops^ and fome others : and was anfwered j Becaufe they had not time to examine how they agreed with the Word of God : the Abp. replied; Surely }OumJi(yk the matter. Ton v:ill refer your feheiicho^ ly to us therein, Mr. Strype is oftended at the Anllver made to this of the Abp: That they v/ould pafs nothing, before they underftood v/hat it was : that to do fo would be to make them Popes. But is not the thing plain ? What can any Pope in the world do more, than require an implicit faith, and perfecute men for w^ant of it ? Here was now a fair opportunity for the Bifliops to have attempted a Refor- mation, according as they had promised ; but they were warm in their nefls, and neither regarded the confcicnces, nor fufterings of their Brethren. And 'tis not unlikely they might have a hand in putting a ftop to thcfe good pro- ceedings of the Farliam.ent. For the Queen, according to her arbitrary manner, lent and forbad their meddling with thefe matters. So jthat our Reformation, after all the boaft- ings about it, was mofdy model'd according to the pleafure of a v/oman ; of whofe charafter for religion I have had occafion to fay fomewhat already. K 4 Mr. FarK, life p. 35>4* 88 J V I N D I c A T I o N (jf Part Ij Mr. Stvype's 2LCCCunt of the ftate of religion at this time is very remarkable : " T he Churchmen heapM up many *^ Benefices upon themfelves, and redded upon none, ne- *^ gleciing their Cures j many of them alienated their ^^ lands, made unreafonable leafes, and waftes of their ^^ woods; granted reverfions and advowfons to their wives ^' and children, or to others for their ufe. Churches ran ^^ greatly into dilapidations and decays; and where keptna- ^^ fly, and hlchy, and undecent for God's worftiip. A- ^' mong the laity there was littl^ devotion. The Lord's *^ Day greatly profan'd, and little obferv'd. 7 he common " prayers not frequented. Some lived without any fervice of ^' God at all. Many were mere heathens and atheifls. The ^' Queen ^s own court an harbour for Epicures and atbeijisy '^ and a kind of lawlcfs peace, becaufe it flood in no pa- ^^ rifh.'"^ I do not wonder therefore, if fuch good men as the Puritans Vv'ere, fufier'd grievouily at the hands of fuch an ungodly generation. This year the perfecution was hotter MDLXxm. againfl the Puritans, than ever it had been before. Several eminent Minifters were brought before the Council, and feveral before the Ecclefiaftical Commifficn. By the Articles propounded to fome of them, they were examined: whether the Book of Service w^^s good and godly, ezery tittle grounded on Holy Scripture.^ Whether the xxxix Articles were agreea- ble to the Word of God, or not ? W^hecher we mufl of ne- celTity follow the primiitive Church in fuch things,as are ufed and eftablifhM,. or nct.^ And whether all Miniflers fhould be equal? Ar;d furelythey had a wonderful opinion of their Service Bock, that there was not a little amifs in it. One w^ould think they fhould have left this honour to the Holy Scriptures, and only to the originals of them. But what will not a perfecuting fpirit hurry men to.^ Againft one of the perfecuted Minifters, Mr. De:i}2ge, ^twas objeded : That he fpake againft: the defcent of Chrifl into hell ,• againfl Miniucrs who did not preach ; and for the right of people to elect their Minifters. Several of the Minifters were cafl . into prifon, and fo inhuman wer^'the'Ecclefiaftical Com- milTioners, that they made an inquiry who were the per- fons, who vifited tliem in their aiHiction ; tho^ the com* fore ; Park Llie, p. 3P5. Part I. z^^' D I s s E N T E R s. Sg fort of their friends vifits does not ufe to be denied to thieves, murderers, and luch like vile malefactors. Seve- ral of the Miniilers were threatened with banifhment, un- lels they would agree to their religion. 'I he Archbifliop prompted the Privy Council and the Queen to feverity againll them. And two fevere Proclamations were publiHi'd againii: the Puritans, and one of them particularly againft their Books, tor notwithllanding Whitgijt's endeavours, this courfe was thought the molt el}e(!:iual confutation. The violence and fury of theBifliops did but render them odious, and the Miniilers the more belov'd in the city. This gready mov'd their envy and malice, infomuch that Sands^ Bp. oi Lcndo}!^ advis'd: '' That the chief authors " of thisfedition [as he was pleas'd to call it] v/ho were ^' now elleemM as gods, fhould be remov'd tar from the ^' city. If thefe idols, faid he, who are honoured for '^ faints, and greatly enriched with gifts, were remov'd '^ from hence, their honour would fall into the duft ; " they would be taken for blocks, as they are. ''' ''^^ This was fine language from a Bifhop concerning his Brethren, for whom he cnce profefs'd a great eiteem. Afterwards he cries out to the Lord Treafurer, and other Lords, to put to their helping hand ; telling them, that as for himfelf, '' He was too weak : yea if all of his calling *^ were join'd together, they were too weak : their efti- " mation was little, their authority lefs: they were be- *^ come contemptible in the eyes of the bafeil: ibrt of peo- ple. And may that always be the reward of perfecutors. Mr. Deringy 2l Minifter who had a Lecture at Paul's, f was forbid reading there ; but he procur'd a Letter from the Council to reftore him, as he told the Bp. of London. Mr. Strype fays the Council gave him no Letters, and fo in eftect charges him with a falfehood. But he has been fo kind as fully to clear him w^ithin a few Pages after, by an atteilation under the hands of the Abp. and Bp. oi Lcndvn : ^^ We have fent unto you certain Articles, taken out of ^' Carf^xrigbt's Book by the Council, propounded unto " Derwgy with his Aniwers to the lame ; and alfo a Ccpy ^^ of the Council's Letter, zurit to M,\ Dering, to rejlore htm ^' to Lis jormer reading and preaching, his anfwer notwith- " ftanding, our advices never required thereunto. Thefe " pro- • Park. Life, /. ^sS. t Paik Life, /. ^2%. 90 ^Vindication^/ Part I. *' proceedings puft' them up with pride, make the people *^ hate us, and magnify them with great triumphings. '' ^ I fhall now return to Dr. Nithvls^ and conlider what he fays concerning this year. And the Hrlt thing he complains ot it : T'hat Cartwright, jtinnig vcith himjome cf Ins Puri- tan jr tends ^ openly begins afeparationfrom the EJlablijh'd Clmrcb, And now under his direction a Puritanical Clafs is jet tip at Wandfworth, near London j and ethers were e- \eEied at Northampton, Daventry and Kettering tn Nor- thampconfliire : and Jeveral others in Warwickftiire, Sultoik, and in ether counties of the kingdom. The Puritans had Jong made their complaints and tefli- lied againft the eltablifh'd corruptions, and pleaded for a more thorough Reformation; and if, upon hnding there was no hope they fhould perfuade the government to un- dertake the work, they made an attempt themfelves, who can blame them.^ Our Author, in his Latin Treatife, taxes this with Schifm. And we can freely return him his com- plement; being Vv'-ell allur'd, that to leparate from Schifma- tics is no Schifm ; and efpecially when they turn furious perfecutors. If the Puritans were in any fault in this mat- ter, it ftiould rather feem to me to be, that they were fo backward to leave thofe men, who wxre very forward and zealous to drive them out. The Church pretends once a year to make a complaint of her want of a godly difcipline. And where was the hurt, if thefe men attempted to fet up fuch an one ? Thofe Minifters of the Jeparationy w'ho had no Benefices ^ kept Con'uenticles in private houfes, or in the fields. And therein they imitated the primitive Chriftians, as our Ad- verfaries do their perfecutors, who exprelVd their contempt of their affemblieS;, by beftowing the fame name of Conven- ticles upon thein. Others who were the parif) Minifters ^ referv'd the office of preaching to themj elves; but for reading the Common Prajery they hired fome forry per fon^ of the meaneji of the laity J to perform it. Mr. Snape, Minifter at Warwick, a g> eat Puritan of that time^ and Mr. C^rtwrl^ht^s particular confident^ did tranfgrefs all rules ofmodefty in this particular y and hired a Lane old Soldier to be his Reader. It is not fair from a fingle inftance, if true, to advance a general charge; as our Author here does, againft a whole party. What Mr. f 433. Part I. //;^ D I s s E N T E R s. 91 Mr. Sihipe did might be no common pra6(ice. But the cafe is this: In the ioreign CJiuiches, as Jikeuile in lome of tivj Cc^nformilts Churches, 'tis common for the Clerk to read the Scriptures. This is all I can guefs was done by the Soldier, ordinarily in the ailcmbiy ; nor can it be thought to be done out of contempt : unlefs it be imagin'd, that Mr. Snapif deiign'd to treat the Holy Scriptures with con- tempt ; which 1 never heard any one pretend to charge upon the Pu itans. There is not the leait mention made by our Author's voucher, of the Soldier's reading any part of the ordinary fervice of the Liturgy. He was ordered indeed to read the Ofjicefor Matrmmty^ but that was not to contemn it ; but bccaufe Sncil)e held, " That duty to " appertain no more to the Minifler's office, than to any ^^ other man. ^' But what greater evil was there in Snake's imploying a Soldier, had it been to do ail our Author- fuggelts ; than there w^as in Bifliop Aylmers ordaining his old Porter, and not only allowing him to read the Church fervice, but beiiowdng a living upon him alfo ? The Puritans having fet upon this work, and being more afraid of the Bifhops temporal power than their ar- guments, acted, as our Author fuggells,. with a great .deal of privacy ; which ail, who are impartial, muft own to have been prudently done by them. After this tbeyprccecded idth alltkefv!e?nnity of a legal cmin- iily making Canons and i nj unci ions ^ to be cbjerv'd by all tberr follozi'ers. If our Author had fet down what thefe Ca*- nons and injunfrions were, every one would have been able to difcern, that they are not like thofe of idoj, which de- nounce a great many excommunications againft perfons, vcho are far from deferving them. Indeed their Canons (as our Author calls them) are no other, but the refolu- tions they fonn'd concerning their duty, upon the moit ferious deliberation. They did not pretend to make any thing a fm or duty, w-hich the Scripture did not make fo. Supported by this authority y the Ptr.it an Mini/leys take upon the?n^ judicially to ariimadvert upon anyfaultSy committed by any of their Congregaticn^ and to f^xcomrmmicaie and forbid the life oj the facr anient s and publick vcorfbip, 1 he autho- rity by which they werefupported, was that wliichChrift has given to his Minifters, whom he has plac'd as rulers ia his Church ; which is an authority much better, than the civil magiftriite is able to beilow^ And one would thinij here could be nothing, that any man fliould be able 92 -4 V I N D I c A T I o n' (7f Part I. able to look upon as criminal. Our Author fuppofes per- fons to be really guilty of /^/^/^j; and why (hould not their faults be amiruid'veftedufonzccoxd'ingX.oKhtir dt^QXt} This certainly is jult matter of praife, rather that reproach. And \would have much better become our Author, to have lamented the utmoft lofs of difcipline in his own Church ; than to upbraid the Puritans with reviving and reftoring it among themfelves. The perfecution of the Puritans flill went MDLXXvr, on, tho' their great enemy, Archbifhop ParLerj w^as dead. Grindalyhis fucceilor^ had too much a hand in giving them difturbance, and ftirring up the Queen's anger againit them, while they endeavoured to dif- charge their duty with a good confcience. And now this year he had a tait of that hard ufage himfelf, which his Bre- thren had met with from him : for he fell very much into the Queen's difpleafure,upon the account of his encouraging a foijc of exercifes, which w^ere than call'd Prcpbecyings. Of thefe I Ihall here give a fhort account. The tirft mention I find of them is in the year 1571 : '' When ^^ they were fet up at North ampin^ with the confent >' of Scambley^ the BilTiop of the Diocefs, the Mayor *' and his Brethren, and other the Queens's Juftices of " the peace within that county and town. In thefe *' exercifes, certain of the Miniiters, who were appoint- *' ed, ( difcourj[ing orderly one after another) handled ^^ fome Text (given, as it feems, by the Bifliop) open- " ing the fame briefly and plainly to the people. The *^ hril:, that fpake, began and ended with Prayer : His ^^ province was to explam the Text he read, and to con- ^' fute any falfe and unfound expofitions thereof: then ^' to give the comfort to the audience, that the place '^ miniftred juft occafion of. He, or they, who fpake ^^ after, had liberty to touch at v/hat the firft fpeaker " omitted : the exercife not to exceed two hours : one ^' of the moderators always to make the conclufion. Af- " ter the exercife was ended, the Prelident call'd the ■^^ Brethren to him, and required their judgment, coa- ^^ cerning the expoiltion of the Scripture, that had been '"^ given : and if any matter had been untouched, then •^^ to be declared : and if any of the fpeakers were in- '^ fam'd, or convicted of any grievous crime, he was " then and there reprehended. After the confultation, [^ any Parti. the Dissenters. 9j " any of the Brethren might propound their doubts, to '' have them latisficd the next excrcife. The confulta- *' tiun was ended with a (hort exhortation, to move each '' one to go tbnvard in his holy office, to apply his *^ lludy, and to incrcafe in godlinefs. Then the next " Ipeaker was nominated publicly, and the Text he " fhould expound, read/' ^ The ufefulnefs of thefe ex- ercifcs was very great. Slothful Miniflers were fhamed out of their idlenefs : the elder Miniflers w^ere made more folicitous to excel in knowledge and virtue, as well as in age: the younger were, by good counfels and examples, taught to inllruct their refpedive congregations. And in Ihort, they were all the better for their mutual helps. Thefe exercifes were fet up in Noifolkj and feveral o- ther places; but Archbifliop Parker was very much of- fended ac them, and fent his Archiepifcopal commands to the Bifhops to fupprefs them. But when the Privy Council, on the other hand, wrote in their favour, Parker made his application to the Queen, and got her order for the fuppreffing of them ,• and then triumphed over the Bifhop oi Noriikh in his great atchievement. The oppofition Parker made againft thefe exercifes, was really unaccountable; for there was nothing then done in them, that in the leaft interfered wich his dar- ling Conformity. But that difiike, to W'hich he wrought the Queen of thefe exercifes, never wore oft! When Grindal fucceeded, and complaints w^ere made of fome abufes in thefe exercifes, he drew^ up orders for reforming them. But he might have fav'd himfelf the trouble: " For the Queen did not like, the laity fhould negled " their fecular aftkirs, by, repairing to thefe meetings : ** which fhe thought alfo might fill their heads wath no- " tions, and fo occafion diflentions, and unquiet dif- " putes ; %nd, it may be, feditious in the flate. And " the Archbifliop being at court, fhe particularly de- *^ clarM herfelf oiiended at the numbers of Preachers, as " well as at the exercifes, and v/arn'd him to redrefs ^' both ; urging, that it w^as good for the Church to " have few Preachers, and that three or four might *^ fufEce for a county ; and that the reading of the Ho- ^^ milies to the people was enough. The fpeeches fhe '' ufed I G[j«i Ufc^^, ^7;,J7^, 94 ^Vindication^/ Part L *^ iifcd to him were fomewhat fliarp ; and fhe was very *^ reiblutc to have no more exercifes of this fort, and *^ cared not for any great encreafe of Preachers ; but *^ that the licenfes for preaching fliould be more Iparingly *^ granted out ; and flic expeded the Archbifhop fhould *^ give efpecial orders for both. '' * Upon this occalion, Grindal wrote her a very modell; and humble, but a moft convincing and moving Letter ; f wherein he vindicated thefe exercifes, and fhevv^d the great advantage of them, both to religion and the civil government : and he adds this frank and noble declaration : " And as for my own *' part, becaufe I am very well affur^'d, both by reafons " and arguments taken out of the Holy Scriptures, and *^ by experience (the moft certain feal of fure know- " ledge) that the laid exercifes, for the interpretation " and expolition of the Scriptures, and for exhonation *•' and comfort drawn out of the famie, are both pro- *^ litable to incrcafe knowledge among the Minifters, and ^' tendeth to the edifying of the hearers ; 1 am forced ^* with all humility, and yet plainly, to profefs, that I ^^ cannot with fafe confcience, and without the otlence ^^ of the Majefiy of God, give my aftent to the fup- *' preffing of the faid exercifes : much lefs can I fend " out any injunction for the utter and univerfal fubver- *' fion of the fame. '' II He earneftly exhorts her too, that when Ihe dealt in matters of faith and religion, or that touch the Church of Chrift, fhe would not pro- nounce fo refolutely, and peremptorily, upon her own authority, as i^ne might in civil matters ; but remember the will of God, and not of any earthly creature, was herein to take place. He puts her in mind : That *tis the Antichriftian voice of the Pope : Sic njolo^ fie jnheo^ Sec. So Iivill have it^ jo I command : let my will fland for a reafon. In God^s matters, all Princes ought to bow their fcepters to the Son of God, and to ask counfel at his mouth, what they ought to do. Thefe exercifes were approvM and promoted by many of the Biiliops, encouragM by King James in Scotland : to whom my Lord Bacon recommended the reviving them, after he became King of Great Britain. It • Grjndars Life, p.22U t Su thf Letter in Strype's Life of Gi'ifiA^l, ^ff> p, 74. li Ibid, p, (>2, Parti. /^^ Di ssE NTERS. 95 It muft be own'd, the writing this Letter was one of the noblelc ads of GriuJiii's life, if he had but kept more IHfiy to it. The Queen would not be movM by all he could fay, and in fome few months after fent her own Letter to the Bifliops, whereby flie requirM them to put down thefe exercifes : and her refentment ran {o high a^ainft the Archbiihop, that he was confin'd to his houfe, and fequeftred for lix months. The Lord Trca- furer fent to the Archbifnop, directing him in what manner he fiiould make his fubmiifion ; which he for the prefent refus'd, becaufe he did not think himfelf to have committed any fault; and therefore he would not own himfelf in any, in a fubmilFive Letter, which he wrote to the Lords of the Privy Council in the Star Chamber. His fequefcration therefore continued, and there was fome delign of degrading him. But at laft, in the year 1582, he made his fubmifTion ; wherein he in- {ifts upon it indeed, that what he did was, becaufe^ he was mov'd in confcience to it; yet however he fays, That " under/landing that her Majefty therein, " [the forbidding thofe exercifes] did ufe the advice " and allowance of certain Bifliops, his Brethren, who " by likelihood certified, that they in their own Dio- " celFes found the fame more hurtful than profitable; ^^ in, and for that, he is perfwaded, that her Majefty *' had herein a fincere arid godly meaning to the quiet- " nefs of her people : and that alfo her commandment '^ was not againft pofitive law, or conftitution of the " realm, he cannot but [peak honourably and dutifully of " her Majeftfs doings^ as of a godly Prince, meaning "Jceil " of the Church and her people, in this her Majefty 's ^^ direction and commandment. And as he is moft hear- '' tily forry, that he hath incur'd her Majefty 's grie- ^^ vous offence, for not obferving that her command- ^^ ment; fo doth he moft humbly and lowly befeech ^^ her Highnefs not to impute the fame to any obftinate '•^ intent, meaning to difobey her Majefty; but only that he was then moved in confcience to be an hum- ^' bie fuiter to her Majefty, to be fpar'd from being the fpeciat inftrument in fuppreffing the faid exercifes. And to the Intent her Majeity may think that he meant no difobedicnce, in any maintenance of them to con- tinue contrary to her commandment, he doth pray her, " Majefty to be truly informM, hoVv' he hi?nflf did, in " his 9^ .^Vindication^/ Part I. *' his oven Bijhoprkky and ether peculiar jurifdiElionSy fuf- *^ fer no fuch exercifes to be njed^ after the time of ^' her Majefty's faid commandnient/'' "^-^ So that I do not fee, that Mr. Sfrjpe had fufficient ground to com- inend him, as he does, upon this occalion ^ for being en- dued "With an immutable ccnflancy of mind, in perjjjling in a thin^ that he reckon d his duty, f Nor is it true, that he lays elfewhere : T'hat he 'would never be brought to give forth his order Sy for the Putting thefe exercifes down. II ^Tis true, he would never fend his order to the other Bifliops ; but 'tis plain, by his fubmiffion, he gave out fuch orders for his own Diocefs. And I would fain know, how it* could be lawful for him to fupprefs them himfelf,- if it was unlawful for him to fend to the other Bifliops to do it ? If the fuppreffing them was evil, it was unlawful for him to do it ; if it was not, he might have fent to his Brethren to do it too. This fliould be a warning to men, to beware how they attempt to force men upon any thing contrary to their confciences ; lince "'tis a righteous thing with God to fufter others to deal with them in the fame manner ; and he fome- times does fo, as we fee in this inflance of the Arch- bifliop, to his great vexation and difquietment. ""Tis eafy to imagine, the perfecution raged furioufly, when the Queen fhewed herfelf in fuch a temper. Ma- ny good men were now in diflrefs, and while abundance of complaints were made of the vaft increafe of Papifls; yet litde encouragement could be allowed to fuch Mini- llers, who would have zealouQy opposM them. Mr. Richard Gawtcn, or Gayton, was now fufpended for his Nonconformity. He was Minifter of Snoring ; but Archbifliop Parker, after he was prefented to it, forc'd him to fign an obligation of loo Marks, to pay Dr. Willovghby (who had thro' meer carelefnefs lofl the living) 14/. a year. 4^ If he had not done it, he mufl: have gone to prifon ; which was a barbarous and tyrannical aft of the Archbifhop; and the poor man was fo crampM with paying this annuity, that he was glad to quit the living. About * See hh Life, p. 273. f P. 300, II P. 2^6. J Part tf a Regijter, f* Jf 3v rc;»/. Farker'a Lik, f. 575. part I. //;^ D I S S E N T E R s. 9j About this time fell out alfo the troubles of Mr. Rii/j- .i,d Gieenham^ Minifter in Drayton near Cambridge^ a man of a moft excellent fpirit; and who, tho' he would not I'ubfcribe, or conform to the habits, yet avoided Ipeaking of thefe matters, that he might not give of- lence : and whoever will read his Letter to the Bifliop of £/}, will wonder what fort of men they could be, that would bear hard upon fuch a Minifter. Dr. "John Aybner was this year, 157(5, made Bifliop of London^ 2i man of a moft intemperate heat, who per- fecuted the Puritans with the utmoft rage, and treated Minifters with fuch virulent and abufive language, as a man of fenfe and indifterent temper, would fcorn to ufe towards porters and coblers. I think it worth while to tranfcribe a part of his examination of a poor Minifter, that it may be feen how this Bifliop behav'd himfelf up- on the bench. * This Minifter's name was Merbury ; and upon the Bifliop's urging him earneftly to tell w^hat he had to fay againft him, or the Bifliop of PeterborGUgh^ he an- fwer'd him thus : '^ M. I come not to accufe, but to defend \ but be- ^' caufe you urge me for advantage, I fay, that the ^' Bifliops of London and Peter borough^ and all the Bifli- " ops in England^ are guilty of the death of as many " fouls, as have perilhed by the ignorance of the Mi- " nifters of their makins;, "jchom they kneiv to be unable. " B. Whom fuch have I made ? " Af. I accufe you not particularly, becaufe I know " not your eftate ^ if you have, you fliall bear this con- " demnation. " B, Thy propofiticn is falfe ; if it were in Cambridge _^^ it would be hifl'ed out of the Schools. " M. Then you had need to hire hiilers. " B, If I, finding one w^ell qualihed with learning; " admit him, and he after play the trewant, and become " ignorant, and by his ignorance flay fouls, am I guilty ",of their death ? " M. This is another queftion. I diftlnguifli : I-fpeak *' of them, which were never able. " B. Diftinguifli ? Thou knoweft not a diftinftion i " What is a diftinftion ? L '' M ^Tis • ?drtcf a Regiji, /?. 3Si 98 ^Vindication (?/ Pait !• ^^ M 'Tis a fevering of things which feem to be the '^ fame. " jB. Nay that is diffcemia. " A/. DijfeniVit^ qua ncn jum ambigua; but we di- " tinguifh thofe things only, which are ambigua : as you " diiier not from the Bifhop of Lcndcn, but I may " diiUngiiifh between you and the Bifhop of London ; ^' becaufe you remain a man without the Bifhoprick. " B. Here's a tale of a tub. How many Predicaments *' arc there ? ^' M. i anfwei you according to your queftion, if I " fay there are enow of feven : for why do you ask ^^ me queflions fo impertinent ? " -B. How many Predkables be there ? Where didft " thou learn thy Logic ? " M. T he laft time you fpake much of to t? eTroy : but *^ this is 70 TTct'f 2f j^j^. I am no Logician. '^ Thou fpeakell of making Minifters : the Bifhop of " PeterboYOtigh was never more overfeen in his life, " than when he admitted thee to be a preacher in '' Northamptcn, ^' M, Like enc ugh fo, (in fome fenfe) I pray God '^ thefe fcales may fall from his eyes. " B. Thou art a very afs ; thou art mad ; thou art ^^ couragious; nay, thou art impudent: by my troth, " I think he is mad ; he careth for no body. " M Sir, 1 take exception at fwearing judges : I ^^ praife God, I am not mad, but forry to fee you fo out " of temper. " B, Did you ever hear one more impudent ? *^ M. 'Tis not, I trufl, impudence to anfwer for my " felf. " B. Nay, I know thou art couragious, thou art " fool hardy. " M* Tho' I fear not you, I fear the Lord, '^ Recorder of London. Is he learned ? ^' B. Learned ? He hath an arrogant fpirit : he can " fcarce confirue Cato, I think. *^ M. Sir, you do not punifh me, becaufe I am un- " learned. Howbeit, I underlland both the Greek and ^^ Latin tongues ; allay me to approve your difgrace. " B. Thou takeft upon thee to be a Preacher, but " there is nothing in thee : thou art a very afs, an ideot, ^^ and a fool. « M. Part I. //;^ D I s s £ N T E R s. 9^ " TV/. I humbly befcech you. Sir, have patience, give " this people better example : I am that 1 am, thro* *' the Lord : I fubmit the trial of my fufficiency to the " judgment of the learned ; but this wandering fpeech '' is not logical. This is the Bifliop whom Mr. Sty}pe commends, as an exaEi Ltgidivi,-^' How jufily the reader may judge by this Jpedmen. How fine was fuch language out of the mouth of a Chriftian, a Magiflrate, and a Bifhop ! There is a great deal more worth reading in that examination. Parti- cularly one thing is remarkable, that he infults poor Me>b:iry^ becauie he was for having a Minifter in every parilh. At parting, he gives him the civil falutation of an civerthvoart proud Pttritan kmrve^ and fent him to the Marjhaljeay tho' he had been twice in prifon before. This man devis'd the employing Apparitors, as fpies, to go about on the Lord's days, and fee what Conformi- ty was ufed in every pariib, and to certify accordingly, f And very ftridt he was in enquiring, whether any did not ufe the Surplice, or alter the fervice, and particularly the rites in Baptifm. One of his Articles related to contentious Preachers, who fcandaloufly gave others the namie of dumb dogs. This name, which the Scripture gives to fuch Miniiters, as difcharge not their office, Ifa. Ivi. lo. was very much re- fented by the Bifhop, when the Puritans applied that Text to unpreaching Minifters ; but afs, ideot, fool, knave, were terms which the Bifliop could freely ufe himfelf, as appears by what I have fee down already. Another of his injunctions was : " No invectives ta '^ be uied of, or againfl:, Eflates : "' II that is, fays ]s/lv, Strype^ This, or other kingdoms, or potentates; fome preachers, as it feems, being now a-days very liberal in their fpeeches, both againft Fra}7ce and Spain^ And yet he himfelf practised quite otherwife ; as Mr. Strype has fet down his moil; bitter invective againft Henry the French King : " He, a King, or a Devil ; " a Chriftian, or a Lucifer ? Oh ! wicked caitift, '^ and firebrand of bell. "' t Had a Preacher utter'd fuch words, .he v/ould have been profecuted by this Bifh- op, but his dignity privileged him above other mortals, L 2 to fAylm. Life, ^,240. f Ibid f ^3. 202; I'.f.S?. ±p 279 160 '^Vindication of Part L to fay what he pleas'd. He was pleas'd to fay of thefe his injundions and enquiries, when he gave them forth in his Cunliftory ; that he would furely and feverely punifli the ofiendersin thefe points, or he zuculd lie in the dufl jcr it/^ And that his cruelties fufficiently expos'd hiin, we may learn from what he afterwards faid himfelf : ^' That he was hated like a dog, and was cail'd, 'jThe ^^ cpprcjjoy of the children of God. '' f And not without good reafon : for he made nothing of flinging men in- to prifon, and keeping them there to ruin them. And when JVhitgift was made Archbifliop, MDLxxxui. tlie fulierings, which good men indur^'d for the lake of their confciences, became intolerable. The Miniders in Kent being grievoufly harrafs'd this year by IVhitgift, for not fubfcribing to Articles, devis'd by himfelf, prefented a Petition to the Privy Council. And at the fame time came up a great many other Peti- tions from feveral parts of the Kingdom, complaining of their Minifters being turnM out. The Council therefore wrote to the Archbifhop in their behalf,- but all was in vain • he only grew the more outragious hereupon, and let up a new method of perfecuting among us. He devis'd therefore twenty four large Arti- MDLXxxiV. cle5, or interrogatories, penn'd in the fubtil and captiousftile of the Ro?mjh Inquifitions, and commanded Minilters to fubfcribe to them, ex 7nero ojficio. No copy of thefe Articles was granted them ; nor time flowed them to confider before hand of their anfwer ; but they muft give it upon the fpot. Burleigh^ the Lord Treafurer, upon the complaint of the Miniiiers, fent for the Regifter of London^ and defir'd to fee thofe Articles; of which he foon after thus gave his opinion, in a Letter to the Archbifhop : " The Articles 1 have read, and *^ End them fo curioufly pennM, fo full of branches and *^ circumftances, that I think the Inquifitions of Spain **^ life not fo many queHions to comprehend, and intrap *' their preys. I knew your Canonifts can defend thefe ^' Vv'ith all their particles : but farely, unilcr your Grace's ^^ correction, this juridical and canonical iiftner of poor ^^ Miniiiers, is not to edify and reform. And in cha- '' rity, I think, they ought not to anfwer to all thefe " nice i ^5. Part I. the Dr s s e k t f r 5. loi *^ nice points, except they were very notorious ofienders *^ in Papillry or Herciy. But 1 conclude, that accord- *' ing to my iimpie judgment, this kind of proceeding is *^ too much favouring the Rimijb Inr]uifiti(^n, and is ra- ^ ther a device to feck for otiendcrs, than to reform '' any/'^^ This year was publifli'd the Rhemijh Teftnment^ which they every where endeavour^ to accommodate to tlie Popifh opinions. 7 he learned part of the nation thought a confutation of thofe opinions was necellary. Nay, and Queen Elizabeth feems to have been not a httle concern'd about it ; who is faid to have fcni to Bez.a^ to requeit him to undertake the anfwer. Put he modeiily excusM it, and return^'d anfwer, that (lie had one in her ov;n Kingdom far abler than himfelf to undertake fuch a task. Being ask'd, who that perfon Ihould be, he at length told her, 'twas Mr. "Thomas Cartvjrjg/jt ; the man our Adver- faries hated and deposed;, and counted worthy of nothing, but reproaches and inprifonment; tho^ Bcza thought the fun did not fee a more learned man. f Soon after^ Secre- tary IValfirigha??!^ by his Letters, folicited him to under- take the work ; and the better to enable him to go thro' with it, fent him an hundred pounds^ promilinglikewife to furnifh him with whatever more was neceifary. The Queen her felf, who placed a great confidence in IVah Jingham^ is thought not only to have been acquainted with what he wrote to Cartvorigbt^ but to have disbursed the miony he fent him. His Letter to him was foon fe- conded by another, WTote in the nam.e of Fulk and Whitakerj and feveral other of the chief Divines at Cambvidgey who earneflly intreated him to undertake this work. The Minifters of London and Sujfolk folicited him to the fame purpofe. Cavtvjyight^ in compliance with the requeft of fo many eminent perfons, and out of a delire of vindicating the truth, fet about it diligently : and had made a good progrefs, by that time Archbifliop PVhhgift got notice of it. He w^as defperatly nettled, either that his adverfary (liould have fo much refpefi fiiew'd him, or fhould have an opportunity (which he knew he would improve) of gaining lo honourable a victory • L 3 or' FJl. Ch. Hift. lib, 9. t CUrk in Ciitwrighc'i l-fe. IOC ^Vindication (?/ Part L or, that he Taw his own learning undervalued, while no body delir'd him to undertake it ; or finally, becaufe he apprehended his authority to be neglected, while his leave was not ask'd for his undertaking it. Whatever it was, that moved this Gentleman's choler, ^tis certain he pre- Icnrly lent, and hauf^htily enough forbad Cartwrigbt's far- ther proceeding in it. Now I would fain know, how this fell under his Archiepifcopal cognizance and autho- rity } or, what right he had to trouble himfelf about what Mr. Carticight was writing in his fludy againft the Pa- pifis? One may eafily guefs by this, that when he faid to him, as I mentioned before : " You do what you lift, '^ go when you lift, come when you lift, fpeak when " you lift, at your pkafure : what would you have ^^ more ? ^' we may guefs, I fay, "'twas a grief of foul to him, he fhould have fomuch as that poor liberty, and therefore he took the rirft opportunity to deprive him of it. A like method of our Adverfaries we fliall meet with again, in the re'gn of King James II. Who can now for- bear wondering at the vain and troublefome humour of the man } What? Was there no need ofany anfwer? All the learned every where unanimoufly teftify'^d the con- trary. If an anfwer was needful, why mufi Caitwright be forbidden to meddle with it } Perhaps, the work w^as too difficult for him to be able to manage it. Whoever thought fo, I dare fay IVhitgrfi did not, who know by experience what Cartivright's abilities were. If Ca> tiiright was net to be truftedin fuch a combate, why did not Wlntgijt himfelf undertake it 'i Or if he had \t{% leifure, now he had got his prcfermjent, to write againft the Pa- pifts, than he had formerly againft the Puritans ,- w^hy did he not himfelf however appoint fome other noble cham- pion, x\?x mould be fitter to enter the lifts than Cart- 'Wright? Weil, poor CartZiT/g/jt^ knowing the authority and wrath of his Grace was much more formidable, than the arguments of all the Rhemifts put together, laid alide the work : but fome years after, encourag^'d by an Ho- nourable Lord, he refumM it, but had not time to perfe(S it. ""T was not printed ''till after his own and lVhitgift*s deach, in the year, 1618: the Copy had been negleded, and was moufe eaten in part, which causM fome defeds, when it came to be publifli'd. '' A Book, (fays Fuller) *' v^^hich notwithftanding the forefaid defects^ is fo com- " pleat. Parti. r^^ DissEN TER s. 105 " pleat, that the Rhemlfls durft never return the leafl " anfwer thereunto/' ' And in another place thus: '' In a word, no Englifi champion, in that age, did " with more valour, or fuccel's, charge or rout the Ro- *' mijh enemy in matters of doctrine. '' \ Which is a noble commendation out of the mouth of an adverfary. Some may perhaps think, that Dr. Fulk wrote his learned Anfwer to the Rhemiftsy at the defire of the Archbifhop ; but 'tis certain he did not : he was one of the Cambridge Doftors, who deiir'd Cartwrigbt to undertake it ; and when he faw he had, upon the Archbilhop's difcourage- menr, laid afide a work, which he thought abfolutely ne- cefFary, he undertook it himfelf. And when he publifli'd his Book, he gave his readers notice, they were to expeft a much more compleat anfwer from Mr. Cartwrigbt. And indeed there was no great reafon, why the Archbifhop fhould commit the work to Fulk^ rather than to Cart- luright : Fulk was himfelf a Puritan, and chofe to leave the College, and board in a private houfe in Cambrige, rather than wear the Surplice. And Mr. StrypCy in feveral places, has occafion to (hew he was a Puritan. This year Mr. George Giffard^ a learned Minifter at Maiden in EJfeXy wasiufpended by his Diocefan, Bifhop Aylmer. He wrote with a great deal of zeal againft the Brcvjnifls^ in defence of the Church ; tho' he was a Pu- ritan, and fcrupled Conformity in feveral things. " He " was, as Mr. Strype fays, a great and diligent Preacher, " and much efteem'd by many, and of good rank in the *^ town ; and had brought tliat place to more fobriety, " and knowledge of true religion. '' + But thofe things were poor trifles, while he did not like the ceremonies : and the Archbifhop was as bitter againft him, as his Dio- cefan, and would not regard the fuit the Lord Treafurer made in his behalf. He was brought before the High Commiflion, and accused of teaching difobedience to ma- giftrates, and feveral other things. But v/hen his accufers could not prove what they alledgM againft him, but all the charges appeared to be falfe, the Biihop, for very fhame reftor'd him to his preaching, for a little while; for he kept his ears ftill open to this kind of fycophants, L 4 whom. • 5w<9. f, 17T. .f B.9\ 10. p. |. 11 Hickm. Apol p. 71. I Aylm. Life, I04 J V I N D I c A T I o N ^ Part V whom, one would think, upon fuch tryal, he (hould have adhorr'd ; and lo, upon a new complaint, he luf- pcnded him a iecond time. The latter end of this year, the Houfe of Commons' pafs'd a Bill for reforming iome things : .what they par- ticularly were, and how the Bifliops at that time bchav'd thcmfelves, may be learnt from Archbifliop IVhitgiffs Let- ter to the Queen. ^' They have pafs'd, Jays he^ a Bill in ^' that Houle yefterday, touching the matter [of admit- *' ting men to the Miniftryj which, bcfides other great *^ inconveniences, hath this alfo, that ifitpafsby Par- " liament, it cannot hereafter but in Parliament be ai- *' tcr'd: whereas, if it pafs but as a Canon from ^^ us, by your Majefly^s authority, it may be obferv'd or ^' altered at your pleafure. ^' [This was a cunning fetch of the Archbifhop, confidering the temper of the Queen.] '^ They have alfo palled a Bill, giving liberty to marry ^' at all times of the year, without reitraint, contrary ^^ to the old Canons, continually obfervM amongft us ; " and containing matter, which tendeth to the llander of ^' this Church, as having hitherto maintain^ an er- ^^ rcur.'** The watchful Archbifhop was very folici- tous, that the Church of England might be thought as infallible, as that of Ro?ne. By this we may perceive, what kind of men we have had to do with ; and that their pride and infufterable arrogance has always made them oppofe all methods of peace and union : and yet this man himfelf, before he was made a Bifhop, and had tafted the fweet gain that thefe laws brought in, declared himfelf difpleas^d, that men fliould be forbidden to marry at all times of the year. And what did it fignify, that this ^'^s contrary to the old Canons^ if thofe old Canons were contrary to fenfe and reafon, and were deflgn'd in favour of fuperftition.^ But let's hear how he goes on : *^ There is likewife now in hand, in the fame Houfe, a ^^ Bill concerning Ecclcfiaftical Courts, and Vifitations by *' Bifhops, which may reach to the overthrow of eccle- " liaflical jurifdiction, and fludy of the Civil Laws. The *^ pretenceof the Bill is againft exceffive fees, and exadi- "^^ ons, in Ecclefiaftical Courts, which fees are none other '^ than have been of long time accuflom^'d to be taken- the " law. • Fuller, p. 174. Part I. //;^ D I s s E N T E R s. 105 ^ law, already cilablifli'd, providin^:^ a fharp and fevere *^ piinifhmcnt for fuch, as (hall exceed the fame. The Convocation fat this year, and the Minifters drew up their reafons, why they could not fubfcribe, as the Bifhops required thein, to two of their three Articles, viz,. 2. ^' That the Book of Common Prayer, and of or- " daining Bifliops, Priefls and Deacons, containeth in ^^ it nothing contrary to the Word of God, and that *^ the fame may be lawfully ufcd : and that I my felf, *^ who do fubfcribcj will ufe the Form of the faid Book *^ prefcribed, in public Prayer, and adminiftration of '^ the Sacraments, and no other. ^^ 3. " That I allow the Book of Articles of Reli- ^^ gioUy agreed upon by the ArchbiChops and Bifnops of *^ both Provinces, and the whole Clergy in the Convo- *^ cation holden 2iZ Lcndcn^ in the year of our Lord God, ^^ i$62y and fet forth by her Majefty^'s authority; and ^' do believe all the Articles, therein contain'd, to be ^^ agreeable to God. In witnefs whereof I have fubfcrib^d " my name/"" Together with their reafons they prefented a Petition, drawm in the mofl humble and refpeftful ftile. Herein they earneftly requeft them, " To ponder the reafons that " with held them from fubfcribing, and [o to refolve , " them of the point they had fet down, as that they ^' might clearly underlland how with a- good confcience " they might yield unto it; or if they [the Convoca- " tion] t of a Regi/ierj p. 333, &c. wherein I do not meet with thofe hard names our Author fets down. Afterivards in a certain Petition offtrd to the Parlia- ntent^ entitiiied, A Supplication to the Parliamient, and fubjcrih'd by ten thonjand hands^ they threaten the Houjes with no lejs than a rifrngy if they do not take care to ejlabliji) the dijcipline ; which if they did not take care Jpeedily to do^ '' They would be in danger of the terrible mafs of God's " zvrath both in this Life, and that to come ; that they ^^ might well hope for the curfe of the Law, but the favour '' and loving countenance of jfejm Chrift they Jhould never ^^ fee. ^^ I can^'t find any v;here mention made of a Sup- plication thus fubfcrib'd in Qiieen E/iz-abeth's reign, and am very m.uch miiiiaken in her government, if a Petition, that muft be handed about a long time, and could not be 'kept fecret, and that w^as (o contrary to her Mind, would not have had a flop put to it, long before fo many hands could be procur'd to fubfcribe it. I delire farther, that the reader would here take notice of thehard conllrudtion which the Dodor gives to the words, w^hich he cites of the Supplication. The Puritans were convincM of the necef- fity of a farther Reformation, and looked upon the main- taining fuch a corrupt Church government, as ours is, to be a grievous fm, highly provoking to God : and having thefe apprehenfions, they honeilly wain the Par- liament of the danger ; telling them, they could not but expect fom^e fearful judgments of God. To this an invi- dious turn is given, that they threaten the Houfes with a y^tngi whereas they always declared againll any feditious M 4 practl« 120 14VjNDicATioN(?f Part !• practices, and never could be charged with any. They were for fetting up Chrift's government, not by popular tumults, but peaceably, however the law had unrighte- oufly forbid it. But nothing was more likely to infti- gate the government againft them, than the reprefenting them as feditious perfons. This was the common prac- tice of our Enemies at that time, and ever lince con- tinues to be fo. And yet I am perfuaded our Adverfarics were more charitably dealt with, when they were charg^'d with belying their own confciences in fuch accufations ; than were the Turitans, whofe words were thus pervert- ed, for no other end, but to render them obnoxious to the government. But God has given thefe men an op- portunity in our time, to fhew they have that in their hearts, of which they are fo forward to accufe their neighbours. Our Author next complains, thefe things were pub- lifti'd, when the Spanifli Armada ijcas hovering oz^er cur country. But iince Martinis writings, as he complains himfelf, did not pleafe the Puritans, I can^'t fee how they are concerned in them. And befides, the writers he is difpleas'd with, might well alledge as an excufe, that they wrote when they were groaning under the cruel per- fecutions of the Bifhops. And how eafy is it to retort our Author's own Vv^ords upon him ? Such perfecution, tho' it ix:a5 at all times mofl unbecoming^ it wa5 at that time more efpeciaUyJo ; kcaufe then the Spanifc Armada zi:a5 hovering ever our nation^ threatning defiruElion both to our country and religion. But our Author goes on : Nor indeed iDOuld they have proceeded to fuch a boldnefs, hut that it zi'as thought they were buoyed up by the Earl of Leicefter, &V' Francis Wallmgham, Sir Francis Knollis, rcithfome ether great men of the courts who long'd to be fin- gering the Church revenues; thinking if they could get the Bi- pops to be puird down by the Puritans, their lands would be am inconliderable prey for tbemfelves. But certainly our Adverfarics are very boldy who think they may afperfe all men, who in the leail: differ from them. The credit of hiftory is much impaired, by that party fpirit, which too often goyern^d men in v/riting it. Thus learned men think, little credit is to be given to many of the accounts v/hich we have of thofe Emperours, who were cali'd Ici'iWfiachi;, becaufe they are peon'd by a parcej^of )Part 1. //;^ D I S S E N T E R S.^ 1*21 Monks, zealots for the worfliip of images, and therefore bitter enemies to thole Lmperours for oppofin^ it. Nor are our Adverfaries many times more worthy to be be- Jiev'd, who are often much fonder of their own fancies, than the truth. But lince 'tis generally allow'd, that fuch perfons have been very deferving, whc^m their very ad- verfaries have commended, let us hear what is faid of thefe courtiers by Dr. Fuller ^ a much more fair and can- did writer than Dr. Hcylyn^ upon whofe credit (tho' he deferv'd none) they are befpatterM. Concerning Sir F, Walfingham thus he writes : " A- *' mongft all the favourers of the Presbyterians, furely " honelly and wifdom never met more in any, than in '^ Sir Francis I4^alfirigha777^ of whom it may be faid, as '' of St. Paul : T'ho- poor, yet making many rich. Having ^' but one only daughter, he negledced wealth in himfelf, -'' tho' I may fay, he inriched many, even the Englijh " nation, by his prudent fleering of ftate affairs. ''" * Mr. Camden agrees with Fuller j and fays, that by the charges of his public fervices, '^ He weaken 'd his eftate, *' and brought himfelf fo far in debt, that he was pri- ^^ vately buried in the evening in Paul's Church yard at '' London^ without any funeral folemnity. ^- t Concerning Sir Francis KnoliiSy Dr. FyJier only fays : '^ That being bred a banifhed man in German)^ during ^' the reign of Queen Mary^ and converfmg with Mr. " Cahin at Geneva, he was never after fond of Epifco- ^^ pacy, but was a great patron of Nonconformifls. '' It muft be own'd, he accufes the Earl of Leicefter of being a means to incenfe the Queen againfr Archbifiiop Grindal, and attributes to him her being lo much dif- pleas-d wiih his Letter about Prvphejyings. He fays : " Leicefter cafl a covetous eye upon Lambeth hcnfe^ al- " ledging as good arguments for his obtaining thereof, as " ever v/ere urged by Ahab for Nabotlfs vineyard. Now '^ Grindaly though generally condemned for remifnefs in " this kind, (parting with more from his fee, than ever " his fucceffours thank'd him for^ ftoutly oppos'd the 5^ alienating of this his principal palace, and made the " Leiceftrian party to malice him. *' If this flory were • rue, that fome greedy courtiers, at that time, encouraged the 122 [^Vindication of Part L the Reformation we defir'd, from an expectation of fer- ving their own particular intereft by it ; our caufe cannot reafonably be thought to be more difgrac'd by it, than is that of the Reformation in general, which, all the world knows, was promoted by fuch courtiers, who loll nothing by it. But to fay the truth, the ftory itfelf has not any great appearance of probability : the Earl was efteem'd the chief friend of the Puritans in the court, and was not difpleas'd at his being thought to favour them. ^Tis not therefore likely, he would oppofe the Archbifliop in a matter fo plealing to the Puritans, as thefe exercifes were. Whatever handle he ufed, he would never take this to incenfe the Queen againft him, as long as he had any defign of currying favour with thofe peo- ple. But Mr. StrypCy the mofl diligent enquirer into the hiftory of thofe times, does fully confute this part of the ftory, with this very fubflantial reafon : That the Arch- bifliop made ufe of the Earl himfelf in this matter, and by his hands fent the Letter to her Majefty ; "'^' which he would never have done, had there been at that time any grudge between them. And fince this, fo material a cir- cumflance of the report, is certainly falfe, "'tis but rea- fonable to fuppofe the reft is of a piece with it, and that it deferves the fame credit with fome other flories, de- vWd to blaft his reputation, and that perhaps upon the account of the favour he fliew'd to good men, groaning under the cruel oppreflicn of the Hierarchy, f And now let any man judge, whether Dr. Heylirty whom alone Dr. Nichols produces, as his voucher in this matter, is to be believ'd. Indeed I can't but remark, that when our Author deals in fcandal, he makes much ufe of him ; tho"* he fpeaks elfewhere ilightly of him, as en- tertaining fome Popifli opinions, li He is really an author^ who had no regard to truth, when he wrote concerning bis adverfaries. But let two famous Bifhops, of the Church of England^ determine what credit he deferves : the one is Dr. Barlow, Bifhop oi Lincoln ^ who calls his performances, " Peter Hey lin^ angry, and (to our Church " and truth) fcandalous writings. '' + The other is Biihop Burnet^ who fays : " Either he wa$ very ill in- '' formM f Grindars Life, /. 224. f Ibid. p. 234. 225. T. f. I6p. i: Genuine Re« Part I. /^^ D I S S E N T E R sJ 12 J *^ form'd, or very much led by his pafTions. In one ^^ thing he is not to be exxus'd, that he never vouch'd **^ any authority for what he writ : which is not to be *'■ forgiven any, who write of tranf^ftions beyond their " own time, and deliver new things not known before. *• So that upon what grounds he wrote a great deal of *' his book, we can only conjecture ^ and many in their " guefles are not apt to be very favourable to him. "" * Archbifliop JVhitgifty as I faid, forbad Cart- Tcright to confute the Rbemifls Tranflation of MDxa the New Teftament : but this year fome more enectual care was taken by him and his Brethren, to pre- vent his doing it. One and thirty Articles were exhibited againfl him, drawn up after the laudable fafliion of the Spanijb Inquifition. f To all which he was requir'd to give in his anfwer upon oath. The matter of thefe Ar- ticles was partly fome idle tittle tattle, which they had gather'd up, more fit for good women to talk of at a goflipping, than to be turn'd into Articles by Biinops. Such are thofe, wherein he is articled againft, for that difcour- fmg about women, and their childbirth, &c. he did fpeafc thereof fo indifcreetly and oftenfively, that fundry of them, in great griefs had confpirM to have mifchiev'd him with flones in the ftreet. li That by his perfuafions his own wife, and other women, had refused to be churchM after they had lain in. + That he had nourifli'd a faction, and heart-burning of one inhabitant in M^ar- ixkk againft another, fevering them in his own, and his followers fpeeches, by the names of the godly^ or brethren favouring fine erity ; and the prophane. '^' And in this num- ber I may rank another : That being a Minifter, accor- ding to the order of the Church of England^ he had re- nounced the faid orders, as AntichriRian. f Others were grand impertinences, wherein the Bifhops were not con- cern'd; as. That he had been ordain'd again ^tAntiverp or Middkburgy had fet up a Presbytery there, and ordain'd ethers there in a manner ditierent from the Church of England^ and ufed another Liturgy, like tlie foreign. Churches. H Others were infnaring : as, Tiiat he knew, or was credibly informed, of the authors oi Martin Mcir- ■'^y • Kiftor. Ref fart I. Vref. + Fuller, Ch. Hift. B ^ f, is 2. 134 ^ V I N D I c A T i o N (/ Part I. prelate^ "The Demoyiftration of the Difcipline^ DiotrePhes, Circ. and did not dilcover thein. * That he had fet upClaf- fes, Conferences, Synods, &c, f There was another, which one would think they fhould have commended him for, if, according to the commination on JJh Wed- nejday^ they wifli'd for the refloration of dilcipline : That when his lorvant had committed fornication, and gotten a baftard in his houfe, he, taking upon him the authority of the Ordinary, did appoint unto the delin- quent, a pul)lic form of penance, or fatisfaction, in St. Mary's C>hurch in Warwick, and caus'd him to perform the fame. But there being no law in our nation, which obliges a man to accufe himfelf, Cartwright refus'd to anfwer to thofe Articles. Whereupon, according to their ufual le- nity, they call him into prifon, without alledging any thing againft him. With Cartwright were many other Minifters in prifon at the fame time : vix,-. Fen, King, Wight, Payne, Lord, Snape, Proudlove, and Jewel. Cart- Wright had lain a while in prifon, and was not only teaz'd by the Archbifhop, but by another of his Brethren in perfecution, Bifliop Aylmer. This Bifliop, together with Dr. Bancroft, (afterwards Archbifhop of Canterbury) Dr. Lewin, and Sir John Popham^ the Attorney General, fent for Cartwright out of the Fleet, to appear before the Bifliop in his chamber. There he rattles him, for " abu- '' fing the Privy Council, by informing them of his difea- " fes, wherewith he was not troubled. For, fays Mr. ^' Strype, Cartwright had lately lued to them for his li- " berty from the Fleet, upon pretence of his Gout and ^' Sciatica : which, it feems, was more in pretence than " truth. '' II 1 ftiould never take A}lmer's word for that. Cartwright had been lb harrafs'd by his perfecutors, and had lain now long enough in prifon to contracr diflem- pers; and, being old belide, might be fuppos'd, efpecially with fuch ufage, to be infirm, as Fuller afTures us he was in his latter time. Another thing he rattled him for was, his " luggefling, that the oath, tendred ^' to them, was not according to law, and that it " was given generally without limitation. '' Both thefe things," 1 doubt not, were true : the latter appears by all ^ w^/r.'. 24. t ^r*. 25, 3vc. I! Aylm. Lifyj /. 1 6 ; Part L the Dissenter s. 1 2 5 all the accounts we have of the manner of their pro- ceedings . the tbrmer he had from fuch as were learn'd in the law. T he thing in its own nature was barbarous, and being without law^ was intolerably tyrannical. But 'twas a greater crime in the Minilters to complain of un- juft ufage, than for the Bilhop to be the caul'c of it. The third thing he reproached him with was, "' That he con- " fefs'd twice or thrice before that time, that a man might " be faved in obferving the orders of the Church, efta- " blifh'd by the laws of the land, and in confcquence there- *^ upon, he charged him with the vanity and fruitlefnefs ^^ of feeking farther Reformation : adding, moreover, that ^' in the greatefi matters he and others contended for, '^ they were of the fame opinion, that the Papifts were " of I have the rather inferted this, that it may be feen what an exact Logician this Bi(hop was. The Puritans did not damn thofe who complied punctually with the or- ders of the Church, and therefore, according to this mane's logic, they were vain in feeking farther Reformation. When Mr. Carncright was about to anfwer this filly inveftive of the Bifhop, Sir John Popham^ interrupted him, and began another; upbraiding him with ading againfl the peace of the land, becaufe that upon conceits of his own head, and yet under colour of confcience, they refused things, that had been receivM for laws of a long time : and he farther alledg'd, he had oftended againft the juflice of the land, in rcfufing the oath tendred him.'^ Then the Bifhop requir'd him to take the oath, Cartvjright defir'd he might anfwer to the grievous charges laid againft him by the Attorney, and efpecially by the Bifhop. But theBifliop, confciousno doubt of the weaknefs and impertinence of his own dif- courfe, told him he fhould not anfwer to any thing, but only to the oath, whether he would take it to anfwer to the Articles. Cartivrigkt hereupon complain'd,'twas a hard courfe to give open charges^ and the fame very grievous, and yet tofmu men fnm all anfiuer to them, f But ftill the Bifhop infifted upon hisfirft anfwering touching the oath. Mr. Cartwright then produced a paper in anfwer to the Ar- ticles, offering to fwear to the truth of it. He refus'd any further anfwer; and faid, he look'd upon his refufal war- ranted by the laws of God and the land. Dr. Leivin^ upon Mr. * P^Ze 310. t 5 I. 126 -^ Vindication t?/ Part L Mr. Cayti\:yight's calling this oath, the oath ex officio^ told him he was greatly deceiv'd ; becaule it was deriv'd from the authority of the prince by a delegate power unto them. Cartrcright anfwer'd : Firll, That in calling it an oath ex cficiOj he did it by warrant of the court, for theBifhop had caird it lo himfelf, and another of the High Commiffion, not then prefent, had cali'd it the oath oflnquifition : the molt proper name of it without all queftion. The BiQiop denied that he had done fo. But, Mr. Cartwright appealing to thofe prefent, he was lilent. Secondly, Mr. Cartvjright allcdg'd, he hadfeen Commiffionsfrom her Majefty, where- in there was no mention of proceeding by corporal oath. Dr. Bancrc>jt own'd this of former Commiinons, but faid the High Commiifion had been altered. Upon this hap- pened a jarr between the Doctor and the Bifliop; the Bi- Ihop pretending it had been always in the CommifTion for thirty years, while he was in Commiifion himfelf. For the Bifliop lecmM to fear, left the CommiiTioners always ufmg the oath, without warrant, fhould be in a Premuni- re. And lince this was the real cafe, how arbitrary and tyrannical had theBifhop and other Commiffioners been in all their proceedings? Mr. Canvsright farther infifted, that tho' they might, by virtue of the Commiffion, proceed by oath ; yet it follow^l not they might do it without any to accufe, without any limitation, without reafonable time of deliberation and advice what to anfwer. There were many other impertinent cavils uied by the Commiffioners, to which Mr. Cartvcright anfwer'd with marvellous judg- ment and modefty. I will however tranfcribe one pare more of the examination, beiiaufe it tends to clear the pro- ceedings of the Puritans. The Attorney charged Mr. Cart- imight and others with holding conferences and making laws. " Mr. Cartvcright anfwer'd : That, touching that *' point, his anfwer was before them, which (being requi- '' red) he would confirm upon his oath : that is, that they *^ never held conferences by any authority, nor ever made ^' any laws by any manner of com.pulfion, to procure any *' obedience unto them. Alfo, that he and others had ex- *' prefly tefiihed by fubfcription, they would not fo much " as voluntarily and by mutual agreement, one without " another, pracrtife any advice or agreement, that was con- " tiary to any law of the land. Whereunto Dr. Bancroft " replied : That authority they had none, and therefore *^ could not ufe it; and compulfion needed rot, feeing <« every Part I. f/;^ D I s s E N T E R s. 127 *' every one, received to their conferences, mufl fubfcribe *^ to all orders he and others (hould fet down; ib far as if *^ they {hould fet down the fenfe or interpretation of a ^' place of Scripture, it Ihould not be lawful for any to *' depart from that : which, faid he, is dcpos'd by three or *' four. But, faid Mr. C. he might have eccleliaftical ju- *' rifdiction of reproof, fufpenfion, excommunication, de-- *^ gradation, as they had been openly, but mofl untruly, *^ charg'd to have done, if either he, or others with him, *' had thought it lawful for them fo to do. And for the " other point, of their requiring fubfcription by any that " was admitted, much lefs fuch a fubfcription as Dr. B* ^' fpake of, he protefted, that neither had he fo done, *' nor any that he knew : and that he was ready to make *' that alio good upon oath. ^^ '^' When they had done bandying about the oath, and the Bifliop, upon his refufal to take the oath, had commanded an aft thereof to be en- tered, Mr. C. put the Bifhop in mind of his promife, of leave to anfwer the charges which were given againft him. The Bifhop anfwer'd ; he had no leifure to hear his an- fwer, and if he would anfwer, he fhould do it by a pri- vate Letter to him. By which it appears, the Bifhop^s confcience was much of a fize with his logic. For what fignify'd the defence of a private Letter, againft a charge before fuch company } Upon this occalion King yames WTote a Letter to the Queen in their behalf, which was in thefe words : " Right Excellent, High and Mighty Princefs, our dea- ^' reft Sifter and Coufen, In our heartieft manner w^e re- ^^ commend us unto you. Hearing of the apprehenfion ^^ of Mr. Udal and Mr. Cartwright, and certaine other *^ Minifters of the Evangel, within your realme, of whofe " good erudition and fruitful travells in the Church we ^^ have a very credible commendation, howfoever that ^^ their diverfitie from the Bifhops, and others of your ^^ Clergy, in matters touching them in confcience, hath '^ bin a mean by their delation to work them your mifli- *^ king ; at this time we cannot (weighing the duty *^ which we owe to fuch as are afflicted for their confci- ^^ ence in that profeffion) but by our m.oft eftectuous and *^ earneft Letter interpone us at your hands to any harder '• ufage ! P'^i( ?25. 128 !^ V i N D i c A T I o N t?/ Part t, " ufage of them for that caufe : requeuing you mofi: *' earneflly, that for our caufc and interceilion it may ^' pleafe you to let them be relieved of their prefent ftraite, *^ and whatfoever further accufation, orpurfuitedepending *' on that ground, refpedting both their former merit, '^ ifi fctting forth of the Evangel, the llmplicitie of their ^' confcience in this defence, which cannot well be their ^^ let by compuUion, and the great ilander which could ^^ not faile to fall out upon their further ftraiting for any '^ fuch occafion, which we allure us your zeal to religion, ^' beiides the expectation wc have of your good will to ^^ pleafure us, will willingly accord to our requeft, having " fuch proofes ffofn time to time of otir like afteftion to ^^ you, in any matters which you recommend unto u$. " And thus Right Excellent, Right High and Mighty *^ Princefs, our dear Sifter and Cozen, we commit you to " Ciod's good protcftion. From Edenborough the 12th " day oijuncy 1591/''^^ So great was the reputation of thefe Minifiers, both for learning and piety, that even a King, the wife Solomoriy as the flattering Clergy ufed afterwards to call him, was not alham'd to intercede ^in their behalf: and indeed, this was not the lirft Letter he wrote to Queen Eliz.abeth upon that occafion. For Mr. Udaly who is mentioned in this Letter, lays, he had writ once before in his behalf, when he was clofe prifoher. f But hotwithftanding the King's interceilion, Cartimght continue fometime a prifoner; nor do I hnd that any favour w^as (hewn to the other Minifters, and particularly to Mr. Udal, In their proceed- ings againft whom, they atted with fuch horrid injuftice and cruelty, that no trial I ever met with, fince Queen M(pfs days, comes near it j no, not the illegal proceed- ings in King Charles the Second, or King ^ames the Se- cond's reign. I fliall therefore be a little more large in giving an account of it. But lirft let us hear what our Author fays. Udal, ancther Puritan Aliw/ier, being cfnviEled of wri- ting cigainfi the Qiieens ealejiajlical jurifdiclirn^'u:hich waf made Felony by a temporary Afl of that Q]{ee:i's reigny vcas likeivife conde??ind ; but vjas pardoned by the intercejjion of Jrchbijhcp Whitgift. II I • Udar« Tryal Hcylyn i^ives an impfrffcl CoPy^ Hiftor. Presbyt. p. Ji6- t UdilM'iyal, /'. 42 11/. 32. Part I. f/y(? D I s s E N T E R g. 1^29 I have now UJaFs Trial before me, and from thence fliall give an account of him. Mr. Vdal then was indeed one 0I' the Puritan Miniiters, and had been Preacher at Kinyjlon upc^n Ihmnei, 'I here lie was iilenc'd by the Of- ficial Dr. Hone^ for what reafon he fays^ he could not tell, nor imagine, faving the fecret fuggeftions of Mr. Kirvie. I guefs therefore by this, there were then fome illegal underhand dealings againft him. After he was fi- Icnc'd, he relied about half a year, preparing himfelf to a private life, for that he faw fo little hope of returning to his miniilry, or any rell in it to the good of the Church. But fom.e good people, at Ncwcajile upon i)}iey prevaiPd with the Earl of Huntington^ to fend him to them. Accordingly he went, and join^'d with two more godly Minirters, and found their labours were very ufeful. When he had (laid a year there, the plague being very fevere, all the while in the town, (which carryM ort •2000 inhabitants) he was fetch'd thence by Letters from the Lord Hun/don^ Lord Chamberlain, in the name of the whole Council. He fet out December 29, 1589, in the foreft weather that could be, and had a fad journey, but got fafe to London^ 'January 9. And on the 13 th he appear'd at the Lord Cobhams houfe, before the Lord Ccbbam, Lord Btickhurfty Lord Chief Juftice Anderj'on^ Dr. John Young Biflbop of Rochefter^ Mr. Frrrtefcue^ Mr. Egerton^ the Queen's Solicitor, Dr. Aubery^ and Dr. Le'x-- in. I am careful to fet down their names, that they may be remembered, as they deferve. The Bifhop ask'd him, whether he had the allowance of the Bifhop of the Dio- cefs to go to Newcaftle? Udal told hini, there was no Eifliop at that time in that Diocefs. Then fays the Bi- ihop you fliould have gone to the Archbifhop. But, fays Udal, there was no Archbifhop at Tork neither. This mat- ter then drop'^d, tho^ afterward Mr. Fortefcuey thinking he could cramp him, brought it about again. You are, fays he, very cunning in the law; I pray you, by what law did you preach at Newca/iky being forbidden at Kingfion? To which Udal anfwer^ ; he knew no lav/ againft it, fee- ing it was the Official, Dr. Honey who filenc'd him, whofe authority reached not out of his Archdeaconry. And fo there was an end of that matter, which was too imperti- nent to have been ftarted, but only as they would have been glad of any occafion of worrying him. Then the Lord Chief Ju (lice Andevfon told him^ he was call'd thither to N anfwer ijo '^ ViN Die ATiON i5f Part !• anfwcr concerning certain books thought to be of his wri- ting. He told them, if it was any o( Alar tin's books (as my Lord Chamberlain's Letters imported) he had clear'd hiinfelf at La?/ikt/j a year and a half before, from being the author of them. 'Ihen was he cjueftionM,' whe- ther he was the author of the Demonjlration^ or Dia- I gue. To which he refus'd toanfwer. When he wasask'd, why he would clear himfelf of Martin^ and not of thefe : he laid, becaufe he would not be thought to handle the caufe of difcipline as ALirtin did i but he thought other- wile of the books mention'd^ and car'd not tho' they Ihould be fathered upon him. Hefaid likewife, he thought the author, for any think he knew, did well, and he knew he was inquired after tO; be punifli'd : and therefore he thought it his duty to hinder the finding him out, which he could not better do than thus j for ifevery one fufpefted deny'd it, the author at length muft needs be found out. The Lord Anderfun then urg'd him : why dare you not confefs it, if you be the author of it ? dare you not (land to your own doings? To this he thus anfwer'd : I profefs'd before, that I liked of the books, and the matter handled in them, but whether I made them or no, I will not an- fwer^ neither of any other book of that argument, what- foever goeth without name, if you fliould ask me, for the reafon alledg'd before: befides that, if I were the author, I think that by law I need not anfwer. That is true, fays Anderfon^ if it concerned the lofs of your life. [Oh barba- rous wickednefs ! to urge and fcrew him by fuch arts as thefe to witnefs againft himfelf, and to infmuate the mat- ter did not touch his life, when the defign was to try him for his life, as they afterwards did, and con- demned him I] Well L/J^^/anfwer''d him thus : I pray your Lordfliip, doth not the law fay generally : No manjhall Le put to an fiver zmhout prefent?nent^btjhye yufticesy or liKit- ter of recordy or by due prccefs and writ origuialy &C. A. 42. Edw, 3. cap. 3. That is law, fays Anderfony and it is not law. I underftand you not, my Lord, (ays UdaL ^Tis a Statute which is in force, if it be not repeal'd. And (o that Lord's mouth was flop'd for a while, and he was relieved by fome of his auxiliaries. The Bilhop of Rcche- jler thought to catch him, by faying to him : I pray you Jet me ask you a queilion or two concerning your book. [Which was malicious enough in a Bifhop, who fhould not make it his bufinefs to hunt for the Blood of the in- nocent.] But Udal\y^$ upon his guard, and faid: 'Tis not parti. ///^Dissenters. j 3 i not yet provM to be inlne ; but I will anfwer to nny thing concerning the matter of the book iu far as 1 know. At length the folicitor faid to him : Mr. Ucla/^ I am fur- ry that you will not anfwer, nor take an oath, which by law you ought to do [he did not mcnti(.n what lavv.J I can allure you, your anfwers are like the femlnary Priefls anfwers j for they fay, there is no law to compel them to take an oath to accufe themfelves.^" Sir, fays UJal^ if it be a liberty by laWjthere is no rcafon why theyfhould not chal- lenge it : for (tho' they be very bad ones) they are fubjedts, and untill they be condemned by law, may require ail the benerit of fubjects; neither is that any reafon, that their anfwering ioy iliould make the claim of lefs value for me, feeing that we are herein fubje(5ts alike, tho' otherwife of a molt contrary difpofition. The Solicitor being thus put to filence, after a fhort confultation held among them- felves, a Civilian undertakes him, this was Dr. Aidery Lezviri, who faid to him : You have taken the oath here- tofore, why fhould you not take it nov/ ? Udal anfwer'd him to this : Indeed you call to remembrance a good reafon to refufe it. I was calFd to anfwer certain Articles upon mine oath heretofore, which I voluntarily did, and freely confefsM that againft my felf concerning my judgment and preaching of the points of difcipllne, which could never have been prov'd. And w^hen my friends labourM to have me reftord to my place, the Archbifhop anfwer'd there was fufficient matter again ft me by my own confeffion, w^-hy 1 fhould not be retliorM ; whereupon I covenanted with mine own heart, never to be mine own tormenter in that fort again. At length the Bifhop told him, his fentence for that time was to go to the Gatehoufe clofe prifoner. So much good fenfe and integrity appears in all his an- fwers, that one can't think of thebafeufage he found with- out indignation. Take it In his own words: " I was car- *^ ried to the Gatehoufe by a MefTenger, who delivered me ^^ with a warrant to be kept clofe prifoner, and not to be *^ fufter'd to have pen, ink or paper, or any body to fpeak ^' with me. Thus I rem.ain'd there half a year ; in all which ^* time my wife could not get leave to come unto me, faying ^^ only that in the hearing of the keeper flie might fpeak N 2 • " to * UJal's re^ly to this may ferve far a folid atjfwer to a faggejiion ofBi/hap Ayl« Bi^r, I rnjajiinU hsfsrt U the third pari of h'l^ invfcfiye againjl Cirtvyng^c. • 132 ^4 V I N D I C A T I O 1? (^f '^^^^ "f* ^' to me, nnd 1 to her, of fuch things as he fliould think *^ meet ; notwithflanding that fhe made fuit to the Com- ^' mifHcners, yea unto the body of the Council, for fome '^ more liberty: all which time my Chamber-fellows " were fcm.inary Priefls, traitors and profefFed Papifis. '^ At the end of half a year I was removed to the White *^ L\on in Sira/mwk^ and fo carried to the aflizes at '' CrcydaL' The 24 of July he was brought to Croydon together with the 1 clons and other criminals, and with fetters up- on his legs, to be tried before Baron Clarke and Serjeant Piickering., The judge ufed him very rudely, and hardly. When Mr. Udalto\d him, he was ignorant of the law in the matter of challenging a jury, and ask'd how^ many he might challenge : he anfwer'd him; he was not to tell him that, he fat there to judge, and not to give counfel. And yet with us the judge is reckon^ to be council for the accufed, till he is found guilty,* and tis a very com- mon thing in trials for the judges to inform perfons in this matter. Mr. Daulpm^ who v/as council for the Queen, began with a long fpeech, wherein he inveighM againfl the caufe, and thofe who profefs'd it, and efpecially Mr. Udal ; he mentioned fome of their books of Common- prayer, and faid there was in one of them horrible blafphe- my in thofe Vv^ords of the confecration of the Lord's Sup- per : T^ake eat this is my b dyj drink this is 77iy blood ^^' And whereas, fays he, one of the books doth allow, that o- ver every congregation there fliould be a faithful Paftor, that is, a fhepherd, whereby they may take the govern- ment out of her Majefty's hands, and fo bring her Maje- fiy to be one of their (heep; no, quoth he, her Majefly is no f}:eep under any fliepherd in the world, except Chrift. t And for the government that thefe men do feck for, I am allured there is none fuch to be found in the Word of God. Mr. Udal anfwer'd, this being yet a controverfy among learned Divines, he thought it would have been a part of modelly for Mr. Daulton to h^ve fufpended his judgment, efpecially fince he formerly fhew^'d fome liking to that caufe himfelf. Then the judge took him • B) thiitke vci/JerP cr hovep-ycfthtmafi^ who was the ^reat managv ofh'rf try 4^^ mn le e^-'fi.'y dfernd. f ThiJ is ,jn odd ivhrm enoi^gh ■ b'tt if ^ieen Elizabeth riiQ'^^ij/ fo^ I ivondir jvhy [he Kculdt.ik^ a V'rfceifutiQnJnm tht ^rdiifio^ 10 uf jUjt. »n Lent, part r. ///^Dissenters. i ^ j him up thus : Sirra, firra, anlwer to the matter Mr. Daulton hath againfl you : and then bid Mr. DaultUii proceed to the proof of the points in the indictment. Mr Dnulttn then undertook lo prove, 1. That he had a malicious intent in makinp; the book. 2. That he was the author of it. 3. That thefe matters in the indictment u'ere felony by the Statute of EUz.. 23. cap. 2. Then Mr. Beadle theRepjder was fworn, that the exa- minations [about to be read] were as the parties them- lelves deliver'd them. [For you muft know they did not fland upon the trifling formality of bringing his accu- lers to his face.] Then Stephen Ch.itfielu's articles were produc'd againft him. Thefe were articles which Cljat- fiAd had carry 'd to the Archbif]:op, and contained a re- port of certain written papers he faw in Mr. Udal's fludy, tending (as he fuppos'd) to the making fuch a book as this. Upon feeing them he asked, whofe writing they were: and Mr. Udal anfwer'd, a friend's. CbatfrJd then delir'd him to nd his hands of them, for he doujted they concerned th.e fiate. He faid too, that another time Ud.d fhould tell him : That if they put him to filence, he would give the Bifhops fuch a blow as they never had. Chatfield was call'd for to witnefs thefe things, but ap- pearM not. Daulton faid he went out of the way on pur- pofe. The judge faid : Mr. Vdaly you are glad of that. Mr. Vdal anfwer'd : My Lords, I wifn heartily he had been here, for as I am fure he never could fay any thing againfl me to prove this point ; fo 1 have heard, and ain able to prove it to be true, that he is very forry he ever made any complaint againft me, confeffng he did it in his anger, when Ala; tin cam.e riril out ; and by their fu.-''gefti- ons, whom he hath proved hnce by experience to be very bad men. He added : He u'as accufed two years before upon Chatfidd's words, that tlie papers he faw in his fiu- dy were the miatter o^ Martm Marp ehitc, and becaufe he had cleared himfelf of that, the fame thing was now brought to prove another matter, but it proved nothing unlefs it were fet down in particular what they were. Mr. Datihin faid, it prov'd he had a purpofe to wTite this book, and thofe things v/ere colleccions from, his friends and preparations the^^eto. Mr. Udal refer'd it \?.^ one would think he might fafely'l u^ tlie jury to confider hov/ that point was cleared. Befides, he addcd^ the book itfeif N 3 was 134 ^Vindication^/ Part L was extant in men^s hands before his talk with Chatfield^ Then he dein\l he iniy;ht explain his own words of gi'ving a three to the B/jhcps. But the judge told him, the matter was clear, they iaw what he could fay to it well enough, and bid Mr. Daulton proceed to the proof of the fecond point. [This is fuch evidence, as a man would not hang a dog upon. Here was no witnefs in court, only a paper read, which had never been fworn to, nothing particu- lar mcntionM in the papers alledg'd to be feen, and thefe are pretended to have been preparations for a book, that was in print before, and all this only the fuppofition of an angry man (fet on by bad men) and who was forry for what he had done. What a judge then was this Baron C/arLe ^ The jufiice of the nation was then at as low an ebb, as the facred miniftry.] Then Mr. Daultvn endeavour'd to prove him the author of the book ; and for that end read the anfwer o{ Nicolas ^^ompkinsj made upon oath before the High Commif- fxners : That be knew Mr. Udal was the author of that book, caird 7'he De-monjiratioriy for he faid that Mr. Udal himfelf told him fo j alio that he faw either in Mr. Vdal^'s houfe, or in kmio: other place in Kingjhn^ a catalogue of all the books Mr. tfdcil had made, amongft \\ hich the Demorj/iraticn was one. This Thompkins was beyond fea, and hardly knew what he faid when he was examined ,• and own a he could not for a thoufand pounds affirm any more, than that he heard Udal fay : He veculd not doubt i?utfet his naire t'l the bxk, if he had indiferem judges. And when witnelles oiicr'd to prove he had differently re- ported his confeffion, they were anfwer^d : That becatife their vciwefs T:a^ ^'^g^^drji the Qjj.eepJs Majejly they could mt he heard. [The judge no doubt faw how impertinent thefe things were, and therefore to prejudice the jury a- p;ainft him, otier'd Udal to difcharge him, if he Vi^ould fvrear he made not the bool: ; which he knew he woul4 not do.] Another evidence he was the author of the book was read ; and that was the confeflion of Henry Sharpe^ of Nohhamptcn^ who, upon his oath before my Lord Chan- cellor, had faid, that he heard Mr. Penry fay, rhat Mn Udal was the author of the DemGiiftyatkn, This was the v.^iole evidence, upon which he was con- demned. And befides, the flatute was made againft Pa- piils/and could :ior, without a violent Ilraining, be ^x- ,' ' tended jPait I. f/;^ D I S S E N T E R S. 1^5 tended to fuch a cafe as this : it was againft thofe, uho zirre evil afiethd to her Highnefs^ as all the writings of the Puritans (hew, they were not : bclides, the Mi was leveird againft defaniw^ of the Qiieens Majefty^ or jlir- ring up of irijmieciio/y feditimiy or rcbillim. Now here was nothing in the book, upon v\ hich fuch a charge, a- gainft Mr. Vdal^ could be grounded, fuppofing he had own'd himfelf the author of it. Let but any man read the words, upon which the indiftment was laid : " And " who can (without blufhing) denie you (the Bifhops] ^" to be the caufe of all ungodlinefs, feeing your govcrn- *' nient is that which giveth leave to a man to beany " thing, faving a found Chriftian ? tor certainly it is " more free in thefe days, to be a Papift, Anabaptift, of " the Family of Love, yea, any moft wicked one what- " foever, then that which we fhould be ; and I could " live thefe twenty years any fuch in EhgJande (yea in a " Bifhop^'s houfe, it may be) and never be much moleft- " ed for it ; fo true is that which you are charged with, '' in a Dialogue lately come foorth againit you, and fmce ^^ burned by you, that you care for nothing but the " maintenance of your dignities, bee it to the damnation " of your owne foules, and infinite millions moe. '^ And what is here to defame the Queen's Majeiiy (who is not fo mJ%h as mentioned) or to Itir up lediricn or rebellion ? The judge told the jury, they muft hnd him author of the book, the evidences being manifeit for it. As to the matter of felony, that was a point of law, agreed upon by all the judges. And fo the jury brought him in guilty^ to the everlafling reproach of the juftice of the nation, and particularly of that reign, and of the Bifhops, who Vv^ere the great ftirers in the profecution, for the fake of their own reputation. The jury having found him guilty, fcntence w^as not pafs'd upon him, "till Febr, 20. Vvhen the next affize was held in Southvcark, In the mean while, he drew up a Petition to the Queen, wherein he protefts before God, he had never any thought, or imagination, to publifii, write, or do any thing maliciouily, or tending to the diflionour, or flander of her JVlajefty's Royal Perfon, or Princely Eflate : and after having earneftly intreated her gracious pardon, promifes, if he m/ight obtain it, to lead the reft of his Jife in all humble and dutiful obedience. N 4 The 1^6 ./^Vindication of Part I. The firft day of the afllze he was dealt with by fome to condemn the book in qiielHon, and juflify the Hie- rarchy. This he would not, and at a private hearing, he drew out a paper of reafons to move his judges to flay the fentence,nutvvith{landing the verdidt againlt him, and to be a means of his releafe. He herein pleaded his own caule very ingenioully and flrenuoufly ; and took notice, the jury were only directed to find him the author of the book, and were freed from inquiring into the intent, without which there is no felony. He appealed to their own cf.mfciences, whether by themfelves, or report, they could hnd him guilty of any act in his whole life, that lavour'd of malice, or malicious intent, againll; her Ma- jefty, or of any other behaviour, than flandeth wuth the allegiance and duty of a mofl dutiful and Chriftian fub- ject. He complained, his jury were not left wholly to their own confciences, but were wrought upon partly by promife, alluring them it fliould be no further danger to him, but tend to his good ; and partly by fear j and it had been occadon of grief to Tome of them ever fmce : that no witnefs did directly, prove him the author of the book ; and that Cbatfidd^ the chief witnefs was fo griev'd, that he was aflia^Ti u to come where he was known. That the ' book fpake honourably of her Majefty every where, and the drawing of the Statute from her Majefty to the Bifhops (as a part of her body politic) was a violent depraving and wrefting it. In fine he pleaded, he had maintain'd a caufe, wherein all the Foreign Protellants agreed. He clos'd all with this fentence : " If all this prevail not, yet " my redeemer liveth, to whom I commend my felf, and ^^ fay as fometime Jeremy faid in a cafe not much unlike : ^^ Behold I am in your bands ^ do vcith me zvhat Jeerneth good ^' unto yen ; hut kncio you this, that if you put me to deaths ^^ youjhal^ brir,Z innocent blood upon you, and upon the land. ^^ As the blood of Abel, fo the blood of Udal xi/V/ cry to ^^ God zvith a loud voice, and the righteom judge of the ^^ worlds vci/l re^uiye it at the hands of all thofe that JhaS '' begialtyofit/'' After he had pleaded his reafons in open court, where he was ufed with barbarous injuflice, Puckering pals'd len- tcnce of death upon him. The Queen repriev'd him, and fent Dr. Bond, her Chaplain, jto him, to ofer him a form of fubmiffion, Vthich he refused, and drew up another of his own. In the Part L r/;^ D I s s E N T E R s. t^j the mean while he rcccivM advice, that fome about the Qiieen inform 'd her, he held fucli opinions, as rendered him not worthy to live; and that Sir IVa/tcr Rdivleigh was in hopes of obtaining hi5 life, if he would lend him fomcwhat under his hand, concerning thefe opinions. This he did, and font it in a handfome Letter to Sir JValter, After this. Dean Nuzir/y and Dr. ylndrei^Sj came and brought him a form of fubmilHon, promifing in the name of the Council, he fhould have pardon and liberty, if he fubfcribM it. He refus'd at hrfl:, But after- wards, upon ad viling with his friends, yielded; and that this might not be mifconftrued, he fcnt a Letter to the Lords of the Council, telling them honeilly, how he would be underllood, as to feveral paflages in it. Soon after came Dr. A^drevjs to him, telling him, the Clark had miftaken the form of fubmiflion, and brought him another, which was moftly the fame he had refus'd be- fore. And foon after he heard, that that fubmiilion Noirel had procurM of him^ was made ufe of to haften the execution of the fentence. Upon which he wrote a plain Letter to him, fetting before him the danger gf having a hand in fliedding his innocent blood, and in- treating him to aft in his behalf; at the fame time, Qiew- ing he was not afraid to die, even fuch a manner of death. Ke continued in prifon, without being allowed to go to Church, and in Eafier "Tenjt^ ^59^j he fued for liberty for that; but was deny^'d, being a condemned man, and then he got a copy of his indictment, which he could not obtain before. Upon this he got a pardon fram'd, according to the indictment, and fent it with a Petition by his wife to the Council, who refer'd him to the Archbifhop. Udalthen fent divers Petitions, and dutiful Letters to him, and got many friends and honourable perfonages to llie to him ; yet could not his good will be gotten. The ^Turky Mer- chants then fued, they m.ight have him to Guinea, to teach their people : the Archbifhop promis'd his good will, provided they would be bound for his going upon hio having his liberty. But afterwards he added another condition, that they fhould be bound, he fhould tarry there, ''till her Majefiy^'s licence to come thence. This condition was refused. However at length Dean Nonel prevailed with the Lord Keeper, and the Archbifliop pro- filed, at their next meeting at court, to deal with her M:i' \ jS J Y 11^ Die AT I on of Part I. Majefly to fign his pardon, that he might have his li- berty to go the voyage. Whether they did this, or no, does not appear. IF Fu//ey is to be believM, he was not pardon'd at all, but dy'd a prifoner. Whether he had fairer play in the prifon, than in the court, I can^t tell. However there is good reafon to think, that his impri- fonment, and the great vexation he met with, were the means of hafiening his death. And fo we leave his, with the other fou/sy tinder the altar y crying zuitb a loud voice j a'adfayingy Hovj longy Lordy holy and truCy doft thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that diuell on the earth ? I cannot here but take notice of a great miflake of Sir George Pauly who, extolling the Archbifhop for his mildnefs and clemency y (and he might as well have done it for his Nincoyijormity) fpeaks thus of him : " Did he *^ not, after that Udal and others were condemned unto *' death, draw upon him the diflike of his dear and ho- ^^ nourable friend, in making earneftfuit, and never cea- *^ fed, ^till he had obtainM pardon for them at her Maje- ^^ fty^s hands .^ '' ^ The honourable friend is mentioned by name in the Margin, Sir Chriftopher Hatton^ who was Qyeen Eliz^abeth's Chancellor. Now how falfe this is, concerning Udaly may appear by what Udal himfelf writer of the matter. He tells us exprefly : That after the Chan-- ceUors deathy he fent fevcral times to the Archbifhop, and that his good will could not be gotten. How then could the Archbifhop draw upon him Hatton's diilike, by Cuing for his pardon .^ This I mention the rather, that my readers may be fenfible, how little credit is to be given to that author. And what is it makes our Adverfaries wrig- gle after this rate, and be fo folicitous to fave the credit of their Archbifhop ? If Udal was prov'd guilty, and his crime was capital, what harm had there been in it, if the Archbifhop had never ftir'd to obtain his pardon ? But if-rothing appear^ againft him, and the very matter objefted was a meer trifle, I think it would much better become our Adverfaries to teflify their utter abhorrence of the horrid villany pradis'd againfl an ingenious, learned, and pious Minifter, than to forge fuch forry cxcufes and vindications of any, who had a hand in it. I • Lih: of Whitg. /''; ^o. Part I. the Dissenters. i j 9 I confefs, this account is pretty long, tho' I have, to fliorten it, left out much I would have been glad to put in i but the extraordinarinefs of the cafe, and the fcarcity of the trial will, I hope, be a fuflicient apology for ine, and efpecially iince our Author himl'elf led me to fpeak particularly of it. Now alfo was filenc'd Mr. IVulter T^raverSy a very pi- ous and learned Minifter, whom King James had invited, together with Mr. Cartvjrighty to be Profeflors in the Univerfity of St. Andreivs, He was not fufter'd either to fee his accufers, or make any defence for himfelf ; but be- ing unheard, was filenc'd, and that in the moft rude and atironting way, that his adverfaries could contrive- For when the congregation was met together on a Lord's Day, and Travevs was juft going into the pulpit, a forry fellow delivered him Archbifhop Whitgifth Letter, whereby he forbad him to preach. ''Tis paft doubt the defign was to provoke him, by thus publicly aftronting him before the congregation ; but fome people can't help fufpecting, the crafty Archbifhop had a malicious intention to lay a fnare for him ; and fought an occafion of ufmg him with the^ greater feverity, if he had lefs regarded the authority of the Archbifhop, than the profit of the affembly, and had therefore difobey'd fo unexpeded a command. However that be, the Archbifhop, according to his tender afledion to the people, fent no body to preach in Trave/s's room; but the congregation, being difappointed of the expected entertainm.ent, was difmifs'd. The Archbifliop pretended three reafons for this prohibition. I fiiall only take notice of the firfl, which the Foreign Divines ought to be acquainted with : and that was, that Mr* T^ravers was not a Minifler, according to the manner of the Church of England : for he was not ordain'd by the Archbifhop, but by the Presbytery at Antijceyf. This has been the manner of our Adverfaries fince that time ,• they null the ordinations of Proteftants, while they allow the validity of thofe of Papifls. Concerning this, Mr. Hornheck fays : '' Nothing is more intolerable, than *'' that thofe, who are ordainM by the Papifts, fhouJd be " received without any difficulty, becaufe they were or- '• dain'd by a Bifhop ; and at the fame time, the orders ^^ of thofe, who are ordain'd by Presbyters, are call'd in ^' queftion : efpecially, fmce the Presbyterians admit per- i' fons ordain'd by Billiops in the Froteilant Church, '^ the i4o ^J V I N D I c A T I o N (?/ Part I. '^ the Bifliops, on the other hand, ought not to difpute ^' againft the ordinations performed in the fame Church *^ by Presbyters, as tho' it were null and invalid. ^^ Now our Author proceeds to the ftory of Hacket: Nay feme of the Puritans^ fays he, of this timc^ zuerefo ?nady as to attempt a rcheUion for the fake of the difcipliney and by the folicitation oj fome enthufiajlkal ^nen^ Hacket, Cop- pinger, and Arthington, proceeded to flir up the people to take up ar?ns againft the Q/ieen on that behalf, Hacket was a fellow of a bold and confident nature, illiterate to the lafl: degree; for he had never learn 'd to read. Dr. Fuller hints, that he was thought to be diforder'd in his brain, and was fitter for Bedlam^ than BrideweL ^^ However that be, 'tis certain he broke out into inoft horrid blaf- phemy, and even died with it in his mouth. It would be very unjuil: to pretend, his being a Nonconformift is an evidence of the badnefs of our caufe. Every one knows, that Simon Magm^ Afontam^s, and Marcion^ were once members of the Chriftian Church, tho* they after- wards fell into the moil: abominable Herefies. Nay, among the Difciples of our Lord himfelf, there was a JudaSy who was a Devil, f The tares will be mix'd with the wheat, until the time of harveft: and ^tis com- mon for wicked men, to feek to'hide their wickednefsby aft'eding the company of good men. Nor can our Ad- verfaries boaft they are, by any fingular privilege, ex- empted from the like difgrace. We need not defcend to the illiterate laity, or their inferior Clergy, to find out inftances to reproach them with. We are able to ftop the jnouths of all iuch objefters, if they have any modefty, with the vile practices even of fom.e of their own BiQiops, and chief rulers of their Church. And if the difgraceful punifhment inflifted be thought to ercreafe the difgrace of a party, we don^'t want an example of that kind to retort upon our Adverfaries. What crime could be viler than that of Adertcn, Bifhop of IFnterfordy for which he was hanged, and that retaining his facred character ; for he was not firfl degraded ? I would here farther add, that our Author has not fairly reprefcnted this matter. Thefe three frantic perfons had no body to join with them in their infurrecticn ; nor is there evidence, that any. * iS^K 5. f. ios, io6. t JcMi vi. 70. Part I. //;^ D I s s E N T ER s. 141 any, befide themfelves, approv'J, or were indeed ac- quainted with their true defign. Dr,Nk/jo/s tell us : Coppinger coynynuuicated this mat- ter -ivitb M)\ Cartwright, Mr. tgerton, and Wigginton, Puritanical ATniijlers^ ii/jo zi:ere then at London, asking their advice concerning it. But to this they return this cun- ning anjix:er : " "That it icas not to be deniedy but that the ^^ cauje "dcas good, which he deftr\i to be an aclor in, but ^^ the thing ixhich /luck teas, they thought it imjpojjib/e that '^ he jhould be fit to intermeddle in ity zcithout endange-ring " both oj himfelf and of the real caufe^ which he -would feem ^^ to be mcjl dcfirous to further. And Egevton faith : T'hat *' tho^ he would not undertake to approve his extraordinary " callings yet he would be loth to quench the fpirit of God in ^' Coppinger, or to hinder his z^eal. ^' But none of them all thought fit to dif cover his confpiracy. How fhould they difcover his confpiracy, who were not acquainted with it? There is no evidence of their acquainting the Minifters with their defign of making an infurreftion. They pretended an extraordinary zeal, and that they w^ould exert themfelves for the difcipline : but did they ever inform them, that they intended to rife in open re- bellion againft the Queen ? Some of the Minifters took them for men deluded and diftemper'd in their brains, and anfwerM them accordingly; perhaps fo as they hoped was the moft ready way to get rid of their impertinence. And who ever thinks it worth his while to go and trouble a magiftrate, with an information about the romantic, ram- bling difcourfes of fuch kind of men ? "^Tis poflible a weak Minifter (and fuch there may be in any party) might give an unadvisM anfwer to them: but that any of them were let into their real defign is not pretended. And all thefe inform.ations muft come from thofe men them- felves, whofe teUimcny will not be much regarded by pru- dent men againft perfons of probity and reputation. And who, that knows any thing of the Puritans, will imagine they would countenance the proclamation that Coppinger and Arthringtcn made, that Chrift was come in Hackety with his fan in his hand, Zjc? Dr. Fuller fpeaks candid- ly of the matter. " This bufinefs, fays he^ of Hacket " happened very unfeafonably for the Presbyterians. True " it is, they as cordially detefted his blafphemies, as any " of the Epifcopal party. And fuch of them as loved " Hacket the Ncnanformift, abhorr'd Hacket the Hcre- '' tic 142 y4 V I N D T c A T I o N c?/ Part lo ^' tic; after he had mounted to fo high a pitch of impie- u ^y^y :X: ^jj j^t 3ny j^2j^ confider the fpirit of that rdgn, and how fcandaloully they hunted after the blood of Udaly and he will reckon it an argument of the Puri- tans innocence in this atiair, or at Icaft an evidence there was no proof againfl them, that none of them fufter'd for it. Farther C^r^tun^/;^ wrote an Apology for himfelf, againfl: the llanders of Dr. Sutdijfe. In which lie moft fully ju- ftihcs himfelf, and fhews the weaknefs of the charges ad- vancM by that trifling and impertinent fcribler. Particu- larly he fhews, he had never feen Hncket or Artbringtonj and had never any conference vvith them by letter or mef- fage. That as to Coppinger^ a friend of his had confulted him about his extraordinary calling-; and that he gave his reafons to prove it a delulion : that he advis^'d his friends, a little before his lewM praftice broke out, to put him irl Brideicell or Bedlam : that when he fent Mr. Cartzvright a Letter, he would not receive it, or [o much as look upon the fuperfcription of it. Nor was Cartwright clearM by himfelf only, but by Mr. yob T^/jyockjmrton^ a Gentleman who was fallly accused, as being privy to this confpiracy, and therefore wrote an Apology for himfelf. He fays : " A reverend judge in this *' land did once tell my Lord Chancellor, that the matter of *' the indictment that pafled againfl "Throckmorton at War- " "ijuick, wzs in trueth but a frivelous matter, and a thing ^^ that he would eafily avoid. And the flud Lord Chancel- " lor did fay, not only privately in his houfe, but even to *^ her Majelly (who caufed the fame to be fignify V. to me, " that I might therein be thankful to my Lord) and more *^ than that did openly in Parliament pronounce, that he ^^ knew the fame Job Throck?norton to be an honefl man."*^ Moreover he fhews, that the writers concerning that con- fpiracy had wretchedly wreftcd his and Egevtor's words, to a fenfe quite different from that of the authors; and had left out fuch paflages of their letters, as would have made their meaning plain. He declares he was caution'd by Mr. Cartwright from the very firfl:, to beware of Cop- finger as of a craz'd man. Thefe, and feveral other things, which quite deflroy the credit of thole bafe and mercena- ry ^ «••* Part L //;^ D I s s E N T E R Si 14 j ry writers Sutdijfe and Cofiriy he not only relates, but of- fers to fwear to the truth of them, whenever he liiouI4 be caird to it. Our Author in the next place difcourfcs concerning Rcbert BroiLH,'^' Of whom I Ihall fay but little at prcfcnt, the reports of authors concerning liim being fo various, that 'tis hard to difcern the truth. Nor, do I apprehend the caufeof the DilFenters to be much afiedted with his hi- ftory. All feem to agree that he was not {o fix'd in his no- tions, but that the perfecution of the Bifliops made him conform. If he did this fmcerely, our Adverfaries may triumph in their profelyte; if hypocritically, they may learn what is the great benefit of thofe perfecuting practi- ces they are fo fond of; but they are the worft men in the world to become his accufers, becaufe they were firft his tempters. The Independents do not own him as their ringleader. He is faid by a Foreigner to have been a man cf a mod diflolute converfation, and to have continued Minifter of a Parifh ; which, if it be true, fhewsour Ad- verfaries are more ilrict in punifhing men for difparaging their conftitution, than for tranfgreffing the undoubted laws of Chrift. f But 'tis to be hoped, that in a little time we may have a much more full and certain account of him, than we have at prefent. And that makes me the wil^ linger to pafs him over fo lightly. A fevere law was made about this time, by which fuch as (hould perfuade others, or be prefent themfelves at Conventicles, were required to abjure, or otherwife were to be banifli'd. Sir Walter Rav:leighy when the Bill was read the fecond time in the Houfe of Commons, fpake a- gainft it. He faid: " In his conceit the Brownifts are " worthy to be rooted out of a commonwealth ; but " what danger may grow to our felves, if this law pafles, *^ it were fit to be confider'd. For it is to be fear'd, that " men not guilty will be included in it ; and that law is *^ hard that taketh life, or fendeth into banifhment, " where mens intentions fhall be judg'd by a jury, and *^ they fhall be judges what another meant. But what ^^ law that is againft a faft, that is juft ; and punifh the '^ fad as feverely as you will. If two or three thoufand '^ Brownifis meet at the feafide, at whofe charge fliall '' they \ p. 34- t Honor. Regius deSuj. E^dd [r, Aigliai 144 '^ V I N D I c A T I o N (?/ Part h *' they be tranfported ? or whither will you fend them ? *^ I am lorry for it ; I am afraid there is near twenty thou- ^' fand of them in England \ and when they are gone, " who (liall maintain their wives and children ? -^ Upon thefe poor people the perfecution was very heavy. The only crime they were guilty of was^ their oppofmg vigoroully the impofitions of the Hierarchy, and their worlhiping God according to cheir confciences. They were indeed very high in their notions about many things, and they commonly wrote with a great! deal of bitternefs; but they were undoubtedly many of them very* good men, and far from deferving any fuch hard and cru- el treatment. The Puritans always diflik'd the rigidnefs of their notions, and were the chief writers againft them; for which the Bifliops, according to their ufual gratitude at that time, rewarded them with filencing, fufpenfion and imprifonment. In the year 1592. there were fifty fix of thefe people taken on a Lord^s Day as they were worfhiping God, in the very place, in which the Proteftant congregation us'd to meet in Qiieen Marfs days. They were fent two by two into the feveral prifons in and about Lcndon. Some of them by long imprifonment were near flarvM, others after two years imprifonment were banifli'd, and fome were hang'd* f There were at that time detained in prifons in London (befide thofe in other goales throughout the land) 7 2 perfons lying in cold, in hunger, in dungeons, in irons. Barrow fays the 56 taken in London were un- bailably committed by the Bifliop of London clofe prifon- er in B^'idewely the Limbo or Dungeon in Newgate^ the Fleety the Counters^ the Clinky the Gatehoufey the white Lyon. '*" Thefe bloody men, fays he, will allow them nei- ^' ther meat, drink, fire, lodging, nor fuft'er any, whofe ^^ hearts the Lord would flir up for their relief, to have " any accefs to them': purpofing belike to imprifon them ^^ unto death, as they have done 17 or 18 others in the '^ fame noifom goales within thefe fix years/"* The huf- band and wife, he tells us, were not fufierM to be in the fame prifon : their poor families at home were miferable. *' Some of this company, fays he, had not one penny a- ^^ bout them, when they were fent into clofe prifon, nor " any ' nwnJhsK&s Hlftorical Cclkdllons, />. 76. t D^rroyv's Suppli;::. to ihs ParlianJ: Parti. the Dissenters. 145 ^' any thing being abroad (which is the cafe of mofl of ^^ them, if not all) to procure tlieinfelves and their poor ^^ families any maintenance, fave only by their handy la- ^' hours and trades. Whereby it is come to pals, that *^ thefe enemies of God do not only flarve and undo a *^ number of men in the prifons, but even a lamentable ^' company of poor orphans and fervantsabrcud. Their " unbridled llanders, their lawlefs privy fearches, their, ^^ violent breaking open and rifling our houfes, their la- " mentable and barbarous ufage of women and young " children in thefe hoftile aflaults, their uncontroul'd ^^ thievery, robbing, and taking away of whatfoever chey " think meet from us in this cafe; their unappeas'd and " mercilefs purfuit of us from our houfes, trades, wives, ^^ children, efpecially from the holy fociety of the l:iints *-' and Church of God, we are inforc'd to omit, left we '^ fhould be over tedious. We crave for all of us but '^ the liberty either to die openly, or to live openly in the ^^ land of our nativity. If we deferve death, it befeemeth " the Majefty of juftice not to fee us clofely murdered, ^^ yea ftarv'd to death with hunger and cold, and ftifled *^ in lothfom dungeons. If we be guiltlefs, we crave but ^' the benefit of our innocence, viz>, that we may have *^ peace to ferve our God, and our Prince, in the place of ^^ the fepulchres of our Fathers.'^ But let us hear what our Author fays of fuch, as wer^ put to death upon the account of Brownifm. One Thac- ker and Copping u'^r^ hang'dfor publijhingYj'cowWs Books. '^ And v/as not this, do we think, a mighty crime for which men fhould be hangM } Was not this a juftification of the Papifis putting men to death for the fame fort of crim.es? This cruelty was pra(Sis'd in 1583, ten years be- fore what he next mentions. Barrow and Greewood fuffer^d the fame pi^'nijjment, for putting out Books tpon the like principles in defamation of the eftablijh'd Churchy and for holding fepar ate Meetings con-- trary to lave. But a pardon vjas offered them^ if they vuould promife to live quietly for the future j and not dijlu) h the peace of the Church, But the flomoxhful Schifnatics cbofe deaths rather than quiet, Thefe two Ferfo.ns, ]s\r, Barrow a Gentleman, and Mr. Greenvcood a Miniiler, by their O whole ? (S'tffi Fulkr'fi Cha«h Hlft.- B- 9,^- 1(>9 1^6 A Vindication of Part I. whole converfation approved theinfelves, fo far as I can find, honed and good, tho^ weak Chriftians ; nor can their adverfarits find any thing to reproach them with, faving-their judgment in controverted points about cere- monies, church government, &c. And tho^ I look upon them to have been extravagantly mifbken in fome things, and to have been too fharp in their Itile ; yet I make no doubt at all, they are now glorious faints above. And I muft own, I cannot, without fome indignation, think of thofe men, who flied their blood under a pretence of do- ing God fervice. Is that the way of confuting argu- ments, and lllencing an adverfary ? Were not the matters difputable, and fuch wherein good men might difter in their fentiments ? If they were in an error, was it not a very tolerable one ? Nay were not their adverfaries them- felves in much greater errors even about thefe matters ? Was there not good reafon to think they were honeft and confcientious in embracing and profefTmg their opinions? Did not their w^hole conducl, did not the teftimony of their blood abundantly confirm it ? If they were quite out of the way, w^as fuch rigour and cruelty the proper method of convincing and reclaiming them ? And is it not fcandalous in wTiters after them to infult thefe men ? Can any man be fo weak, as to think they did not love ^heir lives, as well as their neighbours ? Was it any thing but the defire of keeping a good confcience, that kept them from accepting an otter'd pardon ? Few men are ftomachful enough ro refufe their Jives, when they are of- ferM them; and 'tis barbarous to impute to fuch a reafon, what is apparently done for the fake of a good confcience. While I am writing this, w^e have an account of the be- haviour of Mr. Pauly one of their own Clergy, who tho" he had been in open rebellion, and died vindicating the iinpudent caufe for which he fufier^d ; yet was not fo fto- ?fiachfuly but that he could bafely and Icandalouily fawn, and flatter, and lie too, as long as he had any hope of fa- ving his life. What made the ditierence between him and them ? Certainly not that he was more humble, and they more ftomachjiil ; not that he only lov'd life, and they defpis'd it; but that the one a(ited upon no religious prin- ciple, as did the other two. And let any man read the examinations of Bayyoiu and Gvceii-xcQd^ and I am mifia- ken^ if he will not perceive a plain hearted Chriflian lim- plicity PartL the Dissenters, 147 plicity in their behaviour, and an inhuman fpiiit of cru- elty and tyranny in their pcrfecutors. I lliall farther fet down here what I meet with in one of their writers, who, in King Ja?nes the lirft's reign, publilh'd BayiuusP/atjor?n, '^ A Gentleman, Jays he, of *^ a good houfe told me, that Qiieen Eliz.ubeth asked the " learned Doctor EuiymUsy what he thought of thofe two ^' men. And he anfw^er^d her Majefty, that it could not " avail any thing to fhew his judgment concerning them, " feeing they were put to death : and being loth to fpeak " his mind further, her Highnefs charged him upon his '^ allegiance 10 fpeak. Whereupon he anfwer'd : That he ^^ was perfuaded, if they had lived, they w'ould have " been two as worthy inftruments for the Church of God, " as have been rais'd up in this age. Her Majefly figh'd, *^ and faid no more. But after that, riding to a park by *' the place, where they were executed, call'd to mind " their fuftering of death, and (being \\ illing to take fur- ^^ ther information concerning them) demanded of the " Right Honourable the Earl of Cumberland (that w-as " prefent w^hen they fufter^'d) what end they made. He ^^ anfwer'd : A very godly end^ and prayed for your Maje- ^^ flyy the fiate, &c. Moreover Mr. PhilipSy a Preacher *^ famous, having both heard and feen Mr. BarroWy his ^' holy fpeeches and preparation for death, faid : BarroWy " BarrcUy my foul be iLtth thine. For thus I have been ^' credibly inform^. ^^ Mr. Strype tells us, that pardon was promised them, if they would have come to Church, but that the great thing that ftuck with them was, the do6:rine of ChrilVs defcent into hell; which w-as mighti- ly infifted on at that time, and w^as the occalicn of much fuftering to good men. * Dr. Nkholsy in the next place, brings in Barren: under fentence of condemnation, as making a heavy ccmplaint_ of Cartwright's refufing to come to him. This ftory, tho* related by fome writers, is not very probable. The Bro^donifis were pretty much alienated from the Puritans, who wrote againft them, and perhaps more than they ought : and whatever ufe they might make of Cart- vjright's principles, yet he never appro vM their doings, or gave them any encouragement. Indeed he, and the Fu- O 2 ritans • Sjj Aylmer's L'lfzj f. 2^v 1 ^S J V I K D I c A T I o ]st ^/ Part L ritans in general, ftem^d to be too much of Dr. Nicholses mind, concerning the Magiflrate^'s power in matters of rcligi( n. And ccnfidcring what treatment Cartvcright had met with, no one can blame him for being on hii guard. He was cHendcd with the Hityrical ftile of many writings publifh'd at that time, by the enem.ies of the ec- clerialtical conftitution, as Mr. Clark afiures us, and Cnrt- v^r'jght himfclf tcjQifics in his Apology, And Dr. Fuller fays that tho' fume thought thofe jeering pens well employed ; yet *' the more difcreet and devout fort of men, even of *^ fuch as were no great friends to the Hierarchy, upon *^ folemn debate then refolv'd (I fpeak, fays be^ on cer- " tain knowledge from th!e mouths of fuch whom I maift *' believe) that for many foul falflioods therein fuggefted, ^^ fuch books were altogether unbefeeming a pious fpirit, " to prijit, publifh, or with pleafure perufe, which " fupposM true both in matter and meafure, charity would ^' rather conceal than difcover. '' '^ And if Cartwright fufpedied Bancw to have a hand in any fuch pieces, and knew at the fame time how carefully his adverfaries watch'd for an opportunity againft him, he muft be thcmi^ht to have adted prudently in avoiding (if he did avoid) a converfation they would have improved againft him. If he had done otherwife 'tis poffible all the blame mii^ht have been laid upon him, and he afrefh have been caft into prifon. So impoifible is it for innocence itfelf to pleafe unreafonable and malicious men. Soon after thefe was executed Mr. John Peirry whcm our Author mentions before, faying, He ivas eve of the ampcfers of that mtorkm Libel\ Martin Marprelate, and being jound guilty of libelling the Qrieen^ ixa: bang^d/f Not knovvdng \Uiether his trial be in print or not, I can't fo v;ell judge of the evidence alledg'd to prove him the au- thor of ALrrtiif Marprelate. And befide the afTertions of that party that fhed his blood, I have m.et with nothing to induce me to believe it. And Mr. Udal^ who Vv'as well acquainted with him, declar'd he did not believe Penry was the author : and indeed what I have read of Penry, appears to me to be written with an intirely different ftile and temper from Marti}? Marprelate. The government fccms never to have had any certain information of the true * ^K^s^'f. i^h t p: fz. Part L the Dissenter 5. 149 true author; and perhaps \\yp kn()\\n then to very tew, if any bdlde the author himleHl But if l^c were net the author, Ibme mens inalice af\ainll the party was gratiheJ in putting him to death. Another thing I would take notice of Is : That our Author fays, he vj^s found guilty if llhellii.g the Q^iLcyk: whereas, I dare fay, there is nut any fuch thing in any oi Md,trn^ wrliings. Satyrital enough they are upon the Bifliops and C!erp,y of the Church. But what was faiJ againll them is violently firain'd to be aga:nfl the Queen, becaufe they were her Miniflers. But that he never entertain^ any defigns againll the Queen, or bore her any difrefpect, appVars by what he fays at his examination before Juftice Fanjhirj:^ and Juftice Tmrig. 1 or a man who was lo honeft and free to declare his mind, in feveral tilings, wliich he could not but kncnv would he improved againft him, deferves to be believed in thofe declarations he makes for his own vindication. When Mr. FanfiitiD faid to him: '^ Then you are privy unto no *' practice or intent of any fedition or commotion againft '' her Majefty, or the fiate, for the pullmg down of Bi- " fhops r Mr. Penry anfwer'd him : No, I thank God, '' nor ever was; and I prcteii: before heaven and earth, " that if I were, I would difclofe and v/ithfland the iame '^ to the uttermoft of my ability, in all perfons of what ^^ religion Ibever they \\-ere. " '- Afterward Mr. Fa^iyja-jj :5Ut him in mind, he had laid, that the offices and livings e conceived to be derived from the body of Antichriil: fhould be,overthrov/n by the Lord, and therefore defir'd to know hov/ he m.eant this fliould be accomplii'h'd. And then Penry faid thus : ^' I have already fliewM ycni, that " this work fca!l be done by the appearing of JefusChrift, *^ in the fliining brightnefs of his Gofpel, thro' the effica- ^^ cy whereof, the Lord fliail [o lay them open, as he will ^^ put it into the hearts of princes and fiates, wherein they " are now maintained, to alioJifb their offices, callings and '^ works utterly from, among men, and to employ their " livings unto th^ holy civil u(cs of the princes and flates ''^ wherein they are. '' . And in a declaration he iucw up, concerning his alle- giance and his faith, w^aicli has. mariy things that are found in his examination,, he profeffes as ample an allegi- O 3 . ance ; See the Examiiut, of Barrow, Greenwood and Vcwy=, p. 54, t 150 J V I N D I c A T I o N ^ Part I. ance as any Chriftian, for ought I fee, can rightfully do ; and declares himfeif mod willing to defend her Majefty's authority againft all eftates, perfons, and creatures under heaven, to the lofs of his life, adding this honeft expreflion : " And I take the Lord to record, that that day to my " knowledge hath not pafled over my head, I am fure, *^ fince the firft time that the Lord under her gracious " reign brought me to the knowledge of the truth, where- ^^ in I have not, or do not pray for the Weilings of my *^ God, both outward and inward, to be pourM with a ** full hornup^on her Right Excellent Majefty's throne, re- ^^ gimcnt and dominions for ever and ever : and that he *^ would either convert or (pecdily overthrow in his wrath " all his and her enemies with their enterprifes, whether '^ they be home or foreign. Hereof I call the fearcher of ^"^ hearts, as in witnefs of truth againft my own foul, if ^"^ either I diffemble or forge in the premifes. '' He after- ward profcffes, that whatever he held in the points con- troverted, he held it of meer confcience toward God, ha- ving the written Word for his warrant. But if any one could convince him by that Vv'^ord, " that he err'd in a- *^ ny thing, he was willing to reform his judgment, crave " pardon earneftly for his overfight, yea, and be mod ^^ willing to fufter due punifliment for his temerity. But, ^' fays hey if on the other fide, I teftify nothing but verity *' in thefe points I am undoubtedly perfuaded of, I moft " humbly crave, that the piercing edge of that fword *^ may not in heat be turnM againft me and my brethren, ^^ which was never profeftedly violent againft the open ^^ and fworn enemies of their native prince and country. ^' He goes on like a Chriftian hero : " Death, I thank God, *' I fear not; in this caufe cfpecially ; for I know that the *^ fling of death is taken away, and that they are bleflcd ^^ which dy in the Lord for witneffing againft the former ^"^ corruptions, Rev, xiv. 9. 13. Life I defire not, if I ^^ be guilty of fedition, of defaming and difturbing the ^* quiet flare of her Majefty's peaceable government. '^ He concludes wath a vein of good fenfe, one would think above the age he livM in. " Laftly,/2)'.f be, I moft ^' humbly and earneftly befeech their Honours and Wor- *• iliips, in whofe hands this writing of mine fliall come, ^^ to confider, that "'tis to no purpofe that her Majefty's ^^ fubjeds fliould beflow their time in learning, in fludy ^' and meditation of the word, in reading the writings • " ^ • " and Part L //y^ D I s s E N T E R s^ 151 *^ and doings of learned men, and of the holy Martyrs ^^ which have been in former a^',cs, efpecially the writings ^' pubHflrd by her Majelly's aiuhority ; if they may not ^^ without danger profefs and hold thefe truths which " they learn out of them, and that;n fuch fort as thev " are able to convince ail the world that will Hand againll ^' them, by no other weapon than by the word of God. " I befeech them alfo to conlider, what a lamentable cafe '^ ^tis, that we may hold fellovvfhip with the KomiJJ} " Church in the inventions thereof without all danger, " and cannot, without extream peril, be permitted in '^ judgment and practice to dilfent from the fame, where " it fwerveth from the true way. And as they find the " things to be of cfpecial moment in religion, I befeech ^^ them in the bowels of Jefus Chrift to be a means unto " her Majefiy and their Honours, that my caufe may be " weighM in even balance. Imprifonments, indictments, '^ arraignments, yea death itfeif are no meet Vv^apons to '' convince the conference, grounded upon the word of " God, and accompany'd with fo many witneffes of his ^^ famous fervants and Churches. Dr. Fuller mentions three more, who were condemned for the like crimes ,• but fays, he fuppofes they were par- don'd, becaufe he hears nothing of their execution. Wherein I believe he was not mifiaken: for I find one, if not two of the fame names were afterwards among the exiles at Amfierdam, '^ I rind by a Brownift author, there was one William Deunys executed at "Thetford^ in Norfolk^ for the fame crime. When a jull: and terrible God fl:all make inquifi- ticHi for blood, ^tis not hard to know in whofe skirts the blood of thefe men will be found. I fhould be heartily glad, if I could find our Adverfaries of this generation, when they mention thefe things, would go as far as the ^e\'cs did, and fay : // vce hiid been in the days of guy fa- thers^ ue would not have been pa/takers ivith them in the blood oj thefe men. I c^n^t imagine what they mean, who abet thefe practices, or mention them without a juft ab- horrence; unlefs they are willing that upon themfelves iOiould come their righteous blood, and the blood of all other good men, vrho have in like manner been unjufily perfecuted unto death, O 4 The • Pj^e 22%. 152 ^Vindication^/ Part I; The Puritans, who had endur'd fuch a long liDcn. ^nd grievous pcrfecution under Queen EliZja- b'jthy were now in great expeftation of the long defir'd reformation aud peace of the Church, when King j^jwdT, who had interceeded by his Letters for fome of the l^erfecuted Miniflers, came to the throne, "i^r nio' Dr. i7///Vr places the Petition^ fign'd by a thoij^f^rld hands, after the Hampton Cotm Conference; but 1 ajn fatisfy'd I wa5: mifiakcn in following him therein. The matter of their petition was digefted into four Articles. In the rirft they defrre the Crofs jn Baptifm, the Interrogatories mi- nilLred to infants, ConHrmation, Baptifm rhiniflred by wo- men, the divers terms or Preifls^ Abjoluiiony Sec. and the Ring in marriage may be laid alide: that the Cap and Sur- plice, the reft upon Holidays, and the teaching the peo- ple to bow at the name of Jefus^ be not urg^d ; that the Service be abridged, and Church Mufic moderated to better edification : that Canonical Scripture be only read in the Church, &c. The fecond Article was for a diligent preaching Miniflery, and againft Nonrefidence. The third . againft Pluralities. The laft againft the notorious abufes of the Spiritual Courts.^' There are very few of thefe, v/hich would not be grateful to fome of the beft men. in the Church. But the Bi(hops fet themfclves obftinately againft all alterations, and inftead of making things eafy to the Petitioners, they feem to h.ave taken their meafures in Convocation from the Petition itfelf, to make the Minifters cafe more hard and difficult. Dr. Nichols reprefents the Kiyig., as net v^ell pleased zvitb theje demands. But Dr. /^////^r fays:" After it was prefent- "•' ed, it was given cut, that his Majefty lent it a favour- ^^ able ear.*^t The account I fhall give of the Conference at Ha'fTitton Court will make this latter appear moft probable. Npw whereas Dr. iV/VAo/j, in relating the hiftory of the Conference, follows the falfe account, given by Biftiop JBarlcw'; I fliall prefent the reader with a more true and exafl: orv<^"from Mr. Caldervjocd. " Sundry reports, fays ^^ he, went of the Conference, difierent from that relation, ^^ which is ki forth by Barlow. I have therefore fet down '' hv^re • Church Ilia-. B. 10. ^21. t ^'^g- ^o, p. 23. Fart I. //;tf D I S S E N T E R s. 15} *' here that relation, which Mr. Patrick Galkviay fcnt ^* from London to the Presbytery oi lidinhuyg^ after it was " revised by the King himfelf." ''•^ Then follows Mr. Galliv^dy% Letter, in which he thus writes : *^ I received two ot your Letters, one directed to his ^^ Maje[ly,and another to my feJf/or the uirng thereof^ tb.e ^' fame I read, cJofed^and three days before the Conference ^^ delivered it unto his Majefty's handstand received it back '^ again, after fome fliort fpeeches had upon a word of " your letter, as, thegroja corrupiuns of this Church ; which ^^ then was expon'd, and I allur'd that all corruptions " dilfonant from the Word, or contrary thereto, Ihould '^ be amended. The twelfth oijiimiary w:is the day of ^^ meeting, at what time the Bifhops,, call'd upon hy his ^^ Majeily, were gravely delir'd to advife upon all the cor- " ruptions in this Church, in Doctrine,. Ceremonies and ^^ Difcipline ; and as they will anfwei' to God in con- ^^ fcience, and to his Majeily upon their obedience, that " they Ihould return the third day aftei;, which was Sa-- '^ turday. They return'd to his Majeily, and there ap- •^^ pofed as of before, it wasanfwer'd, all w^as well. And ^^ when his Alajefty in great fervency brought iullances to .'^ the contrary ; they upon their lintQS with great ear- '^ neftnefs crav'd, that nothing fliould be altered ; leil Po- " pifh Recufants, punifliM by penal Statutes ior their dif- ^^ obedience; and the Puritans, punifii'd by deprivation '^ from calling and living for Nonconformity, fhould fay, *^ they had juft caufe to infult upon them, as men who ^^ had travelled to bind them to that, w^hich by their own '^ mouths now was ccnfefs'd to be erroneous. | Al- " ways after live hours difpute had by his Majefty againll; ^^ them, and hisMajeily'.s refolution for Reformation inti- " m.ated to them, they were difmilled that day,. Upon '^ the 16 ot January^ being Monday, the. Brethren were " c^lPd to his Majeily, only five of them being prefent, ^' and with them tvv^o Bi (hops, and fix or eight Deans. ^' Here hjs Majefty crav'd co know of them, what they ^' defir'd to be reformed : bu:: it was ver) loolly and coldly ^^ anfwer'd. This day ended aker . four hours talking, ^•^ and Wcdnefday the 18 of January was apnointed f r ^^thc • Hiff.of the Ch. of Scot! ''. 474. f Tuhs did the grodBip^ops with their fata care ^reftriicir aivn honour and r^^jtraticn to the react i-f rh't CkHrJi, 1 54 ^Vindication^/ Part I. *^ the meeting of both parties. Where, as before, the ^^ parties being calKd together, the heads were repeated, <^ which his Majefty would have reform 'd at this time ; ^^ and fo the whole action ended. Sundry, as they favoured, *^ gave out copies of things here concluded: whereupon '^ myfelf took occafion, as 1 was an ear and eye witnefs, to *^ fet them down and prefented them to his Majefty; who *^ with his own hand mended fome things, and eked o- *^ thcr thing, which I had omitted. '" Thofe Headsy mentioned in this Letter of Mr. Galloway^ arc next fet down at length. All which, as well- as this account of the management of the Conference, appear at iirft iight vaftly difterent from Bifhop Barhvfs relation. Dr. Jolm Raynolds was celebrated for one of the moft fa- mous Divines of his age: but it Bilhop Barlow be credit- ed, and the Dodor talk'd in the Conference, as he re- lates, he muft be look'd upon as the moft ftupid, filly w^retch in the world ; fo weak and childifli is all his dif- courfe. But Barlow himfelf repented, upon his death- bed, of the WTong he had done Dr. Raynolds and his Brethren, in the relation he h^d given of that Confe- rence. I'his w^as attefted by Dr. Hemy Jackfon, Dr, Sparky who was one of the Minifters that appeared at the Conference, but faid not one word in it, and after- ward wTote for Conformity, decJarM Dr. Raynolds and the other Minifters were wrong'd by that relation : and Dr. Raynolds himfelf made the fame complaint. ^Twere too long to fet down all that is faid upon this head, and therefore I refer the reader to the authors men.tiojiM in the Margin. ^ -^^atfxi jkinrr Farther, Dr. Raynolds was a Man, who thought more favourably of many points in our controverfy than many of his Brethren, and .therefore our caufe cannot be hurt by w^hat he is reprefented to have faid, if Barluzc's account fhouid with any be thought to deferve credit. He was not chofen by our lide to manage the Conference, and he and the reft were probably pitched upon by the Bifliops, and then caird to it by the King ; who might, from the great reputation of the Doctor, be ready to think, the Bilhop3 ztted fairly in naming him and the reft upon that occailon : and • A Revic'v cf rhe Certamen Epijiolare beiv/ccn Hejlin and Hicktnjrt^ p. 2S, 2^. A.C viriiigatcd from :hc Abufes of Mr. Dkrel md Scrivener^ v. iSi^-i'.", 1 part L //;e D I s s E N T E R s; 155 and yet no doubt they had their particular views as to e- very one of them. And 1 will in^^age to run down any caufe in the world in a conference, let me but have the naming of the parties on both fides to manage it. This affair may receive light from what 1 meet with in nn old pamphlet, printed foon after the Conference. '''I is intituled : A Chrifiian and 772odeft offer of a moji wdiffevent conference o-r dijputationy about the maine and p-hidpal con- troverjies betiuixt the Prelates^ and the late ftknced and de^ f rived Alinifters in England : tendered by fome of the f aid Miniflers to the ArrchbijhofSy and BijhopSy and all their ad- herentSy 1606, In aniwer to an objection, that thefe mat- ters had meen managM in a conference already, "'tis faid : I. " In their objecting to the MiniRers the Conference " at Hampton Courty they object to them, as it were, that ^^ which is non ens : none of them knowing what it was, ^^ nor any other, fave a few that Vvxre prefent; whofe re- " ports thereof are fo diverfe, that one Ipoils the credit of '^ another. And that which is fet forth as the true report ^^ of ky being publifh'd only by the Prelates (who are par- " tial) without the knowledge, advice, or confent of the " other fide, deferves no credit ; the rather, confidering ^^ that Dr. Morton hath been allowed to call fome part of it '^ into quefiion, even fome fpeeches fathered upon his Ma- ^' j^fty, which he was faign to confute as unfound and '^ contrary to Divinity. Wherein fith the King's own " fpeeches be, as it feemeth, grofly abus'd by the author, '^ ^tis much more likely that fpeeches of other men are ^^ abus'd. Befides^ none but Prelates, and fuch as were '' partial, being prefent at the iirfl: days Conference, there '^ can be no credit at all given to the report thereof: for " 'tis more than apparent, that they have fradulently cut " of, and concealed all the fpeeches (which were many) " that his Majefty utter'd againft the corruptions of our '^ Church, and practife of our Prelates : as appeareth by " that tertimony of the Dean of the Chapel, which he '^ gave thereof, faying : That hi-s Myefly did that day vcon- ^' de fully flay the Puritan. But if he play'd that part no ^^ otherwife than is fpecifyM in the Prelates report, he ^^ acted it very poorly, or rather never a whit. If there- ^*^ fore they would have had the Minifters to ftand to the " determination of that Conference, they Ihould have .^^ ufed more indifterency and hcnefty in the relation of it, f than they have done : they (hould at leaR havj? made it " appear 1^6 J Vindication of Part I. '^ appear by mutual teftimony of all fides, that it was a true " att. For they have no reafon to believe luch enemies, ^•^ as the Prelates have fhewed themfelvesto be unto them, ^^ any further than they fee them. 2. '' Such a conference as that was never defir'd by the ^^ MIniflers. And it feems by the whole managing of it, ^^ that it was underhand plotted and procured by the Pre- ^^ lates themfelves, abufing therein his Majefty, and ufing ^' Mr. Gallovcay as an inftrument in the matter, to the end *^ that they might have the more colour for their intended ^' proceedings afterwards. And there is great probability '^ of this, for that the Archbifliop profelVd to the Com- ^^ mittees of both Houfes^ the laft SelTicn, that he had ^^ the Letters written from Mi.Cummghtto Mx^Gallo'iJay ^^ about that matter. 3. " Moft of theperfons, appointed to fpeak for the " Miniflers, were not of their chufing, nor nomination, ^' nor of their judgment in the matters then and now in " queftion, but of a clean contrary. For being intieated ^^ at that time by the Minifters to difpute againft thefe ^^ things, as things fimply evil, and fuch as cannot be yield- ^^ ed to without fin ; they profefs'd to them, that they ^^ were not fo perfuaded, and therefore could pot [o do. ^^ Being then requefted, to let his Majefty underftand that " fome of their Brethren were further perfuaded touch- ' ^^ ing the unlawfulnefs of thefe things, than themfelves ^^ were ; they refusM that alfo. Laflly, being intreated ^^ either to give them in writing their reafons to prove ^^ thefe things indifterent, or to give them an anfwer in . ^' writing to fuch reafons, as they would give them in ^^ writing, to prove them fimply evil; they would do '^ neither the one, nor the other; fo that there neither " \y,as, nor could be any hope of good iby that Confe- ^^ rence. 4." The matters in controverfy were not in that Con- ^' ference thoroughly debated, but nakedly propounded, "and fome, not all touched : neither was there any one *^ argument to the purpofe followed in the fame. 5. " The Prelates took unto themfelves liberty to in- " terrupt, at their pleafure, thofe of the other fide ; info- ^' much that they were checked for it by his Majefty. 6. " The Minifters (if his Majefty w^ill give them " leave) will at any time, in one v/eeks fpace, deliver to *^ his Majefty in writhig a full anfwer to any argument, " or Part !• //;f D I s s E N T E R s. 157 ^' or aflfertion, propounded in that Conference againft *' them by any Prelate : and they do here plainly profeii, *^ that all and every one of them are molt vain and fri- " voIou5. '' ^ 1 leave the reader to compare what I have faid with our Author^'s account of that Conference, One Conceilion 1 cannot but take notice of, in which he faysy The Kirfg vouchjafd to indulge the Minifters : viz. That the jacramcm (f Buptifm Jhoiild only be ielebr cited by perfons'in holy Orders^ it being before tffual in fome places for any Chrijlian man or uoman to baptize. The Cafe was thus : K. James was very much offended that Laymen, and even women fhould be allow^'d to admi- nifler Baptifm. Archbifhop Whitgijt and Bifliop Babing- tony pretended the Church did not approve of it, but cen- fur'd it. Which certainly was contrary, not only to the Ruh'iCy but to fad, as appears by what I have mentioned before. Bifiiop Bancrojt therefore warmly opposed them both. The matter was thus compromised : That the words laixful Minifter fhould be added to the RubriCy and fo the power of adminiilring Baptifm fhould be reftrain'd to fuch. Yet, if we may believe Dr. Heylyn, "" The al- " teration was greater in found than fenfe, it being the ^^ opinion of many great clerks, that any man in cafes of ^^ extream neceflity (who can pronounce the words of " Baptifm) may pafs in the account and notion of a law- ^^.fu^ Minitler. "" f And to fay the truth, he feems not to miftake the mind of the Church in this m.atter. There is no penalty for Laymen or womens baptizing. And Imce their Baptifm is accounted valid, how can they be efteem^'d other than la-xful Alinifters ? The Church feems to be concerned about this one thing only: Whether Baptifm be miniflred Vv^th water in the name of the Father, &c. II Whence Bifhop Burnet fays they do not annul fuch lay Baptifms, or rebaptize perfons fo baptizM, however they condemn the praCiice. t That the Hampton Cotrrt Conference did not really go on h fmoothly to the Bifhops minds, as Barhw reports, and that they were difcourag^'d by the Kings's behaviour, there kems to me a reafonable fjfplcion, from what 1 meet * p. 28, &c. t laud'j Life^ p. 27. |i See the hft Rubric for private Bapr; Expolicicn of ihc i^ Art. /^. 2:5i, 1 58 ./i V I N D I c A T I o N £?/ Part L meet with of Archbifliop /^/^7;7V^//}, who feem'd to have conceived feme dreadful fears ol a llorm, that would come uix)n the Church at the fitting of the Parliament, w^hich was foon after: ini'omuch that he '* defir'd, not many *' days before he was llroken, that he might not yet live *' to fee that Parliament, as near as it was. '' '^ However he was, as Dr. Fulleif fays, therein more feared than hurt. And Mr. Cumbden fays, " that when the King began to *' contend about the receivM Liturgy, and thought fome *^ things ought to be alterM in it, ArchbiQjop iVhitgijt ^' dy'd with grief. '' f Together with the Parliament the Convocation fat to do bufinefs, and drew up a long body of Canons, in a plentiful manner dealing out their Anathema s^ or ipfojaclo ExcG7n?nunkaticns, There was a noble Speech made in this Convocation by the Bifbop of St. David's^ Dr. Anthony Ruddy May 23, 1604. I had it lately fent me in MS. I doubt not it is in print (tho' I never faw it) becaufe I find it quoted by Dr. li^bitbyy in his Proteftant Reconciler. II Whence the Doftor cited it I can^'t tell, and believe Ws very rare to be met with ; and therefore I prefumc it will be no difpleafure to my reader, it I prefent him with it, as 'tis in the copy I have by me. The Title is thus : ^^ The Speeches of the *' Re^'erend Fat her , the Lord Bijhop of St. David% in the *^ Convccaticn, May 23, 1604. before all the BiJhopSj and " the reji of the Cls'gy there ajjembledy grevj thm a5 fol- '' lews. " After that by occafions of an explication, there exhi- " bited, concerning the Dfe of the lign of the Cro fs in *' Baptifm, with the intent that it might be a fatisfadion *^ to fuch as have been hitherto fcrupulous in that behalf; ^^ and that the Bifhop of London^ with fome other Bifliops, " had fpoken to prefs the fame point ; at length the Bi- ^^ fliop of St. David'Sy grounding his fpeeches upon the *^ premifes immediately beforegoing, faid to this efteft " following : " For my part, I acknowledge the antiquity of the ufe " of the Crofs, as mentioned in Tertiilliany and after him *' in Cyprian^ who rcckonM of Tertullian as his Mafler ; " infomuch as when he call'd for his works^ he was wont '' to • Frff. to Hampton Court Conf. t Annates Jsc. H Part I. Tr^f- f.iz. Part h ///^ D I s s E N T E i( s. 159 ^' to fay. Da Magiflrwn ; likevvife in Clnjfojlonj^ Augu* *' jline^ and others. '' Alfo I conf'efs the originals of the ceremonies to have *' fprung by occafion of the Pagans, who reproached the '* ancient Chrirtians, for believing in Chrifl crucified ; ^^ and that in Popery it hath been fuperftitioully abufed; *^ and affirm that it is in the Church of England now ad- •' mitted and entertained by us, and reftor'd to the ancient ^' integrity, all fuperftition abandoned. " Likewife I with, that if the King's Highnefs (hall '^ perfift in impofmg of it, all would fubmit themfelves to *' it (as we do) rather than forego the Miniflry in that *^ behalf. But 1 greatly fear by the report which I hear, " that very many learned Preachers, whofe confciences ^' are not in our cuftody, nor to be difpos'd of at our de- ^^ votion, will not cafily be drawn thereunto. Of which *' number, if any fliall come in my walk, I defire to be *^ furniflicd beforehand, by thofc that be prefent, with *^ fufficient reafons to fatisfy them (if it be poffible) con- " cerning fome points which have been prefently deli- ^^ ver'd. ^' Firfl: of all. Where there was even now alledg'd for " the Crofsfundry places of fcripture; as, God forbid that *^ Ijhould rejoice^ fave in the Crofs of Chrifty and divers *^ more of the like fenfe : If any of the adverfe opinion ^^ fall into my company, and fay, that thofe Scripture ^^ fpeeches be figurative, implying the death and paffion " of our Saviour Chrilf, with the effefi: and fruit there- ^^ of; and that to draw an argument from them to jullify *^ the fign of the Crofs in the forehead, is an infujffici- ^^ ent kind of reafoning, and a fallacy; Vv^hat anfwer fhall ^^ I make unto them ? " Secondly, Whereas I have obfervM upon prefent re- *^ lation, that the impugners of this ceremony Vv^ere heard *^ at large in the Conference at Hampton Ci/urt, and ha- " ving objeded the example of Hez^ekiah^ who broke in ^^ pieces the Brazen Serpent, after it had been abufed to *^ idolatry ; and therefore the fign of the Crofs (which *^ was not brought into the Church by God's exprefs ^^ commandments, as the Brazen Serpent was, but was '^ from the beginning a meer invention of man) ought ^^ now to be taken away, by reafon of the fuperflitious ^' abufe, which is fufiain'd in Popery; they receiv'd an- ^f fwer : That King Hezekiah might have preferv'd it, *' aban- cc 160 -4 V I N D I c A T I o N t?/ Part L ^' abandoning the abufe of it, if it had pleas'd him; and " confequentJy it is in the King's Majefty's power to abo- liih this ceremony, having been abufed, or to retain it *' in manner aforel'aid. Hereunto 1 fay, that I was one of " the Conference, yet 1 was not at that part of the Con- *•• ference, when thofe that ftood for Reformation had " accefs to the King's Majclty's prefence, and liberty to ^^ fpeak for theml'elves; for that J, and fome other of my " Brethren the Bilhops were fecluded from that days af- " fembly : but 1 (uppofe it to be true as ic hath been for- " merly reported; and I for my own particular admit the " confequence put down above* Now becaufe I wifh all " others abroad to be as well fatisfied herein, as ourfelves " that be here prefent, if any of the contrary opinion '^ fliall come unto me, and fay, that the forefaid anfvver '' doth not fatisfy them; becaufe they think it to be a ^^ great reafon now to move them to become Petitioners ^' to his Majefty, for abolilhing of the Crofs in Baptifm ; ^^ as there was then, to move the godly zealous in Heze- '^ kiahs days to be Petitioners for che defacing of the Bra- " zen Serpent ; becaufe the Church-going Papids, now ^' living among us, do fuperftitioufly abufe the one, as '' the Ifraelites did the other ; what found anfwer fliall I ^' make to them for their better fatisfaftion ? " Thirdly, whereas it hath been this day ailedg'd^ that ^' it is convenient and neceflary to preferve the memory of ^' the Crols of Chrift, and confcquently by this means; ^^ if haply any of the other fide fhall come unto me, and •^ fay, that your memory of the Crofs of Chrift might '' be fufticiently, and more fafely w^ithout danger preferv'd ^ by preaching of the doctrine of the Gofpel, the fum ' whereof is Chrift crucified : in refpecS whereof "St, Paul ^ told the Galatians^ that Jefus Chrift was difcrib'd in ^ their fight, and among them, crucified ; that it wasfo • lively preached among them, as if his bodily image had • been crucified among them ; and yet we know not of "^ any material or fignal Crofs that was in ufe in the ' Church at that time ; I defire to know, what fatisfadi- ' on or anfwer muft be given unto them ? " Moreover, I protcft, that all my fpeechesnow areut- ^ ter'd by me by way of propohtion, not by way of op- ^ pofition ; by way of queftion, and nor by way of con- ^ rradidion, and that they all tend to work pacification ^ in the Church (if it be poffible) which I Jvnovv to be " very I Part I. //;ff D I S 9 E N T E R ?. l6l ^' very neceflfary at this time: and that I put a great dif- ^' ference between quid iiceaty and exptdiat ; and hkewile " between them that are Ichifmatical, or open didurbers *' of rheilate eccleliafUcal eftablifhed ; and them that are *^ fcriipulous only upon fome ceremonies, and other cir- " cumftances, being otherwife learned^ fludious, grave, " and honeftmcn, whofe labours have been both painful *^ in the Church, and alfo profitable in th^eir feveral con- *' gregations. " Concerning thefe Preachers lad mention^, I fuppofe ^ that if upon the urging them to abfolute fubfcription, *' and ufe of the ceremonies, and attire prefcrib^'d, they ^^ (liould fland out ftiff, and chufe rather to forego their *^ livings, and the exercife of their Miniflry; tho I do '^ not juftify their doings therein ; yet furely their fervice *' would be mifsM at fuch time, as need fliall require us ^' and them to give the right hand of fellowfliip one to " another, and to go arm in arm againft the common ad- '^ verfary, that (o might be 'vis unita Jcrtior. In which " cafe of want of their joint labours with ours, there " might arife caufeof fome fuch doleful complaint; as fell ^^ out upon an accident of another nature, in the Book of '' J^^^&'-^y where it is faid : For the divijions of Reuben ^^ vcere great thoughts of heart. " Likewife confider, who mull be the executioners of *' their deprivation, even we ouri'elves the Bifhops ; a- *^ gainft whom there will a great clamour of them, *^ and their dependents, and many others who are well ^^ aft'efted towards them ; whereby our perfons fhall be in " hazard to be brought into great diflike, if not into ex- " tream hatred,* whereof what inconveniences may en- " fue, I leave to your wifdoms to be confiderM of '^ Alfo remember, that when the Benjamites (though *^ for their juft deferts in m^aintaining a bad caufe) were *' all deftroy'd, faving 800 [or rather 600] and the men " of//r^c'/fware in their fury, that none of them would " give his daughter to the Benjojnites to wife, that when " their hot blood was over, they lamented and faid : There ^^ is one tribe cut off from Ifrael this day : and they ufed all *^ their wits, to the uttermoft of their policy, to rellore ^^ that tribe again. ^* In like fort, if thefe our Brethren aforefaid fhall be ^^ depriv'd of their places for the matter premifed, I think. ^^ we (hculd find caufe to bend cur v/its to the uttermoft P " ex- J 11^21 J V I N D t'C A T I O N of Pait T. ^' extent of ouiJ skill, to provide fome cure of fouls for '* them, where they may exercife their talents. " furthermore,' if tbefe m^n, bein<^ divers hundreds ^^ (as it is bruised abroad) fhould forfake their charges (as " fome do prefijppofe they \\nU) who, 1 pray you, Ihould ^^ fucceed them? Verily I know nut where to find fo '^ many able Preachers in this reaiin unprovided for. But ^* be it,' 'that feinany may be found to fupply their empty ^' rjoms, yet they mi^,ht ir.orc conveniently be fett'ed in '^ thefrats of -unpreachin^j Mimfi'ers; and fo the number " of Preacher^ -fhould be^ much encfeafed. " But if they^ " flia^} be put-'in the places of thefe men, being difpot- '^ felVdr theTeu]3crn would follow^ : Firlt, 1 hat the num- '^ ber of pleaching Incumbents fhould n()t be multiply'd ^' hy thi's fupp/y. And fecondly^ The Church could not ^^ in* jikelihood.be fo well afid htly furnifh'd on a fudden ; *^ /for tha-t though haply tfn? new luppJy fnould be of men ^^ as learned as the form'er; yet it is not pro ba We, that " they Ihould be at their firll coming from the Univerfi- ^^ ty, or in a f^oo'd while after, fo ready Preachers, fo ex- "^ perienced In pafioral government, lb well acquainted " \nth the mc^nhers and ufage of the people^ andfo dif- " creet ev^i^* way in their carriage of themfelves, as the " other, who have fpent already many years abroad in ^V'their minifltrial charge. ' '^' Beiide this, forafmuch as in the time of thf late Arch- " bifh'op o( 0ame bury^ thele things were not fo extream- " ly urged,^-bur that many learned Preachers injoy'd their 'V liberty hef^n, tondirionaUy, that they did not by word ^^ or deed Openly difgrace or difturb the eltate efiablifhed ; ^^ I would Jcnow a reafon why it fhould now be fo gene- ''. rally, and exceeding firaitly called upon ; efpecially fee- " ing that thofe means are now more neceffary, by {o ^^ much as we fee greater ii^creafe of Papifts to be now of " late, tliari was before'? '^ To conclude, I wifh, that if by Petition made to the " King's MajeRy, there cannot be obtained a quite " remove of the premifes, which feem too grievous to ^' divers, nor yet a toleration for them which be of the ^^ more fiaied and temperate carriage , yet at the lea ft " there might be procured a mitigation of the penalty, if ^' they cannot be drawn by' our reafons to a conformity ^' with us. '' Aftc: Parti. the Dissenter s. i5j " After this the Bifhop of LondoUy with three other *^ Bifhops.i'/^'. lVi)n:hc'Jii'yy £/), and £/>2rc////e^ niadeanfwer *' to that the Bi'hop of "^^t, Davids had fpoken : but he *^ was forbid by the Prelident of the allembly to make a- *' ny reply,; and he fubmirted himfelf obediently thereun- *' to, affirmini^, that bccaufe nothinp; v/as more dear un- *' to him, than the peace of the Church, therefore he ** will llill purlue the courfe which he had always held, ^' in ufing the belt me<^ns and perfuafions he could, to ^^ draw all others to unity and conformity with himfelf, *^ and the rcfl of the reverend company. And fo that *^ Conference ended as it began in quiet. "'^ I beg leave to make a few remarks briefly upon this Paper. 1. ^Tis very probable from this Speech, that Bifl:iop Barlcw's reprefentation of the Confei-ence at Hampton Court is not a true one ; and indeed that the Bifhops de- fignM not to let the Minifters have fair treatment at the Conference, or the world have a jufl: account of it after- wards. Why elfe fhould they take fuch care to exclude this honeft Bifhop Ruddy and fome others (I fuppofe of the fame temper) from the debates ? 2. Thofe men could have little regard to honour, or juftice, or to the edification of the Church, who, when they were thus honeftly warn'd, would yet contrive need- lefly fuch a wicked engine to rack the confciences of learn- ed Minifters, w^ho had deferv'd well of the Church by their labours ,• or elfe deprive the Church of them, at a time when they had not others to fupply their places. 3. It wasafignthey had very little reafon for what they did, when they could fatisfy themfelves to alledge Scriptures fo little to their purpofe, as that : God for hid that I jhould glory^ fave in the Crofs ofChrifi. 4. Whereas Dr. ASc/Wj pretends the Church o? England has mk^tcd Hez.ekiahy in laying afide all ufages that have any appearance of fuperftition, and that his example makes for their praife ; '^' Ws evident, the advocates for the Crofs in the Synod were feniible of the contrary, and therefore pleaded that the breakino; of the Brazen Serpent was an in- dilterent thing, and Hez^ekiah might as well have pre- fer v'd it. P 2 5. Con- ^M^sfs 164 ^ V I N D t c A T I o N ^^ Part I. 5. Convocatic/iis are not much to be regarded^ fince there appears to be fo little liberty for free debating of mat- ters in them. When fuch a noble Speech as this, made by a Rwverend Bifhop, was anfvver'd by four Bifliops, he is fcrbid by the Preiident to fay any thing in defence of it. "^The difcovering and ellablilhing the truth is not to be hoped for from fuch partial proceedings. 6. What wonder that fuch men will not hearken to reafcms ofter'd by us; when they fo little regard good fenfe, when it ccunes from one of their own Billiops ? And now the Perfecution was renew'd with MDCiv. great fury. " In the fecond year, fays Mr. Cal-* " dervcoody after the King's coming into Englandy '^ three hundred Miniflers were either lilenced, or de- " priv'd of their Bcnehces, or excommunicated, or caft ^' into prifon, or forc'd to leave their own country ; the " relicks of Popery, which were much grown out of ufe ^"^ before Queen Eliz.abetlfs death, were now reftor'd. A " more grievous perfecution of the orthodox faith is not " to be met with in hiflory, in any prince's reign. '' The next year it began to rage in Scotlandy and ccn- " tinues to this very time (1623) to do fo. The Bi- " (hops, by virtue of the High Commiffion, or a jurif- " diftion delegated to them from the King, have poflefs'd " themfelves of all ordinary jurifdi6tion, w^herein they " flrengthen themfelves, and turn out the belt Miniflers " and quite alter and overthrow the excellent polity, *' which was eflabliihM in the Church, which the King ^^ himfelf and they alfo were fworn to maintain : and ^^ giving the name of Puyitans to orthodox and pious '' Minifters, they wound the purity of religion, and *^ God*s worfhip thro' their fide. This was the Jefuite '^ Dohnmis advice, that the Puritans were to be kept *^ under, while the Koman Catholics fliould grow in '^ numbers and flrength, foas not only to be equal, but ^' fuperiorto their enemies.''''"' Our Bifhops could not be content with their Hierarchy at home ; but, having the advantage of King "James's be- ing with them, they relblv'd to have it obtruded upon their neighbours : arid being nice Cafuifts in the bufi- nefs of oaths, could help the King well enough over that : Alt, "sm-jn rr4> Part I. f^^ P I s s E N T E R s. 165 that he had taken in Scotlandy if he chanced to hog^ je at it. The conduft of that Prince is really very liran;re. In a General Allembly, at Edniburgy 1590, '' He praifed " God, that he was born in fuch a time, as in the time '^ of the light of the Gofpel ; to fuch a place, as to be '' King of iuch a Kirk, the fincerell: Kirk of the world. *^ The Kirk of Geneza^ faid he, keepcd Pdfih and Tuhy ^^ [Eafter and Chrijhnafi] What have they for them ? " They have no inllitution. As for our neighbour Kirk " England^ their fervice is an evil faid Mafs in Er^glijh ; ^^ they want nothing of the Mafs, but the liftings. I ^^ charge you, my goc^.d people, Minifters, Do6:ors, El- '^ ders, Nobles, Gentlemen and Barons, to ftand to your *^ purity, and to exhort the people to do the fame ; and ^' I forfooth, io long as I brook my life and crown, fliall " maintain the fame. "' * And in another Speech in I5'98, he declar'd : ^^ He ^^ minded not to bring in Fapiilical, or Anglican Bifli- " ops. '' t Nay, and after he was proclaimed King of Englandj ^' in his harangue in the Kirk of Ed'mhurg^ he thanked " God, that he had fettled both Kirk and kingdom, and " left them in that flate, which he intended not to hurt, " or alter any ways, his fubjeits living in peace. ^' II And yet foon after he came into England^ he fhew^d himfelf very bitter, not only againft the Englijh Puritans, but againft the Scots Minifters alfo. Nay, and in his lirft Speech to both Houfes of Parliament, '^ He acknowledged '"^ the Church of Rome to be our mother Church, altho' " dehl'd with fome corruptions. He faid, he would be '^ content for his ov/n part, to meet thofe of the Roman ^^ Kirk in the midway, lo that all novelties might be re- " nounc'd on either fide. '' t What pity was it that fuch things fhould drop from a King, who had exprefs'd fo very different a fenfe of religious matters before ! It had been well for this nation, if he had had no fuch views at the time when he fought the Spanijh match for his Son, which, tho' it mifcarry'd, was the unhappy copy that was follow^ in the Freiich that took efteft. I cannot here but remark thefe two things : P 3 I. That ! aid. Hift. f, 286. t f 418. i' r- rs. i Cald. Hift. p. 478. i66 '^ Vindication qf Part I. I. That our Adverfaries are inoft refllefs in their en- deavours to obtrude their Hierarchy and ceremonies. They are never fatisfied, while they cannot by force or fraud engage others to reflore thofe remnants of Popery, which they have retained thcmfelves. Thus they got lirft their Prelacy, and afterwards their ceremonies eflablifh'd in the Church of Scctland. And it very much concerns our Brethren abroad, who are ap- pealed to in our controverfy, to take particular notice of this matter. Now indeed, Brethren, our Adverfaries flat- ter you, that you may give judgment in their favour-: and yet, if you fhould do it (which God forbid !) they will never much eiteem you, till you embrace all their fancies, and endeavour to eltablifli them in your Churches. Be- lieve me, they will otherwife foon return to their wonted diUike of you. Even our Brethren at Geneva muft, upon any other condition, quickly lofe their edeem ; they are^ upon their good behaviour, whether they ftiall be call'd the Churchy or the Rout of Geneva, Whoever confiders the temper of our Adverfaries, will not wonder, that, when they had got King JumeSj apt enough to hearken to their advice, they fhould be fo offi- cious in meddling with the atiairs of Scotland^ and fowing the feeds of difcord and confufion among them. Thus Dr. Eancrofty who was aftervvard Archbifliop of Canter^ bury^ playM the bufybody in the Sects affairs in Queen Eli- z.(ihetns time; and in 1589, brib'd one Norton an Englijh Bookfeller, living in Edinburghy to betray the Scots affairs to him, as he confels'd with tears upon his examination. The many curious articles he employed him to fearch into are fet down by Calderiiood, * And in January I59i> were intercepted his Letters to Mr. Patrick Adamfony wherein " he advis'd him to give the Queen of England " m.ore honourable ftiles, and to praife the Church of " England above all other. He faid, he marvelled why he *^ came not to Englandy as he was look'd for; and aflurM " him, that he would be very well accepted by my Lord ^^ of Canterbury^ Grace, and well rewarded, if he came. '' This Adamfon was excommunicated, and repenting him of u4iat he had done againlt the Church, earneftly fought ^bfolution. Part of the confeffion he m^de ran thus : " I '^ grant ; H^ft. ;. 345' I ^55. part L ; thi D i s s i^ n r £ k s. 167 ^^ grant I was more bufy with fomc Biftiops in Englandy *' in prejudice of the ciifciplinc.of our tvirk, j\artJy when *' I \^as there, and partly by mutual intelligence lince, " than became a good Chriliian, much lefs a faithrul Pa- *' fior. Neither is there any thing that more afhameth *^ me, than my often deceiving and aLulmg the Kirk here- *' tofore, by confelFions, jTubfcriptions, protellations, C7c. '' Dr. Heylyn likewife tells us, that when he became liifiiop of Londou^ ^' and knew how much the peace of this *' Church did depend upon it, he manaR^d a fecrct cor- ^' refpondency with King ^jamcs in Satland^ infinuating • ^^ to him the necellity of conforming the Churches of '' both kingdoms in government and forms of worfliip, ^' and laying down a plot for refloring Epifcopacy lo *^ that Church without noife or trouble. '^ ^ 2. I w^ould here obferve that our Adverfarics, how- ever rigid they were in their notions in King jaDies's time, have fmce grown worfe. To v/hich purpofe 1 fiiall tran- fcribe a pallage from Mr. Hickman : '' Some, that had ^' been ordainM by meer Presbyters, ofier'd themfelves in '^ King yames's time to be confecrated Bifhops, in the ^^ Church of Scotland, Dr. And. ews Bifhop of Ely moved ^^ this queflion : Whether they fhould not hrft be Epifco- ^' pally ordain'd Presbyters, that they might be capable of " being admitted into the order of Bilhops ? But Arch- *^ bifhop Bancrcfty a moll: rigid afTerter of Epifcopacy, ^^ anfwer'd : There was no need of it, fmce ordination by " Presbyters w^as valid. The Bi'hop of Ely yielded, and ^^ immediately, v/ithout repeating their ordination as ^^ Presbyters, they were confecrated Bifhops. But they " who lately [after the Reilauration of King Charles] con- ^' fecrated Mr. Jaines Sharps proceeded in a very ditterent '^ manner. For as though he had been a meer Layman " before, they firft ordain him a Deacon, then a Prielt, " and then a Bifhop. '' f The fame author mentions another inflance of moderation a little later than that of Bancroft: " When the Archbifli op of .^/?.7 ///?(; was in Eng- " landy he defir'd Bifhop Morten to recrdain a perfon or- " dain'd beyond fea, that he might be the more capable of " preferment. The Bifhop wrote him in anfwer : That " it could not be done but to the fcandal of the Ivef .rm'd P 4 " Churches, ; Life of Laud, ^ 63, Ccm/drehis Hlft, Presb. /. 355» t Apol, p. 38: i68 .^Vindication of Part I. *' Churches, wherein he would have no hand. '' For the truth of the former of thefe ftories he appeals to SpotJ-- ^iDGod's Hiflory ; and for proof of the latter to Mr. Calen- drin^ the Dutch Minifter, who had the original of the Bifhop^'s Letter in his pofledion. If any one defires to know what fort of men thofe Bifhops were, whom King James fettled in Scetland^ Mr. Calderwood will foon inform him, that fome of them were of very bad morals, and others grievoudy repented their accepting Bifliopricks. I ftiail give an Inftance of each fort. " Mr. George Gladflonesy after he had fworn that he ^^ fhould never be Bifhop of St. Andrews^ becaufe the '^ Bifhops of that See made a miferable end, and were '^ much hated; yet returned from Court, in the beginning ^^ of January with prefentation to that Bifhoprick. Up- ^^ on the tenth of January^ he declarM in the prefence ^' of the 1 resbytery of St. Andrews^ that as he departed '^ a Brother, fo he returned, and would ufurp no fuperio- ^^ rity over them, but content himfelf with a fimple vote *^ as the reft; and promised to behave himfelf as humbly, " yea more humbly, than ever before : yet when fome " gentlemen, his favourites, and others who had hope of '^ advancement by him, asked, how he could bear with ^^ the Presbytery : he anfwer'd : Hold your tongue, we ^^ jhall fteal them off their feet, '' ^ Mr. James NicholjoUy another of them, died with grief, when he faw his devices crofs'd, neither the King nor the Church contented, and his own eftimation much impaired, *^ Before his departure he utter'd thefe, or the like words: ^^ lloe digejling of the Bijhoprick hath wracked my flomach, ^^ He would not fiiffer the ftile of Bifhop to be put in his ^^ latter will. Mr. David Lendfey^ then Minifter at Dun- " decy his familiar friend, fet down his laft fpeeches in " Latin verfe; and among the reft his exhortation to him- ^^ felf, not to haunt the Court, and to efchew all im- " pioyments. But this exhortation wrought no good ^" upon himfelf: for he made no fcruple to accept the '^ Bifhoprick o{ ^rechen fome few years after. '' f The I JBWI ■■ ■ ■' I . ■ .1 I I . . ill ■■■■■I.I .11 ' ' ' -T' • r- 487. t f. 570? Part I. f/;^ D I S S E N T E R s. J69 The Verfes, wherein he defcribes the liifliop's trouble, about his having accepted the Bifhoprick, are fet down in a Trcatile at the end of the Altar e Damajcenum; '^'- which a friend of mine has thus rendred : In 'uain my wife andjyiefids luou^d gize reliefs In njuin they try to eaje my raging griej : Tihe learn d Phyfidans art*s apply d in vaiuy No drugs y alajs I can reach my inward pain. Thou vnlyy Royal James, canjl comjort give^ IVithout thy help 1 can no longer live : Remove this Mitre from my burthen d heady Or foon I am nnmbred with th' unhappy dead. X'his burden /inks (do thou thefe fears difpel) ly body to the gravey my foul to hell. But let us leave Scotland for a while, and come nearer home. The Bifhops, having gained the eafy King to their iide, fell heavily upon their Brethren. A little Treatife was printed in the year idoj, call'd : AjhortDialoguey pro^ ^ing that the ceremoniesy and fome other corruptions mw in quejliony are defended by none other arguments y thanfuchas the Papifis have heretofore ufedy and our Proteflam writers have long fince anfwer'd. And in that the method taken by the Billiops is thus related: " At firft fubfcription was " hotly urgM, and that not by other Bifhops only, but *^ even by the now Archbifhop of Canterbury, at fuch '^ time, as conventing all the Minilters of London before ^' him, he took his leave, being to go to the See oi Can- ^^ terbury. But when it was difcern'd, that a far greater '^ nmnber would refufe than was fuppos'd, and than his " Majefty and the Lords perhaps vv^ere born in hand *^ would; this fecond courfe was taken, that men iTiouid ^^ be prefled (for the time) but to Conformity; and it be- ^^ ing difcern^d that the number of refufers would flill be ^^ great, they have fince fallen yet lower, accepting of fome " the ufe of the Crofs and Surplice only ; of others the ufe ^* of the Surplice alone ; of others a promife to ufe them ^^ only; and of fome the prpfellion of their judgment only ^^ that they may be ufed, without preiTmg them to the ufe ^^ of them at all. Their purpofe, he Jays, herein was to " draw /. 57. \^o ^VrNDicATiON^/ Part 1. *^ draw men on, by ftcps and degrees to fubfcription. '' And then he fets down at length a Letter of Archbifliop Bancroft to the Bifhops about this matter. "'Twas dated December i8. 1604. Therein he advertifes them of fuch a courfe and uniform kind of proceeding with the difobe- dient and obltinate Miniflers, as he thought fit fhould be ufed by himfelf and his Brethren : viz,. As to fuch Mini- flers as were not already placed in the Church, the 36 and 37 Canons were to be obferv'd, and none were to be admitted to execute any ecclefiaflical funftion without fub- fcription. Such as were already placed in the Church, were of two forts : 1. Some ofler and promife Conformity, but are unwil- ling again to fubfcribe. Of them he fays: tor as much as the near affinity betwixt Conformity and fubfcription doth give apparent hope, that, being men oj Jincerit\y they will in fhort time frame themfelves to a more conftant courfe, and fubfcribe to that again, which they, by their prac?tice, teflify not to be repugnant to the word of God ; your Lordfhip may (an act being made to remain on re* cord of fuch their oirer and promife) refpite their Jubfcrip-' tion for fome Jhort time. 2. Others in their obRinacy will yield to neither fub- fcription, nor promife of Conformity. Thefe are either ftipendary Curates, or ftipendary Lecturers, or men bene- ficed. The two hrft he orders to be filenc'd ; the third to be deprived. He fays, the King's Proclamation, i5, yiihy 1604, admonifli'd them to conform themfelves to the Church, and obey the fame, or elfe to difpofe of themlelves and their families feme other ways, as being men untit, for their obftinacy and contempt, to occupy fuch places : and befides, they are within the compafs of feveral laws. Mr. Robert Parker, a Puritan Minifler, this MDCvir. year publifhM a very learned Yreatife of the Crofs in Baptifm, It muft be own'd his fancy was fomewhat odd, as to his m.anner of handling his ar- gument, but all muft allow that his Book had a great deal of learning in it; and our Adverfaries would have :done their caufe no harm, if they had fhew'd themfelves able to anfwer it. But they knew what was the moft eiTecrual way of filencing their adverfaries, and therefore cxafperating the King againft him, rhey got him to put forth a Iroclamation, v.'ith an otier of a reward, for the taking Part I. the Dissenters. 171 taking him. He therefore rcfolving to take the firfl op- portunity of leaving the kingdom, lay hid fometiine a little way out of Londoiij where a treacherous fervant in the fimily endeavoured to betray him, and brought officers to the houfe to fearch for him. He was then actually in the houfe, and yet prefcrv'd by the fpecial providence of God. 7 he only room in the houfe they negletted to fearch was that where he was, from w^hence he heard them quarrelling, and fwcaring at one another; one faying, they had not fearch'd that room, and another confidently aflerting the contrary, and refufing to fuller it to be fearch'd over again. This ftory the author of the Epiille, prehx'd to his Ecckfiaflkal Polity^ had in his eye in thofe words, Hiiic ante)}: incionbemeniy ike. " When *' Parker was thus writing, v;hich was fatigue enough it ^' felf, fuch a dreadful fiorm fell upon him from the '^ Church, upon the account of his 'freatife cf the Crofsy " that unlefs he had fav'd himfelf by flight, (wherein he " vsu^Javou/d by the ffecicil providence of God) he had ^^ been caft into prifon^ where, without doubt, he muit '^ have remain'd \iil the day of his death. '' Mr. Parker got into Holland^ and had been chofen Miniiler of the Englijh Church at Amfterdam., had it not been that the magiftrates were afraid of difobliging King Jumes. For the Burgomafters of the City fent them word : " That *^ they defir'd to keep friendfhip with his Majefty oi Great " Britain^ and therefore they fhould furceafe from the ^^ purfuit of that bufinefs. ^' ^ Afterward he went to Doe^burghj and was Miniiler to the garifon ; and there he died, f While the Scots new-made Bifhops grew warm in their preferments, the Presbyterian Minifters of that kingdom were driven from their flocks, and fome of them fent for up to Court by the King, and detained there whether they would or not. Thus the two Melvins^ among others, were a long time kept from their country and their cures. They were com- manded to be prefent at the King's Chapel on the Feaft of St. Michael, This was done without all queiiion to vex thofe good men, who could not but be foreiy difpleafed at vvhat * P-iget agiinft Beft and Dav£npo:t, p. 27. ,t Vref, ie Tagci's Pcf. of Ch. Govsnaa-jenc, ' 172 '^ V I N D I c A T I o N (?/ Part t what they there faw ; 'viz,. the vain pomp of the Church and the Altar, and the King and Queen making their ofterings at the Altar. A Geyman happening to be prefent at the fame tirne, cried out with indignation: I never be- held Juch a worjhip ud this! Nothing is here zuaming to make it a joknm Majs^ except it be the adoration of the K ft, Mr. Andrew Mehin defcrib'd, and feverely exposM the furniture of the Altar upon that occafion, in an ingenious Epigram : T^he royal Altar /lands (portentcm fight !) Adorn' d zvith two clos'd books ^ and tapers without ligljt. Two fiaggons of refulgent metal Jhine^ Gloriom without^ but empty all within. Das England then God's heavenly truth conceal? Or do^s he not to her his heavenly truth reveal ? Is her religion thm obfcure and grofs ? Blind in her lights and purify d to drofs ? For while thej^ Komifhfeatttres we can tracCy We fee the fear let IVhore's new-painted face. Mr. Andrew Melvin was laid up in the Tower for thefe Verfes, and his Brethren, without any pretence of law, were not ufed much better. For though there was no accufa- tion laid againft them of any thing done by them in Eng-- land^ which was the only thing for which they could be proceeded againft here j yet the King, thro"* the inftigation of Archbifhop Bancroft and his Brethren, would not fuffer them to return home, but committed them as guefts to the "keeping of the Bifliops and other principal Clergymen, that they might have an opportunity to inftruft and ma- rage them. The Minifters defir'd, " They might rather ^' attend his Majefty^'s leifure upon their own coft and '^ charges, as they had done fome months already, than to " trouble fuch, to whom neither could they be pleafant *^ guefts, nor they pleafant hofts to them. They faid, ^ they had houfes and tables of their ovv^, according to '^ the faftiion of their country, and condition of their *^ callings, more accuftom'd to give meat, than to take of '^ any. Some of them w^ere aged and difeafed, and there- *' fore 'twas not fit that men of fuch honour and worfhip ^^ Tas the Bifnops] fhould be troubled with them. And " likewife that 'twas manifeft, where opinions differ, there ^ cannot be found agreement in afte6ion. Truly, faid '' Ban- Part I. //;^ D I s s E N T E R s; i^j *^ Bancroft in :ini\very yefpeaktrue, and like honcft men *' as ye are. And 1 think, my Brethren the Bilhops would *^ have little pleafure of you, except it were to pleaiure the *' King^s Majelly. For our cudom is, after our ferious ^^ matters, to refrefh ourfelves an hour or two with Cards, ^' or other game, after our meal. But ye are more pre- ^^cife"-^ I have the rather mentioned this, that the reader may fee what fort of men our chief Adverfaries have been ; flirt- defenders and maintainers of thofe Canons, which being made againll the Dillenters, have no relation to piety and good manners; while they negledt thofe Canons, which they have made themfelves, for the good converfa- tion of Miniflers. This very Bifliop was Frefident of the Synod 1^03, in which thofe bitter Canons were fram'd againft DifTen- ters. In that collection there was one Canon bearing this Title : Solder con^verfation requird in Minifters^ And now within three or four years after the making them, the ve- ry Frefident of the Synod is not afliamM to own himfelf a notorious breaker of them. I (liall tranfcribe the whole Canon, it being really a good one, and there being hardly another in the pack worth any thing. " No ecclefiafti- ^' cal perfon (hall at any time, other than for their honeft ^^ necelTities, refort to any Tavern or Alehoufes, neither ^' fhall they board or lodge in any fuch places. Further- ^' more they fhall not give thmefelves to any bafe or *' fervile labour, or to drinking, or riot, fpending their *' time idlely by day or by night, playing at Dice, Cards or *^ Tables, or any other unlawful game ; but at all times *^ convenient, they fhall hear or jead fomewhat of the ^' Holy Scriptures, or fliall occupy themfelves with fome " other honeft ftudy or exercife; always doing the things *^ which {hall appertain to honefty, and endeavouring to *' profit the Church of God, having always in mind ^^ that they ought to excel others in purity of life, and *^ fhould be examples to the people to live well and Chriil:- *^ ianly; under pain of ecclefiafiical cenfures, tobeinflifited ^' with feverity, according to the qualities of their often- " ces.f'^ But, alas! there was none to call this Arch- Biftiop to an account; and if we may judge of the Canons by ; Cald.Hift./'. 563. t Can 75. J74 ;^ V I N D I c A T I o N of Part L by the practice of the Church, they Vv^ere never delign'd againft gaming, drinking Minifters, but againft fuch as would be hardy enough to difpute their power and autho- rity. I can't but here take notice of the cruel and perfecuting fpirit of this Archpi(hop, in an inltance that happened about the year 1610. *^ ilmnas Lad^ a Merchant of Tarmouth *' in Norfolky was brought before the Chancellor of Nor- " wich^ for a fuppofed Conventicle; becaufe that he, on *^ the Sabbath days, after the fermons ended, fojourning in *^ the houfe of Mr. Jackler in Tarmouthy who was late " Preacher of r^r7;/o//^A, join'd with him in repeating the *^ fubilance and heads of the fermons that day made in *^ the Church, at which ^Thomas Lad was ufually pre- *^ fent ; and was. forced upon his oath to anfwer certain ^^ articles touching that meeting, which he could not fee *^ until he was (worn. And having anfwer'd upon his " oath twice before the Chancellor there, he was brought *^ to Lambeth before the Ecclefiaflical Commiflioners, to ^' make a farther anfwer upon a new oath, touching the ^^ fuppos'd Conventicle ; which he refus'd to do, with- " out fight of his former anfwers (becaufe he w^as charg^ " with perjury) and therefore was imprifon^'d by the Com- '^ miffioners a Idng time, and could not be bail'd. " Richard Muunjel, another prifoner, being a Preach- *^ er, was chargM to have been partaker in a Petition ex- '' hibited to the nether Houfe of Parliament ; and for re- '^ fufmg to take the oath es officio^ to anfwer to certain '^ articles which he could not be permitted to fee; he was *^ imprifon'd by the Commiflioners at L^wto/;, where he *^ remain^ very long, and could not be baird. Both thefe ^' where brought to the bar upon the Writ of Llaheas cor- " fus;'''^^ and hiv. Nicolas Fuller their Lawyer, and a very learned man in his profeilion, pleaded earneitly their caufe. His argument is in print, and from thence [ have tran- fcrib'd their cafe. This does not ufe to be reckon'd any oHence in a lawyer in our country : but the Archbifliop pretending he had got an advantage againft him, caft him into prifon, and implacable as he was, there he detain 'd him a clofe prifoner till he died. A • Fulla';»Ara'4n^^nc, />. i. ^^ ]?art !• r/y^ D I s s E N T E R s. 17^ A inij^hty ftir there was at this time about builJ- in? Cheljey OMege, Ic was pretended to be de- MDCrx. fjofi'd for Divines, wlio fhould ftudy and write in^maintenance of all controveriies againlt the Papifls. * But King ^iinies fcems to have had a very difterent vicu', if we may believe Father Paul^ who had more infight in- to the intrigues of the feveral Courts of Chrijiendom^ than any man of his time. For he thus fpeaks of that Col- kge. " It Vv^as thought that they that govern there, had *^ a defign to make it a controverlial foundation, to pacify ^' difcords ; but the deputing of two Jffnits to read con- f troverlies, do''s not look any thing like fuch a thing/' j The pcrfecuting of the Dillentcrs^ as may be eafily ima- ging, went on furioufly in this reign. The King's fancy was wonderfully pleas'd v/ith the applaufes and flatteries of the Rifhops j and he was not backward to gratify them with indulging them a liberty to vex and opprefs their Brethren. In the year 1618, he publifh'd a Declaration: givmg liberty for all manner of fports en the Lord's Day to fuch as had been at Church at evening prayers, and for- bidding all others to ufe that liberty. Licentioufnefs of morals was then thought the moft ready way to promote a zeal for the Hierarchy and ceremonies. This ccurfe was afterwards purfuedafreih in the reign of his Son. And it w^as not now firft begun ; but, as Camden tells us, the King had given this liberty before to thofe of Lancaflnre -^W that is, as a writer of thofe times, and living thereabouts, fays, in the year i^iy. For in that year, according to him, ^ I)\\ Morton, Biftiop of C/;^/?^^, fram'd the directions for " the lirft liberty granted to fports en the Lord's Day ; " at the fame time he fo eagerly profecuted the Noncon- ^^ form/ifts for ceremonies. " + Mv,Daz'idCa!dezx)Ocdy being forc'd to leave his country for the fake of his religion, publifii'd MDCxxnr. his Aitare Darruijcemim under the feigned name of Edi^ard Didoclavitis, The King was very fenfible of the ftrength and learning of that Treatife, hovv^ever dif- pleas'd he was v/ith ic. For '' being after the reading of it ^' fom.ewhat penlive, and beln;^ ask'd the reafon by an Eng- ^^ lijh Prelate, (landing by and obferving it ; he told him " he • See Fuller's Ch. Kift. B. lo. t. 5^ t Letters of Father Paul, p. i99' ij6 ^Vindication^ Part L '' he had feen, and read fuch a Book : wherupon the " Prelate, willing his Majelty not to let that trouble him, ^' for they would anfwer it ; he reply'd, not without *' Ibine PalTion : J^yhat wil/ you a}7jzi:ery man? TMre ^^ is nothing here, than Scripturey reajon, and Fathers. " * Nor was his Majelty out in his judgment, for the patrons of Epifcopacy have never yet anfwer'd it, how much To- ever their caufe requires it. But when a foild anfwer was defpair'd of, another w^ay of handling him was attempt- ed, which take in Mr. C^/^r/'iL'Oo^'s own words: '^Patrick- ^' Scoty a landed Gentleman befide Falklandy having wa- *' {led his patrimony, had no other meane to recover his ^' eilate, but by fome unlawful ihift at Court. He fee *' forth a recantation under the name of a banifh'd Mini- *^ fter. My, David Caldenvoody who, becaufe of his long' " ficknefs before, was fuppos'd by many to have been, " dead. The King, as he alledg'd himfelf to fome of his ^' friends, furnifli'd him with the matter, and he fet the ^^ matter down in form. This courfe failing, he went " over to Holland^ and fought the faid Mr. David in fun- *' dry towns, efpecially i;i Amfterdamy in the month of '^ Nx.ve7}ihr, It appeareth, his purpofe was to difpatch. '^ the faid Mr. David. After he had flaid at Amfierdam ^' twenty days, and made diligent inquiry, he was informed *^ the faid Mr. David was returned home privately to his ^' own country. '^t King James feems at lafl to have met with his MDcxxv. niatch, and to have had a foul trick play'd him in helping him out of the world, which made- way for his Son Charles to fucceed him. And under his government the tyranny and perfecution of the Bifhops came to its height. But let us here follow our Authory vt^ho lays : /// his reign v^hat difmal tragedies were excited by the Pu-^ ritansy future ages v:ill both feel and lament, W ^T\$ an ea- fy matter for men to lay the blame upon their adverfaries of what they have done themfelves. ''Tis to the immortal honour of the Puritans, that they fell in with th^t noble Parliament of Patriots, that flood up againfl: tyranny in Church and flate, without which our nation muft have been utteily ruin'd. And thofe tragedies our Author men- • Fref, t9 ^i;Hift, t ?• 5o2 R h 2^ Part I. /^^ D I s s E N T E R s. 177 mentions, are to be intirely afcriLM to the Hi;.'Ji Church- men, who have been always the caufe of whatever cala- mity has come upon us. /// the beghmiug of his reign rne Leighton, a fierce Scotch Pu'ituiiy piiblip\i aiJjickid Book cali\i Zion's Mea, r^hith he had thexonjidence toprejem to the Parliamenty t he ti fittings iiherein he excites the Parliament and people to kill ail the BiJhopSy iu the jiV7ie Pamphlet bitterly inveighing again Jl the Queen^ calling her a daughter of Heth, a Canaanite and idol- atrefs. Fur writing ichich Bock he iras by Sentence of the Star Chamber order to be publicly whipty and haz^e his ears crept, Suppafing w^hat is here faid were the whole truth of the matter, .and that Leighton had wTote with an intem- perate heat and fury on our lide^ is the whole party of the Puritans to bear the blame of it ? If fo, what muil be- come of our Author^'s party, w-hich has abounded v/ith fuch kind of writers in every reign ? Leighton can^'t com- pare wath his ^c^/f/;ei;6T6'/j., Mather Sy Tillies^ and abundance more who might be named, if there was occafion for ir. Befides, w^hat comparifon can there be between w^ords and deeds ? li Leighton excited the Parliament and people to kill all the Bijhops ; furely this is a lefs crime, than the Bifhops aftually killing a greater number of the Puritans. And if cppreffton makes a wife man mad^ *"' what w^onder if the in- tolerable oppreffion of the Bifhops hurried fome of the Pu- ritans into methods that were inconvenient ? But the af- fertion of our Author is falfe, that he excited the Parlia- ment and people to kili all the Bijhcps. The truth is this : Reckoning up a great many grievances and miferies, w^hich w^re owing to the Hierarchy, he excited the Parliament utterly to root out the Hierarchy, that fo the nation might be freed from all farther danger from it: but that he any- where urg^d, that all the Bifhops, for the fake of their office, fhould be put to death, w^iether they had been guilty of any crime or no, is what I can't hnd in his Book. Nay, I meet with that W'hich is direfily contrary. Thus he fpeaks tow'ard the conclufion of his Book : ^' To make an end of ourprefent fubjefl: : We wifh your '*^ Honours might prevail wdth the Prelates by fair means "" to call off that overcharging calling. « If they will a " net f EvdjVil 7i 178 ^Vindication^/ Part I, " not be thus perfuaded -we fear they are alike pleu- ^' ritic patients, that cannot fpit, whom nothing but in- '^ cilion will cure : we mean of their callings^ not of their " pe fens; to whom we have no quarrel, but wifh them " better than tliey either wifli to us, or to themfelves. " One of their dcf'pcrate Mountebanks out of the Pulpit ^' could find no cure for us, their fuppo.s^d enemies, but *^ pricking in the bladder: but we have not fo learned " Chrijh ^' '^' What little credit is to be given to men, who reprefent the fenfe of authors direddy contrary to their own mofi exprefs words ? 1 he other pallage our Author refers to, is this: " A ^^ fourth thing that w^e much importun'd God for, was *^ the breaking the Spanijh match, and our Prince's fafe ^^ return from Spain. God in mercy granted both, but '^ we were fo unthankful for both thefe in a right manner, ^' and brake up our w-atching over him for a better help- " er ; that God fufierM him, to our heavy wo, to match ^^ ivith the Daughter (^/Heth, thoi" he mifi an Egyptian. '' \ There might be perhaps fome indecency in his fpeaking thus of the Queen, while alive ; but the meaning of his expreffion is obvious, that flie was a PapijQ: ; and fo flic was, and a bitter one too. And the author may well be excus'd, now the whole nation isfatisfy'd his PopiQi match was very pernicious to the kingdom. '' Had it not been, *' fays Archbifliop T'lllctfin-^ for the countenance which '^ Popery had by the marriages and alliances of our Princes, " for two or three generations together, wath thofe of ^' that religion, it had not probably had a continuance a- *' mcng us to this day/' II And aftenvards he adds: ^^ Let us now at length refolve never to join in affinity '^ with the people of thefe abominations^ iince our alii- " ances with them, by marriage, have had fo fatal an in- *' fiuence, both upon the public peace and tranquility of ^^ the nation, and upon the welfere alfo of private fami- ^' lies. And in my mind, the people of thefe abominations is not a much better expreffion, than the Daughters of Heth; and had it been ufed at the fame time Leightons was, would have been equally refented. By both is meant per- fons oi a foreign and idolatrous religion. Whether he calls her a Canaaiiite I can't tell; if he do's, it has no other 343. t /". 172. liScrm.V. J. p. 6- Parti. the Dissenters.^ 179 other meaning, than that die was an idolatrefs; which was matter of fact, for all Papills are fuch. But if we may jud^e by the words laid in the indictment, we fliall find his troul)les were not procuiM by what he laid a- Rainit the Queen. I ihall tranfci ibc an account of his cafe from a Letter of Mr. Ludlow to DY.HJ/iiJgwurth. " Upon the ij o( Fdj/ua/y 162^^ Yix.Leightony coming *^ out of B/ackfriars Churchy was feiz'd by a warrant from ^^ the High CcmmilHon Court, and drag'd to Bifhop *' Laiid'shoxi'i^. From thence, without any examination, " he was carried to Ncxgate^ and there clap'd into irons, ^' and thruft into a nafty hole, where he continued from ^^ Tuefday night till 'Thurfday noon without meat or drink. ^^ They kept him in that loathfom place, where fnow and '^ nin beat in upon him, fifteen weeks, not permitting his ^' wife, or any friend to come near him, and denyM to *^ give him a copy of his commitment. Then they brought " him into the i>^rC/?/zw/'^r Court, where an information ^^ was exhibited againft him, forpublifhinga Book, call'd : ^^ Sions Plea againft the Prelates. By his anfwer he con- " fefs'd, that when the Parliament was fitting in the year ^^ 1628, he drew up the heads of that Book, and having " the approbation of live hundred perfons under their " hands, whereof fome were Members of Parliament, he ^^ v/ent into Holland to get it printed : t^at he printed '^ but between five or fix hundred, only for the ufe of the ^^ Parliament; but they being diflolv'd, he returnM home, " not bringing any of them into the land, but made it *^ his fpecial care to fupprefs them. ^' ^ " T^he Dodor being chargM by the information with *^ thefe words in the faid Book : IVe do not read of greater ^^ perfeaaion of God's peopky than in this our Iflandy cjpe- ^^ dally Jince the death of Queen Elizabeth : he confefs'd ^^ the words, and anfwer'd : That the thing was too ^^ true, by the Prelates taking away life and livelihood " from many Minifters and private men, of w^hom many " were pined to death in prifon, and miany wander'd up " and dow^n, their families being left defolate and help- ^^ lefs: that befidesthis, the blood of fouls had been en- *• danger'd by the removal of the faithful fliepherds from .^^ the flock. This was a cutting truth, and Laud being Ct 2 " enrag'd. ! f!sa; iSo L4 Vindication^^ Parti, ^^ enragVl, defir'd the Court to put the higheft cenfure ^' that could be put upon him. That they did to his con- " tent, condemning him [after deprivation] to have his " ears cut, his noie Hit, to be branded in the face, " whip'd at a port, to Rand on a pillory, to pay loooo /. " fine (the they knew he u^as not worth fo much) and " to be perpetually imprifon'd. The grateful fentence be- ^^ ing paft, Land puH'd off his cap, and holding up his *' hands, gave thanks to Cod, who had given him vi- *^ ftory over his enemies. A Knight mioved one of the *^ Lords about the dreadfulnefs of the cenfure, intimating, ^^ that it open'd a gap to the Prelates to inflidt fuch dii- ^^ graceful punilhments and tortures upon Men of Qiia- *' lity. That Lord rcply'^d, ^twas but in terrorem^ and *^ that he would not have any one think, that the fen- *^ tence fhould ever be executed. ^^ Neverthelefs, Laud had his defigns. For upon the ^^ 26 o'( November y 1630. the cenfure was executed in a " mod cruel manner. His ears were cut off, his nofe " Hit, his face branded with burning irons, he was tied " to a poll, and whip'd with a treble cord, to that cruel ^^ degree, that he himfelf writing the hiftory thereof ten ^^ years after, affirmed, that every lafh brought away the " flefli, and that he fhould feel it to his dying day. He ^^ was laftly put in the pillory, and kept there near two ^^ hours in frofl and fnow : and then, after this barbarous " ufage, not permitted to return to his quarters in the '^ Fleets in a coach provided to carry him ; but com- '^ peird, in that fad condition and fevere feafon, to go by ^^ water. " After this, he was kept ten weeks in dirt and mire, " not being fhelter'd from rain and fnovv^ They fhut him " up moft clofely 22 months : and he remained a prifoner ^^ ten or eleven years, not fufferM to breath in the open '^ air, until the Parliament of 1(540. moft happily delivered '^ him. When he came abroad, to profecute his Petition ^^ to that Parliament, he could neither go, fee, nor hear.'' This account I have the rather tranfcrib^'d, that I might fet out Archbifliop LMud in his proper colours, fince he was the principal author of all this barbarity, however Dr. Nichols afterwards commends him for his extraordi- fiary Icarmng aiid adniirable piety ] in Vv'hom he fays he can fee nothing to hi' bhund^ but onlj an untimely z^eal of ra'tjing part I. f/;t? D I s s E N T E R s. 18 1 raif.ng the honour of the Churchy and endearjouring an uni- fo)Viity of "duorjhip in ajcajon ixh'nh iiould nut bear it. I would only add, that tho' Dr. Nichols has very falfly reprcfented the fenfe of Leightons Book, yet he is to be excus'd, becaufe ^ris evident he took his account from Dr. Heylyny who has the very expreflions the Dr. ufes. '' And 'tis no wonder to meet with the gi oljeft mifrepreftntations of adverfaries in that author. Indeed he led me into a miftake, by afl'erting he was a Dodtor of Phyfic by pro* felfion, whereas he was a Doctor of Divinity. In the next place Dr. Nichols makes heavy complaints of the ii^arfn difputes that happen d MDCxXXiir. ab^)ut the Lord's Day, and Predeftinatitn, \ That the true Itate of our cafe at that time may be rightly underftood, I muft obferve to the reader, that the great defign of Archbifliop Laud's fadion was to fet up an Englijhy and not an Italian kind of Popery. Hence they endeavoured to bring in a multitude cf the old fuper- fiitions and idolatries, and to fecure intirely to themfelves that powder which had been taken from the Pope. And this I do not alTert, barely from the writings of the Puri- tans, but from the fpeeches of our wifeft and befl Senators, made in the two Houfes of Parliam.ent; and from thofe matters of fad, which were fully proved at the condem- nation of Archbifhop Laud; and from the writings of Dr. Heylyn^ and others of the fam.e flamp with him. While this defign of theirs was carrying on, that they might the eafier, and without any difturbance accomplifh it, they perfecuted the Puritans with the utmoil: rage and barbari- ty, and at the fame time ftifled all books written againft the Papifls. The Biliops Chaplains, without whofe leave no book could then be publilVd, or old one re- printed, would grant their licence to no book, without firft reading it, and blotting out, or at leaft altering w^hat- ever they found therein faid againft the Papifis : which was an art they borrow^ of the Papifls, W'hofe Indices JLxpur^atorii are ufed jufl in the fame n:ianner. But whatever reftraint was laid upon the books of Proteftants, thofe of Papifts, written in the behalf of their fuperltition, were publiQi'd without any difficuity : and indeed all things were managM according to their hearts defire. Al- Q^ 3 tars f Sie Life of Laud, ^, r^g. f ?ngf 43, 44, 45. i82 ,/4 Vindication^ Part I. tars were every where fct up, raird in, and men requlr'd to pay their reverence to them, as of old to the Calves oi Dan and Bethel] and abundance of other things, fa- vouring of nothing but Romifh fuperflition, were every where injoin'd ; and ail luch were barbaroufly worry'd_, who would not tamely fubmit to thofe arbitrary and law- lels impofitions. Moreover, the Papifis judging Armmamjm would prove the mofl fure remedy againlt our Hcrefy, and that they might with more fafety fpread that doctrine, flock'd hither in great numbers. Nor were they deceived in their expedations, for it foon took deep root, and brought forth much fruit; as appeared not only by experience^ but by the teflimcny of a ^ejuh^ vv^hofe Letter concerning it was happily intercepted. In a very fhort fpace of time, multitudes of the Clergy were leven'd with that dodtrine. So ealily did they yield themfclves a prey to the Papifls, who fiiewM themlelves rigid and four enough to the Puritans. But yet feveral brave men, both among the BiChops and inferior Clergy, famous for learning and piety, earneiily opposed and refuted this new dottrine to the fatisfadtion and joy of many good men. But thefe inno- vators diltrufting the fuccels of that kind of contei% be- took themfelves to a much more politic device ; which they afterv^ard were difpleas'd with^ when they faw it turn'd againft themfelves, in the reign of King 'James IL They abuling therefore that intereft they had with King Charles^ perfuaded him to interpofe his authority in this controverfy, and utterly to forbid all handling thefe points cf Divinity. The King comply 'd with their defire, think- ing perhaps, and as they without all doubt cunningly fug- gefted to him, that by this m.eans he fhould confult the peace and agreement of his fubjects. Hereupon concluding they had gained their point, they became moft intolerably infolent and arbitrary in their management. They (hut the pulpit and the prefs sgainft the Cahimjis^ but left both wide open to the Anmnians, And if z Cahin^'fiy with ever fo great modefty, declared his judgment ; he was prefent- !y accused of contemning his Majefly's authority, and was fure to fuiier feverely for it : whereas an Arrmnian might, without any hazard, not only declare his judgment ; but ufe the fharpefl invcdtiyes againft thofe chat diflerM froni him. And by this means the old doctrine of the Church oi Emiandy v/hich had been received from the time of her iirft Part L //;^ D I s s E N T E R s. 183 firft Rcforinatlon, was fupplantcd by thefe new fchciucs. They borrow'd another Itratagem likcwife from the I-a- pifls, and by introducing; i^^norance and impiety, endea- voured to prepare men tor tlie embracinf^ any kind oi lu- perflition. For this end afternoon Sermons on the Lord s Day, and all Ledtures on the week days were put down. Miniflers were commanded to hear chiWren the Catechiim on the Lord's Day, but were not allowed to add any ex- plication of it. In the room of thefe afternoon Sermons, on the Lord's Day, were fubftituted games, and dancing, • according to the laudable exemple of the antients, whether Chriftians or Pagans it matters not. To promote thefe, a Royal Declaration was put forth by the Church's Martyr, and all parochial Minillers were required to publifh it in their congrepations. Who now can wonder that fuch proceedings Ihould caule difiur- bance } It could hardly happen otherwife, and elpecially in our nation at that tim.e, when all pious men bore an implacable hatred againft Popery, and whatever had any tendency thereunto. Between the Churchmen and the Puritans there had been no controverfy in matters of doctrine, from the be- ginning of the Reformation to this time, as appears by the writings of both fides, and is attefted by Bifnop Carleton, and Mr. Crackanthorp. And therefore all the difturbances that followM are intirely owing to the ecclefiaftical inno- vations of fbme Bifhops, and their wicked attempts to undermine our civil liberties. The opinion of the Puritans concerning the Lord's Day, was the fame v/ith that of the old Church of England y 'as appears by the Homilies, and that Prayer which in their Liturgy they teach the people to ufe, after the reading of the fourth Commandment: Lord have mercy upon uiy arui incline cur hearts to keep this lave. For who would teach the people to pray after that rate, if he thought the law itfelf was aboliui'd ? Nay, and when Bifliop Barhrjj re- prefents Dr. P.aymlds.zs complaining in the Hampton Court Conference of tl^^e profanation of the Lord's Day, and de- firing a Reformation of that abufe, he fays : '' Unto this " he found a general and unanimous ailent. " ' a 4 The r* 45. 104 ^Vindication of Part I. The writings of thofe who abet thefe proceedings, make it very probable, that one chief defign of them was to ei-ablilh their own authority. They endeavour'd, upon this account, to make the religious obfervation of the Lord's Day depend upon the fame authority with their own prefcrib'd 1 afts and leflivals. 7 hey chofe therefore that the Lord's Day fliould be abominably profan'd, rather than their own inititutions fhould be nc^jected. Where- ' in they followed tlio venerable example of thofe, who made the Qomyncmdment of God of no effeB by their tradition, * I don't think it worth while to inquire, whether this were owing to Archbifhop Laud's advice, or not. ^Tis certain, at that tiine nothing hardly was done, which he was unacqujiinted with, or difapprov'd. And if the King's adminiination in this matter was amifs, the fault, according to our laws, fell upon Laudy who publifli'd the Declaration, and lent it about, when he fliould have ra- rher difluaded his MajeRy from thofe proceedings. And what Vv^as Laud's opinion, may be eafily gather'd from his treatment of Judge PJchardfon^ for difcouraging the pro- fanation of the Lord^s Day, and fuppefling the tumults occafion'd thereby. Dr. Nichols fays : T'his Proclamation 77vght infowe meafure be defended, f But there being no Itrength in his arguments, I (hall content myfelf with fay- ing, it ought in ail refpecis to be condemn'd. And the Luriean Minillers acted honeftly and bi-avely, in refufing to publifh it in their congregations : and had as good reafcn (to fay the leaft) on their fide, as the Miniflers of the Church of Ey^gland had fmce, for refufing to read jn the Churches King James the Second's Declaration for liberty of confcience. rinally, we appeal to all Foreigners of whatever perfua- ficn, Caluinifis and Armrnians, Let them read over the 'XX XIX Articles, and then give judgment, w^ho are in the wrong ; whether the Puritans, who fubfcribing thofe Articles, embr^ice the Calviniftical fcheme ; or the Con- formifis, who put an Arminian meaning upon Articles, '^A'hich affert the Calvinian dodrines, and fubfcribe them in a fenfe quite contrary to the words wherein they aie O'preis'd. Some ^ 2viatth. XV. 6. t P^^^ 44* Part L //;^ D I s s E N T E R s. 185' Some difpiites arofc between the King and Pay-^ I'hWtenty concerning the extent of the prerogativCj mdcxc- and the rights vj the people ; the Epifcopariansy for the mrjt party take the fide of the Courts and the Pari- tans Jiand tip for the People. '^ The Epilcoparians then took the fide of the Court, be- caufe the Court took theirs, anJ was for advancin,^ the Clergy, that the Clergy might advance the prerogative, tor they ufe to regard their own intereft more than the merits of any caufe. And the fame party, who in King Charles the Firlt^s time took the court fide, afterwards in the reign of King ^ames II. when the like controverfy arofe concerning the liberty of the people, wherein they faw their own intereft at ftake, took the other fide, and flood up for the people. But pray mind what follows^ and fee how prettily he ftrokes his own party, and lafhes purs. But no Trrihunitian pcvcer ever blcufd up fuch fires in a commonijcealthy and fo fiirrd up the people to popular fury^ 05 many (it grieves me to mention it) of the Puritanical mi- niftry. But with the good leave of thefe Gentlemen ; who were they that fet up themfelves for fuch Cenfors? who, that occafionM popular fury ? They who taught the people to obey the King, and the laws of the land ,• or they who told them they muft obey the King, in oppofition to the laws ? Who blovod up fires ? They who defended the rights of the people, which were unjuftly invaded ; or they Vv' ho endeavour^ in their fermons utterly to over- throw all fuch rights ? ''Tis notorious to all the v/orld, that the Epifcopal Minifters firft attempted the fubverfion of our laws and civil liberties; and that the Puritans never attempted to meddle in that controverfy, till they were thus provok'd by their adverfaries. And fince King Charles I. would never have invaded the liberties of the people, if he had not rely'd upon the afliftance and defence of his ecclefiaftics ; they furely, above all Men, deferve the honour of being ftil'd incendiaries. But our Author goes on : ' 'The great fault indeed of fo?ne of our Clergy ii'Uiy that they taught an obedience to the Prince^ farther than perhaps "ji'a^ agreeable to the ccnjlitution of a free people. How hap- py I ^^i^ 45. iS6 [^Vindication^/ Part I. py is it for us, that our Adverfaries will vouchfafe to own, they ever did any thing amifs. And truly, I fhouid think, our Author was much to be commended for his ingenuity, it he did not prefently endeavour to extenuate what he here calls a ^r^^/^yi//^//. But let us fee how he cxcu fes them : But then tins vcas done at a time when en both fides their fajjions zvere too much heated by contentions : If their paf- iions were heated on bothfidesy this will as well excufe the Puritans (if any fault be charged on them) as it will the Epifcoparians. But whence are we to derive the original caufe of all that heat ? Who were the men who jfirft meddled with thofe matters ? This v:a5 done by men voho ivere by profeffion Divines^ and luho had not a fufficient in- fight into the laws of the nation : The being by prcfeffion Divines, do's not more ferve to excufe them, than their Adverfaries, And if they had not fiifficient infight into the iaivs of the nation ; why were they fo bufy in meddling with what they did not underftand ? But befides that, thofe ecclefiaftics pretended great skill in civil matters j they treated this not as a civil, but a theological difpute; and, which v/as a moft horrid impiety, they father'd their nionilrous opinions upon the ever bieffed God, and with the utmoft confidence allerted, they were to be believ'd upon pain of eternal damnation. 'This wcu done when Chri-^ fiian Brethren, and the deavefi friends , were jufi running in to worry one another with bloodjhed andflaughter. But how came we to be in any fuch danger ? Whom will our Ad- verfaries accufe, as the authors of all this? The Puritans, who defended the laws of the nation ; or thofe, v.^ho had but litde skill in, and much lefs love to them ? Our Ad- verfaries preached their deadly dofirine jufi at that very time, when there was more efpecial occafion to inculcate the contrar^^ Juft as they lately preach'd up PafTive Obe- dience and Non refinance, like furies, in the reign of Queen Anne, when there was not the leail: fliadow of any dan- ger; but were as filent about it generally, as tho' they had never heard of fuch doctrines, when a rebellion was actu- ally rais'd againft his prefent Majelly King GEORGE. Our fafety and liberty is loft, and there's an end of all meetings of Parliaments, and the nation muft be redac'd to the moft miferable flavery, whenever a King fliall have it in his power to lay ta>:es upon his people, without the confent of the Parliament. x\nd whenever any Prince^ at- tempts Parti. the Dissenters. 187 tempts it, "'tis the indil'pcnfablc duty of all that love their country to oppofc it. When the laws of the nation, and the rights and privilep;es of the people are in danger of being fubverced, then is the time for men to ftand up in the defence of them-: as our Adverfaries at Icn.^th acknow- ledge! in the reign of King Junies^ when they thcmielves followed the noble example the Puritans had fet them. And tho it mull: be own'd, a civil war is attended with very grievous calamities ; yec ^tis to be prefcr'd uir before flavery, which is attended with much worfe.^ Nh'u: if a piom miflake ought ever to be forghen^ this error of the Churchmen ought to be pardon d^ by ichich they endeavour\l to quench that ji,e vchich Zi:a5 breaking cut in the fiate, and to pre-ucnt the impeyiding ruin of the Church. What fliall one make of thofe men, who efteem the mi- flakes of their own fide ^spicuiy and traduce the honeft and noble actions of their Adverfaries as horrid crimes ? But let their miflake be efieem'd picm-y and fuch as ought to be pardon d : when men confefs themJelves in a fault (and, as our Author has call'd it, z great one) we are not backward to forgive. But our Adverfaries Vvill by no means forgive the Puritans, that they defended the laws of their country j tho' they were in no miflake at all, not fo much as a pioM6 one. And truly herein w'e glory, and, with our Adverfaries good leave, reckon "'twill turn to our everlailing honour, that our Miniflers undertook the vindication of the law^s and liberties of their country. But the Epifcopal Mini- fters v/ere they, w^ho firlT: attempted to perfuade their country men to take upon their necks the fervile yoke ; they were the men, who firft call'd the rights of our Par- liaments in queftion ; they hrft preach'd up the abfolute and unlimited power of our Kings, and pav'd a way to the mod grievous tyranny of our Princes, and the vilefc fervi:ude of the people. This was the ccurfe taken by Manivaring and Sibthorp^^ thofe vile wretches, whofe mem.orv is become accuried to pofterity. By this art they merited their preferment, the former to a Bifhoprick, the latter to a fat living. But it may perhaps be objected, thefe were private Cler- gymen, and the whole body of the Clergy is not to be re- proached with the conduct of one or two particular perlons. Let us then hear the reprcfentative bodies of the whole Eng-- ///SClergv, I mean the two Convocations ofCah'te: /v/rvand lork^ 1 83 1^ V I N D I c A T I o N ^/ Part L Torky which, in the year i6'4o, declar'd themfelves of the fame opinion. " The inoft high, fay the\^ and facred or- •"^ der of Kinp;s is of divine right, being the ordinance of ^' God Himfclf, founded in the prime laws of nature, and '^ clearly eftablifli'd by exprefs Texts both of the Old and '^ NewTellamcnts. Afupremepower is given to this mod *' excellent order by God himfeJf in the Scriptures, C^Tc. " '^ If this were true, not only the feveral commonwealths abroad, but our own Parliaments here at home, would be contrary to divine inftitution. A little after they have this Paragraph : "' For fubjects^ to bear arms againft their ^' Kings, oftenfive or defenfive, upon any pretence what- ^^ foever, is at leafl to refift the powers, which are or- *^ dain'd of God. And tho' they do not invade, but only " refift, St. Paid tells them plainly. They jhall receive to *' themfelves damnatiGn, ^' And afterwards the whole body of the Clergy are required to preach this doctrine, or thefe fiom mi/iakesy as our Author calls them. Hence our Ad- verfaries have ufed to boaft, that this was the dodtrine of the Church of Eriglandy and to triumph in it, as a glory peculiar and appropriated to themfelves. Nor were they therein in the wrong, or much envied by us. But when they faw occafion to aft upon other principles, in the reign of King panics II, they for fhame ceased their clamors and reproaches upon thnt head for a confiderable time, till to- ward the latter end of-Qiieen Anne's reign : and then they renewed them with greater fury and madnefs than ever. But fmce the happy acceifion of his prefent Majefty King GEO RGEy they have laid afide their doctrine again. So occaiional are thefe Gentlemen in their opinions and practices. What follows in our Author is an harangue, wherein he fets out the behaviour of the Puritan Minifters according to the fancies of thofe of his party, from whom he bor- rowed thefe things. Thefe are not the applications of the Minifiers themfelves ; but the ItrainM and forcM interpre- tations their adverfaries put upon their words, even con- trary to their exprefs declarations. Thus they commonly ileal with Leighton^ as 1 Ihew'd before. And fince the Miniiiers always tellify'd their refpcct to the King, how- ever difpleas'd they were with the abufes of his Minifters, and Part I. ///6 D 1 S S E N T E R 5* 189 and the inalc-aciminifiration, I fliall not think it worth while to confider his ,<^encral charges, till 1 fee foine par- ticular proofs allcdg'd. ^ I own the iMinKlcrs heartily e- fpous'd the Parliament lide, and went as far as they went in the caufe ; but neither of them had any deligns againll the perfon of the King. And doubtlefs this is to be re- member'd to their honour. And had it not been for the noble ftand, then made by the Parliament, and the greatelt part of the nation that fell in with them, we mull have been utterly inllav'd. I wi.l not deny, that the iMinifters in their fermons earnefily recommended to the people the caufe, the Parliament had undertaken. And if they ex- ceeded in meddling beyond their function with ftate af- fairs ; yet 1 fhall not believe, before I fee it prov'd, that the Puritan, or thofe afterward call'd Presbyterian, Mini- flers can be charged with taking the wrong lide, or advancing any thing inconfiflent with the laws of our country. E'vil men and feducerSy the Apoflles f^ys, wax ivorfe and ivorfe : * and fo it prov'd Vv^ith our adverfaries^ their fu- perllitions and approaches to Rome^ their perfecuting and violence were now much advancM. Many things might be produced of this nature. Private Clergymen fet up Ima- ges, placM their Comm.union Tables altarwife, and forc'd people to the idolatry of bowing to them ; prefs'd their people to ccnfefs their fins, and preach'd up their own power of abfolving. If any opposM them, they fell un- der their wrath and fury. Aliniflers were filenc^d, feque- fler'd, and deprived ; and the Laity excommunicated, im- prifon'd-, plundered and ruin'd. A fon vv^as excommuni- cated for repeating a fermon to his own father, w^ho was under the fentence of excomm.unication.f The Arcicles againft Bifhop Wyen are very remarkable, for the account they give of his fuperftition and tyranny. But I fhall only mention two of them : Art. 13. " that during the time of his being Bifhop *^ of NuYuitchy which was about two years and 4 months, " there were, for not reading the fecond fervice at the '^ Com.munion Table, fet altarwife, for not reading the " Book of Sports, for ufing conceived Prayers before and ^^ after fermons, and for not obfeiving fome other illegal " into k 2 Tim. iii. 13. f Ruihworth's Coiled. Part 3p. 18 ' 190 J V I N D J c A T I o N t?/ Part L ^ innovations, by him and his under Officers, by and " upon his dirediions and injundion, fundry godly, pain *' ful, preaching Miniftcrs, to the number of hl'ty, ex- " communicated, fufpended or depriv'd, and othei*wife '"^ cenfurM and lilcnc'd, to the undoing of many of them, ^^ their wives and children. They could not be abfolv'd " without giving promife to conform to his diredions, *^ editis & edeyidis; by means whereof IbmeMiniflers were ^' forc'd to depart this realm ; and others of Noru-itch, *' to remove into other peaceable Dioceffes; and fome of *^ them i'o profecuted, as hath been fufpeded to be the ^^ caufe of their deaths. The terrour of which proceed- *^ ing hath caufed other minifters to leave their Cures, *^ and go away: and if a flranger preached at the Cure of " fuch a parfon fufpended, the Churchwardens, permit- '^ ting fuch Parfon fo to preach, were enjoin'd penance, ^' and otherwife troubled/^ Art. 16. " That by reafon of rigorous profecutlons, &c. *^ many of his Majefly's fubjeds, to the number of three " thoufand, many of which ufed trades, fpinning, wea- " ving, knitting, and making of cloth, fluft^ {lockings, " and other manufadures of wool, fome of them fetting '"^ an hundred poor people on work, have remov'd them- *^ felves, their families and eftates into Hollandy and other ^^ parts beyond the feas, and there fet up and taught the ^' natives there the faid manufactures, to the great hin- " drance of trade in this kingdom, and to the impo- " vcrilliing, and bringing to extream want, very many *^ who were by thofe parties formerly fet on work, to " the great perjudice of his Majefty and his people/^ "^ By this fpecimen we may judge what cafe the nation was in, by reafon of many fuch Bifliops at that time. This year Dr. Bnftwicky Mr. Burtoriy and Mr. Prynne^ were released from their imprifonment.f I ftall therefore here give as concife an account as I can of their long and grievous fuheriiig. lAi.Burtcny a Divine, and Mr.Pr;^/^, a Lawyer, had anp,cr'd the Arminian party by the Books which they had publifa'd againil: them,- and were therefore profecuted in the High CommiiTion, but deliver^ by Prohibitions from the Temporal Courts. This exafperated Laud and his party. Ibid, ;^. 3 5 3 . t S6e the ncw DifcQVCiy of the Prelates Tyranny. Part I. //;e D I s s E N T E R s. 191 party, who watchM for an opportunity of bcinr^ revcn['/cf. In the year 1632, Mr Prynne publifliM a Book againifc Interludes, intituled H/JiriowaJliXy liccncM by Archbifhop Abbot's Chaplain. Six weeks after, the Queen adted a pare in a Paftoral at Soinerjet Houje, And there being fome paf- fages in the Book againfl women Actors, and particularly in'the Table at the end of the Book, a reference made in thefe words: JVo?}2an Aclors nuorious zcbores : it was fug- gefted to their Majeflies, that thefe were dcfign'd againft the Queen. At which they were incenfed, till they were better informMof the Book's being pubiifhM before any one thought of the Queen's acting. Upon this Bifhop Laud fet Dr,Heyl\n to collect fuch pallages out of the Book, as might draw him into queftion for fuppos'd fcandals there- in of the King, Queen, ftate and government of the realm. " After this, fays Heylyn himfelf the collect or re- ^' ceiv'd a further order to review his Notes, and deduct *^ out of them fuch logical inferences and conclufions, as ^^ might, and did naturally arife on thefe dangerous pre- '' mifes.'^ Upon this he was imprifon'd by a warrant utterly illegal, no mention being made in it of the reafon of his ccmmatment. Bifliop Laud's hand was to the warrant, and he procured this barbarous fentence to be pafsM upon him in the Star Chamber : That he fhould be committed to prifon during life, pay a fine of 5000/. to the King, be expeird Lincolns Inriy disbar'd and difabled ever to exer- cife the profeifion of a Barrefter, be degraded by the Uni- verfity of Oxford of his degree there taken ; ' and that done, be fet in the pillory at Weftminifter^ with a paper on his head declaring the nature of his oftence, and have one of his ears there cut o^\ and at another time be fet in the pillory in Ckeapfide^ with a paper as aforefaid, and there have his other ear cut oft, and his Books at the fame time burnt before his face. And all this w^as done upon Dr. Heylyn's inferences and conclufions: and no paffage of his Book was laid in the information brought againft him. But the punctilio's of law were a trifle to thofe men, who bid open defiance both to juflice and humanity. The Queen interceeded with the King to remit the execution of the fentence; but LaudWntQXtH was fuch, as that he got I Life of Laud, f. 850 192 ^Vindication (?/ Part L got all the corporal punifliment inflicted to a tittle. And prcfently after, contrary to law, feiz'd a cart-load of his books. And when Prynne complain'd of it. Laud falfely deny'd in open court, that hii> hand was to the warrant, and promisM prefent reltitution of the books; but under- hand give order to detain them till they were extended, and fold toward paying his fine in the Star Chamber. While he lay in prifon, Dr.Ba/iivicky a Phyfician at Col^ chejier. publifh'daBook, call'd: Elencbus Religionis Papifli- cai: with an Addition thereunto, caird: Flagellum Pontifi- CIS & Ep/fto/jorum Latialiinn. He declared in his Preface, he meant not fuch Biiliops, as acknowledged their authori- ty from Kings and Emperors. In his Book he argued the parity of the BiQiop of Rome^ and all other BiQiops and Presbyters. Hereupon a Purfevant from the High Com- iiiifTion Court came and ranfack'd his houfe, broke open his fludy, and carry 'd away books, writings, letters and what he pleas'd. After a long and chargeable fuit, he wasfinM 1000/. to the King, excommunicated, debar'd to practife Phyfic, his faid books orderM to be burnt, and himfelf pay cofls of fuit, and be imprifon'd till he fliould make a recantation. By virtue of this fentence he had lain two years in prifon in the Gatehouje, when he wrote his Apologetkus ad Prafules AnglicanoSy and his Litany : which accordingly anger'd the Prelates, and begat him greater troubles. M.x.BuYtony on the 5 of November 16^6, preach 'd two Sermons, For God and the King^ Pro v. xxiv. 21.22. The delign of thefe was to lay open the innovations, and arbi- trary proceedings of the Bifliops. But the flile and lan- guage of them was indecently fevere, bur yet defervM not fo terrible a punifliment, efpecially coniidering his zeal was provok'd by things fcandaloully evil. By the order of Laudy now become Archbifhop, his houfe was broke o- pen, his perfon feiz'd, and fuch books and papers as the OflScer though fit, taken away. While thefe three lay in prifon, there came out two Books; the one intitled : A Divine Tra^^cdy^ containing a catalogue of God's late judgments upon Sabbath-breakers : the other : News jrom Ipfwich. This latter exposM.the innovations of the Bifliops, and particularly the extrava- gancies of Bifliop Wren. There was no name to them, and the Bifliops being not able to find the author, that they might bereveng'd on him^ refolv'd to make Prynne fmarc Part I. r/;p D r 5 s E N T E R 5. 193 fmart fur It. And [o they exhibited aninlorimti^ n againlt thtl'e three Ccnt'einen at once in tlic Star Chmhicr^ ZU' nexing thcfe two lall nainM Books, and Dr. Ba/JvjicL'^ and hir.Bu,t(m\ to the information. Neither of the!e liuoks was particularly charged en Mr. Pynne in the in- fonnation, nor wzs any witnefs produc a to prove him the author, or difperfer of any of tiiem. They wnxtfub- pccna'd to put in their anfvver. 'J hey liad Ccunfel alTign'd them, who being feverely threaten^, dared not fublcribe their anfvver, and then their anfwer was refused , becaufc it had not any Counfellor's hand to it. And proceeding by fuch bafe tricks, they took the information pro ccnjejjo. T hey were fined 5000 /. each, to ftand in the pillory, and have both their ears cut ort! Mr. Prynne was to have the fmall remainders of his cut oir; to be ftigmatiz'd in both cheeks wdth S. L, and to be conhin'd in Carn.rrjan Caftle during life* Mr. Buiton, to be deprived of his Benefice, degraded from his miniflerial funCticn, and degrees taken in the Univerfity, and contin'd to perpetual imprifonment in Lancafter Caftle. Dr. Bnfiidck^ to be clofe prifoner in Lancefton Cafile in Corn'u:aL They were debarM the ule of pen, ink and Papery none futier'd to come at them, not fo much as the wives of the two latter. By fending them to fuch remote places, they proposM to put them to the greatei't hardfhips. But as revenge is an infatiable paiiion, they could not be content herewith \ but con- trary to the fentence given, they order'd them, in an ex- trajudicial, aibitrary manner, to be tranfported ; Pryraie to J^yfeyy Burton to Gueryifey, and Bafncick to the Ifland of :^^dliy. In their feveral confinements they met v/ith bar- barous ufage, which continued till the Parliament^ did them right. The noble behaviour of thefe three perfons, when they fuRerM, is too long to be tranfcrib'd, but well worth reading : my defign is to lay open the perfecutions of that time. I cannot omit m.entioning the b?.rbarity ufed upon the occafion of Mr. Prynne's journey to CanLirvan, * Being Tit Coijemry in his way, on a Lord^s Day, he went to Church, and fome of his friends ("asking leave of his keepers, who faid they had no orders to the contrary) vifited him. For this Archbifhop Laud i^nds a melTenger R for * New Difcovery, c-^r. f.p'.y &c. 194 ^ Vindication of Part I. for them^ and when he had chcck'd them, and put them to two or three hundred pounds charge, he difmifs'd them. But his friends at Chefler could not come oft' To eafily. Mr. Cuhin Breicen accidentally overtaking him upon the road, rode with him into Cbejler, He, and Ibme of JMr. Prynne^s acquaintance, came to fee him in his inne, and next day went with him to buy fome bedding and furniture for his chamber at Cavnarvany where fuch things could not be gotten. And when he went out of Chefter^ fome three or four of his friends conducted them over the waflies, which were dangerous (none of his guard knowing the way) they brought them on four or five miles, and beflow'd a cup of wine and fome cold meat upon his guard, and fo went back. This the fliftelt Churchmen in the nation, ever fince Dr. Sac/jeverel's famous progrefs, muft own to be a trifle of an offence j and yet for this they were treated very hardly. The Bifliop of Cbejier ordered his C'ergy to preach againll them, and fcnt a complaint of it to the Arch- bifhop of Came) bury. By his direction they were put into the High CommifTion at Tork^ and there hned ,• fome 500, fome 3 CO, fome 250 pounds. They were impri- fon'd, and forc^'d to enter bond in 300 /. apiece, to (land to the farther order of the Court, and to make fuch a public acknowledgment of this great crime, both in the Cathedral Church at Chefler^ before the congregation there, and likewife in the Tozvn Hall before the Mayor, Aldermen, and citizens, as the Commifiioners fhould pre- fcribe them. When I read fuch things as thefe, and con- fiderthat ourBleifed Saviour well underftood with w^hat an implacable bitternefs his Difciples would be perlecutcd, I the lefs wonder thatfo much notice will be taken in the great d^ay of thofe, who, vjhen his l^rethyen vjeye in p'ifon^ came to them. '^' I wifh men of a perfecuting fpirit would ferioufly confider the other part of the reprefen- tation of the proceedings of that day. In this year u'as the dreadful maffacre In / c- MDCXLi. landy wherein two hundred thoufand Proteftants wxre murder^. " 1 he Rebels pretended they ^^ had the King's commiffion for what they did. Many " tliought I Mmh.xx'/. 36. 4o> Part It //;^ D iss E N TER ?. 195 " thought they bely'd the King herein ; till afterwards, in *' the rei^n onvingC/;.//^-) the Second, the Marquefs of ^' Antrim^ a rin^^jeader of the Kobe's, fued to have his ** elbte, which had been Icqueitrcd, rellor'd to him. ** The Duke oi Ormoyui^nd the Council in A t'A///*^ judg'd *' againft him, as one of the Rebels. Whereupon, he '^ brought his caufe over to the King, and allirmM, that *^ what he did was by his tather's confent and authority- *' The King refer'd it to fome worthy Members of his ^' Privy Council, to examine what he had to fhew. *^ Upon examination they reported, that they found '^ he had the King's conllnt, or Letter of inltrudtions " for what he did : which amaz'd many. Hereupon " King Charles wrote to the Duke of Orniond to reflore " his eftate, becaufe it appeared what he did was by his " Fathers order, or confent. The Lord Maz^aririe^ and '^ others in Leland^ not fulJy fatished with this, thought *'' lit fo far to profecute the miatter, as that the Marquefs '' oi Antrim v/as forc'd to produce in the Houfe of Com- ^^ mons a Letter of K.C/;.7/7^jI,by which he gave him order *' for the taking up arms, which beixTg read in the Houfe " product a great iiience. '' '^ He that would be fatished in this matter, fiiould read the Letter which K. Charles IL wrote to the Duke oi Ormonde and the Lords of the Coun- cil in Ireland^ which Mr. Ludlozi) has publifh^'d in his Me- moirs, t I fliail only tranfcribe the account the King gives them of the report of the Lord's of the Privy Council, to whom he had refer'd the examination of that matter, " Our Lord Referees, after feveral meetings, and having " perus^'d what had been ofterM io them by the faid Mar- " quefs, have reprefented to us, that they have feen fe- " veral Letters, all of them of the hand writing of our " Royal Father to the faid Marquefs, and feverai inHru- 6tions concerning his treating and joining with the " h'ijh^ in order to the King's fcrvice, by reducing them " to their obedience, and by drawing fome forces '^ from them for tlie fervice of Scotland. And that be- '^ fide the Letters and Orders under his Majefties hand, " they have fufficient evideaice and teftimcny of feveral " mellages and directions lent from our Royal lather, ^^ and our Royal Mother with the privity and direction of R 2 " the • OiIaD}*s Ab:i',^gTr. r :4. t I'c/. j. /. si cc i()6 ^Vindication ^'^ Part I. cc the King our Father; by which they are perfuaded, that whatever intelligence, correfpondcnce, or actings the faid Marquels had with the confederate Lijh Catholics, was directed or allowed by the faid letters, inftrudions ^^ and directions, • and it manifeflly appeared to them, that " the King our Father was well pleas'd with what the *' Marquefs did, after he had done it, and approv'd the *^ fame. ^' 7 his Letter was read twice in one 3ay in the Court of Claims in L eland before thoufands of people; and among the reftaperfonof quality, whofe papers I have nfcd, who then took a copy of it; and heard eight of the twelve qualifications (any one of w^hich being prov'd asiainft a perfon, he was to be declared nocent, and his eftate forheted) proved upon him by lubfiantial evidence ; as that by his commiffion many thoufand head of cattle were driven away, and the people murderM ; that in the town of Cajhnlj ne^r Clonmel^ in the county of Tiperaryy by hiscommiflTion I200 throatsof men, women, and chil- dren were cut in one night, in cold blood; with others of the fame nature. But the Commiflioners would not hear any m.ore, Sir W///iam Dumvil[zymp:^ the defign was to wound the King thro the Marquefs of Antrim's fides. And tho he was general of the army of the Lijh Rebels, and the Duke of Ormond of the Proteftant army, they two were both declar'd innocent in one day. This accident of heland^ iny Lord Clarendon tells us, was of infinite difad vantage to the Kings afiairs. '^ Nay, he fays : " It was L eland that drew the firft blood, and '^ if they had not at that time rebelled, and in that man- ^' ner, ^tls very probable, all themifenes which afterwards *^ befell the King, and his dominions, had been pre vented /'f He fays: " It was infinuated into the minds of the people, ^' that this rebellion was contrived and fomented by the " Kng, or at leaf! by the Queen, fortheadvancementofPo- " pery, and that thj Rebels publifh'd and declar'd, that they ^^ had the King'sauthoriryfor all they did. He even }\, this " made more impreliion upon the minds of fober and mode- " rate men, th^n could be then imagined, or can yet be be^ " liev^d."ll Yet he calls it a calumny, without the leali: fna- dow or colour of truth. But w^hether he fays this V' ith as much reafon as ailurance, the reader muft judge. And that theie r./. I. ;-. 2Sf^. Sv-. Edition, f va.s p. 574. II Tv/. i. p. joi» Part I. //;^ D I s s E N T n R s. 1 97 there was at leaft fmie cdour or Jhnd iv ^/ truth in this, Teems plain from what is related by himfelf. It was certainly a very conliderable circiimltance the ParHa- mcnt took notice of : " 1 hat the Proclamation where- *' by they were declarM traitors, was fo l(mg withheld, " as to the fecond of January ^ tho the rebellion broke ^' forth in Ochber before; and then no more than forty '^ copies appointed to be printed, with a Ipecial command ^^ from his Majeity not to exceed that number, and that '' none of them fliould be publifii'd, till his Majefly's " pleafure were further iii^nihed ; as by the w^arrant ap- ^' pears: fo that a few only cculd take notice of it, which '^ was made more obfervable by the late contrary pro- *^ ceedings againll the Sccts^ who were in a very quick " and Iharp manner proclaimed j and thofe Proclamations " forthwith difpers'd, with as iruch diligence as might be, ^' throughout all the kingdom, and ordered to be read in " all Churches, accompanied v;ith public prayers and ^^ execrations. '' '^ 7 he Kings's anfw^er to this feems very unfatisfactory. t And all thofe reafons which his Majefty alledges for thefe kind of proceedings in the Lijh bul:nefs, had no manner of influence upon him in the lefs dange- rous aiiair of Scotland; and this he feem.s to have been fen- fible of, and therefore wx^uld not meddle with the compa- rifon, or attempt to give a reafon for the dirterence of his conduct. Befides, we have the m.ore rcafjn to believe the account K. Cha, !es the Second's Letter gives us, from what my Lord Clarendcn himfelf relates of the car. iage of the King toward the iMarquefs of Antrhn afterward. For two years after the rebellion, when the King was at Oxford^ he imploy'd this Earl of Antrim^ together with Darnel O Neikj another Papift, to go and miake levies of the Irijh to tranfport them into ^cctlandy as they aftually did. II And for his incouragement he then created him a Mar- quefs, as 0 Ndk was made at the fame time Groom of the Bed-chamber. And I hardly think any Man will much credit his Lordfhip, that Antrim^ correfpondence with the rebels w^as not known, when he came to EngUwd, + But I make no doubt my Lord Clarendon was one of the Lords Referees, fpoken of in K. Charles the Second's Let- ter, and underftood this miatter better than his Hiliory, as it now appears, would make us believe. R 3 But • ViL i.f. 550. t Vid. ^. 604, 605. ii Va. 2. r- ^<3Pi ^c. t Vol. 2. p. 609. 198 ^Vindication^/ Part I. But be that as 'twill, "'tis certain the Englijo were (truck with a great dread ; partly by the malfacre itfelf, and partly by the threatnin{:s of the Lijh cut-throats; w^ho openly declared, that as loon as they had difpatchM the final! remnant left in Leland^ the) would come into Eng- Imidy and deal in like manner with the Parliament, and Englijb Protelbnts. What cur author fays about the civil war, is, I think» forei[-n to cur matter, lince the caule of civil liberty, ra- ther than religion, was the occalion of ir. It cannot I'eem iirange, if a civil war be accompany'd with difmal cala- mities \ but yet llavery, as 1 laid before, is attended with worfe. I pafs over what he fays of rabbles, whofe de- fence 1 will never undertake ] altho ^tis very certain they were provck'd to w^hat they did by the cruelty of fom.e Biihops, who in cold blood adted as bad as any thing dune in that diiiurbance. And if the Tranflacor ever took any liberty, he (hould have done it here, modeliy requiring him to pafs over thefe rabbles and tumults in filence ; fince he knows in his confcience, his own party have lately, without any ihadow^ of a provocation, abun- dantly exceeded all that was ever done before of that kind in this nation. But however I pafs over vhefe things, I think I ou,i:iht to do juitice to the memory of a Minifter injur'd by him. BurgCJSy fiiys he, a PtiYitan Minifter^ irritates a rabble ixhicb he had bra^ght out tf the city^ m the head ixheve-j he hi^nlclf atfears^ ij^hieh lays fuge to the doors cf the Par/ia- rriein Hciijf^'ywhere rcayir^gagainjithe BJjhops ajid their j] tends y irnfi threaiiimg them ivii/j hard uxrds^ Jo jcaves the^n^ that they had net the liberty of gi'iKyjg thcjr fiffrage^ as they iccnld. -"^ I doubt not our Author is miiiaken herein. Neither Hey hi ^ Fuller^ nor my Lord Clarendon give this account of him. And indeed the ringleader of that rab- ble, that petition^ againft the Bifhops, was Sir Richard IVijeman^ who was himlelf fiain by a ftone from oft Wejl- mirjier Abbey P/alls. And if thole, who then opposed High Church, did ill in coming fo tumultuoufly to the larliament Houie; why did High Church, who fo freely blame them^ afterwards follow their example, during the trial f Pag9 48. Part I. /Z'^ D I s s £ N T E R Sr 199 trial of their iate incendiary ? And why have mobs and tumults been encourag'd thro the whole nation ever lince ? I cannot here forbear tranfcribing a part of my Lord Dlgl^/s Speech upon the occafion of this Petition. A great flickler he was for Bifhops, and was in that very ipecch earnefily pleading in their behalf, but yet fo fla- grant and notorious was their tyranny, that he could not fpeak of it without indi^^nation. Iking a friend, his tefti- mony may be the more readily believed, lince it cannot be thought, he would beyond truth aggravate the crimes of thole he \\ as pleadidg for. " Mr. Speaker, fays he, you fee in what plain language *^ I have fct forth unto you the faults of this Petition ; '^ notwithflanding, as great as they are, fo they may not ^^ obtain any Teeming countenance from us, 1 hnd myfelf *^ willing to have them pafs'd by ; efpecially when 1 con- '^ iider how naturally prone all mankind is, when it finds " itfeif opprefs'd beyond all patience, to fly unto extreams ^' for eafe ; and indeed I do not think any people hath ^^ been ever more provokM, than the generality of E^/g- ^' land of late years, by the infolencies and exorbitances ^^ of the Prelates. " 1 proteft lincerely, Mr. Spealer, I cannot caft my eye ^^ upon this Petition, nor my thoughts, on the practices ^' of the Churchmen, that have governM it of late, but ^^ they appearM to me as a fcourge imploy'd by God upon " us, for the fins of the nation ; and I could not but " think of that paflage in the Book of Kingi : He that " efcaVeth the fii:ord of Hazael, Jhall Jehu (lay ; and he '' that efapeth Jehu, jhall Elifha ,%v. " Methinks, the vengeance of the Prelates hath been ^o ^^ layed, as if ^twere meant, no generation, no degree, " no complexion of mankind fliould efcape it. **^ Was there a man of nice and tender confcience? Him " they afflicted v/ith fcandal in adiaphoviSy impofing on '^ him thofe things as necedary, v/hich he thinks unlaw- ^' ful, and they themfelves knew to be indifferent. " Was there a man of legal confcience, that made the ^^ eRablifhment by law the meafure of his religion ? Him " they netled v/ith innovations, v/ith freih introductions " to Popery. " Was there a man of a meek and humble fpirit? Him ^^ they have trampled to dirt in their pride. K 4 " Vvas soo ^ V I N D I c A T I o N t?/ Part I. '^ Was there a inan of a proud and arrogant nature ? " Him they have bereft of reafon, with indignation at ^^ their fuperlative infolence about him. ^' Was there a man peaceably afledced, fludious of the " quiet and tranquillity of his country? Their incendiar- ^^ (hips have plagued him. '^ Was there a man faithfully addifted to the right of ^^ the crown, loyally atiedied to the King^s fuprem?icy ? *^ How hath he been gall'd by their new oath, a direct '^ covenant againft it ? ^' Was there a man tenacious of the liberty and proper- ^^ ty of the fubiect ? Have they not fct forth Books, or *' Sermons, or Canons delbuctive to them all r* " Was there a man of a pretty flurdy confcience, that *^ would not blanch for a little ? 1 heir pernicious oath " hath made him fenfible and wounded ; or, 1 fear, pre- ^^ par'd him for the Devil. " Was there a man that durft mutter againfl: their info- ^^ lencies ? He may inquire for his lugs^ they have been '^ w'ithin the Bifliops vifitation : as if they would not on- ^^ ly derive their brandiihment of the fpiritual fvvord from " St. Peter^ but of the material one too, and the right to " cut ort ears. " Mr. Speaker, as dully, as faintly, as unlively, as in ^^ language thefe actions of the li elates have been ex- *^ prefs'd to you ; 1 am confident there is no man hears ^' me, but is briinfult of indignation. ^^ For my part, I profefs, 1 am fo enflamM with the " fenfe of them, that I hnd my felf ready to cry out with ^' the loudelt of the 15000: Down with them, Down ^' with them to the very ground. '' ^ Our x^gthor next complains of twelve Bifhops being im- prifon'd, upon their protefiing againil: the acts m.ade in their abfence. But as this was done by the Parliam.ent, fo there is no body novv^ who pretends to juilify the pro- teflation of the Bifhops, nor does my Lord Clcv endon him- felf And as to Archbidiop LiVud^ v>'hom he commends in the next pa (Inge • I leave it to every one to judge as he fees caufe. I o\^m, I look upon him to have been mol]: fuperflitious, haughcy and cruel, and the prime caufe of all the diftiactions .-it that Hme. And let but the reader re- view f Kuiliv/crth's Collet. Tart }. /, 17?. Tart I. //^Dissenters. 20I view my Lord DIgbfs fpeech, and reinember that the Archbilhop was the iin<:^leader of the Bifhops, and then he may form a truer notion of him, than our Author Teems tQ have done. Aiid now all England uas dcfil'd ivitb civil blocd : •'^ Which cannot be Itrange in the time of a civil war. Nei- ther are the ChU'ches Jpm'd in thd mwatunil ruge, ' i is no iinufual thing for foldiers to fpoiJ Churches. The Royaliits then did the fame, f The Jike was done by our Ibldiers, who were Churchmen, after the famous Battle at Hochjlet. And what can any man fay in defence of that ungodly fury, which has rag d now for leveral years in our High Churchmen ; who have made it their practice to commit felony , treafon and facrilege in fpoiling our Churches.^ But I would here further obferve, that our parifh Churches were horribly polluted with abundance of fuperflitious trinkets retained in them, or then lately brought in, under a pretence of adorning them. And there being an order of Parliament for the removing fuch kind of things, there could fo far be no hurt in it. II For oftentimes the glafs i^indii'cs oj Churches^ painted ivith the moft exquijtte are^ are broken by the rabble^ or the foldiers; feme of the Puritanical Minifiers^ uuho were Chap- lains in the army^ at the fame timeflanding by^ and exhorting them to it. I don't remember to have met with this charge upon the Puritanical Minifters in any of our Hiilorians. But fuppofing it true, that they did this by the order of the rarliam.ent, and did it without any tumult; I think it fhould be look'd upon as matter of commendation, rather than difgrace to them. And herein they really follow'cl the example of our old Reformiers. So Mr. ttrype tells us, in a vifitation, in the year 1559: " They took care to " have all the utenfils, and iniiruments of fuperilition and " idolatry demolifh'd, and defuoy'd cut of the Churches, " where God's pure fervice was ro be fet up ; fuch as the ^^ Roods^ that is the images of Chrift upon the Crofs, " with Mr/vand 3^.';/;;2fl:anding by; alfo Images of other ^^ Saints, Tutelaries of the Churches, to whom they were " dedicated,- Popifli books, Altars and the like,- as know- ^^ ing, that whi-e thefe things remain'd, the practices of ^^ idolatry mufl almofl neceffarily be continued amon^^; the " igno- t P^Z 4^- t Clarendon, Vol. 2 f 653. tl Stey.r, Baxrer's Life, Part I. f. 40. 202 .^Vindication^/ Part I. " ignorant people, and the Reformation of religion b^ *^ greatly obitrutted. "' '^' ' lis really a great difgrace to a RefurmM Church, to retain idolatrous pictures in their temples; fuch as that at Saiisbn,)^ which reprefented Cod the father under t!ie form of an old man, toward which an old woman ufed to make a curfy. Ihis was broken by Mr. Sherjield^ who was miferably harrafs'd by Arch- bffliop Lcmd upon that account, and had at laft a fine of I coo/, laid upon him for it. I wifh our Advcrfarics would let us know, by what anticjuity they defend them- felves, in retaining and fetting up fuch things. The pri- initiN'e Chriflians had no fuch pictures in their places of worihip. The hrit we read of was at Anahlatha ; con- cerning which ^tis worth while to hear what Epiphanim fays: " I found there, fays he, hanging at the door of the '*' Church, a veil with the Image of Chrift, or fome Saint *^ (I don't well remember which) painted upon it. When " therefore I fiw this, that the image of a man hung ^^ there, contrary to the authority of the Holy Scriptures, *^ I tore it down, and advis'd thofe who had the care of *' the Church, that they Oiould rather make it a winding ^' fheet for fome poor body that was dead. Pleafe to ^' accept this veil, which 1 have fent by the bearer; and ^^ give order, that hereafter no fuch veils, as are forbid- '' den by our religion, be fet up in the Church of Chrift. *^ tor it becometh your goodnefs, to be the rather careful " about this matter, tlrat you may take away that occa- *^ fion of fcruple and doubting, w^hich is unfit for the Church of Chrift, and the people committed to your *^ charge. '' f And fince the Homilies very much com- mend this example of Epiphamm, I can't imagine why the Church Ihould be angry with the Puritans for follow^- ing it. But thefe windows we^e painted with exqtii/ite art* And therefore I fuppofe that antient complaint is renew'd, Ahttk.KKYL 8. To what purpofe is this Wcift f Thefe com- plainers are moft concern d about the coft and worth ot thefe things; while the Puritans, above all, minded the honour of our Redeemer, and the purity of Chriilian woriliip. And truly, Vv^hen pernicious things are to be de- ftroy'd, no regard is to be had to the exquifitenefs of the artdifcoverM in them, or to the price of them,y^c?ixix. 19. What • i-i-l' of Grir.da!, r. 25 . t Letter to John of Jerjlalem. cc PartL the Dissenters. 205 What follows in our Author concerning the plunder- in;; of Churches, if it is all true, is not llrange, as 1 faid before, in a time of war. 'I he fame, or worle, was done by their ow n fide not long lince, in the war in Bavaria^ and at the tort St. Mary. As to the TAIiments of the Cler- gy, the ufe of them was aboiifh'd, and to what purpole they fliould be preferv'd 1 don't underlland ; unlefs any ihould edeem them fo facred, as I'ome have done, who wxre for burning old Surplices that were worn out ; left fuch holy garments fiiould be profan'd, by being apply'd to any common ufe. Our Author next comes to the Solemn I.eague and Cvz'e/ianty which, he ikys, zcas an oath vohkh mdcxliii. the Puritans cbligd themjehes b\^ to extirpate the order of Bijhops^ and to reform the government (j the Church according to the Presbyterian difcipline of the Church of Scodand. ''-' This is a miflake, which I fhall redtify in the words of Mr. Baxter. " This Covenant, fays he^ was " proposed by the Parliament to the confideration of the "Synod at IVeftminfter. The Synod Humbled at fome " things in it, and efpecially at the word Prelacy. Dr. ^^ Burgejs the Prolocutor, Mr. Gataker^ and abundance ^^ more declared their judgmients to be for Epifcopacy, e- ^' yen for the antient moderate Epifcopacy, in which one " ftated Preiident, with his Presbytery, governed every " Church ; tho not for the Englijb Diocefan frame, in " which one Bifliop, without his Presbytery, did, by a " Lay Chancellor's Court, govern all the Presbyters and " Churches of a Diocefs, being many hundreds; and that " in a fecular manner, by abundance of upilart fecular " Officers, unknown to the primitive Church. Hereupon " grew fome debate in the Allembly ; fome being againft ^^ every degree of Bifiiops, (efpecialiV the Sat ifb Divines) " and others being for a moderate Epifcopacy. B^it " thefe Eriglijh 'Divines would not fubfcribe the Covenant, ^' till there were an alteration fuited to their judgments: " and fo 2L parenthefs was yielded to, as defcribing that ^^ fort of Prelacy w'^hich they opposed, iv'^i.. [that is, Church " government by Archbijhops, Bijhops^ Dtans and Chapter s^ " Archdeacons, and all other Ecclefiaftical Officers depend- ^' ing en that Hierarchy.] All which conjoined are men- '' tion'd P'ig^ 5<». 204 !^ V I N D I c A T I o N ^/ Part I. " tion'd as the defciipticn of that form of Church go- *' vernment, which they meant hy P,tlacyy as not ex- " tending to the antient Epifcopacy. When the Covenant " was taken, the Lords and Commons firit took it them- '' felves; and Mr. Thomas Coie/nun preach'd to the Houfe *' of Lords, and gave it them with this pubhc exphca- *^ tion : That by P,elacy ne meiui not all Epilcopac)y but *' ally that fonn iihich is he:e clefcrib\L '' ^' 'I hus far Mr. Baxter^ who was himfelf of the fame opinion with Mr. Gat.iker. And the generality of the Englijb 1-resby- terians, as far as I can judge, don t much ditterfrom them, wifliing the prefent very corrupt form of Prelacy were abo- liih'd, and the true antient Epifcopacy reflor'd. l[his oath by an order of Parliament^ ix:ho novj acled uithout the Krng^ iias enjoyn'd to be taken by all Alin.fters cf parijhes, and thoje uho rejmd it were to be ejecied pom their livings. By this Ordinance of the Parliament^ in cotnje of ttme^ almifi all the Epijhpal Clergy "cjere fe- auejler'd or turad out. An hundred and fifteen iisere de- frtvd in the city cf Lcndcn cnly^ and in ether parts of the nation fome thoufinds. If thefe things were a!l true, they mi^ht have pleaded for themfelves, that herein they only follow^'d the exam- ple the Epifcopal party had before ki them. And indeed, 1 am forry that they imitated them fo much as they did. lor it mull be own'd, that feveral, w^ho deferv'd better treatment, were turn'd out upon this occafion. But "'tis utterly unreafcnable to fay, ail that w^re then fequellred or turn'd out, met wath this ulage upon the account of their refulmg the Covenant. Manyof them were deprived for the molt notorious crimes, which were fworn againft them. And bcfides. Dr. He\lyn is an author who de- fer ves very little credit, as 1 obierv'd before : and yet he, if I millake not, is the only writer, w^hofe teftimony Dr. A^. is able to produce for what he here lays. ^'-..M And KOii) by the a:cthorUy of Parlia??ienty th^re,\tSf'k Council of the Puritnns convend^ ctmmmly called the Af- fembly of Divines, hi ivhiih no Bijbops are allovjdy [A great iTiiRake: Ujher^ IViftiord^ Prideanx and Bruirning were all Bishops, and yet call'd to the Alienibly] b.tt cnlyfomefii) Ep/fiopurian Diz'iiusjor (.ounPenance Jake, are nominated; TjhOy • liisLiic, Par; i, Pj^ 48. Part I. //;f D I s s E N T E R s. 205 xvhoy becaiife the Synod zuas cah\i without the Kings autho- iwpyoper to cvJirt their fa'vour^ jor as much as they Jaw that they ei^e-ry day mo) e and muie grevc into the (ftceui oj the com?nm peiple.'^' To which let us add, what he afterwards mentions: Scaie ferjons oj Erafiian principles were joind to them I men whj ziere neither for Epifcopacy nor Presley- tery ; but who were difpos^d to receive any government in the Churchy which the Parliament thought jit to eftablijh. 'To thefe fome La}?nen were likewife added: ^The Earl of Pem- broke, and Lord S^y^ cut of' the Houfe of Peers; Mr. Whit- lock, and A//-.Selden, out oj' tie Houje of Co?nmns, This jumble of a Synod made their firjl Seffton the fi Jl oj July 1(543. t The Aliembly was not conftituted according to the principles of either the Epifcopal, or Presbyterian party. However, no man can with any modefiy deny, they were a company of very excellent perfons both for learning and piety. Our Parliament w^as now confulting about a Reformation in religion, wherein they thought they needed the advice of fome Divines. And becaufe they did not like a Synods that fliould make Canons by their own authority, they themfelves chofe fuch Divines as they faw fit. They obferv'd, Divines v/ere much divided in their opinions, and thought it reafonable the arguments of every party fliould be u'eigh^'d. Upon this account, they chofe the molt eminent men of each party and call'd them to the AfTembly. There were many Erajlians ' at that time ; as their Principles had been formerly rife enough in the nation. Archbliliop Whitgift himfelf goes much upon thofe principles, in his waiting againft Cart- ikrright. He is faid alfo to have licensed Erajius^s Book, and writ with his own hand, in one of the Books iinely gilt, thefe 'words: Intus quam extra jorm.ojioY : More he autijiil within than without. But after our High Churchmen had got the whim of the Divine Right of Epifcopacy, the number of his follovrers declined. Con- cerning the Independents, our Author has inferted here 2l pretty long account- But they will not eafiJy allow, their ! P^^. %u tp. ss. 2o6 J Vindication of Part I their principles were rirft flarted by Byoi^n. I fliall only give this fhort account of the rile of them. T lie Bifliops by their cruelty in perfecuting all Prote- ftants who ditier'd from them, turn'd the minds of many both againfl themfelves, and the manner of their wor- fl^ip. 'I^he Puritans thought a fcparation was very much to be dreaded ; and that they ought to try rirlt what could be done by intreaties, lUpplications, and fuch like means. But thole who had afterward the name of Byown- ijis were more hafty, than perhaps was fitting, in fetting up feparate congregations. At leali the Puritans were of that opinion, and therefore wrote earneflly againft them. Whether they were right in this their opinion is to me very queltionahle, and therefore I will not here interpofe my judgment. However that be, a great many of them wearied out with the oppreflions and perfecutions of the Bifhops, left their dear native country, and fled into the wild and defolate regions of America ; where, in fafety from the rage of the Bifhops, they worfhipM God ac- cording to their confciences, and fet up a difcipline that was not contemptible. Cotton^ Ellioty Hooker^ and many other moft pious Minillers, were among the firft that fled thither. Our Author makes fomefevere reflections upon Mr.yoira Ccttoriy'''' who was a learned and pious man; and therefore I fhall fay fomewhat in his vindication, however I ditier from him in many of his opinions. Mr. Cotton was not a Brovsnifiy as indeed none of the Independents are. This is evident by an Epiftle he prefixed to Mr. Arthur Hil- dcrjhanh Letlures upon the Fourth (f John, wherin he has thete Words: " Yea, and that one Letter of his [Mr. i//7- ^' derjharns] to a Gentlewoman againft the feparation, " "which without his confent a Separatilt printed and '' refuted, hath io llrongly and clearly convinced the " iniquity of that way, that I could not but acknowledge 'V in ir both the wifdom of God, and the iniquity of the " Separatift. — In v>'hich refpect, I conceive, it was, that '' the induftrio'js Dr. IVillet flileth this our author: Sch[\- " muticOYum (f^ui vulgo Brovonift.^) rnalieum : "The harii" ^' TMr of SchijmatkSy v:hom they commonly call Brozun- " //^j." This Letter was writ in the year 162^, the year before r^Z' 5 J Part I. ///^Dissenters. 107 before he went ior new Englandy according to Dr. Ni- chols. And in tfie year 1648, he lays his judgment wa.s not altered in what lie had write in that Preface.* In the 'IVeatife 1 have now laic cited, Mr. Cotton has pubUUi'd a molt modelt defence of himfelf againfl fuch kind of accufations which our Author fuggeits. As to the charge laid againlt him about Mrs. Hutihinfutiy he an- fwers : '1 hat at her luft coming, fhe was well refpedted and elieein'd of him, not only becaufe her felf and family were well belov'd m EngLiudy nor only becaufe Ihe and her family went over thither for confcience fake; but eliielly for that he heard fhe did much good in their town, in womens meeting at childbirth travds, i:7c. After this fl:ie turned aiide, not only to corrupt opinions, but to difelieem generally the Elders of the Churches, and with cunning arts fpread her notions, f This change of hers was long hid from him, and much longer the evidence of it : altho he try'd to diicover her, and dealt freely with her concerning feveral things he dillik'd in her. Not long after, he heard by fome of the neighbouring Ei- ders, that Mrs. Hittcbinfon propagated her errors, as cho' they were alFerted by himfelf; wherupon he dealt with her and her aflociates again, declaring thofe opinions were erronious, and that he was unjuftly pretended to be the author or encourager of them. They, on the other hand, faid, they neither held fuch tenents themlelves, nor had they ever fathered them upon him. i\Ir. Cctton re- ported their anfwer to his Brethren ; and ask'd them, if any tw^o of them, or of their neighbours, could bear wit- nefs in this cafe? They anfwer'd, they had but one. He then defir'd their advice what hi? fliould do. They advis'd him publicly and privately to hear witnefs againft their errors. This he did; and then the followers of HutchiH- Jin pretended he faid another thing to them in private. At length the Miniilers, andefpecially Mr. Cc/^o;^, thought it proper to call a Synod Eourfcore of her opinions were proposM to the Synod to be examined by them ; and MwCottcn declared his judgment openly before all the allembly : That he efteemM fom.e of the opinions to be blafphemous; fome of them heretical; many of them er- roneous ; and almofl all of them incommodioufly ex- prefs\i ! %V.iy of tbe.CoDgreg. Churches (;kar'd, ft 18, t Ibid. p. ti. 2o8 A Vindication of Part L prcfs'd. Hjtchinjon therefore was reqiiir'd to retrafl: them. She did To, but the prehdious wretch at the fame time declar'd, Ihe had never held them. Of this moil: im- pudent falfliood ihe was pr"efently convidted, and then call out of the Church; Mr.Cotton and the whole Church, except her own Son, voting for it. So that our Author had little reafon to rcprefent the Independents, as eiteem- ing her famous jor revelation ; or to fay^ Ihe was the mijlant companion of Air. Cotton, as formerly Maximiila iViis of Moncanus. It mud be ownM, that the ingenious and learned Mr. Ainjivortby and fome other of the old Brownift wai- ters ufed many exprellions in their writings againft their adverfaries, which were fcandalouily harfh and fevere : wdth which it would be very unreafonable to charge the Independents in after times. 7 hey only now ditier from us in fome notions relating to the difcipline of the Church; and that difference daily abates. Nor is Mr. Span^ hei?n mlftaken in his judgment, who calls them pious and orthodox j'"^ and fays, they only dirter from the Pref- byterians in what 1 juft now mentioned. 'I hat fome Laymen were added to the Jlffemhly of Di- vines was no new thing in England. In the reigns of King Henry Vlil, and K. Edward VI, there were xxxii CommiHioners appointed to draw up a body of Ecclefia- llical Laws: and thefe were partly Clergymen, and partly Laymen, as is well known. And bcfides that, eccleliafiical laws arc daily made by our ParHaments, which confift of fome Biftiops, and the reft Laymen. And therefore there is no reafon, any reflection Ihould be caft upon the Af- fembly upon that account. But let us come to the acts of this Airembly. After ag- eat deal of pains and fludy^ fays the Doctor^ they fet foith a Catechijmj jor children at fchool to learn.] This is a miRake. The Larger Catechifm was defign'd for the'ule of fuch as were more advanced both in years and religion. 'Tis known by experience, that a catechetical way of inflrucring is above all others the moft ufeful : whence it hns been practised in all ages. The AfTembly therefore, conluhing the edification of all forts of Chrift-« ians among us, not only drew up a Shorter Catechifm for children, of which afterv/ards ; but this which was more • Elcnch. Controv. ^. <;o. t Pagt 57, Part I. the Dissenter s. 209 more fui] and lar^e, for the ufc of ctliers: wherein they h:ul p^ood precedents, hoth among l-oreirn DiVines, and thofe at home of the Kpifjopal perfuajlon. And to fay nothing of Cy? //, and the primitive Chrifiians; Archbidjop Vjker, a perfcn ofadmiralJe judgment and piety, publifli'd feveral Catechilins: one very ihorc, of 34 Pages, in fmall Diadt'cvvo ; another of 52 Pages, bound up U'ith the for- mer ; a third 451 Pages, in Fo/io. It would be endlcfs to reckon up all the Epifcopal Divines, who have publifh'd their catechetical inltitutions, which have been larger than this Catcchifm of the Allcmbly. tor, indeed, it contains but 81 Pages, in Diicdecvno. Our Author^i cenfure there- fore of this v/ork is very unjufi, when he lays : But as the vjork we/it c/7, it had grciu: to fuch a bulky that people [he means fome buffoons of his own party, who pjaife that in themfelves which they ridicuie in their neighbours] could not chufe hut fmile at the cddnefs of the comrrjance; that they Jhould order thofe thiJjgs Jbould be committed to fuch tedder memorie^y ixhich the compifers thereof had, for many years y been taking in vjyitingfo7n the Lectures offcho- lufic Projcffors. What hurt thefe Proftffors have done our Author 1 can't tell, but I find he has a la-h for them, -^^ as often as they come in his way. And what do^s it Cg- nify of whom the Divines in the Ailembly learnt the mat- ters they taught, provided they were truths proper to be taught? But "'tis not hard to guefs what is defign'd by this fuggeftion, viz.. That thofepoor fouls cf Divines had nothing to fay, Vv^ithout looking hril:into the notes they had taken from others. And. if that, as our Ad verfaries feem to think, is ^the general unhappinefs of Cahinifts, I can't fee how the AfTembly can be excused; iince /'tis cer- tain they were all fuch. They defended the hated do- ctrine of Calvin^ againiT: the Jefuits, and Bifhop La^:d's f Kfrion : and this was a crime never to be forgiven. Judge whether it be not fo by what next follows. But the fault was yet lefs Pardonabley ht that the mofi p erp/ext points of Divinity y concernim Predeftination, the fe- ci et Wiil of God, &C. jhould be therein tropes' d to be dif- cifs'd by iSchool boySy vcith zvhich the zuits cfthe 7?io/i lea-'ned IheologjieSy iihenezer they treat of theniy aoe for the mojl part puz-zled and coyifunded. So that what the Anni- S nians Sit p. \ri. 2IO ^Vindication^/ Parti. nians praLiice daily with muchpraife and commendation, mult in Cnlvmifis be elteemed a great crime. And yet whatever the crime be, the Allembly might learn it from thofe of the Epifcopal perfuafion. juft in the fame man- ner are thefe things handled in a Catechifm fet forth by K. Edzvard the Sixth^s authority ; and by another printed in the year 1 607, which u fed to be bound up with our Bibles. Both which are printed by Mr. Prynne^ in his An-^ tiarmi}7in}2Jjm. Nay, and in the common Church Cate- chifm boys are taught to believe, that the Holy Ghofi fan- Hi fie s all the ^kti people of God, Our Author thus goes on: Therefore to reciify this mijlakey the Symd injoiris that this loTig Catechifm fjould be abridged. But now thefe diffiadt pcirits of Divinity being b:n lightly touched upon^ they are rend ey'd the more obfcure. This Catechifm was indeed defign'd for the ufe of chil- dren; but what greater obfcurity there is in this, than the other, I can't imagine, and queflion very much whe- ther any one can tell me. Altho I wnll not vindicate every exprelTion in it, yet in the main I will venture to commend it, as the beft and moft orderly fummary of re- ligion I have met with, confidering the bignefsofit. Let the Foreign Divines compare it with the Catechifm in the Book of Common Prayer : I am fare we need not fear their verdict. 'Tis tranflated into G/eek and Latin by Mr. Havmar. And what reputation it galn'd among pious and learned men, Vv'e may guefs by what Mr. Hickman fays of two fimous Divines : *' When a copy of it was " fent to Mr. Peter du Moulin^ he returned this anfwer^ " that he never faw a more perfed Catechifm ; nor did " Archbifliop Uiher lefs efteem it. '' ''■' I (hall not need to fiy much of the DireEiory ; in ichich our Author can difcover nothing to find fault with, 11 but that all For?ns of Prayer are banijh'dy^ out of dijregard f' to the Englif) Common Prayer Book : t which is a pretty ftrongprelumption the Book is very compleat and ufeful in its kind. ' u4fter thiSy 7mich time is [pent in fettling Church difci- 11 pUyie^ andin cflablijhingthe Parochial^ Claffual and National " Jffemblies. But in all this affair., their labour is but left ; for our Englijh people, being impatient under lordjhip, do vcith * Apol. /, 4. t P^^«5S# Part L //;f D I s s E N T E R s. 211 iicith great rcluclamy retthc this di/L/pl/fie. 'I hat tlicir labour was not quite lolt, our Author iinmeJiatdy ccn- fellcs, when he lays : This dijapline the people of London rewrje at jiiji voith jome readintjs^ thoje raj eve, al mar Let tbvcns Hit appearvig "very averje to it ; but the country^ pa- rijhes do hardly any whee recei've it. ^Tv^'as the oblcrva- tion of 13i(hop Parker and Dr. Goodman^ that the inha- bitants of cities and market towns were more commonly addicted to our principles, than thofe who dwelt in coun- try villages. And upon a diligent inquiry into the ab- ftrufe reafons of this difficult pointy they at laft concluded^ this muft be owing to the too great increafe of trade in the nation. For while poor countrymen, who weary'd themfelves with their hard daily labour, had little incli- nation to trouble themfelves about the difcipline and cere- monies of the Church ; the inhabitants of cities and towns living at their eafe, and having time upon their hands, indulged their curiofity. They therefore with all humi- lity mov'd, that for the fake of their ceremonies, our Parliament would find out fome fpeedy remedy againft this evil, and lay fome reftraint (as they thought ht) upon trade. Such was the fondnefs our Adverfaries then had for their ceremonies, that they would have gladly fold the moft ufeful thing in the nation for them ; tho they were dear at the price of one fingle halfpenny. Nor was this the only time, when they were preferM to trade, to the unfpeakable prejudice? of the nation. Now tho there were at that time, as there are ftill, many of the inhabitants of villages,, who were on our fide ; yet it cannot be denyM that the number of thefe w^as lefs in proportion than of the other : of which va- rious reafons might be given. Men oi their imploy- ment and converfation are not commonly very quick and ingenious; nor fo apt throughly to coniider and examine things foreign to their ordinary callings. B.efides, the greateft profanation of the Lord^s Day, during the ty- ranny of Archbifhop Laud, was in thefe villages; w4iere the people minded little elfe, on that day, but {porting and gaming. Hence as mens minds are more addicted to pleaiure, than to virtue and piety ; thefe country people did not much care to have this yoke put upon them. Nor can this feem ftrange to thofe who are versM in the hi- ftories of ancient times. Thus v/hen under the encou- ragement of the firft Chriftian Emperours, our religion 3 2 fpread 211 JViNDicATioNc?/^ Part I. fpread itfclf far and near in a very ftort fpace in cities; the inhabitants of the viila^.^es flood out the icngeft and mofi ililiy in their Tuperftition. Whence thofe who em- brac'd not the Chriltian religion, are frequently by Ati- (li/Jliite^ and other Fathers, as they are with us to this day, term'd l-agaus : the name being derived from pa- l^as^ which fi^^nihes a village. The judgment therefore of fuch village ■$ or Pagans cannot juflly be interpreted to the prejudice of our caufe, unlefs it be likewife to that of Chriiiianity itfelf. Taking cur leave therefore of thefe Pagans, let us return to our Author. 'This ZIYIS the Jiaie of religion at that tirhe in England, after the Church zjcas cverthrczun : the Pre^h\terian Mini^ jlers being promoted to the befl prefennents tftbe Chu. ch^ the meaner livings fill\i hy men v:ho hud been formerly bred to trades. '^ If the circumRances of our Minlflers became now a little more comfortable, our Adverfaries have no realcn to envy them, conlidering how long and grievoully they had fuKer'd before thro their inlligation. And lince the Fpifcopal Clergy fo greedily hunt after the beft prefer- ments, J can't imagine, why our Author ftiould blame the Presbyterian Miniflers for accepting fuch, now the obfiacles being removed, they could do it with a good confcience : elpecially fince they behav'd themfelves well in thofe preferments, being fo diligent in feeding their fiocks rather than themfelves, as that they appear^ wdl to deferve the preferments, however good they were. True piety, I think, hardly ever f]ouri(h''d more in the latter ages than at that time. And yet I don't deny that fome things were then out of order; which may well be imputed to the unfettJed condition of the nation at that time, and efpecialiy to the exorbitant power oi CronrcceiL Hence fome tradennen and Sectaries got into livings, which the Minifters were troubled at, but could not hin- der : however it having been the pradcice of the Church to admit fuch in Q^jeen Eliz.abeth's reign, "twill be pru- dent in our Adverfaries, not to aggravate this matter too much. But the pidpits do net thunder nozv, as heretcjore^ againfi Phiralifis ; the Puritans at that ti?ne being pleas'd to fa- vour I P^Z^S9, 1 Part I. r/;^ D I s s E N T E r s. 2 i j vouY the?nfehes, who beiii^f(ffejs\l of three or four Bene- ficeSy vchnhjcvtraloj the Lf/JiOpal Divines had been Jeque- Jired from, or deprivd of, the in great eaft ahd fplendor. 'I his is the firlt time I liavc heard the Turitans thus char^'d^ and then 1 will believe the charf^^e to be true, when 1 fee it prov'd : "viz-. 1 hat the Presbyterian Mini- fters (for I am not concerned in the Sectaries) held at the fam.e time more i^.ood living's than one, lying at fuch a diftancej as that they were not able themfelves conve- niently to fcrve them. Every b^xly knows the income of Ibme livings in England is i'o imall;, as not to be fuffi- cient to maintain a Miniftcr : \Uience (ometimes one Mi- nilter ferves tw^o livings w^hich lie near together : nor do 1 remember that any of the Puritan writers ever fpake a word againft this practice, pjut they always, and in my judgment defer vedly, efteem'd it a great Vvickednefs, for one Miniiier to have two or more fat livings ; one per- haps in the ^orth of England, another in the South, another in the Eaft ; the proiits of all w^hich he received, tho^ he fervM himfelf but ore, putting oft the reft w^ith fome mean Curates, hir'd with forry {Upends. But in the mean time that thefe men fared fo fnely, the poor Epifcoparians liv'd at hardly. For the rujiy Gowns which they were jcrc\i to wear, rendered them a jeft to the Fanatic rabble: they being forced either to get their viHuals at great mens tables, or to keep fome por little fchool for their livelihood. Let any of our Adverfaries now fup- pofe the Minifters of that time to anfwer this obje- ction, as IVhitgift anfwer'd Cartwight in the like cafe : ^ What commodities you want, that we have, we can- '^ not conjecture : your meat and drink is provided wath " lefs trouble and charges unto you, and in more delicate " and dainty manner, than ours is: your eafe and plea- " fare ten times more, you do w^hat you lift, go when '^ you lift, come w^hen you lift, fpeak when you lift, at ^^ your ple.^fure. What would you have more? I know ^' not w^hy you fiiould complain, except you be of the " fame difpofition wath the Frandfcan Friars, who when " they have fiU'd their beliies at other mens tables, were ^^ w^ont to cry out and fay : H/w many things are we '' jorcd to endure? '' "^ Would not any man think fuch ^n S 3 anfwer • Defence, p. 283. 114 '-4 Vindication^/ Part 1/ fwer baibai ous ? I own I fliould, and would not have again mentioned that paflage j but that, by bringing it in apply'd to their own cafe, our Adverfaries inay fee how we have been dealt with. But as to the thing it felf ; we can truly fay, we are heartily forry that feveral learned and piou^ Miniflers were then turn'd out ; tho they were not fo many as is pretended by our Adverfaries, W'ho have lately llretch^d their wits and confciences to in- creafe their number, and to make Saints of them : whereas a multitude of them (as I oWerv'd before) were turn'd out for the moft flagrant wickednefs deposM upon oath againlt them, which, out of a regard to the honour of cur country, and our Adverfaries themfelves, we chufe not particularly ro mention, unlefs they will force us to it. But the temper of the Parliament was, in one thing admi- rable: for they ordered the ejcfled xMinifters (whatever the caufe of their ejedment was) fliould receive a fifth part of their former income. If we confider the fuc- ceeding tim^es^ we lliall find the Epifcopal Gentlemen to have a^ed with a very different temper. In the year 1 6(52, upon the Refloration of King Charles^ when the Presbyterians were turn'd out of their livings ; the Epif- copal party, deftitute of all compalTion, allowM them not the leaft farthing : nay, on the contrary, foon after, in the year i<565, they baniiVd them from cities, market towns, and their own hoqfes; and then grievoufly har- rafs^'d, im.prifon'd and plundered them. But they are the rather to be excused in ufmg us fo ; fince upon occafion they fcruple net to ufe one another in like manner. Thus Vv^hen feveral Bifhops^ and many of the Clergy, loft their livings, becaufe they adher'd to the received doftrine of ;he Church, and refused to fwear allegiance to K.^/i?/^^^ (which they could not honeflly do, if there had beeen any truth in that doc^trine) they had not the leaft provifion ipade for them by law. Arid after it zia^ (bferd'clj that they maintained them- felves and families hy this ^airful employ^ it was forbid by a nei\) fort cf cruelty^ that ayiy of them for the future jhould kecf^ any fchool. Now allow this for truth, and let it pafs for afcrt of auelty. Yet how can it be call'd a new fort of cruelty. Let any man but look into the Canons of the Church, and particularly thofe of 1^03, and he will find this o'uehy as old as thofe Canons, for 'tis there expreuy forbidden, that any man • fhould Part I. />^^ D I s s E N T E R s. 215 fhould teach fchool without lubfcribing. * And had it been a nev:foyt of cuelty, it would have been prudent to have pafs'd it over in iilence, fince the Epifcopal party foon after pradtisM it themfeJves, as may be feen by the Ati of Lniiormity in 1662, Which yet had not cruelty enough in it to fatisfy our Adverfarics, who therefore endeavoured to advance confiderably farther in the SJjiJm Aci^ in the year 1714; which came in force on the ever memorable Fiyfl of Augtifi. In the next place our Author treats of the MDcxLvm. heheadihg K. Charles ,• which being a matter known to every one, I need fay nothing of it. But fince he reprefents the Puritans, as repenting of what they had done, after he was dead, 1 fhall vindicate them from his calumnies. The Puritans now being aiuaken'd by this horrid acly feem to repent of 'u:bat they had done, Whether they were more griev'd for the ?niferies vchich they had brought vpon their country ; or for the lofs of their power, which was novo get out of their hands, into thofe cj the SeHaries ; is a matter not uery eafy to be deter mind. If we will belienje Mr, Mil- ton, who Jeems to have had Ui certain a knowledge of thfe times a6 any one, he tells m, this fit of love to the King was only out of hatred to the Independents, \ ^Tis an eafy matter enough to determine who v^-ere the caufes of thole tumults and confufions. 'Tis an eafy mat- ter enough for any, but our Adverfaries (who pretend to fearch our hearts and knov/ all things) to detennine for what the Puritans w^re then grievd. The cafe was really thus : When Cromwell and his party were contriving ro put the King to death, they imprifonM feveral Members, who were mofl: iikeJy to oppofe them, others they ex- cluded the Parliament Houfe : w^hereupon many others for fear forfook it. The Parliament being thus modell'd according to Cromweirs defire, King Charles was with- out any great difficulty found guilty. As foon as the Miniilers of london faw this, they put forth a printed Declaration, fign'd by 58 of them, v/herein they thus teftify their judgment : " As for the prefent actings at *' Wejlminjier, lince the time that fo many of the Mem- " bers were by force fecluded, divers imprifon'd, and S 4 " others v.aa. 77. 21 ^ !^ V 1 N D I c A T I o N t?/ Part L *^ otliers thereupon withdrew from the Hoiife of Com- *^ mons (and there not being that conjunttion of '^ the two Houfes as heretofore) Vv'e are wholly unfatis- *' fy'd therein ; becaufe we conceive them to be fo ^^ far from bein^ warranted by fufficient authority, as ^^ that in our apprehcnfions they tend to an actual alte- ^^ ration (if not flibvcrlion) of that which the Honoura- *^ ble Houfe of Commons, in their Declaration of /jpril ^^ 17, 1646, have tau?;ht us to call, "The fundamental con-- ^^ ftitatir,?:, and gc^emment af t/.is Ungdom^ which they ^^ tlierein alFure us (if we undcrftand them) they would ^^ never alter. '^ " Yea, v/e hold our felyes bound in duty to God, re- " llgion, the King, Parliament and kingdom., to profcfs ^^ befr^re (iod, Angds and men, that we verily believe " that which is io much fear'd to be now in agitation, " the taLing a'-.i'ay the life of the King^ in the prefent ^' way of trial, is not only not agreeable to any Word ^^ of God, the principles of the Protellant religion (ne- ^^ ver yet ilain'd with the leafl: drop of blood of a King) '^ or the fundamental confiitution and government of *^ this kingdom ; but contrary to them, as alfo to the " Oath of allegiance^ tht Prcteftation of May 5. 164 1. and ^^ the folemn League and Covenant. ^' Whereupon they earnepily exhort all to beware of perjury, and " to pray ^' that God would reftrain the violence of men, that they ^^ may not dare to dravv^ upon themfclves and the king- " dom the blood of their Soveraiirn. '' And now fmce the Minifiers declared their judgments, by this public aft, in the very critical time, and to the great hazard of their lives, to what purpofe is it to ap- peal to Mr. Milton ? Or what will his tellimony fignify with wife m^en } Mr. Milton^ pretending to fearch the hearts of the Fresbytenan Miniiiers, has here mofl: un- juftly, and only upon conjunctures condemin'd them, whom he continually treats as adverfaries. If Mr. Milton f cents to have had ci6 certain a knokju ledge of thofe times (i5 any cne ; I hope he had no certain knowledge of the fecrets of the hearts of the Puritans. Kad the Epifcopal Mini- fiers darM to have publilhMTuch a Declaration ^t' London^ being in the midft of their enemies, and lying at their mercy> how would their fidelity and bravery have been extoil'd to the skies by their ,ov/n party ? Bpt "pis their pommon pradice to put a perverfe and malicious con- • • -' flruLiion Part I. z/;^ D I s s E N T E R s. 217 ftruction upon fuch aftions in us, as they would extra- vagantly applaud in thcmfelves. I'urther, by the place our Author cites from Mr. Milton Ws evident, that De- claration was publilh'd before the King was beheaded. But there is no need to tranfcribe his words, lince the thing is certain, from what I have already faid. So that 'tis really bafe to reprcfent them as not awakejad^ 'till after that honid aci : when 'tis fo evident they remon- flrated agalnft it, before it was committed. And if Mr. Alilto/iy as tliey feem to allow, when it will ferve their purpoi'e of calumniating their advcrfaries, had fuch a cer- tain hiouiledge of thofe times] and they eHecm him a fuf- ficient witnefs againft his adverfaries, not barely when he fpeaks upon conjedures, but when he relates matters of fad; I am fure they miift be fcnfible they often draw K. Charles in very falfe colours. Let any man read the 4 and 12 Chapters of his iirft Dejence, and he will be fatis- fy'd of the truth of w^hat I fay. If then they will allow him ,to be a falfe witnefs, when he fpeaks of King Charles ^ why lliould they not ow-n the fame thing, when he fpeaks of our Minifters ? Our Author next makes a long com- plaint of the feveral Herefies, which fprung up during the Interyegnuin, This cannot v/ith any juftice be attributed to the Presbyterians. "Tis what has frequently happen'd, when the Churches circumflances, have been favourable and profperous. Their mcfl fubtil enemy, the Devil, is then bulieft in fowing his tares, when he {tQS God's good feed fown in greateft abundance. 'Tis owing to his wicked policy, that the credit of religion (as often as it began to fiourifli) has been weaken'd by the Herefies which have fprung up, and the tumults which have been rais^'d. The fouls of good and pious men are hereby difquieted and tormented : others, W'ho were ready to embrace Chriilianity, are made more doubtful and wave- ring, and become at length utterly prejudiced againft it. Who does not know, that the greateft mifchief befel the Chriflian religion, when it iirft appear'd in the world, by the numberlefs Herefies which then were flarted ? Great tumults, and a variety of religious contentions at- tended the converlion of the Roman Emperours to the jChriftian Faith j of which the Pagans made great com- plaints. I P-Jge p^^ dQZ. iiS J Vindication^/ Part L plaints. In like manner the Papifls blame the Reforma* tion for the tumults of the Anabaptifts at Munftery and the fcveral Hcrelies which have rifen fince Luther. And in imitation of fuch examples, our Adverfaries would impute to us the caufe of thofe Herefies, of which we have always declared the utmolt abhorrence. There is indeed little rcafon to wonder, fo many Herefies fhould then fpring up ; if we confider it was during the time of the civil war, when foldiers, and fuch like unskilful perfons, undertook to be the Preachers of religion. Nor were there w^anting fuch at that time, as endeavour'd craftily to fomenc religious divifions and contentions in the nation. This was not done only by Popifh emiffa- ries, but by others who w^ote, after their bafe copy. Thus Dr. Jeremy Taylor, who w^as afterward Bifliop of jDovcn and Conner, at that time pleaded flrenuoully the Anabaptifts caufe. What his deiign herein was, 1 had rather the reader fhould learn from one of their own fide, than from me. Thus then Mr. TV. Wall, a learn'd writer, to whom the nation is miuch indebted, for the pains he has taken in his Hiftory of Injant Baptifm, repre- fents Bifhop Taylor s defign : '^ 'T\s generally fuppos^d " that he did this with a politic intention (commonly ^^ pra&is^'d by thofe of the Church of Rome) to divide " the Adverfaries of the Church of England among *^ themfelves ; and to that end put arguments into the ^^ mouth of one feet, in order to puzzle the other. A fort '^ of prevaricating in the things of God, which few Pro- " tellants or fincere Chriflians will account judifiable *^ upon any account w^hatever. " '^' And tho much mifchief was done to religion by thofe Herefies; yet that true piety was much increased in thofe times cannot with any modefly be dcny'd. And unlefs religion had then taken deep root in mens hearts, v/hat occafion would there have been to ufe fo m.uch art and induftry to corrupt mens manners after the Refiauration ? Farther, if the Heretical opinions, then fcatter'd among the common people, muft be charged upon the Presby- terians ; upon Vv-hom fhall we charge the not lefs Here- tical and pernicious opinions, w^iich have abounded in the nation, ever lince the Church of England's goUkn days • Hift. r. 27:. Part I. ^/^^ Dissenters. 219 days hcrve appeared ? If a true account was taken, the number of Heretics would not perhaps prove lefs now, than it was tlien in thofe confus'd times. However 'tis notorious all manner of wickednefs (the worft Herefy) which was much difcourag\l and fupprefs'd in the L2tey' regnunty came in like a flood together with the Hie- rarchy. I have prov'd the Presbyterians opposed the cutting oft K. Charles I. I will now fliew they were not lefs true and faithful to his Son when he was gone. Tor when Cromvjell required all to abjure monarchy, and to fwear to be true to his new commonwealth ; many of them refusM it, and exhorted their countrymen not to do it ; altho many of theepifcopal fort not only fwore them- feives, but wrote arguments in defence of the prefcrib^'d oath ; as is attefted by Mr. Baxter. '^^ With their plau- fible and fubtile glofles they varnifli'd over what they dif- approved. Then was invented the nice diftinction of De fatlo and De jure^ not to be met with among all the fubtilties of the Schoolmen ; and by the help of it, they difpens'd with their taking the Engagement^ andp'vmifing to he true and fahhjul to the cojnmonijceahh^ en His now ejiablijh'dy vjithout a King or Houfe of Lords, According to this diilinftion many of the fame kidney fwore to King William^ as a King de faEio^ but not dejiire, as they are not afhamM now to own : fo well have they learnt the Jefuitical doctrine of equivocation, and to make a jeft of an oath, one of the moft facred things in the vvorld. After this the Sects Presbyterians call'd in the King, and crown'd him, when he had taken the Jo/e?nn League and Civenanty and made an acknowledgment of his Fa- therms fms. Upon this Cromwell invaded them. The Englm Presbyterian Minifters then had a meeting, where- in they confulted how they might beft raife Money for his Majeily's ufe ; but their defign taking air, they were in great danger. Two of them l^ed abroad; eight were fent to the Tciver; among thefe was Mr. Chriftcp her Loz'e^ a man of excellent piety; who was condemned for it, and died with great courage and magnanimity. Mr. G;i- k>nsy an honeft Gentleman, was beheaded with him for the fame caufe. After Bixt. Li£^, Pjrl i. f. 65. 2i6 14 Vindication^/ Part T; After Croifiwelih death, the nation was iniferably diflra- fted and uniettledj and then the Presbyterians made ano- ther vigorous attempt to reflore the King. Sir George Bcothy and Sir 'Iho7)m6 Middleton rais'd an army in Che- Jhire. But, the Cavaliers not aUifiing them, they were loon routed by Larnhj-rt. Afterwards General Monk march'd his army out of Scotland into England^ declaring himfelf to be againlt monarchy, and for a free commonwealth. But after he came to London^ upon the urgent perfuafions of the I-resbyterian Minifters, he alter'd his mind MDCLX. and dechr'd for the King. The old Rump Par- liament being diifolv'd, a new one w^as call'd ; who prefently appointed a day of falling and prayer for themfelves. The Houfe of Commons chofe Mr. Calamy, Dr. Gauden^ and Mr. Baxter to preach to them. They all earnefUy exhorted them in their Sermons to reflore his Majefty. The next day being the ifl of May^ the Par- liament voted the King home again, without the lead oppofition. Certain Divines, and others, were then fent by the Parliament and City to him into Holland. The King knowing of their coming, and being fatisfy'd the only hope he could have of recovering his dominions lay in them, craftily contriv'd how he might delude them and fecure their favour. Me therefore fo order'd it, that the Minillers, when they firft came, fliould be put into a room, where they might hear his Majefty (retired in the next room, and as not acquainted with their arrival) earneflly praying to God, and profeffing before him his fmcerity in the Proteflant religion, and his honeft refo- lutions of advancing it. Thefe plain hearted Minillers, who underftood nothing of intrigue, were tranfported immediately with the profpedt they had of the happy times they fhould fee under the reign of fo very religious and godly a Prince. After this he publiPaM a Declara- tion from B> eda^ Apr. 4, wherein are thefe words : *^ We do declare a liberty to tender confciences, and " that no man fhall be difquieted, or call'd in queftion " for differences of opinion, which do not diflurb the ^' peace of tlie kingdom ; and that we fhall be ready to " confent to fuch an Afl of Parliament, as upon mature ^^ deliberation fiiall be otier'd to us, for the full granting " that indulgence. "' The Royalifis alfo then were very liberal in their promifes, tho they never peform'd the kail part I. //;f D I S S E N T E R S. 221 lead tittle of them. " Dr. Bates takes notice that the *^ Kti of Uniformity was pals'd after the King' had in- *' gag'd his faith, and honour, in his Declaration from '^ BrtdUy to pyeJ€)V€ tl)e liberty of confcieuce inviolate; •' which promife opcn'd the way for his KeRoration; and " after the Royalifls here had {^iven public allurance, *^ that all former animoiities fhouid be buried, as rubhijhy ^^ tinder the foundation of an nniverfal concord,'^* Few now doubt whether King Charles was a Papift at his Refloration. But he then thought his interell; and authority not enough eftablifh'd for him to attempt the crufliing the Presbyterians; and therefore he feems at firll to have feriouily attempted the compofing our diffe- rences; as likewife appears by his Declaration of 25 Ocick 1660; and by what my Lord Chancellor Hjde faid in a Speech to the Parliament fome time before. But foon after, when he found the Epifcopal party were fo incens^'d, as that they would rather run any ha- 7ards, than yield and thing at all to the complaints and requefis of the Presbyterians ; he feems to have thought he might be able to fmk them, and fo he aker^'d his de- lign, and in favour of the Papifls, did all he could to in- creafe and perpetuate our quarrels. The King in the De- claration lalt mention'd, promised many things to the Mi- nifters ; who very hartily thank'd him for them in an Addrefs they prefented. But when they looked that the matter of tre Declaration ftiould be turn'd into a law, they found themfelves fadiy difappointed. All the Cour- tiers earneftly opposed it; and none doubted they did fo by the King^s direction. From that time affairs took a quite contrary turn ; and the Presbyterians were well rewarded by the King and the Royaliils for reftoring them ; according as Mr. Milton had truly forewarned them. "' Wo be to you Presbyterians efpecially, fays hey ^^ if ever any of King Charles's race recov^ers the Englijh ^^ fceptre. Believe m.e, you fhall pay all the reckon- ^^ ina, &c. '' But let us now return to our Author. 77?^ divine favour once more began to Jhine out bright upon the Church of England, and the for- mDCLxii. rner ftorms being dijpers'dy her golden days again appear. \ None will v/onder that the time our Adver- laries • Funer. Scrm. for Mr. Bixt. t T^g- 7'^> 222 ^ Vindication of Part L ^aries reckon their golden age^^ is efleem'd by us to have been an iron one. 1 am lure if a delcription was to be given of that time in the words of the old Roman poet, nothing would better fuit it, than what he fays of the iron age. Strait with a fudden and refiftlefs rage A^ fl'od of vice overwhelms the coming age t *1 ruth's biinijh'd from tie vile degenerate race^ 7" While heav'nly faith dejerts th' unhappy place, > And modejl virtue hides he-r hated face. j ^ Inftead of thofe tif infernal lake fupplies Infernal frauds y and fills the land with lies : Rapine and endlefs avarice fucceeds. And vanquijVd by her foes fincere religion bleeds. The deprived Bijhops are drawn from their prifons and retirements : I would fain know what prifons the Refto- ration found them in^ unlefs they muft be judgM im- prifon'd, when they are reftrain'd from perfecuting their innocent neighbours, and the ejeEled Minijlers are refio/d to their flocks : And a great many Miniilers are ejected, and driven^ from their flocks, the Churches are adorn'd ivith their former ornaments : That is. Altars, CrofTes, Pi- ctures of God in the ftiape of an old man, die. and the ecclefeaftical revenues were given up, which had lately been facrilegioujly poffef^d by private hands. If men are tq be counted facrilegious for buying or detaining fuch pojffef- fions, as once belonged to the Church, a great many of our Adverfaries, as is well known, are at tliis day facri- legious. As for the Puritan MinifterSy who had imjuflly invaded the livings of the Ep/Jcopayiansy and thcfe who had by their writings, Jermons and perfuafionSy promoted the unnatural rebellion ; even thofe had not only no pmiijhment laid upon them, but for nigh two years ajter the Kir.gs return they were fuffefd to enjoy the ufurped Benefices. That the Puritan Miniders came not into the Churches, accord- ing to the ufage and cuftom of the Church of England^ is very true; and not much to be wonder'd at, confidering their ufage was laid alide ; and unlefs they came in fome other way, the people muft have been without Minifters- And it would have been limple in the Puritans to have refus'd the livings for fear of breaking the Church's goodly Canons, Part I. //ye? D I S S E N T E R S. 22 J Canons. But that they had unjuftly invaded the livings of the Epijcopauam, as the turn is invidiouny given in the Tranllation, is more eafily ailertcd than prov'd. Were nut thofc conditions unjuii, which excluded them from livings before the civil war? And where was the injuflice of their excepting livin^^s, when fuch conditions were abolifh'd? What Puritan^ that is Presbyterian, Minifters he meanSj that hadpromoted the umiaturalrekdlicny I knew not. 1 beheve none of them went farther than the Parliament, as long as it continued free. And what was done by them I look upon to be a neceflary defence, and not an un-- natural rebellion. Further, tho the aCc of Parliament al- lowed the Minifters to keep their livings near two years ; yet the Churchmen were in feveral places fo very officious as to get the flart of the law in perfecuting them, and getting them turn'd out. Befides, they were turned out of all thole livings, from which any of the Epifcoparians had been ejected, if the Miniilers ejected were then alive; and that, whatever had been the realbn or caufe of their ejedment. While tbefe Matters v:eYe franfa^ing by the fiate^ the Eccleftaftics of the Church of England Tcere contriving me- thids how the differences between the Puritans and us might he compromised y and all the points in contrcverfy between us might be friendly difputed in a conference. W^hat the aim of the Ecclefiailics was, will eafily appear. For our Author is not very confiflent with himfelf in his account of thefe things. A little farther in his Book he fpeaks thus : Nor indeed after the affairs oj the ftate were fettledy was it in the power of the Bijhops to do any thing, but under the direciicn oj the Court. For there all endeavo7^rs for accom?nouation were held for fanatical. Frcm what fountain thefe maxims were derived, we did but too late come to the knowledge of."^ This is honeitiy faid, and as becomes a man of candor and ingenuity ; faving that many of the Bifhops wanted a willingncfs as much as a power to do any thing. But how were thefe Ecclefajiics contriving an accommodation, when from a fimple fear of being counted fanatical, they would not ufe endeavours for it ? If they really endeavour^ after peace, as I fhall prove they did not, this excufe would be needlefs in their be- half: f77. 224 -^ Vindication of Part L half: but if they need to have fuch an apology made for them, "'tis a plain evidence they did not contrive how to end our dirterences in any fuch way. Nay, fo faf were they from it, that on the contrary, they contriv'd how they might olicnd our fide, and lay {tumbling blocks in our way, that fo they might widen and perpe- tuate the breach. Upon which account they not only refused to make eafy alterations in our favour, but pur* pofely altered fome things to make them worfe. Theycfore by viitue of a co?nmij]ion pyocu/d fro7n the crowHy a CcHjeyeme is appointed to be held at London, in the Savoy. Our Author here intimates, that this Conference was procur'd at the delire of the Bifhops : which is a miftake. It was promisM in the Declaration I mentioned before. But when his MajeRy apprehended he could gain his ends, notwithftanding our differences continued ,- he ap- pointed indeed the Conference to put the better colour upon his own proceedings, and not with any defign of healing our breaches. Dr. Gilbert Sheldon, the Bifhop of Lnidx^Uy and afterwards Archbifhop oi Canter bury , was the chief director on the Epifcopal fide ; and, being well ac- quainted with the defigns of the Court, ordered the Con- ference according to their hearts defire. The Minifters therefore prefently, upon their firft meeting, could eafily guefs, from what he faid, the ifRie of the Conference. When they were met, Archbifliop Freive/i, of Yorky fpake firft and laid, he knew nothing of the bullnefs; but per- haps the Bilhop of London knev/ more of the King^s mind in it, and therefore was fitter to fpeak in it than he. The Bithop of London then told them, that the Conference had been fought by the Minifters and not by the Bifliops: that the Minifters had defir'd alterations in the Liturgy, and therefore they [the BiQiops] had no- thing to iay or do, till the Minifters brought in all they had to lay againft it in writing, and all the additional forms and alterations which they dehr'd. By this pro- pofal he doubtlefs defign'd to delay buGnefs, and waft time : he forefaw that difputes would arife, and when mana^/d this tedious way would foon run out the four months fpace allow'd for the Conference, without doin^ any fjreac matter in it. The Minifters carneftly oppos'd this motion, and urg'd the King's commiifion, which requir'd them to meet together^ advife and ccnfalt. They faid. Part I. ///^Dissenters. 225 faid, by conference they might perceive, as they went along, what each would yield tc, and might more Ipeedily difpatch, and more probably attain their end : whereas writing would be a tedious, endlefs bulinefs, and they Ihould not have that familiarity and acquaintance with each others minds, which might facilitate their concord. But theBifliop oi London refolutely infilled on it, not to do any thing, till they brought in all their exceptions, alterations and additions at once. He fuppos'd the Mi- nifters would never agree upon thefe things among them- feives. The Miniflers were forc'd to yield, and brought in their exceptions, &c. But Dr. Nichols feems oftended, they ihould fiid fault iiith innimievahle particulars in the zuo'rjhip and difcipline of the Church, *' But if the things were themfelves faulty, they are not to be blam'd for what they did. And the Bifhops might have made an advantage of this, to correct their admir^'d book, and have formM it to the greateft perfection. Dr. Nichols is angry with Mr. Baxter^ ivho^ fays he, hadfo mean an opinion of our Liturgy ( v^hich all Foreign Divines are ivont to ejieem of) that he did not think it capable of amendment \ but uenturd to compofe a new one, entirely of his own head without retention of the pri?nitive forms J and in a ??iethod different from any antient Liturgy^ The Foreigners efleem of the Englijh Liturgy is greater in our Adverfaries imagination, than in reality ,• and leC them pleafe themfelves with it. As to what he fays of Mr. Baxter^ the cafe in fhort was thus : The very form of the Englifh Liturgy was diilik'd by the Minifters, and they thought it much eafier to draw up a new one, than to mend the old one. They therefore allotted this task to Mr. Baxter^ who judgM that the beft v/ay to obtain peace, was to draw up fuch a Liturgy, as would pleafe all, who were not abfolutely againfl: form.s of prayer in publick Vv'orfhip. The readieft way to this, w^as to leave out every thing controverted and doubtful, and to ex- prefs the forms iii the very words of Holy Scripture. Mr. Baxter J being well vers'd therein, foon perform'd his task, difpofing every thing into a very neat and handfoin method. Our Adverfaries complain, this was done in ci method different from any antient Liturgy. But if rhey T have * ^^Z' 7U. 1226 J ViNDic\TioN of Part I. have no better teflimonies, than what are producM after- wards out of antiquity for Liturgies, they had much better let that matter alone ; for more impertinent and trifling ones cannot be collected about any thing. This Liturgy Ml'. Baxter fubmittcd to the Bifliops correction and altera- tions. Bt{t, fays the Dodtor, this^ fo mean ape'fcrmance in refpeft of the efiablijh^d Litingy^ and undertaken mth fo great a prejumption^ the Epfcoparians do unanimvujly with contempt throw a fide, * No man, unlefs he is greatly pre- judice, will fay the performance is mean. Nor can it be |ufdy faid to be undertaken with agreat prefumption; fmce, xhe Bifhops refused a friendly and free conference, and requirM them to deliver in all they defir'd at once. But they may be excused in their contemning Mr. Baxter's Liturgy, fmce they treat all the foreign Liturgies in the fame manner. Sure ^tis a great inftance of prefumpticn and haughtinefs, that m.en cannot bear to have any Li- turgy commended but their own ; and defpife and (light all others, whether of foreigners, or their own country- men. And Mr. Baxter makes it plain, they defpisM that Liturgy without knovving Vv^hat it was ; \ and "'tis very cafy to defpife the beft things in the world after that rate. The Minifters, together with their Liturgy, and their exceptions againft the eftabliftiM Liturgy, prefented a Petition to the Bifhops ; v/herein they earnefily fued to them for peace. And in a word, they feem to have left nothing untried, which they thought would con- tribute toward the obtaining it. But all was in vain ; for they who were let into the fecret of the Court, refolv'd to Iteer quite another courfe. *That this Ccnference had no better fuccefs Mr. Baxter, in his Lijcy wrote by himfe/f lays all the blame upon the managers of the Church fide. And very juftly, without all doubt ; fmce they would not make the leaft conceflion to the Minifters. Nor is it any wonder they did not, fmce they fo tamely fell in with all the meafures of the Court, as our Author prefently acknowledges. If the Epifcopal party had then as ftoutly oppos'd the Popifh defigns of the Court, as the Presbyterians did, this Con- ference would have been attended with very good iuc- cefs. Our ! Tag, jS t Life, Tart 2. P. 3 J5. Parti. the Dissect EKS. 227 Our Author is to be commended for his candour in acknowledging, that Bifliop Alorlty^ and Dr. Gunning drvp'dfonw exj)rtjjlon!>^ that iiere more hot than were becom- ing Divines. * As to Bifhop Nicholfony whom Mr. Baxter commends, he was no Commiffioner, and lb with what- ever temper he fpake, it iigniries little to our purpofe, Bifliop Gaiiden feems not to have been in the fecret, and to have been a Man who had but little intereft in his Col- legues. Dr. Pearjcny as 1 have been informal, ufed to lay the blame of the ill Succefs of that Conference upon Bifliop Gimning. And now our Author comes to excufe thofe of his own fide. Nor indeed after the affairs of ft ate were fettle dy was it in the power of the Bijhops to do any things but under the direBion of the Court. And why was it not as much in their power, as in the Presbyterians ? Or what greater danger would the Bifhops have incur'd thereby, than did the Presbyterians ? Our Brethren abroad may hence learn, how eafy and flexible our adverfaries can be upon occafi- on. However rugged they have fliewn themfelves to- ward the Diflenters; yet they can be as tame and pliable as may be to a Court, when they have any ends to ferve by k. But now let us hear why the Bifliops could do no- thing : For there [in the Court] all endeavours for accomoda" tion, were held for fanatical And what then ? Does the divine commiand of following peace with all 7nen \ ceafe, whenever the Court is pleas d to defpife it ? Surely the Apoftle was not of this mind, Vv^ho was not much mov'd at Feflus his counting him mad ,• II nor neglecied any di- vine command, that he might gape after the favour of Courtiers. But the Bifhops, unaccountably feared with an odd fear of being efteem'd fanatical, yield themfelves to the direction and counfels of fuch as were carrying on Po- pifli defigns. But our Author adds : From what fountain thefe maxims were derived, we did but too late come to the knowledge of. We are glad our Adverfaries did at length come to the knowledge of it. But I fliall not eafily believe, that fe- veral of the Commiilicners, v^ho were acquainted with the King's intentions, did not at that time knovv^ whence T 2 thefe • Pjg. 77. t Hebr.xii. 14. )i Ads xxvi- 24. fi28 ^Vindication (?/ Part L thefe things were deriv'd. The defpis'd Presbyterians were not lb ftupid, as not plainly to perceive at what Kinp;C/jarks was driving. M^e may add further, that if the Bifiops committed any fault in the point ofrnoderatioUy [^Tis pity any doubt fhould be made of it] and did not make thofe concejjions they might have done ; they are the more to be pArdoii'dy by how much their minds, which were irritated by the many injuries which they juliain\.l p'07H the oppoftte party, were not yet fufficiently cool d. I cannot here but take notice of what our Author fays of this matter, when he feems to be himfelf in a cool- er temper toward us. " Indeed, had matters been ma- ^' nagM with tolerable temper, there might have been fome ^^ good efteft of this Commiffion, and an expedient have " been found out to have given the Presbyterian Minijfters " fome little fatisfatiion, \^o that they might have comply'd *' with reputation among their party ; whereby the fepa- '^ ration^ which has fince enfued, might have been hin- ^^ derM. But the Bifliops being provok'd by their long ^^ fufterings, and not brooking to have laws prefcrib'd to ^^ them by thofe who had been the occafion thereof; were ^^ not very forward to make any alterations which were *' proposM by the Presbyterians, even in fome things as '^ might have deferved confideration ; refuling them fo ^^ much as the change of (^^^^/y^;2 into heinous Jin. ^' '^ But whatever the Biihops had fuher'd, they fhould remem- ber their Brethren had furf-er'd firft, and more at their hands ; and that fhould have foften'd their refentments. But fmce our Author frankly blames them for being then out of temper j I wifh we were worthy to know how long time will ferve to cool them, and bring them into temper again. I dont fee the Clergy are now any nearer to an healing temper then they were then , and they, as well as the BifliopSj are by our Author elfewhere made to bear a part of the blame. " By the management of fome great '' perfons, then in power, the minds of the Epifcopal ^^ Clergy and zealous Conformifrs were fo wrought up, up- " on the talk of thefe alterations, that the Bifliops, who ^^ were concerned in them, found it a difficult mat- '^ ter to m.anage the temper of their own friends. ^^ t ^^ that the fame tem.per continuing, and being much in- creas^'d. • fref, to h;i Coiiiir.enc on chc Book of Common Prayer, f Notes on the Vref. Part I. //;^ D I s s E N T E R s. 229 creas'd, tho now no provocation can be pretended^ 1 can't fee but the fame men muii bear the blame of the conti- nuance of our dittcrcnces, who were unqucftionably the ririt caufes of t!iem. But let us proceed with our Au- thor. Hovsever^ it could not bin vnrjt any ones fpleen to fee Mr, Baxter, rJ)0 had the prhicipal jhave in this Ccnfeyence, liiith fo excejfrje a heat difturbirtg all calm and moderate propo- fals^ and bytavt expyejjionsy and frivolous cbjeiiicns againft otir conjlitution, g^^'^lf'^g neii: p}czn cations te the Eprjccpal Di- vines, I Willi iome iniiances had been alledgM of this; for I can't find them in the account given of the Conference. Nay, "'tis plain our Advcrfariesj^/^^/^ "uoas 'movd^ not by Mr. Baxter's excejf/ve heat^ but by the too great flrength of his reafonings ; upon v.'hich account they endeavour'd by their forgeries to lefien his credit, bo Dr. Piercey who was one of the Commiifioners, afterwards publiiliM mali- cious ftories of his killing a man in cold blood, &c, which Mr. Baxter eafily confuted. But let any man judge, who were likely to have any ends to ferve, hy dijlii.bmg all calm and 'moderate propcfals ; and then he w ill fee, ^tis but reafonabie to attribute tiiat diHurbance to fom.e of the other fide. Neither could thofe reverend perfons^ inany ofivhich mov^d in the highefifphere in the Churchy brook to have the Articles vchich the l^re^bjterians injrfled on, not fo much de/i/dy as exacted and commanded : '^ This is an unreafona&le cavil. For befides that the Commiflioners had all equal authority with refpect to the Conference, the Miniliers out of their vehement defire of peace prefented a moft humble Petition to them. And that by perfons not only inferior to them in dignity^ but in learning likevcife : This it is for men to be the fiaves of a party. They miuft judge of the propofals made to them, according as they are aliected to the perfons who make them, and not according to the intrinfic excellence and goodnefs of them. Tho' to fay the Truth, I don't fee what the Bifhops could defpife in the CommiiTioners of the Presbyterian fide. That they V. ere inferior to them in dignity, is indeed true ; but up- on inquiry, the reafon will appear to be this, that the one T 3 had ! f''^' 78. k 2^0 A ViNDicATi ON of Part L had courted that honour, which fome of the others (par- ticularly Mr. Baxter and Mi*. Calaniy) had refus'd, when ofter'd them. Had they accepted it, they had without doubt been equal to the Commiinoncrs on the other fide, not only in dignity , but in learning. Who had in a manner, devoted themjelvesy and J worn to deftroy the confiitution of the Church 0/ England : In what fenfe they fwore to the Covenant I have already oblerv'd. But >A'hat next follows I do not believe : ivho in their Jermons bad excited the go- verning fewer Sy which were ofthemfehes fever e enough^ a- ^ainjl them : On the contrary, Mr. Baxter opposM the ejec^unent of the Epifcopal Miniflers, as Bifhop Walton of C/;eyZ^r acknowledged in the open Conference. Jndforfif teen years together had been enriching themfelves out of their frefer?7ients^ whilft the rightful owners thereoj had been fiar" ving. ^Twere eafy to retort this charge from the preceed- ing times, wherein the poor Miniilers had been fiarving for many times fifteen years ,• but I only obferve, that the Bifhops, being led by anger and revenge, prevented the accommodating our differences. Not long after a Convocation is called. Mr. MDCLxr. Pierce^ an Epifcopal Minifter, and a man of good temper^ fays : " Great pains and care were ufed ^^ to fraine this Convocation to the mind of the High " Prelatical party ; keeping [ome out, and getting othei^s ^' in, by very undue proceedings. '' "^ Further the Con- vocation tvas not chofen immediately upon the Kings's co- ming in, leaft the inferior Clergy fliould have been againfl the High party. But when many were turn'd out, that the old fequeftred Miniilers might come in ; and the opi- nion of Reordination being fet on foot, ail thofe Minifters, who had been ordain'd, fince the laying afide the Bifliops, were deny'd their votes for members of the Convocation, they wholly carry'd their caufe. So that it was properly enough a High Church Convocation. What their regard was to peace, m^ay appear by this, that they would not fo jTiuch as fufter the omidion o{ reading the Apocryphal Lef- fonsj nay, they made an addition to them, and upon their grave and learned confultation, prefcrib'd the reading the forry fable oi Bell and the Dragon^ which ufed not to be read before : which whether ic was done with a defign of edify- • Conf. Plea" for the Nonconform. Tdrt 1. p, 37. Part I. //;^ D 1 s s E N T £ R s. 231 edifying the people, or of exalperatin;; thofewho had te- flify'd their diHike of fudi Lcilons, tliey knew beu them- lelves. And when Dr. AUcn of Hutitw^tonjImCy a Clejk in this Convocation, earnelily labour'd with Bifliop Shel- aoiJy that they might fo reform the Liturgy, as that no fo- ber man might make exception, he was wifli'd to forbear; for that what Ihould be, was concluded on, or refoiv'd. "* The fame Bifliop is reported to have faid : Nuiv zve know their [the Miniiiers] rninds^ iLe will 7nake them all knaues if they conjonn. And at another time, when the Earl of Manchefter told the King, while the Act of Uniformity was under debate, that he was afraid the terms of it w^ere fo rigid, that many of the Miniiiers would not comply with it : He reply'd, / a?n afraid they zvil/. The Dr. tells us : T'he Liturgy being revised [by the Con- vocation,] the Parliament eftablijh it by an A'tij tbliging all the Clergy who Jhould enjoy am> Beriefice in the Church of England, to declare their confent to the ufe of it. f And this they were oblig'd to do before Bartholomew dayy Aug, 24. And yet it was but a very few day^ before that time, that the Book w^as publiih'd. So that many of our Miniiiers complain'd, they were turn'd out, for not fubfcribing to a Book they had neither feen, nor could fee in the limited time. A writer of one of the State Trads fays : " Not one man in forty could have feen and read " the Book, they did fo perfedly affent and confent un- *^ to.'^'+I know how this will be defended : It voas a matter exprefly and folemnh eftablijh' d by law. II But if the truth was always to be told, he Ihould rather fay, the Clergy made molt confcience of lofmg their livings. Our Author fays: A great number of Presbyterian Minifters partly out ofjhamey and not enduring to make a recantation of their errour \ and partly out of fcruple of confcience to take a counter oath^ f^W^' thentf elves to be d(priv\i of their liv- ings^ according to the tenour of the Acly on the 24 of Au- guft, 1662. But I don't fee what fhame couid be left ia men who, would declare their unfeigned afjent and confent to all and every thing contain d and prefcnb'd in a Book, they had not yet feen. Such nien could not be troubled much With fruples of confcience. And in like manner they fhew'd themfelvesmen of wonderful eafy confciences, that T 4 they *Wd.P,ii. fPa^.^o, :^Sute Tra^g, Fc>/. I.f. 41, ^.Seef.iii. 5^2 ^Vindication (?/ Part L they could fubfcribe another Declaration mention'd in the Act of Uniformity, which they were forc'd themfelvcs af- terwards to break thro. Which was a more remarkable in- flancc of divine juflice in expofing their treachery, than what our Author mentions, which only ferv'd to illuftrate the integrity of honeft men, who feared ah oath. When the time came, about 2000 Miniflers chofe to part with their livings, rather than injure their confciences. Nor cio I believe, that any where in hiflory an equal number of Clergymen, voluntarily leaving their all, for a good confcience, can be produced. And thus Bartholomew Da)\, famous before for the horrid MalFacre of the Martyrs iri France^ was now made fo by the furterings of the Englijh Confeffors. But ^tis worth while to (hew here the bafe arts, where- by our Adverfaries procured that inhuman Kti to be pafsM in Parliament. I fhall give an account of this matter from ^' Captain Tarrington^ a man of an eflablifli'd ^' reputation, who in idSi. piiblifh'd a full difcovery of ^^ the hrft Presbyterian fham plot. In which difcovery ^^ he declares he related nothing, but what he could prove ^^ by letters, and many living witnelfes. Nor was his ac- ^' count ever publicly contradided, He fays: That many '^ both of the Clergy and Laity, difliking the King's De- ^^ claration concerning e'cclefiaitical atrairs, refolv'd to run *^ things to the utmoft height, and that fome of the *^ leading Churchmen were heard to fay : "They would ^^ have a7i Aci fo jraiii^d^ as would reach every Puritan y in the Kingdom : and that if they thought any of them '^ would fo ftretch their confcience Sj as to be comprehended ^' by ity they would infert yet other conditions andfubfcrt- ^' pionSy fo as that they Jhould have no benefit by it^ To ^' pave the way for it, they contrive a Presbyterian plot, *^ w^hich was laid in aboiit 36 feveral counties. In M/'or- *^ cefterfiire feveral letters were drawn up, and diliverM *^ by Sir Jchn P. to one Richard N, his neighbour, to ^^ convey them to Cole of Mart ley ^ who, with one Churn^ ^^ brought them back again to Sir John P. from whom " they" came,' making Affidavit^ that Cole found the ^^ packet, left by a Scotch pedlar under a hedge. In this ^^ packet, when it was openM, there Were found feveral ^^ letters, difcovering a coi^fpiracy to raife a rebellion. ^ -'^-- • rThe^e Part I. //^^ D I S S E N T E R S, 2^ J *^ There were fevei al letters to the Captain ; one from ^^ Mr. Baxter of Kcderrriiiijler, intimating, that he had '^ provided a conliderable body of Men well arm^d, which " fhould be ready againlt the time appointed ; and ano- ^' ther from Mr. Spnnjy intimating, he had ordered him " 500 /. lodg'd in a friend's hand, &c\ Upon this, the ^ militia of the county was rais'd immediately, and the *^ city of MA)yceJier hll'd with them the very night after " the packet was openM. The next morning the Cap- " tain was feiz'd by a Troop of Horfe, and brought ^^ prifoner to H^orcefier ; and fo alflj were Mr. Sparry^ " Mr. Oiiflandj Mr. Af(?or and Mr. B)ian^ Minifters; to- " gether "With fome fcores of others. 'I hey were all kept " clofe prifoners for 10 days; by which time (the Trained '^ Bands being weary) moft of them were difcharg^d, '^ paying their fees. But the Captain, Mr. Sparry^ and '^ the two Oajlandsy were ftill kept clofe prifoners in the ^^ George Inn ; the Dignitaries of the Cathedral taking ^.' care when the Trained Bands retirM, to raife 60 Foot *^ Soldiers (who had double pay, and were call'd the " Clergy Band) to fecure thefe criminals. And be- '^ fides the Sentinels upon each prifoner, they had a Court *^ Guard at the Town Hall oiJVorcejler. There they per- ^' form'd one remarkable ad of chivalry: A poor man ^' coniHlg out of the country, to inquire after the wel- " fare of Mr. Henry Oajland his Minifter, and fpeaking *^ to one of the Soldiers, he told him, that Mr. Oaflnnd '^ was a traitor and a rebel, &c. The poor man ftood upi *^ for his minifter, and vindicated him ; whereupon he '^ was, with great zeal, carried to the Court of Guard, ^^ He that prefided there (who was no meaner man than *^ an Apparitor) commanded the old man to be tied neck ^^ and heels, charged him with having a hand in the " Presbyterian plot, and threatened him with fevere ufage *'^ if he would not confefs. The old man bore his wrath '^ with great patience, and gave him not a word in an- '^ fwer. Upon which the man in authority was fo en- " rag^d that he put lighted matches betwen his fingers, *^ and burnt them to the very bone to make him confefs. *^ At length, Mrs. Tarrhigton difcovering the fham in- '^ trigue, by the acknov;ledgment which the perfon im- f^ ploy'd by Sir J. P, to carry the packet to Cck of ^" Martley^ made pp his brother^ (he gives notice of it to * • "her fij4 -/^Vindication of Part L ^ her husband in his confinement, who immediately en- *^ ters actions againll thofe who imprifonM him. Being *^ at lafl difcharg'd, he comes up to London^ and prevail'd ^' with the Earl oi Brijlol to acquaint the King, how his ^' miniflers impos'd upon him by luch fham plots, Ci7c- ^ Upon this, the Deputy Lieutenants were ordered ta •' appear at the Council Board. 'Iliey endeavour'd to *^ clear themfelves, and delir^d to confulc thofe in the ^^ country. But afterwards Sir y. IV. who was one of ^ them, arrefls the Captain for high treafon. He was " again releas^'d upon the Earl of Brijlol's procuring the «' Kings's Privy Seal, and going down into the country, *' profecutes his profecutors. But within fix months, per- ^ Ions were fubornM to fwear againii: him : "That he had ^' fpi^^^i^ treafonable vcords againfi the King and government. ^^ For this he was tried at the AfTizes at IVorceJiery be- ^^ fore Judge Twifden^ and, upon a full hearing, was pre- ^' fently acquitted by the Jury. And one of the witnefTes *^ afterwards confefs'd he had 5 /. given him for being " an evidence. ^^ ^' Having given this Specimen, I fliall not tranfcribe what was done in other counties, where the like methods were purfu^'d. Now the defign of all thefe methods was, to poffefs the Parliament, that it was abfolutely neceflary to make a fevere Ad againft the Presbyterians, as a moft reft- lefs and feditious people. The King made ufe of thefe ftirs, as a handle in his Speech to the Parliament, to provoke them to feverity ,• and Sir J. P. and other Mem- bers in the Houfe of Commons gave information of thefe dangerous plots. By thefe arts they proem M the pafling of the Uniformity A£t, tho at laft it w^as but by a very fmall majority. And thus the Church of England ob- tain'd that ellablifhment, in which they glory and tri- umph to this day. ' Our Author next relates the Rifing of the Fifth Monar-* chy Men. f But iince we always abhorred the frantic adions x)f thofe murdering zealots, as much as any of our Ad- yerfaries^ I can\ fee any reafon he had to mention this in the Hiltory of our controverfy. And as little reafon had he to fpeak of the next con- fpiracy, of fome of Cromwel's Captains, and others u7;o had ! SctOm, Abridg. F^Jg, 1 77. i Tag, SI, Part !• //?^ D i s s E N T E R s. 2 j 5 had betu Members vf the Rtnnp Purliamentj with a deflgn tu flit all ptv^e)' again into the hands of the Seciaries, Such a plot was not likely to be promoted by us, who have al- ways been avcrfe to thofe kind of men, nor are we charg'd by our Author himfelf with having any hand in it. And ncui) the J'reibjterian and Nunanjonniji Minifters being hinder'' d by the Act of Uniformity Jrvm pi eachiiig^ they began toftt tip priviite Ccnz'enticles. * Herein they imitated the primitive Chriilians, who, in like manner, held their airemblies in private, when it was not fafe for them to do it in public. And in no other fenfe could thofe full afTemblies, our Author fpeaks of, be calFd Conventicles, than were the Chriflian aifemblies under the Heathen Em- perours. But we have learn'd patiently to bear their op- probrious language ; tho' we could ealily mind him, that if any Chriftian allembiies deferve the name of Comen-- ticlesy it will beil belong to thofe, who fet up a tyrannical government in the Church; or who, to its great prejudice and mifchief are fo n^ean fpirited, as to put their necks under fuch a yoke. The Doftor acknowledges their con- gregations were thenlarge,nor did they grow thin, till the Court by their arts had brought a deluge of impiety upon the nation. It gall'd our Adverfaries to fee our congre- gations full, and their own thin; and therefore they had recourfe, according to their ufual manner, to the Popifli weapons to advance their caufe : and hereupon was that Statute made againfi Conventicles. Of the penalty of this law he gives a true account. A Lavj^ fays he, ispafs'd under the penalty of five pounds and three months impri^ fonmenty That no perfon above f.xteen years of age, under colour or pretence of any exercije oj religion^ Jhould be prefent at any public zucnjhip perform a in other manner y than is allowed by the Liturgy or practice of the Church of Eng- land. For the fecond offence the penalty is doubled. And the third time being convicted by a Jury^ the offending party jhall be banip/d to fome one of the American Plantations [excepting New England and Virginia.] So far is nothing but truth, t ho' it be a barbarous one : what follows is falfe : But this law^ by reafon of the great feverity thereof had no effect, f By reafon of that law, not only Mini- fiers, but Laymen, were fadly perfecuted and had their houfes iP^g' 83. trjg. S4. 2^6 A Vindication of Part L iioufes plundered. It was a great hardfliip, that by this law a Juftice of Peace had power to record a man an pftender, without a Jury ; and if he did it ever fo unrea- fonably, the injur'd perfon could have no remedy. And conlidering what fort of men were put into the Com- rnilfion of Pea'^e by the Court; it could be no wonder that the fufterin^^s of both Minifters and people (hould be then exceeding great. ^ . 1 his year the great Plague rag'd in London, ^DCLXV. which Iwept oft about loooo pcrfons a week : and yet fo much were men hardned and blinded, that they would not take notice of God's hand^ or fear the vengeance of the Almighty. This appeared in the beha- viour of our Parliament, which being driven from Lon- don by the Plague, met at Oxford^ and there pafsM a more fevere Ad againft the Minifters, than any of the former ; concerning which our Author thus diftourfes : , Bict as for the nujl pa, t misfortunes irritate mens tern- perSy and make them peevifh^ fo fever al of the ejefted Mi'- nifters are accus^dy as if their pulpits were again thunder- 2Ug againft the Church and the monarchy. I make not the leaft doubt, that what the Doctor fpeaks of, as happening for the moft party our Adverfaries expected and hoped would have fallen out at that time : viz,, that the Mi- nifters, being irritated by the vile, barbarous and unchri- llian ufage they met with, w^ould be tempted to fome extravagance, which might be improv'd againft them, as an occafion of further feverities. But miffing their expe- iftation, they would not wait for the formality of a pro- vocation ; but, without any ofter'd by them, enafted the fevereft law againft them. Had there been any evidence of the truth of thisaccufation, we fliould not fail to hear of it. And if there had been anything more than ru- mours of this nature, "'tis very probable the witnefles were the fame fort of fuborn'd, perjur'd wretches, as thofe I mentioned juft now, whofe aid w^as made ufe of to blacken the Minifters in order to obtain the Aft of Uniformity. But our Author himfeif fcems a^iam'd of this, and there- fore endeavours to mollify it in his next uords : And to take matters in the ?nildeflfenjey fome things zee) e [aid hy fome of them with mere f eedom and left prudence, than veer e fitting to be utter' d by perfns out of the favour of the governmenty or, to be heard by their guvernours. I won- der-what things thefe were, and till they are alledg'd and prov'dj Part I. //;e D I s s E X T E R s. 2^7 prov'd, 1 think no re.^ard is to be had to fuch fhain pretences. And if luch kind of Impertinent rumors, de* vis'd by adverfaries out offpiceand malice, be a fulfi- cient ground for the making fevere laws apainfl men, no body of men in the world can be long fafe. I am fure our Clergy at prefent, upon much better reafon for their treatment*of the government, may cxpcd the feverell laws to be paft againll them, if fuch kind of allegations fliould be allow'd to carry any itrength in them. ^'pLi'as cbjeBed likewife againfi tlmriy that in the choke (f Parlimncnt MeHy they did too officio t//ly inter efi them- Jehes \ jo that upon the death of a Memhe-r^ ojtentimes they jhouhl get a new cue to be chbjen^ of not Jo hearty affeEiions to the Churchy or crown, as wa5 dejired. I would gladly know, what law was tranfgrefs'd by them, when they us'd their utmoft induftry in this matter. And what kind of perfons did they make intereft for } Were they fuch as WTre not capable of being chofen according to law ? The only fault in this matter was, that they chofe the mofl; hearty friends to the Englijh ccnfiitution ; men who would fecure the liberties of the fubjeds againfi: the incroachments of the throne, or the Priefihood. Nor can any of them be charg'd with any worfe deligns againft the Church, than that they were for inlarging it by bring- ing the DifTenters juflly and honourably into it They were in fhort fuch men. as have been always the truefl friends of the nation, and to whom the prefervation of it «nder God has been continually owing j v/hile all the dangers that have ever threatened it have arifen from that kind of men, whom they zealoufly endeavoured to keep out. So that really this hardfhip (to their honour be It fpoken) was laid upon them only for their honefly, and their zeal for the happinefs and welfare of their coun- try. And if the oppofing the crown in elections deferves fuch treatment, what mull become of the E^ig'ijh Clergy, many of whom have at this day, oppos'd the crown with a Witnefs, and have been purfuing meafures, which, if they had fucceeded, mufi have overthrown our whole con/lituticn in Church, as well as ftate ? And 't.'s very re- markable, that when the poor Diflenters were fo unmer- cifully treated for their faithful fervices to their Cvountry at eledions, the Fapiiis had free liberty U make what in- tereft they could at them. 238 J Vindication of PartL Upcnthefe confideratiom, another AEi of Parliament fafr. fed, that no Nonconform?/} Minifter fbotdd live within fivi\ miles of any corporation town, nnlefs he would take an oatbA that he did not hold it lawful, die. ""^^ The form of th#i oath I fhall fet down prefently, a little more fully tharfl the Doftor has done. But firft let me take notice of the] feverity of the Act in what it forbad, which is too flightly fet down by our Author. For if they refus'd the oath, they mull not come (unlefs upon the road) within five miles of any city or corporation, or any place that fends Burgeffes to Parliament, or any place where they had been Minifters, or had preachM fmce the Act of Oblivion. The defign of the Act was to overwhelm, and quite ruine Miriifters with thefe new hardfhips and troubles. They feemM to be difpleas'd, that God was not as unmerciful as themfelves ; but was kind to provide for them, ftir- ring up their friends to aflift and relieve them ; and that they might defeat the kindnefs of God and their friends, they endeavour to feparate them from thofe, who us'd to fuccour them. Had they only intended, according to their ftam pretences, to hindertheir making in tereft in elections, why did they forbid them to come to fuch corporations as fent no Members ? and why are they forbidden to come there at any time, when there w^as not, as well as when there was, any election ? and why are they forbid to live where they had formerly liv'd, whether Parliament Men were chofe there or not ? 'Tis plain, the aim was to flarve them, for no other reafon, but becaufe they were honeil and pious men. However cruel the law was in its ow^n nature, they, who were trufted with the execution of it, made it much more fo. For when feme of the Mi- nifters had found out places for themfelves, above five miles from corporations, which they took care to have exactly meafur^'d ; they w^ere driven from them upon this pretence, that the ftatute did not mean five flatute miles, but fo many according to common computation. And fo great was the feverity of that Act, that pofterity would hardly believe our Adverfaries themfelves were capable of ufing it^ if the memory thereof fhould not be preferv'd by the public records of the nation. The oath imposM on them was this : '' I P^g. S'5. Part I. f ^6* D I s s E N T E R s* 239 '^ I A. B. do fwear, that it is not lawful, upon any " pretence whatfoever, to take arms againlt the King : *^ And that 1 do abhor that traiterc^us pofition of taking " arms by his authority againft his perfon, or againft *^ thofe that are commillionated by him, in purfuanceof " fuch commiffion : And that I will not at any time en- *^ deavour any alteration in the government, either in " Church or Itate. '' Had our Adverfarics perform'd their oath to King J.vnes II. all the afTillance of our good friends the Diitib^ and the Prince of 0;y?/7^£', had been in vain* But blclled be God, they no fooner faw the doflrlne of that oath would undo themfelves, as well as us, but they very freely gave it up : whereby all the world faw wath what fincerity they fwore to the truth of it. And doubtlefs had they not been convinced that our Mi- rifters ufed to take oaths with more fmcerity and con- fcience, than they have fiiewn themfelves, they would ne- ver have attempted to give them any trouble by impofing fuch an oath upon them. M'Ji of the NGnccnformifis do take this oath This Is not true. About 40 of them took it : twenty in LondoUy after the Judges had explainM it, and one of them too upon the Bench, in the foftelt fenfe poffible ; and about twenty in the country : which is far enough from being the mod: of the Nonconformifts, who were in the whole about 2000. But at that time fever al of the moye fagacious, both (f the/n and uSy began to fmell out the arts of that Coirn. Neither uas it falfely fufpeciedy that then they began to lay fnares^ at the fame time to deprize us b:th of our Re- formed religion y and our civil liberties. Which defignsy A few years afteywards^ did appear in a clearer liglit. The firft part of the oath is taken from a declaration requirM in the Aft of Uniformity ,- fo that if this ferv^'d to difcover the defigns of the Court, our Adverfaries mighr have eafily difcoverM it long before. And yet however vifible our Author thought them to be at that time ; ''tis^ certain Archbifhop Sheldon^ and Bifhcp IVard o( Salisbury, two chief men among the Bi^ops, were eager fticklei-s for the Ad with all its notorious cruelty and wickednefs. TheE^rlof^Clarendony among the temporal Peers, wasac- great promoter of this feverity ; as he w^as of all the other afRiCiions, which were then laid upon us. But the juiiice of God foon overtook him : and he v^'as quickly after ' forc^J 240 ^Vindication of Part L forc'd into baniOiment:, in which alfo he ended his days. Concerning which I think Mr. Baxter makes this juft ob- fervation : '^ It was a notable providence of God, that " this man, that had been the ^rand inftrument of flate, " and done almoft all, and had dealt fo cruelly with the *' Nonconformifls, Ihould thus by his own friends be caft '^ out and baniflied ; while thofe that he had perfecuted, " were the moft moderate in his caufe, and many for ^^ him. And it was a great eafe that befel good people '^ throughout the land by his dejection, tor his way was «' to decoy men into confpiracies, or to pretend plots, <^ and then upon the rumor of a plot, the innocent peo- «^ pie of many countries were laid in prifon, fo that no ^' man knew when he was fafe. Whereas fmce then, the' " laws have been made more and more fevere ; yet a man *' knoweth a little better what to expect, when 'tis by " a law that he is to be try'd. And 'tis notable, that *' he, that did fo much to make the Oxford Law for ba- *' nifhing Minifters from corporations, that took not the «' oath, doth in his Letter from France fmce his banifh- ^^ ment fay, that he never was in favour fmce the Parlia- ^' ment fat at Oxford. '' '^ Towards the latter end of this year, came MDCLXXi. forth the King^s Indulgence, whereby the King gave the Diflenters that liberty of worfhipping God according to their confciences, which they had been deprived of by Ad of Parliament. The Doctor is angry with the Dilfenters for accepting the benefit of that in- dulgence. This Qccafon^ fays he, fo illegally offer' d^ all the different SeBs of the Nonconforrnifts do greedily lay hold of through- cut the city, and the federal market towns in the country ; the feparate Meetings arefet up, Minifters are provided for them, hearers are invited thereunto, and all things are carried on with as much fpirit and alacrity, as if they had been countenanced by the law, \ And now if our Adverfaries would deal ingenuoufly;, they would not blame us fo much for greedily laying hold of that cccaficn; as themfelvcs, for making us by their cruel perfecutions fland in any need of it. And why, I pray, lliall not the Nonconforrnifts lay hold of that op- portunity ? His Life. P^rt 3.f. ao. t Page S6. part I. the Dissenter s. 241 portunity ? If a thief robs a thief, and renders me what I had been before rob'd of; is it unlawful for me to receive what is my own ? The worfliippin;^ God according to the prefcription of a man's conlcience, is a right which no good citizen can loofe. Since therefore the law itfelf, which forbad our doing fo, was moft unjuft and unrighteous ; what good reafon could there pollibly be, why we fliould not make ufe of that liberty, which is granted us both by the law of nature, and by the written law of God ? What, or to whom do we offer any injury or wrong by all this ? We know well enough, what their temper is : they never think themfelves touch'd intheleaft, but they make the nation ring with their clamour, and cry out to Foreigners for fpcedy help and affiflance. How then Ihall it be prov'd, that the Diflenters, alone of all man- kind, ought to be fo furly, as to refufe to accept of their natural and unalienable rights when ofter'd them ? I' can't really imagine, what the defign of this pafiage fliould be; unlefs our Adverfaries would have had us forbear upon the royal indulgence to worfhip God according to our con- fciences ; tho' we had done it in (pite of their oppreffive laws, and in much afRidion and fuftering. Do's any man think, we would be fuch fools, as to lay afide our wor- Ihip, becaufe the King exempted us from fuftering upon the account of it? No, no, we were wifer than that comes to; and underftood the temper of our ChurchmeA too well, to play fuch a foolifh game. We know they who now are angry with us for taking the advantage of the indulgence, would have been the firft men in the na- tion, to have perfuaded the King to grant it, if we had jQiewM we fcrupled the making ufe of it. But in February the Payjiamem meetings they "voted down the Kings Declaration as ihegal^ and call thcje to an account^ who had advised the King to theferting it -forth. * The Diffenters truly thou^ht, they had a juil right ta worfhip God according to their ccnfciences : and yet tliey did not therefore think they v/ere bound to defend the Kings's Declaration. When it became a matter of debate in Parliament, v/hether that Declaration was confident with the laws of the land, or not ; then they judgM the liberties of the people, and the fecurity of the conititution U were 11'^ n^ 242 A Vindication of Parti* were concern'd : it being a great hazard to allow the King a power of fuperfeding one Act of Parliament by his own prerogative ; left he (hould be tempted upon the fame grounds to fuperfede whatever Acts he may think fit. The DilFenters therefore, tho they had ufed the li- berty, which the Declaration granted ; yet ftiew'd them- felves zealous defenders of the people's rights againft the King's abfolute power of difpenfmg with the laws; and therefore readily concur'd in voting the Declaration to be illegal. The Parliament did not enter upon this debate now, upon the account of their old grudge againlt the Dilfenters. Their eyes were open'd to fee farther into the defign of thofe meafures, which they had been advan- cing, in complaifance to the Court ,* and they would have been glad to have had an opportunity to undo a great deal of what they had done. For after they had voted the Declaration illegal, on the 14 of February^ " The *' Houfe of Commons refolv'd, nemine contradkentej That " a Bill be brought in for the eafe of his Ma jelly's fub- *^ jeds, who are Diflenters, in matters of religion, from " the Church of England. " Accordingly a Bill pafs'd the Houfe of Commons, but was ftop'd in the Houfe of Lords ; where the Bifhops by their votes and intereft could do a great deal to oppofe the DiflTenters, and advance the Popifh defigns of the Court. Thus the poor Diflenters, being deprived of the fhelter of his Majefty^s Declaration, v/ere left by the Parliament to the ftorm of the fevere laws which were in force againft them, which by fome Juftices were rigoroufly ^ut in execution : but the greater part were then more moderate, and fo the Dillenters had in many places a libety of performing their ivorjhipj in their own icay : our Author fays, for many years ; that Is for two yeari, for it hardly lafted three. For, In the year 1(574. ^^^ Majefty calPd the Bifliopsup to London^ to give him advice, what was to be done for the fecuring of religion, &c* They (who, our Author fays, began before this to fmell cut the arts of the Court ^) after various confultations with the Minifters of State, advis'd him to recall his licences, and put the laws againft the Nonconformifts in execution. This advice was prefently agreed to by the King. No fooner was the Proclamation againft 7^5. Part L the D IS s^iiTEK 8. 24 j against us made public, but many Informers wcrefer at work to advance the delign, and promote the exccutien of rhe laws. Thefe Liformers were a parcel of infamous u retcl.es, who having no fenfe of God and another world, Lut living in all manner of wickednefs, were thoucht pro;jer tools for the Church to work with, in perfecutiny; good men. They were the more ht for the purpofe, becaufe their wickednefs had run them defperately into debt, and they were greedy of any, however ungodly gain. This pellilent generation were flngularly diligent in pulling down the Dillenters, and building up the Church oi Eng- landy as by law efiablithed. And the Spiritual Courts finding how ferviceable they were to promote difciphne, that is, to bring money into their pockets, were very fond of them. ^Tis not eafy' to reckon the vail number of fa- milies, v/hich the Church was pieas^'d utterly to ruine by the help of this vermin, who made nothing of perjuring themfelves ; but their zeal for Mother Church,made attone- ment for that fmall crime, and they were frequently (hel- terM in fuch their wickednefs. But they, who found Means to efcape punifhment from men, could not avoid the vengeance of the Almighty ; who by the miferable end of many of them gave warning to others, not to imitate them in their villany. But as there is feldom a fcarcity of perfons fit to be inftruments of mifchief ; while God by his righteous and remarkable judgments removed fome, others came in their room. The Clergy being grievM to fee, what an interefl the nonconforming Minilters had in MDCLXXiiti the people, fet a new projed: now on foot againft them, and endeavoured to expofe them to be fcorn'd and ridicuPd. For this end they examinM their writings, and where they found an unguarded expreflion they made it a great deal worfe than it was. Such ex- prefTions as would admit of a good meaning, they wrefted to a bad one ; and whatever difagreed with their notions they made a meer jell: of, not fparing reli.^ion it felf^ which was then much wounded thro^ our fides, by men who might have been expected to prove better friends to it. And indeed the controverfy the Doctor is now going to relate, was not properly a controverfy between the Church of England znd DifFenters; but between fome angry Eccleftaftics on the one hand, and fober pious men, both Confgrmifcs and Nonconformifts, on the other. I U a done 244 -^Vindication^/ Part L don^t think it worth while to infift long upon this matter. Dr. Ouens works are known and valued abroad : and by them the Forreip^n Divines may judge of the writings ot the two others, Dr. Jacomb, and Mr. Vincent, who are join'd with him. And here at home thefe writers are all fo well known, that ^tis needlefs for me to fay much of them. Let every one judge of them as he fees caufe. "^Tis invidious and unfair to reprefent them as Antinomians, from iuch confequences as adverfaries may draw from their doto'jnes, when they deny thofe confequences. Nor did ever Dr. Oixjen, or either of the other two, lay down this doch'i'rie, that Chrifl in our ft e ad had [o fulfill d all the law for us J as to merit heaven pr the mrft ixicked and finful pejon ; viz. that died in his impenitence and unbelief. And Xfuppofe, no one will queftion whether he merited heaven for the moil wicked and fmful perfons, who repent and believe. Nor is it a fair reprefentation of their opinion, to fay they taught, T^hat moral virtues were fjgns of a car-- mil mind. Tl:ey embracM no other dodrine, than what the Church delivers in her 13 Article: "Works done " before the grace of Chrift, and the infpiration of his ^^ Spirit, are not pleafant to God ; for as much as they " fpring not of faith in Jefus Chrift, neither do 'they '^ make men meet to receive grace, or (as the School " authors fay) deferve grace, of congruity : yea, rather ^^ for that they are not done as God hath willed and ^^ commanded them to be done, we doubt not but they ^' have the nature of fin. '' And what fhall we think of men, who \^^ill fcoft at the doarine of their own Church, and will not bear others ftould preach, what they have mofi: religioufiy fubfcrib'd themfelves? And who doubts, '- lock never dar^'d to anfwer him, nor mtuch car'd for that way of writing afterward. And that he obtained a com- pleat vidory is acknoVvdedgM by Dr. Souths a man fanious for his wit, and as bitter an enemy as any to the Diflen- ters. And not only the Dillencers, but feveral of the Epif- copal writers, as Dr. Soiah and Dr. Edvcards^ accufe him as having given a deep wound to religion by his writings at that time; which I hope from fome of his after wri- tings he was not infenfible of There are fome things which one cannot read without horror. Let me give one inftance of this nature : Dr. Owen had faid, " That in Chrift God hath mani- " felled the naturalnefs of this righteoufnefs unto him, in " that it was impoffible that it {hould be diverted from *^ flnners, without the interpoiing of a propiciaticn."'' Every one knows this has been a received opinion amiong a great many Divines, the far greater part, I fuppofe, of thofe in Foreign countries. But if it fhould be fupposM to be falfe ; yet it was very indecent in a man, who profefsM himfelf a Chriftian and a Divine, to treat fo very ferious and important a fubjed with flouts and jefting. Yet this did Mr. Sherlock^ who prefently upon letting down the Doctor's words, goes on after this rate : '' That is, that ^^ God is fo jufl and righteous, that he cannot pardon " fin without a fatisfaction to his juilice. Now this in- " deed is fuch a notion of jufticeasis perfe^ftly new, which ^^ neither Scripture nor nature acquaints us with. For ^^ all mankind have accounted it an act of goodnefs U 5 (without 2^6 A Vindication^/ Part I. ** (without theleaft fufpicion of injuftice in it) to remit *^ injuries and oftences, without exacting any punifhment; ^^ and that he is fo far from being ju{t, that he is cruel *' and favaee, who will remit no ottence till he hath fatif- ^^ tied his revenge. But tho' this be a very terrible dif- *' covery of the naturalnefs of God's righteoulnefs, or vin- *' didive juiiice, yet he makes fome amends for it, in *^ that comfortable difcovery of his patience and long *^ liinering towards linners; for now (as he adds) in ^' Chriit the very nature of God is difcove/^d to be love and *' kindnefs. A happy change this, from all juftice to all ^' love ! But how comes this to pafs ? Why the account *^ of that is very plain: Becaufe (if I may take liberty to *^ to put his words mto plain Englijh) the ju( ice of God *' hath glutted it felf with revenge on fin in the death of ^^ Chrifi, and fo hencetor ard we may be fure, he will *' be very kind ; as a revengeful man is, when his paflion *^ is over. For fo he fpeaks very honourably of God : ^^ U/Latei'er di f cover ies uere made of thefatience and lenity *^ of God unto us ; yet if it were not withal reveaPdy that *^ the other Properties of God, as his jujlice, and revenge *• for JtUy had their actings alfo afjlgn'd them to the fully " tke.e could be little conjolation gathered from the former. " That is: He would not believe God himfelf, tho'he " fliould make never fo many promifes of being good ^^ and gracious to finners ; unlefs he were fure he had firft ^' fatisfyM his revenge. Which indeed is fuch a chara- *^ der of the love and patience of God^ as we could ne- *^ ver have learnt, had not fome men falfely pretended " to fuch an acquaintance with the perfon of Chrift, as *^ contradids thofe natural notions which all men have of , ^^ God, and the plain revelation of the Gofpel. The fum ^^ of which is : 1 hat God is all love and patience, when *^ he hath taken his hll of revenge. As others ufe to fay : ^' T'hat the Devil is verygcody when he is pleased, ^^ '^ This is that Dr. .jherlcck^ and fuch were the writings fo much commended here by our Author. The fame perfon denies there is any other, than a political union between Chrifl and believers • and laughs at thofe who pretend any other, of which the Spirit, or faith are the band. He ridicules thofe^who taught in their fermons,That it was neceffary for linners f Of the Knowledge of chrift, f 27: Parti. the Dissenters. .247 linners to fee themlelvcs miferable and wretched without the help of Chrilt, before they would be brought favingjy to believe on him. And "'twere eafy to prefcnt the reader with a great deal more fuch ftufti if Icar'd for.chc.dirty work of looking after it. ;;. • Next follows a long account of the controverfy be- tween Mr. Jenkyn and Dr. Grove. Whether his account of the Se'7nony which I never faw, or of the management of the difpute be true, I know not. If Mr. Jenkyn ma- nag'd it weakly, we are not concerned in it. tor it tvas not a Controverfy about Conformity as far as I perceive; but about the opinions of fome particular Divines of the tl^hurch of Enghind^ which are not put into the Articles, or required to be fubfcrib'd to. This Mr.Jenkyn might have been fpar^'d by our Author, confidenng that i€ he did really deal badly by the Church of England^ they afterwards in 1 684 revenged themfelves to the full upon him. He was then taken at a Fafl, and by two of theit inagiftrates, upon his refufing the Oxford oaiJoy fent to J^ewgate very cruelly ; for they refus'd the ofter of 40 /. fine, which the law impowerM them to take ; altho' it was urg'd, that the air of Newgate would infallibly fuftb- cate him. No petitions could be heard for his releafe. And when his Phyficians teftify'd his life was in danger from his clofe imprifonment, all the anfwer that could be obtained was: That Mr.yenkynfhould be a prifoner as long as he liv'd. And fo at a week and four months end, he ended his days in their merciful hands. He was deny'd in his imprifonment the liberty of praying with any, eveti his own Daughter who came to vifit him. His Life might have aton'd therefore for his oftence; unlefsthey think the more they fink his reputation, the more excufable they fliall be in taking it away. This year the Popifh Plot was difcover'd, MDCLXxvm: into which when the Parliament refolvM to make a diligent fear-ch, they were diffolvM^ after they had continued long enough to make fevcre laws againft the Diflenters, and to fee caufe to repent of what they had done. The next year another Parliament was caird, which beginning where the former left oft^ was foon diffolvM alfo. The year after another Parliament was callM. mdcljcxx; The Papifts now had recourfe to their old pra- (Sices. The Popilh Lords, imprifonM in the Tower for U 4 the 248 u^ V I N D I c A T I o N of Part L the plot, ■' contriv'd.a {ham Presbyterian- Plot, the better to fmother their real one. It is not eafy to exprefs how gree- dily the Englijh Clergy catch'd at that opportunity qf venting their malice. a gaiuft not only the poor Dillenters, but all Presbyterians abroad. Of this I could give many inflances from the fafhionable fermons, which. appeared in print upon that oocalion. But 1 fliall only mention on^ Preacher, whom' die Parliament has made famous by ta- king notice of him, and impeaching him, 1 his was Mr. Ricbard.TJjomffon, a Minifter in Briftoly who in a Sermon on the 30 of January 1679, told his auditory in the pulpit: "^^ That the Presbyterians were *' fuch peribns as the v:ery Devil blulh'd at them : that *^ they v^ere worfey and far more intolerable than the *^ Priefts or Jefuits .-that a Presbyterian Brother, qua talis ^ ^^i'as/fuch^ was as great a traitor by the ftatute, as any -^' Priell orjefuit whatfoever : that the Presbyterians did ^^ outvy Mariana., ^nd that Calvin . was the iirlt that ^^ preached the kingtkilling doctrine : that ther^ was a /^ great noife of a Popifh Plot j but there was nothing in ^"^ it but a Presbyterian Plot. '" The Popifh Plot, which was mofl: certain and unquelHonable ; was decryM by this man as fabulous; while the (ham of a Presbyterian Plot defcrv'd with him the utmoll: credit. But no wonder the Papifts found fo much favour at his hands, coniidering what; he elfewhere declar'd : " That he had been very ^^ often (and above one hundred times) at Mafs, in the **^ great Church at Paris, and ufuallygaye half a crown *^ to get a place to hear a certain Do(5tor of that Church, *^ and. that he was like to be brought over to that reli- **^ gion ;'^nd that when he went beyond fea, he did not ^^ know but that he might be of that religion before his " return • that if he were as well fatisfyM of other *' things, as he was of Juftification, auricular Con feflion, *^ Penance, extream Undion, and Chrifm in Baptifm, '' he would not have been lb long feparated from the Ca- " tholic Church. He ajfinnd: The Church of Rome ^^ was the true Catholic Church, and greatly commended *^ the decency of folemnizing the Mafs in France, and 5^ laid that it was perform^'d with much more reverence *^ and devotion than any other religion doth ufe. He fetid: "That after Excommunication by the Bifliop, \yith- *' out Abfolution from thefpiritual Court, fuch a one was ^^ furely, d^amn'd, and he would pawn his foul for the " trutti Part I. the D IS SEN T E k s. 149 ^' truth of it. '^ And fpeakini^ concerning the Dlfifentc^rs, he declared : " He would hall rhem out, and fill the goals ^' with tliem, and hoped to feerheir houfes a hre abt.ut f^ their ears fiiortly '\ Upon this, and fome other things ^vitnelled againk him, it was relblved, i.emine cirara- dicente : ^' ' I h:\t Richard 7hc?npJvriCierkj hath publicly f^ defam'd his lacred Majefly, and preach 'd fedition, viii- ^* fy'd the Reformation, promoted Popery, by afferting " Popiih principles, decrying the Popifh 1 lot, and turning " the fame upon the Protellants ; and endeavoured to ^^ fubvert the liberty and property of the fubjec!:!, and the " rights and privileges of Parliament ; and that he is a " fcandal, and a reproach to his fun(!:tion. '^ ^^ And that the faid Richard Thonipfon be impeach'd " upon the faid report, andrefolution of the Houfe, t^c.'^ And unlefs fome certain perfons were infected with this man's principles, they would not delate fo much upon the Rye RoujePloty when they fo flightiy pafs over the Popifh Plot. Thompfon for this was made Dean of BviftoL 1 may fay the lefs concerning tht Bill of Exclujiony becaufe our Author has in the main given no ill account of it. He owns the Diflenters were for the Bill, and the greatefl part of their Omrch againfi it ; ^' but fays, there were g^reat numbers of the Churchy who had a par- ticular z>ealjhr the liberty of the people^ who were for it. This is all very true. Only I would here remark, that thoie great numbers of their Churchy he fpeaks of, were among the Laity ; there being very few of the Clergy who had the courage, or honefty, to fhew themfelves favourers of it. And thofe of their Church, w^ho were for it, fell under as much reproach and hatred among the reft : as the Diflenters themfelves; which alfo continues to this day. He ftiould have added too : That as the Bill was loft in the Houfe of Lords, fo the Bifhops w^ere then fome of the chief fticklers againft it ; being very near, if not quite, to a man againft it. So that we owe the lofs of that Bill, as we do a great deal more, to the Church. . The ftrength of the Church's plea againft the Bill, is pot amifs reprefented by Dr. Nichols, I wi fn he had ex- posM the weaknefs of it alfo. He fays, They had thefe cbjeElions againfi that dejlgn : That this deftgn was only an 2^o J YmvicATion of Part L an intYoduBion tofome other ^ which durft not yet be ovjjfd: There has been fomcwhat very unaccountable in the con- dud of thefe men all along. The dclign of introducing Po7.ery was plain all through that reign; and they them- felves now own it, and complain of themfelves for coming too late to the knowledge of it ; and our juft fears of it, and endeavours to oppofe il, were charged upon us as proceeding from unreafonable fufpicions and malicious de- figns. On the other hand, however angry they were with us for our fufpicions, they made no difficulty of infinu- ating thro^ the nation the moft whimfical and filly fufpi- cions of the defigns of all thofe who opposM them. And that nonfenfical cant of republican principles, was a fort of term of arty to difgrace any party or defign \ and fo it has continued ever lince, and more efpecially of late. Not that they who ufe it, much believe there is any foun- dation for the infinuation ; but it ferves their purpofe to blacken their enemies, Now thefe fufpicions have been confuted by the whole condu6i of the perfons fufpected. The Presbyterians, who are chiefly flruck at, were dif- pleas'd with the commonwealth, when it was fet up; were the men who overturned it by bringing in the King ; and never made the leaft attempt toward the fetting up a commonwealth ever fmce. And yet thefe Chimera's muft be made reafons for the Churches oppofing the moft noble defigns. For this is what he means thefe things were an introduftion to, as appears by what follows : and that men of republican principles began with dijinheriting one per- fon of the Royal Family y to make way for the extirpation cfthe whole: Were then the Honourable Houfe of Com- mons turn 'd r^/^Mr^;^ ? If a few Diffenters in the Houfe were chargeable with fuch principles; had the Churchmen, who were fuch a great number therein^embrac'd the fame? Befides, as there was nothing of fuch a defign appear^ in the Bill, ^twas time enough to oppofe it, as foon as it Ihould difcover it felf. The Bill neither removed the King, jior the Houfe of Lords, who would, if the Bill had be- come an Adt, be ready at hand to crufti any fuch attempts. But the Bill it felf defign'd to fecure the monarchy, as appears by the words of it: " In cafe the {2iid James ^^ Duke of Tork fhould furvive his now Majefty, and the ^' heirs of his Majefty's body; the faid imperial crown ^^ fliall defcend to, and be enjoy'd by fuch perf )n or per- * fons fucceffarily; dpring the life of the faid JamesJ^xx^^ " of Part !• /Zf^ D I s s E N T E R s. 251 '* of Yorkj as fliould have inherited and enjoy'd the fame, *^ in cafe the faid James Duke of York were naturally ^^ dead, and thing contained in this Adt to the contrary *' notwithiianding.'^ that there \ie,e nuwy of tlje Jame ferjons uhv uotild depri've the Son of his fuccejfioK, vjho had deprived the Father if his life. This was doubtlefs a falfe fuggeflion. tor I don't believe there was fo much as one fmgle perfun then in the Houfe of Commons, who had any hand in King Charles's death. 'That if this laucJ/JCiJd he fajs'a b) the King and Parliament^ the Duke of York would not Jiick to vindicate his right of fuccejjtcn by tht /word : that they haviiig lately experienced the mijeries of a civil wary they were not fo overfond of it again ; nor could they eajily ftjfer their wmindsy which were hardly healed^ to be torn up afrejh. Was not this, think we, a wife rea- fon ? Was there not more danger of a civil war in driving him out, then there was in preventing his coming in ? It was a wife anfwer an honourable Member of the Houfe made to this objeddon, when the Bill was debated in the Houfe : There is a lion in the Lobby ; keep him out, fay 1 Noy fay fcmey open the door, we will chain himy when he is come in. And no one need be told, what the lofs of that Bill has coft the nation fince that time. And our Ad- verfaries we fee could eafily alter their principles, and fet afidea great many perfons, who were nearer to the crown ; or we fhould never have enjoyM the prefent ineftimabk blefling of a Proteftant fucceffion : which (tho' we dont grudge the coft) we might have had upon much eafier terms ; had it not been for that meannefs and bafenefs with which they made their court to a Popifh King, and a Popifh fuccefTor. This Houfe had likewife brought in a Bill for a Compre- henfiony and another for an Indulgence \ which were both read twice : but the King firft prorogued, and then dif- ^ folv'd the Parliament. However before they role, they came to this refolution : " That ^tis the opinion of this " Houfe, that the profecution of Proteftant DifTenters ^* upon the penal laws, is at this time grievous to the ** fubjeft, a weakening the Proteftant intereft, an en- ** ccuragement to Popery, and dangerous to the peace of " the kingdom. "" And yet the Churchmen went on moft grievouOy to perfecute ns, notwithftanding the Houfe of Commons had exprefs'd their fence of the great danger the Reformation was in, and how much it was heightened by fuch ptrfecuting methods. And S52' ^ V I N D I c A T I o N (?/ Part L • And as tho' the DifTenters had not mifery enough upon them from the penal laws, they were infulted as ie- ditious and fchifmatical people by their Advcrlaries, in the Pamphlets they publKh'd againft them. Among the reft, Dr. Stilliyigfleet counted it a glory to infult the op- prelFed ; preaching a bitter Sermon againlt them before the Lord Mayor, which he after^^'ards printed. Nor can it fecm ftrange, that the heiy zealots fliould then fhew their rage, when not only the King commanded the laws to be put in execution ; but fuch learned men, as had before behav'd chemlelves with much modera- tion and temper, began to iniiame mens paifions againii us. The perfecution therefore lay very heavy MDCLXXXil. upon the Diilenters for feveral years after- wards. And many Minilters were imprifon^d, and their goods feiz'd and fold ; and this without their having the leaft notice of any accufation, or receiving any fummons to appear and anfwer for themfelves, or their ever feeing the JuRices or their accufers. I forbear to mention the rudenefs ufed toward w^oman upon fuch occalions, and how they purpofely frighted children^ tho I Ihall not eafily forget, how I was my felf, being very young and in a Miniiter^s houfe, when it Vv^as broke open, put in great fear of my life by them ; which together with what I then faw, begat in me fuch an averlion to their cruel and perfecuting practices, as I hope will never wear oft Warrants were fign'd for diftreffes in one parifh, that of Hackney^ to the value of 1400/. '^ What fpoil then did they make, may we think, in the reft of the nation -> Mr. Nathanael Vincent^ a moft pious Minifler, and an excellent Preacher, was this year tried at the Quarter Sef- *fions in Surrey ; and by the help of a pack'd Jury was,, for no other Crime than preaching the Gofpel, caft, and condemned to be banifh'd. But after he had procured at a vaft charge, a hearing of his caufe before other Judges, and had lain long in prifon, he was released by the King, at the Interceflicn of fome Noble perfons about him. This year the perfecution did not abate ; ilDCxxxiii. and warrants were out againft many, and fe- veral • /.>/■! 40 CO I. #/, ity mfjlakst was faid in tht frfi Edititn, Part L the DissE^TEKS. 25 j veral Miniflcrs were diflrein'd upon. Perfons taken at Meetings were convided as rioters, and fin'd 10 /. a piece; and lome young perfons (of both iexes) being taken ai them, were fent to Biidev^ly to beat hemp among rogues and whores. This year was that Rye Hotife Ploty in relating which our Author is very particular. '^ An abominable forgery (if taken according to his account of it) which now gains credit with none, but thofe who are miferably enllav'd by the fpirit of a party. The writer of theHiftory of that Plot, from M^hom our Author alfo has received what he fays of it, was Dr. Thomas Spraty Bifhop o( Roche/iery a Man who had an excellent pen, and which he could ufe for any purpofes. He is much more famous for a noble Panegyric upon Oliver CrormvelJ, than for his Hiflory of t\\\sPlvt. And indeed he himfelffeemM not very well pleas'd with what he had done, when afterwards he wrote his Apology^ which he might have entituled his RetraBa-^ tion. Remarkable are thofe words which he ufes in his own defence. Speaking of my Lord Rujfely and fome others, whom he calls perfons of honour, he fays : " I '^ could not hinder, nor did I in the leaft contribute to '' their fall : nay, I lamented it ; efpecially my Lord '^ RuJJel's after I was fully convinced by difcourfe with ^^ the reverend Dean of Canterbury ^ of that noble Gen- ^' tleman's great probity and conftant abhorrence of fal- '' (hood.f But if the confpiracy had been fuch as he relates, my Lord RvJJel and all his fellow confpirators had deferv'd, not only to be hated and abhorr'd of all good men, but to fufter the levere punifliment which was inflicted upon them ; nor would the Bifhop have needed to fay any thing to defend or excufe himfelf for what he had written. Further, the fame Bifhop confeffes : " That King James '^ the Second called for his papers, and after he had read ^^ them, altered divers palfages before the Book was '' printed. '' II What afTurance then can we have of any matter from fuch an Hiftory ? It feems indeed probable enough, in my opinion, chat thole excellent perfons entered into much fuch * ^^l- s>4' t f . 5. Of ibe Biiliofi of KocheJltr*i Letter to the E. of Dirfet. 254 -^ Vindication of Part I. fuch a confultation, as the BIfhops and beft men of the nation did in K. James the Second's reign; who when they faw our civil and religious liberties were defignM to be deftroy'd, contrived what they fhould do to fave both* The former therefore ought not to be condemned, if the ether are juftify'd and applauded. But I am forry to ob- ferve that thnfe, who feem ambitious upon fome occafions of being thought men of temper and moderation, fnould, when they come to treat of this, write in the ftile and fyirit of the High Church. He fays : T^he EarlofEfftKy being accused of the confpiracyy is /up- fos^d hyfome to have laid violent hands upon himfelfy out of confcioufnefs of that crime. '^ By fome : by whom, I pray ? By the Papiils ; may it perhaps be faid. But they under- Itand their own defigns or praftices better, than to fup- pofe any fuch thing, whatever they may pretend to the contrary. But \is fuppos'd by fome wife and prudent men, who are Proteflants. Who can believe that ? who can think any Proteftant, that has any fenfe and honour, can pretend to believe, the Earl of EJfex fliould be able him- ielf to cut thro' his wind-pipe, his gullet, both the jugu- lars, to the vertebres of the neck ; and then go to his chamber window, and fling out the bloody razor ? Thefe and a great many other abfurdities mult a man believe, if he will believe the Earl of EJfex murderM himfelf. ^Twas plain to any man that would make any obfervation, that the Earl of EJfex was murderM, in order to their com- Jjafling the murder of my Lord Rujfel. For the murder was fo contrived, as that the news of it might come juft as my Lord Rnffel was at the bar, and the Attorney Ge- neral and the Lord Chief Tuftice, made great ufe of this, as an evidence of my Lord s guilt. And the Lord Chief Juftice in fumming up the evidence to the Jury, told them : " That there was nothing could be faid, in favour '* of my Lord Rujfel's innocency, as to what he was ac- ^^ cus'd of; but what might be more ftrongly alledgM in ^^ behalf of the Earl of EJ/ex ; who neverthelefsfrom a ^^ confcioufnefs of being guilty of that defperate confpi- ^^ racy, had brought himfelf to an untimely end, to avoid " the methods of public juftice. '' This was fo managed by the King's Counfel, as to influence the Jury (as fome of ! ^^i' 9S. Part I. r/;^ D I s s E N T E R s. 2f^ of them confefs'd) more than all the evidence brought a^ainli him. In one word, there are none who give any heed to this (tory, but Papifts and High Church men^j the former that they may hide their own Wickednefs; the latter that they may have an advantage of reviling and abufing the Dillenters. Antony Earl of Shaftsbury, ivho ijoas /aid to have had the chiej direiiion in this contrivance^ fled beyond the feas^ and died in banijhnient. The Fapifls had feveral times confpir'd to take away his life, and he faw innocence was no fecurity to a perfon in England ; but the Court by the help of corrupt Judges and pack'd Juries carry^d every thing, right or wrong, juft as they pleas'd ; and therefore he muft be allow'd to have a6ted wifely in departing the kingdom, and fo pro- viding for his own fafety. How happy had it been, if my Lord Rujfel had taken the fame courfe 1 He, relying too much upon his own innocence, and the teftimony of a good confcience, refusM to make his efcape, when he had an opportunity,- and fo he fell a facrifice to the rage of his murderers, who might have referv'd himfelf for the fervice of his country. Far be it from us, that ive/houldaccufe all the Noncon-* formifts for having a hand inthis confpiracy, few ofiuhich, J>erhapSy before the public detection thereof ^ did ever hear of it. The Nonconformifts are wonderfully obligM to them for this civility ; and fo are the afhes of the dead, that they, life them with fo much tendernefs and moderation ; and that they fhew themfelves fatisfy'd with making them confpiratorSj without making them egregious fools at the fame time. But if we may now fpeak the truth freely, the romantic account here fet down of this Plot, was never heard of by any mortal, before the Courtiers de- visM it out of their own brains. But that Dr. Owen, Mr. Mead, Mr, Griffith, Non- ccnformi/l Minijiers 'u:ere made acquainted therewith, the Duke of Monm.outh, and Mr. Carfiairs, unexceptionable witneffes in this cafe, do attefi. If the Reverend Mr. Carfiairs had confefs'd any heinous matter as done by them, furely there would be more rea- fon to attribute his confeflion to his weaknefs, than to reproach the Nonconformifts with it. Was not that con- feflion extorted from him w^ith the mcft barbarous and illegal 256 Ay INDICATION of Part I illegal cruelty ; which our Adverfariesy if they aSed pru- dently, (hould never. mention, that it might ifpolfiblebe forgotten? I hardly think, the Papifts and High Church (who aded then, as they have lately, like dear friends) gave a more flagrant proof of their injuftice and inhu- manity in any man, whom they did not outright murder, than they did in that excellent perfon. He washrfl taken up in England^ and kept clofe prifoner for feveral weeijs in the Gutehouje: Then he apply'd to the Court oi Kings Benchj that he might be brought to a trial, or admitted @ to bail, according to law. But they would not bring him to his trial here, becaufe they were fenfible they had not fufticient witnelfes againfl him ; and io they immediately fent him to Scotland^ to be try'd there for crimes com- mitted in that kingdom, where he had not been for feve- ral years. The true reafon w^as, they could not in Eng- land put him to the torture ; and they hopM by that in Scotland., they might force him to make as ample a con- felTion as they defirM. When he w^as before the Privy Council in Scotland^ he defir'd to know if his Majefty s Advocate, or Attorney General, had any crime toaccufe him of, that was committed in Scotland. The Advocate plainly faid he had none. Hereupon Mr. Carfiaivs pleaded his Majefty's warrant, by which he was fent to Scotlandy that did exprelly hear. That he was to be try'd for crimes committed there : but that was not regarded, and he w^as plainly told, he mufl either anfwer upon t)ath fuch queftions as fliould be propounded to him, or futier one torment after another^ while he had life in hiiru And when he begged, that feeing he was not accus'd of any crimes committed in Scotland, he might meet with no greater feverity in his own country, than the laws of the j land, w^here it was faid he had committed crimes, did ./ allow of j he had no other anfwer, but that he muft rer folve upon continued torture, if he did not what is above mentioned. Accordingly he was put to the torture, which he pa- tiently bore for near an hour and a half, having both his thumbs atoncebruifed betwixt two irons, by a new model of that engine of torture, which was call'd T/ju?nmikins; which tho' it did not go fo far, as to drive the marrow out of the bones, yet was next door to it. This torture made both his arms fwell greatly, and made him feaveriQi; he beggM therefore he might have refpite for a day or two J Part I. //;^ D I s s E N T E R s. 257 two ; but his requefl was dcny'd: fo the next day he was brought out of the prifon, to futier a new torture, which he was refolv'd thro" God's aliiltance to undergo, if they had not ofter'd him better conditions than they did before. Thefe conditions he accepted, and fo they took his confeflion, which they printed in a very defective manner. Nay, he declar'd to thofe who were then in the government of Scotland^ he ihould be much injured by the printing thofe depofitic^ns, becaufe they Wwrc lame • and defedive; feeing neither the queilions which were askt him, nor the true and jud extenuations he gave of the atiair in general were fet down, but only the bare an- fwers to quelHons. For they knew he had declar^'d thac all the bulinefs, which made fuch a noife, amounted to no more than difcourfes what might be ht to be done for preferving their religion and liberties, without any defign againll: the perfon of the King or the mcnarchy. He then alfo vindicated himfelf and others, from the afperiion of being concerned in the contrivance of any ailadinating defigns, which he abhorM: and they who examined him faid, they did not believe he was guilty of them. Further they did not perform the conditions they grant- ed him. Whence he had the juftice done him by the Par- liament, in the beginning of K. Williams reign, to have it declar'd and regiftred in the public records : T*hat the public faith had been broke to him. Which a Ferfon of Quality, who was an Officer of State when he was tor- tured, own'd in a paper fubfcrib^'d, and given in by him to the Parliament^ that it might be put amongft their records. Now fuppofing he had confefsM any wicked defigns, being overcome by the barbarous ufage he met with, what: wife man Vvould much regard it? But he confefs'd nothing concerning thofe Minifters, of which an honeit man and a good fubjeft needed to be afliam'd. Let any man read his confeffion as "'tis publifhed, he fliall no where find him faying: That Dr. Oixen, Mr. Aleady and Mr. Griffith were acquainted with any abominable con/piracy oj aJJ.ij]:-- nating the King: with the depign, our Author tells us, which v:as to have him /hot with a bhinde-^hiis^ as his coach TJas topafs by Rie-Houfe in the New Market road: or with the other defigns, which follow : The Dnhe of Yoih was iikewife to be kill d; Md' his Daughter, the Princefs Anne, zvas to be married tofome m^an peyjon^ that her child- e a X might 258 J Vindication of Part T. ?wght thereby have the lefs pretence to the throne : the Keeper of the Great Sealy and feveral of the "Judges uere to be huiJgeJy and their skins fluffed ot.t^ to be Jet up pub- licly befae the Courts oj Judicature in Weiiininlier Hall, &c. 'I hinp.5 quite contrary to thefe were atrefted by him. And a friend of mine, who was very intimate with Mr. Meady allures me, he has often heard him profefs there was no llich deiign. TJiey confulted, as Mr. Cu)jhiiYs own'd, how they might prcfcrve their religion and liberties. And that we are fo far from being afliam'd of, that with our Ad\^crfiries good leave we triumph and glory in it, that we were among the rirll: and forwardelt of thofe, who laid the danger of cur dear country to heart, and contrived for the prefervation of it. Let the action be fairly reported, and we will thank them for doing us the honour to own the Ihare we had in it. And we let our Adverfaries know, we defpife the cenfure of thofe, who have the confcience 10 reproach us with the fame thing, they afterwards in King James the Second's reign pra6tis'd themfelves. And if thofe Nonconformiil: Miniflers were really guilty of fuch a vile confpiracy, as that defcrib'd by our Author ; how came King Charles himfelf to difcharge Mr. Meady when he appear^'d before him in Council ? This worthy man was my Guardian, and therefore I think my felf bound to pay fo much refped to his me- mory, as to take this occafion of acquainting my reader, if he do's not know it already ; that he was a Gendeman, and a Scholar, and a molt excellent Preacher; and that his reputation w^^s too well efiabliflfd among thofe who knew him, to be lefTcn'd by fuch reproaches as are here call; upon him. Further that Hiftory of the Hot, which our Author cites, contains lome notorious falfehoods, which Mr. Ca"J}airs (d.ys he knew to be fuch. What I have here related concerning Mr. Carfiairs^ I have taken from a very civil Letter I received from that excellent per- fon; in whole death the Clmrch, and Univerlity oiEdin-^ bur^h have lately fulbin'd an unfpeakable lofs. Dr. Nichols proceeds next to give an account of the publlihing the Lcndon Cajes.* Thefe were printed by the Divines of their communion, at a time when the Tro- tellant ! ^'i ^6^ PartL the Dissenters. 2^^ teflanr rclij^ion was in the utmcft danj^er; fo that an Anfwer might then have fecm'd as iinlcalbnable, as the Cafes themfelves. 'I hefe champions of the Church had an art too^ to fecure themfelves from being attacked by their adverfaries, and wrote when onr fide could not an- fvver with either conveniency or fifety. Their perfecuted condition deprived them of leifure for writing; and if they wrote, they brought upon themfelves frefh troubles and perfecurions. • Thus Mr. De Laime^ a learned Anabaptift, loft his life, by writing againft one of the Cafes publi^ Prel^Je^ ^^ in Queen Mcvn's time. '" ^ , ' ' ' '/^''/ ^ But iince he was a Papift, I flial{ add another wltnefs, Bifliop Mor^mi, whofe words the fame author fets down thus: ^^ 1 ought not to eftcem any thing a juft caufe of '' filencing my lelf from preaching, for which I ought not " as willingly to venture my life. The Nonconformifts ^' have furtcr'd what is next to death, and too many have *^ fufier'd even unto death in prifons, wherefeveral caught ^^ their deaths, and others died. Of whom Ihall their *^ deaths be required .^"^f ^Tis no hard matter to give an nnfwej; to the Bifhop's queftion : lince whofe time a great addition has been made to the number of the Noncpn(prr miH, either Confeffors, or Martyrs. .^ V ' ' 'r , Now this having been the manner of our Adverfaries in confuting and anfwering thofe who oppofe them ; "'tis no great wonder thofe Cafes, being pubiifliM at firft iu fo firait and difficult a time, Ihould have fewer animadver- fions made upon them. Our Adverfaries boall of them as unanfv^^erable, and think they can never fay enough ifi the praife of them. And yet fome of the chief of them have been anfv.Tr'^d, and perhaps more may be. And in- deed a gue fs may be made at the Cafes by this Defence of Dr. Nichohy who has tranflated the flower of them into his Book. If I may be allow^'d to fpeak my judg- ment : The authors of thofe Cafes many times unfairly reprefent the ftate of our controverfy ; and when they d6 net, they commonly difcover much mpre of an affuming, dogmatical way of writing^ than of any great fli;ength^Sf argument. ,^ About this time a great number of French Proteflant^, being forely perfecuted at home, came over into Engl aM; whofe neceffitous circumftances call'd for the companion and affiftance of their Brethren. Our Adverfaries then gave a notable proof of their friendfhip and afleftion ^p Foreign Proteflants. For when they had collected a large fum of money, of our people, as well as their own, whicji was to be given to our poor banifli'd Brethren in general^ they woujci not fufier any one of thofe poor exiles to rfy- ^ ' , ^^' ' '^^' ceive f Eletithcria. p. 6j, f p, 75. part I. the D I s s E N T E R s^ 261 ^^•ji^re^i^Ya^fliing of thofe contributions, except he firft rcceK^^d the Sacrament accordinf^ to the manner of the Church of England^ in the F,ench Church in the Savoy; and brought a certificate, under the Miniller of that Church's hand, that he had dune fo. '1 han which they could not well give a fuller proof of their perfidious and barbarous, cruel and unchrifUan temper. Several of the Articles exhibited againft Mr. CV/; tvoright were for his va- Aiing from the ways of the Church oi Ei7gland^ w^hen he was out of the realm, at Antwerfy and Middkburg, Par- ticularly the 8th Article ran thus : " henty that he, the ^* faid ThoDias Carnvrighty in the public admlniftration of " his Miniftry there [in thofe foreii^^n parts] among her ^* Majefly's fubjeds, ufed not the form of Liturgy, nor ^^ Book of Common Prayer, by the laws of this land **"'eftablifhM ,• nor in his government eccleiiaflical, the ^^ laws and orders of this land; but rather conform^ him- ** felf in both to the ufe and form of fome other Foreign. ^^ Churches. "" "^ Now if this w^is fuch a fin in an Eng- liJJ) man to vary from the ufagcs of the Church of Eng-- landy I would fain know, why it muft be counted a virtue in a French man to vary from, the ufages of the French Churches ? or how they can think both thefe kinds of proceedings can be juftify'd ? In the reign of King James 11, our Author mdclxxxv. begins with the Rebellion of the Duke of Monmouth. In the heginningy fays he, of this reigny James Duke of Monmouth, taking to himfelf the Royal TitUy rats'" i an army againjl King James. His head quarters were at Taunton, a tozi'n in the weft of England, whither foU diers flock in unto him out of all the different Seels of the Nonconprmiftsy more of which had in all p'obdhility joind himy if he hadfucceeded in his enterprise, f Many of the Nonconformifts thought King Charles was marryM to the Duke^s mother ; and fo were perfua- ded the Duke v/as the true heir of the crown ; and that King Charles difown'd his marriage, that he might do the Papifts a pleafure by fetting him afide. They may there- fore be the rather excus"'d, that being thus miflaken about his right, they embraced that opportunity of fhaking ojfi' the tyrannical yoke, and recovering their juft liberties, after X 3 thay * Fulkfi Church Hiftory, Bcok^ 9. p, is8« t p- 97. a62. 1^ V I N D I c A T I G iq- (?f Part L they had been miferaWy opprefs^d and perfecut-edfor above twenty years. Or if that nnliak^ of our fide is not to be forgiven ; we only dellrc, they may tall under the fame cenfurc, who, befc^re they had felt the thuufandth part of our hardfhips, had recouile to the Prince of Orange^ crying out earncllly for his afllflance, and mutually pro- mifing him their own. But let us hear how tinely he ftrokes his own party after this cenfure pad upon ours : But our men JIuck by their Prince ixiith a great degree aj 'fidelity, ^Twas no wonderful degree of fidelity^ that they fhouldy?/6^ by a Prime v^hoy as he afterwards lays, hitherto had net defe, 'v'd any thing amifs at their hands ; and who they were perfuaded would always favour them. They had fliewn a great degree of fidelity indeed, if they h?A fluck by him^ wlien he turned againft them, and began to oppofe their intereit. Lut the obligation was not great, that they did not forfake his intereli lirft, and that they exerted themfelves in his caufe, when they might be thought to do it as much in oppcfiticTi to thofe who had been the objecis of their hatred and malice, as out of love to their Prince. But our Author goes on telling us : They had rather undergo the uncertainties of a Popijh go- lermnentyjhan to fuffer the Ehg/ijh croivn toheftaind by the fuccejjlcn cf an impure blood. I m.ake no doubt they were in great danger under a Popifli government, as after- ward plainly appearM. But at that time they w^ould not be perfuaded, they WTre in any danger ; but extolPd the King in the mcft extravagant manner, commending him continually under the title oi ^ames fheyuft; and, which was ftrange, they flattered themfelves he would make their Church more glorious than ever; and while they had fiach appreheniions, they deferv'd but little thanks for their being ftift on his fide. Neither did they think they cculd handfomly defert their natural Prince^ who hitherto had not defe.'V'd any thing amifs at their hands, Tho' they might think thus of him, yet I am perfuaded w^hoever will impartially conlider the accounts, which were publifliM of the Hre of London^ and the Popifn Plot, will not care to allow the truth of what our Author here fays. But he had not as yet done any thing particularly againft the Church of England to deferve ill at their hands ; and io long as he perfecuted none but the Diilcnters^ he could not be handfomly deferted. ' Befides Part I. /*t' D I S S E N T E R s. ^63 Befidt's thU^ the) ucre in good hopes that Ki*^g James icould jor thejuture admimjiei the gtveiyment by thL^Jame good methodsy whkh he had hitherto gruen a Jpecimen of : v/x.. That he would protecc the Church, and give them a full power of vexing and perlecuting the Dillcntcrs. Ve.y charitably prejumiiigy that the natural gene,ofity of this Prince might o^'ercoine the cruelty vchich his religion might put kim tipon. They would do a piece of fervice to the memory of that Prince, who would acquaint the world with any aas of his generolity. The Diflenters efpeci- ally know little of them hitherto ; his Indulgence being granted with a deiign to ferve his own caufe, and not to favour them. But, if I millake net the meaning of this pallage, they charitably prefum^d he Vv'ould go on to favour them, and to opprels us, and therefore they v;ere fo zea- lous in his caufe. Our Author difcourfes very well concerning the inhu- man cruelty praCds'd againil: the followers of the Duke of Mo'nmouth. But fince he is pleas'd in another place to twit us Vv^ith Sir MAlliam JVilliarn's being formerly cur Jriendy and afterguards accufmg the Bifiops^ "*' for which we are no ways anfwerable, as I fnall (hew; I cannot but here defire the reader to obferve, how he palh'ates a much more material objection of that nature againit his own caufe. Andfi'fl it nas thought uery advantageom to this end fcf promoting the interefi of the Papiits] to execute the laves ^cith all pcjpble feuerity again ft all vcho had engaged in the Duke of Monn\out\\ s infurrec'iion [and indeed many were then executed who had not been at all concerned in it.] and this vcithout any regard either of age or Jex\ Andy as the fitteft perfon for this purpofey Sir George Jeiieries is picked outy a great zeakt (ai he p, etended) jbr the corf it u- tion of the Church 0/* England 5* a Man of an uncommon confidence and fierce temper y the cruelty of rchofe nature^ would do the Papifts confiderable fervicey in thrcwing all the odium of the defigi2^d feverity from themfehes upon m. \ I foould be as well pleas'd as our Adveriaries can b:*, if they could throw the odium of that and many c the: feverities from themfelves upon the Fapids : but the/ feaily cannot. For not only Sir George Jefferiesy but Oe- X 4 rera! !/? u*? t ^ lOA- 2^4 A V I N D ix: A T'l o A; of Part I. neral A'/Vis and al>undancc more of the canibals of the time^ hv'd and died in the communion of the Church of EngUfiiU without any ecclelialtical cenfure pafsM upon them. And the Church of EvgLmd made great ufe of Sir GeOfgts a(i (lance in accompfilliing their deiigns; fuch as the condemnation of Mr. Rcjeuely the fining and im- priloning Mr. ii^^x/fr, and many other of the hke nature, which are lo black one would be glad to forget therru And the Dilfenters^futterd molt grievoully, not only by the means of Jefferies and Kirk^ but of innumerable others,' mcml>ers of the Church of Englandy to the End of the year 16^6, ..J^fuy,Nii;k'fh^ jwith very good reafon, condemns the c|{>inion of r4»he. eleven Judges of his own communion. '^ But if iiQ hsd compar^'d it with the famous Oxford £>t'j/i:-t',. he would have perceived, that perfons of con- fiderabl^ note,; both in the Univerfity and among the Clergy, had laid the jvuyidation of fo batejul a tyranny in thfta"f?i£l>;.<>f King Charles II. •j£');3 3fit qiT isTiie King ifiued out at length his Decla- MpctspdcVir. rmkn for liberty of confcience, bearing date^ j./,^ - j^pril the 11. Dr. Nichols fhews himfelf dif-. pleas'd with us, for making ufe of a liberty fo granted, Butiince 1 have before had occafion to anfwer the fame objeaion, I (rail pafs it over here; referring my reader ta what i fay about it, under the year 1671. After this, l\if^^ '^a?r:es purfu'd his defigns more openly, and invaded the;.ngl>t^ and revenues of the Church of England; as iii^y be feen in the Dodjtor's account. What the defigu was of giving a relation of thefe things, may be perceived by.^what prefentiy follows it. xM^fi-crf iixe NoncoT^orinijis at thefwrne time iijerefo little aff^cled v^nh cur fad calamity^ that during all that ti?ney they h^ki afHi'f'X^^^ '^^ith our ferJecutorSy and ivere courfrtig their Jjz^oUt. '^hls is not fair. For the act of one or two is not jufdy to be charg'd upon a party in general. And I queiiion, wiiether above cme or two of our Minifters were then much about the Court. And as Papifls were then nume- rous there, it was not eafy for them to avoid all man- ner of correfpjpndence with them ; but that they courted the favour afXu^h (the King excepted) or that they were I intimate J/, ro-. 102, t/'. J 05. Tart L f/;^ D i s s e n t e r sJ 2<$5 intimate with the Papifts, as is faid in the Latin edition, is what 1 ntH'er could fee prov'd concerning thofe Minilters, whom 1 am vindicating. Mr. 1.gI^ had free acccls to King ^aniesy and endeavour'd to ufe what incereit he had for the advantage of the Dillenters : wherein he lecms to me to deferve much commendation, unlefs our Adveriaries can tax him upon good evidence with any thing done amifs. Further, 1 Ihall afterwards prove from Bifliop Btmiet^ that the Nonconformills were very much ajfe^ied^doith their fad calarnity. But for the prefent, let us put the cafe, that what our Author here allerts was true; and that the DiA fenters were but littky nay, not at all affected with their fad calamity. With what face can the Churchmen re- proach us for it ? '77;^ Churchinen^ I fay, who were moft intimate with Fapids, in the reign of Charles I. when Archbifhop Laud^ and the reft of his faction earneftjy courted the favour of a Popifh Queen : who fcandaloufly comply'd fo long with the humours and deiigns of two Popilh Kings, Charles and James II. who have all along not only held a fair correfpondence, but kept up the great- eft intimacy with Papifts in chufing Parliament Men, in devifing iham Plots to be thrown upon the Diftenters, and in framiing and executing the fevereft laws againft them z who, v/hen our Minifters for twenty years together, and more, were turnM out of their livings, their houfes, out of cities, market and burrough towns ; being accus'd by perjur'd informers, harrafs'd and plundered by unrighteous Juftices and Judges, and often kilPd w^ith their nafty goals; who, I fay, w^ere then fo little affeEled with cur fad cala-- mity^ that they not only held a fair correfpondence with our ferfecutorSy but were themfelves the men by whom we were perfecuted. Befides, I vx^ould gladly be informM of what fort thofe were, w^ho aded in King James's Eccle- fiaftical Commiffion ; w^hether they w^ere Churchmen, or Diflenters? w^ho were moft numerous in his court, when at worft. Churchmen or Diflenters? Nay, don^t we fee to this very day, that none more heartily join interefts than the Papifts and High Churchmen ? But behold ano- ther terrible accufation againft us ! ' Btit in thu great controver/ial war [with the Papifts] iwherein our Druines fought fo gallantly^ the Minifiers of the fever al Sctls cftheDiffenters were perfeBly Jilent. ^' ^66 1^ Vindication^/ Part L I would not attempt to IcfTen the glory of thofe excel- lent writers againft the Papifts ; efpecially feeini^ they were fo careful to ingrofs both the work and the glory of it. But they dont act fairly in blaminp; us, that we were then filent. They refused to accept the help we ofierM, tho' now they make fuch an outcry againit us for the want of it. Some of our lide then wrote, tho' they did not, ex- cept it were by Health, publifh what they wrote, againft the Papifls. 7 he Licencers of the Trefs being Churchmen, refused to allow the printing of any writings of the Non- conformiils, meerly for the fake of the authors, when they had nothing to objed againll: the pieces themfelvcs. And the repulfe of fome was a good reafon why all others fliould fave themfelves the labour of writing to no pur- pofe. So that if our Adverfaries will exercife their talent of cenfuring, they mufl level their cenfures at their own fide, and not ours. Nay if our Adverfaries had ufed no fuch artifice, to fecure to themfelves the intire glory of that triumph,* yet they could have little caufe to accufe the Nonconformills for their filence. For to whom was it really owing, if they were then lefs preparM for fuch an encounter ? They Vv^ere but juit delivered from the Church's natty goals, or crept out of the corners where they were before glad to hide themfelves: they were newly return 'd to their families and fludies, from which the malice and cruelty of their enemies had long banifli'd them. And when they had a little reft, yet they could not Vv^ell, in their circum- stances, be fupposM to come to the controverfy with fuch 'advantages, as the Churchmen^ by whom they had been ^^lunderM of their books, or forc'd to fell them either to prevent their being made a prey, or to raiie money to maintain their diurefled families. Farther, if our Miniilers in complaifance to the Court, neglected to alilfl them with their writings, how can they find fault with us upon that account? When our Mini- fters were groaning under the heavieft perfecution, the Churchmen could content themfelves to be lllent, while they gap'd afcer the favour of the Court, whoje arts they l?egir/2 to fjf/eU or/t. Or if a very few perfons were honeit and bold enough to complain of the feverities we indur'd, and to exhort the Church to peace, they brought upon themfelves the difpleafure of the Clergy ,- who were iure not to fpnre them for the fake of their agreemerU: with them Part L //;# P I S S E N T E R s. 267 them in other things, but wrote as bitterly againft them^ as they ufe to do af'ainlt us. But it fliould fcem, that our Adverlaries think 'cis very lawful for thcmleJves, tha' fiot for the Dilienters, to be wholly at the devotioa of the Court. Again, I would be glad to know, who were in nioft danger of being feducM by the Papifts ; our people, or theirs? How few have gone flreight from us to the Roma' fiijisj without taking the Church of ErigLwd in their Avay ! The Papifts always expect and reap a better harveft of profelytes from their people^ than from ours, who they are fenlible mortally hate their fuperftition. Upon this account therefore there was moft reafon for their writing in the Popilh controverfy. Laftly, fince many things, w^hich are matters of con- troverfy between us and the Church of England^ were retained by them with a defign of pleafing and winning the Papifts ; nothing can be more ferviceable to our caufe, than to have the Churchmen moft thoroughly verft in the Popilh controverfy. For the further they go from them, the nearer they come to us : fo that I would not have any envy them the honour, they fo craftily appro- priated to themfelves. After this the King endeavoured to get the Teft^ and penal laws taken away ; as our Author relates that mat-* ter, '^' and then, according to his ufual manner, falls upou the poor Dilienters. Being rno'v'd Vuith the unwcnhinefs of this compliance^ I cannot chufe but make a /top in the courje of this running Hiflory^ uhich Juffers me no where to Jiay^ and to ftand fttU a little while in admiration. Could any one be fo vile and mean fpirited, as not to [corn and defpife to be the tools of fuchfcandalcm m after s ? f Could any one be fo vile^ do^s he fay? Yes, a great many of his own dear friends, who acted under the direction of a Courts where all endeavours for accom7?wdation were held for janaticuL They were the men, who were fo vile and mean fptritedy a5 not to f corn and defpife to be the tools of fuch fcandalom majlers^ in making the penal laws againft us. They were the men^ who ftir'd up two Popiih Kings to perfecute us, and moft readily executed their com.mands. Such f p. 127. t f. loS, i6S '^ y I N D I c A T I o K ^ Part I. Such 'vile and meanfpirHed creatures were the Churchmen, not only upon the Judges bench j but upon that of the Biftiops too, where Hall, J4/attt)n, Parkei^ Sprat, Sec. be- came the tools of fuch fcandalom Majiers. But let U&' H&l him proceed in his declamation : r'j Could any cue be jo void of fenfe, a6 to fiiffer himfelf to ie impofed upon by fuch mete bed arts, and by fuch ceurfe fiattery / Could am one be fo proflrgately wicked, as when all our liberties and religion lay at ftake, not only to give no affftance to refcue them, but join their power in fur- thering the abominable dejign ? So void of fenfe, and Jo profiigately ivicked could the Churchmen be, who fell in with a Popifh defign, not of repealing a law, thought to be fcandaloully wicked in its own nature, as is the cafe here put by our Author ; but of giving up entirely the liberty of our country. The Epifcopal Clergy have been fo profligately wicked, as to allift the Papifts in fathering upon us their feigned plots, and bruiting them abroad among the people to make us odious : they have had a great hand in plundering their Proteflant neighbours, and lo have weakened the intereft cf the Reformation here in England. JVhy this aElion, however mad, however wicked, was done by great numbers of the Diffenters, who not only did not hin-- der this horrid contrivance of the Papifls, but encouraged it iy their inter e/iy their advice, and their praifes. If they had done fo, they had only follow'd the exam- ple the Churchmen had fet them long before; and they iiad then done nothing in which they had not many Churchmen joining with theip. But let Bifliop Burnet give an account how the Diflenters then behav'd them- fclves. He was as well acquainted as any man with the^ tranfactions of thofe times; and about the latter end of this reign pubiifhM, An Apolcgyfor the Church oj England; with relation to the fpirit oj perjecufun, for which jhe is ac-- cm^d. In which, after he had alledg'd many reafons to prove the Church of England could never return to her old pradice of perfecution, if ever fhe got out of that ilovm her felf ; he adds what fully confutes the Dodor's fuggeftion : " And indeed if any argument were wanting ^/' tO'Compleat the certainty of this point, the wife and " generous behaviour of the main body of the Diffenters, ^' in this prefent jundure, has given them fo juft a title " to our friendfhip ; that we muit refolve to fet all the ^^ worlcl Part 1. //y^ D I s s E N T E R s; 269 *' world againft us, if we can ever forget it, and if we do ^^ not make them all the returns of eale and favour, when *' 'tis in our power to do it. This teitimony is honourable ; but the Dodor wrote Ipmctimes as if he car'd not what he laid againlt us ; tho' the Tranllation in this pallage is not fo bad as t\\€ Ori- ginal. IVhik many of our Miniflers in the Univerjity andelfe^ ijjher€y for fianding up for the common liberty y vjere thrown out of their prefermerftSy and forcd to live at other mens tar Lies ; fever al of their Pafiors live in fplendor about the Courty pojjejfmg the ear of the Prince, and advijing brm /oQ-u: he might obtain the repeal of thofe lavjf, whereupon depended ail our hopes of prefer ving the Prote/iant religion among us. Mr. Lob, a Presbyterian [rather an Indepen- d^nt] Alini/lery and Mr, Penn, the chief of the Quakers^ ^ere fo great counfellors and javourites of the Kingy that thofe ijcho "(jjould requejl any favour of the crovjny or beg off' any penalty y 'would make ufe of their inter eji to obtain their d^fire.'^^ A very fmall and inconfiderable number of their Miniflers were then turnM out, I am fure it is fo, if com- pared with the number of our Miniflers turn'd out in 1^162. But fever al of our Paftors livdin fplendour about the Court. And if they did, our Adverfaries need not en- vy them y coniidering they had been then turn'd out of their livings above twenty years, and forc'^d to live mean enough all that time. But who were thefe Minifiers a- bout the Court ? Mr. Lcb is a lingle inflance : and when the Doctor adds Mr. Pen the Quaker, with whom we were no way concerned, it looks as if he could not iind any iBore of our Minifters about the Court. And out of their Bifhops, who are but few in number, I could name feveral who fell in v; ith the Court, while our Autlior can name but one of our Minifters, who are fo much more numerous. But if any man will confider what the beha- viour of the Churchmen ufes to be in hanging on the Court, he will fee our Author could have little realbn to blame our Minifters, if more of them had then join'd with Mr. Lib in attending upon it. And if Mr. Lob'^s teftimony may be taken, I have beard him declare, that the Churchmen made bafe otters enough to King ^ameSy > ,'.. M.wr.ro- .^^ when 2 Pa^. icp. C70 J Vindication of Part L when he firll began to pretend to favcur the Dif- fenters. But perhaps he was among thofe who advis'd the King, how he might obtain the repeal of the laws refer'd to by our Author. And "'tis indeed truer His opinion was^ that the Tefi AB ought to be repealed by the Parliament, and that it might be done at that time with fafety. Nor did he want plaullble reafons to fupport his opinion. The law itfelf leemM to him not only unjult, witli reference to many Diflenters; but to give occafion alfo to the. abo- minable profiination of one of the moR facred inftitutions iof our holy religion, while the vileft debauchees were ob- liged to take the Sacrament. Several were of Mr. Lc^'s opinion, that a law they apprehended fo oppollte both to jultice and piety ought to be repealed the firft opportunity; and that every one Ihould contribute what he could to^ ward the repealing it. Nay, altho'' the taking away tht *Teft might feem dangerous to politicians ; yet certainly, if the firft enading the law was a grevious oHence againft God, they could not be innocent, who negleded to abro- gate it, when it was in their power. For we are not to do euily that good may come of it. Further, tho'' Mr. Lob knew very well King "James's religion was the worft in the world ,• yet he thought he did not diffemble in the .profefTion he made of his defigns. And therefore as the King made large promifes of an equal fecurity for our reli- gion, in cafe the Teft w^re repealM ; Mr. Lob too eafily believ'd him, as experience has con vincM us. ButifMr.Lo^ was rather in a mriiake than in a fault; yet the main body of the Diflentcrs took other meafures, as I have already fhewn from Bifhop Burnet. But there is no end of our Adverfaries cavilling; and fo here follows another fad charge againft our Laity. • ■ Noiv the Lay Nvnccnformifls from alf parts of the nation fend up Addreffes to the King^ fignd imh their cicn handsy ftdl of the mofi fubmiffive flattery^ Szc ^Tis natural enough to all men to be coniplaifant and o- bligingtofuchasfliewkindnefstothem. Our Princes have had experience of this in the Church of £;;^/^7;74 who have complemented them with as jubmifpve a flattery ^ as ever the Diffenters did. They not only let the Diffenters an ex- ample, by their mean cringing to the two Popifh Brothers; but in the laic reign, after they had feverely reflected upon our lide, for what was done in King James % time ; they, in Part I. r/;e D 1 5 s E N T E R $• xji in defiance to all modcfty, renewM their old praftice in pre- lenting icandalous Addrelles, llutt'd with iulfom flattery, and promifcs of unrelerv'd obedience ; and that at a time wiien the nation Teems to have been in as much dan-* ger as ever. Indeed the Diflenters are eafy to be won upon by Kindnefs, as the Churchmen themfelves have reafon to acknowledge ; and would have had much more, if they could have ever found in their hearts to have adted friendly toward them, when they were not themfelves in any diftrefs. And what if fome of our Laity, who dwelt in villages, earning their living with daily hard labour, and having little skill in the laws of their country, when they found themfelves delivered from a cruel and tedious perlecuticn by their Prince, who, as they thought, delign'd them nothing but kindnefs herein; what if fuch men, I fay, in thefe circumftances were tranfported w^ith a liberty fo un- expededly granted, and were unwary and exceffive in ex- preffing their acknowledgments to their deliverer ; and, being deceiv'd by fome fpecious pretences, promised toa much fubjeAion? Is this fuch a crime as is never to be for-, given ? We are men, and fo not exempted from the com- mon infirmity of mankind, a liablenefs to miftake. Our Author owns his fide have fometimes, and I have prov'd they have often, been in the wrong. And they who ex- pert pardon from others, ought not to be backward in granting it themfelves. There was no great reafon why our Author, in giving an account of the trial of the Seven Bifhops, fhould twit the Diflenters with Sir Wtlliam WUliams being formerly tkeir great friend. He is faid to have been a Churchman, and if as a Lawyer, he w-as fometimes imployM by Dif- fenters, and for his own gain pleaded any of our caufes : are we anfwerable for his appearing in any ether caufes, and his ferving other kind of clients? If this is matter of re- proach to and befide the man himfelf, all impartial Judges will think ^tis much more fo to the Church, for receiving him as a member of her communion, than to us for re- taining him as a Counfel. After the Parliament had given the crown mdclxxxviiL to the Prince and Princefs of Orangey the Diflenting Minifters attended them, in a body w^ith their AddrefiTes. The Billiops in their Petition to King "^ame^s^ had ^72 J Vindication tf Part f. had declar'd thcmfclves ready to co?ne to a temper towards Diffenters :'^ and therefore the Miniflers now defir'd their Majeftics Vi. William and Q^Mar)\, in the Addreffes they prelented, to compofe our dirierences, and eftablifh a farm union among us^ and profefs'd their own readinefs to embrace juft terms of union. Their Majellies were pleas'd readily to undertake the defirable work ; and foon after Commiflioncrs were appointed, as our Author tells us, t " "lis true it did not fuccecd, '' fays Biihop Burnety " a formed refolution of confenting to no altera- " tions at all, in order to that union, made that the at- ^^ tempt was laid alide/MI Dr. Nichols makes fome very honefi and handfom refle- ftions upon the occafion of mentioning the Acl of 7o- leration. However he ieems to me not to come off very well in the conclufion of his difcourfc upon that head. Many, lays he, have thought this Toleration tco extenjive; hut it ivas juch as the then prejerit ftate of the comrnonvcealth uould bear. 'TiS indeed true, that the High Church bigots have thought it too extenjive; and therefore fet themfelves to cramp it in the late reign ; and in all probability, had not a merciful God cut fhort their defigns, they would have made it narrow enough in a little time ; for they v^ould probably have left nothing of it. But if things aref fairly confider'd, and men form their notions according to that exaft rule : TVhatfoever ye would that others jhould do to yoUy do je the fame to them; wemuft allow that Tole^ ration, even before it was curtailed in the lafc reign, was not extenfive enough. Nor can I fee any reafon, why an abfolute liberty in matters of religion (liould not be granted to all good lubjetis. Particularly, what good has been done by the Tolerations not being extended to the Socinians, as our Author takes notice it is not ? If they have been a fmall matter fe\^ er in number upon this ac- count, that advantage has been perhaps out weighed by a contrary mifchief. For while they have not been allowed to keep up fuch a religion as riiey approve, they have run into Deifrn, and a neglect and contempt of all public vvorfliip, and many other inconveniences. 'Tis ♦ p. HE. t Tag, 117. u Reflexions on a Bo:>k inticurj, 77;? K'^^f;, Sec ofs Part I. the Dissenter s. 27 j II: PK in . -.4 i::: .r tiu.; :. . . D) be . ,1 iioiu .1 V - . ru b^;^itii'cli our l^aiiiaintnt woukl uiice inuieia* x woiT: (!r'r(-.rv,nn'':! >: oui* dillercnLOs : I'.-v aic . ;-e Ha ' intlw Cierf' ,'^'. • good piece ui i. ; :§^ ( ailTioners before r.. 0-5 blii^c the wo: Id \v;iii an account of vvha;: u- n ; th^ To, it, might be read on both Udes. \\t kno\v:how,Eir they are willing to yie! . 1^^ to acquaint thein how well thofealteraLL.... v4^ After our Author has finlfli'd his accc i J7 cccdirigsof the Commiflioners^ which very v . .j^ reading; he runs out into a long difcourle^ xon: le , difputes which have been among themfelves in ^^w.^jZ'^' tion. Herein our controverfy with them, ib Jittje c^^tf-^ cernM ; unlefs, as many have thought, they were defi^n-r edly fet on foot and kept up by the High Church Clergy, far fear left they fliould feem to have Jeifure ot teiTiper' enough, to have the work of Pacification afre^i: recom: C mended to their confideraricn, and fo it fhouid at.len^tK' be accompli Qi'd. This is evident, that they, who- h^t^f^:! been moft backward to agree with us, have been forwarS , enough to raife a fquabble in their own Church ^bpo't'^trp^'^ fles; tho at the fame time they expos'd themfelves to^VHe'* fcorn and contempt of wife and prudent men. I therero'r^"^ pafs over thefe things ; and come to vvhat^our^4*utJhLt)j^^y^^^ Vvhen he has done with them, . r*' :':' ^'-'-'''*^^^^^ And novo let all the Chnftian vsorld be pidg^'^ r ^ - ••??t hcvi^e not to the utmrfi of our pozver endeavgu'i-^d .• t'^l^ du6tion. But feme things happening to his pmj^cf:::- aftep^^^^. he feems to have written fo far, he thought' ht to ^add'^'' them. By which one w^ould guefs he ibllov/M Ruracfs'^' advice, and this work was not lefs than nine years \t% pd^'*- lifhing. As to what he here fays, I may well afnrm concerning our fide, what -he 4^>^f:ctimes to ouY comrnunkn) to the great dijOimur (if the laws and the chief Magi jt racy of that city^ went pub- licly to n Cohventide^ which was held in a Hally belorigihg to <.ne of the mean mechanical Companies in that city, at- tended iv/th all the enjigns of that augaji corporation,^'^' 1 fliall have a moie proper occalion to treat of Occajicnal Co{j'or7nity afterv\ ards, and therefore wave it here, f I would now gladly learn, what law then in being this adrion oi Sir Hurnfey difhonoui'd. By our laws a Lord Mayor was as free to chufe his religion, as any of the in- ferior people. Nor was he forbid to attend cur worfhip with the eyifigns of his ofiice. And how was it to the dijhcnouY of the chief magifiracy of that city? If the laws permit the Lord Mayor to frequent our ademblies; why might he not carry thofe enfgns with him ? Would he not be a greater diflionour to our laws, if they allow'd him to appear himfelf in any place, where it would Le fcanda- lous for thofe badges of his honour to be leen ? But oti^ would think the Church looks upon thofe fine things as her property ; or fuppofes they have* been hallowed- by feme Bifhop, and fo were profan'd by being carry'd into any place of worfhip, not firlt confecrated by one of that order. But what fo great holinefs belongs to them, that they cannot without a profanation be carry'd into a reli- gious protellant affembly; hnce without any fcruple, they are continually carried about in mpre profane places; 1 mean in the common ftrects ? But he went publicly to a Comemicle thus attended. ''Tis not my bufmefs to render railing for railing ; but yet I would admonifh our Adver- faries to confider, that when with fuch difgraceful namics thev defam^e religious allemblies, which are contrary ro no laws^ they alfront the laws both of God and man : the jaws of God, in reviling aflemblies form'd according to the rule of God's Word, without the vain inventions of men; the laws of men, fince thofe aflemblies are allowM by a<^t of Parliament vrith a penalty upon the diliurbers of them. Part I. the Dissenters. 277 ihcm. Uut 'tis cx^jnmon u ith loinc incn, to endeavour to ajifutc tlieirad\ej lliries witi) reproaches, for lack of folid arguments. But fincc the CJliurclies of the primitive CJi: i- liians went by this difj'/aceful name amony, the la;.',ans, a5 Ayncbu!6 and Laclantim te/iify, we can patiently bear this reproach.-'^ Weil, but that Convemicle v:a5 held in a Hull btlongltig to cne of the menn mechanical Compayiies in that city. And why muil thole Companies be fpoken c;f with fo much contempt ? It do's not lock well for our Adveilaries to fliew a malignity ap^ainlt men, for Icttin^c^; us the places of our worlhip ; becaufe this looks aJ tho they are difpleasM we have any, and envy'd us our libertv. And is there not an inconliilency in this period ? How can he call the city an augtifi Cvrpi^ratim', if he looks upon the feveral focieties that ccniiitute it to be mean mechanical Companies? I am forry to oblerve, our Clerp.ymcn fre- quently appear 'lo little friends to the trading part of the nation, that they can hardly (peak of them without c( n- tempt. But as to the thing ir felf:, What if "the aiieinbly was held in fuch a place? What. law of God has ever for- bid men to W(;rriiip him in any places, where men ufe to meet upon the account of their trade or merchandize ? Where do's the Scripture teach us the unlawfuinefs of worfhiping God any where, but in places fet apart from a)l common ufes for divine worQiip ? And what greater barm is there in our worlhiping God in fuch places; than there was in the antienteft Chriftians meeting in the School of "ty,-annin^, f or any hcufes, or fields, which they found convenient? Or where have they any precept, that places of worfnip muft be confecrated by a Bifliop ? Or by what argument can they prove any greater holinefs be- longs to their places of worihip, than ours ? For tho I done reckon the controverfy much c( ncern^'d in the cb- lervation; yet I can tell thofe who delight in talking after this rate, that the place, whither Sir Hurnfyey. Edvnn car- ry'd the Mace, was as handfome as many of their own parifii Churches; and was indeed applv'd to no other ufe but that of the worfliip of C3od,.no ufe being m.ade of it by the Company which granted the leafe of it. But men often wound their own credit, -when at ail adv^'ntures they endeavour to diiparage their Reighbou^ \ Author proceeds thus concerning this ^'uHnefs : This •Am Uk.^.Li^,i:jjr,Lih.s ^. :i. I.: Md.c. Teiicc. c. i; 54. j^j .§. t A:ts XIX. 9* 2jS J V I N D I c A T I o N of Part I. Tl^jis bold ach'on ixas defended in print by fome of his friend}: : v ho had no hard task to manage; for as yet w$ have heard nothing againft it, but a bitter, lorry decla- indtion : this confidem reafon being amon^ ethers alledgdy thiit their nlkjonuw as inuch ejlnblijh'd by law (^^ ours tSy viz. by the Act of Toleration v:hich nets lately paj]ed^ and b: vchitb they ave permitted to exert ije their czin ^j:ay of ^lovfhip v:iih'>ut incurring the penalties of the laucs. The relisitn which any one* may freely poflefs, and in the pra- ctice -of which all are fecur'd and protected by the laws of the- land, may properly enough be (aid to be ellabUQi'd. And thus ours is oi muchj that is, cw /^>7^/;' eflablifhM as iheiiis. 'They who talk after this ratefeem to think, that i'eligiori bnly c.^n be laid to be eftablifli'd, which is favoured by the (late with the gre;lte{r privileges and fecular advan- tai::^s. ' Which is' juit as tho"" a man fnould fay : The woolen iTianufaaurip is the only or»e eftablifli^d in England ; be- cauft greater privileges are gi anted to it, than any of the reft. 1 acknowledge the Church o( England was for- merly the only religion eilablift'd by law. But when the old levere laws againft us were repealed, and a new one was enacted, that left every one to his own judgment in the choice of his religion ; how can our religion be faid not to be efiabliib'd? Our Adverfaries would gladly have people: think the preceptive part of thofe old perfecuting jaws 'Riil continues, and that the penalty only is taken oft! Etit what fort of lav\^ muft we underftand that to be, which lias no fanction added to it ? Muft V7e apprehend oUi'iawmakers, as requiring us to do fomiewhat, which they ktr' urv know we may neglect without any oftence ? Atld is. 'noc'tlmia Very weighty controverfy? Do's it not delhvc roihave-^all our Brethren abroad call'd in to the de^dfion of It } Oh men of Ifrael^ come in from all quar- ters, and help the diftre(Ied !- Whofe forrowful cafe is i:nc«* the liift ilarting of this controverfy become much worfe. For ever lince the two kingdoms were united, the IV^sbyteifian religion has been 'an eftablift/d and national religion in Great iir?>4'tf«,'!n-the fame fenfe in which the Epifcopal is fo. Nay, in fome fenfe ^tis more eftablifli^'d than the tpHbopa! ; in as much as the Epifcopnl may be alter'd by the Parliament,'whcreas the Presbyterian in Scot- land cannot according to the Articles of Union. Tho :r muft be own'd, High Church did notwithftanding break j^iuppnt h^in, an4 had gs giyth regard to public faith with — :„.^ .-,^^.,^^ >-^.~ ,, . theai Part I. tht^ Dissenters. 279 them, as with the poor CatiiUwiiiis^ and the rcfl of our Alhcs, whom they molt pcrhdioully bjirayM^^iDakingihcm- Hives an abhorrence to God and all the world. After tins came out a Book Jet forth by vcay of Letter ^ fubjcnl^dj as the furkm author the, eof pretends^ tho vcith- ^oui iiiUneSj by ail the Nonconforv^ifisy agaitjji Mr, Robert Burlcoe, ii:ho had ivritten a leayned ^Tieatije agaiitfl Sthijrfi, Mr. Buyfcoiigh had written againfl the Dillenting Laity, and accordingly the author, whoever he was, returned an anfwer to him in a Letter, letting forth what the DilFent- ing Laity had to fay for themfelves j but he never pre- tended his Letter was ftibfcrib'd by all the NotKinformiJlsy and cfpecially fubfcrib'd vsithout namesj which is an odd way enough of llibfcribing. One may here fee what the fpirit of a party will do : for Mr. Burfcoughy whom our Author fo much extols, wTote with the greateil bitternefs and raillery, if his Anlwerer fiirly reprefents him: '' '^Ihat " our Diilenting is Vv^orfe than mu.der cr idolatry^ and " equal to the crucifying the Son of God : that we ^^ have cut our felves otf from the catholic Church, and " from Chriit the head of it : '' ^^ \^ith a great deal more to the like purpole. And yet this author's Treatlfe has no other character given of it, hut that it was a leamed one ; when on the other hand the writer of the Anfwer to it, which, for ought 1 have feen, is very modefl:, is termed a furious author, and the Book it felf thus defcrib'd : *J his Book ua5 repleyiijl/d "duith jo many virulem caftrnimes againfl the Church of England, that no railirtg writer c-jer filled his pavers u'ith fo many mauciom inveciives againfl any pri'-jate adverfary^ 7muh lefs againfl fu renown d a Church. But Mr. Burfcongh had hll'd h'is papers with more malicious invectives againil us, without any provo- cation on our part. Nay, I might w'ell fay^ that not onlv the Diffeniers, but the Foreign Froteuants are worfe treated in feveral parts of this Defence of the Doctor ; than the Chui-ch men are in any part I have obferved of that An^v^^er, \o much condemned by him. But he de- fcends to particulars. He accufesy[^ys he, the Lives of oiir Aliniflers^ oa worfe than thofe of Pagans : f This paffage is reprefented more fevere than 'tis in the Author, who on- ly fays : " 7 is lamentably too true of very many, not '" only of the common members, -b»ut of the teachers and " leaders of the Church, that they have litrJe elfe to ' Y. 4 diuingui^i •/. IC4, 105. t r 'i^- 280 yi Vindication of Part I. '^ dilL:n;;in:ii them from Heathens, or to perfuade a belief ^^ of their Christianity, but an empty name, and a blind ^* zeal for what they call the Church. " '^ In two things pur Author niifre[;refents that writer : in making him fpeak of tj-ipir Miniflers in general, when he only fays ^re.) inauy^xdf tbn'/ri 'j and in making him fay that their lives were. .'j^W^a.^^'Ii^n he only aitlrnis them to be as bad as |hojv ' ans. And tho neither of tliefe is fair in any aut'. 1 will ventm*e to fay, the latter mifrepreleii- tatiuu tfii^ I. b^.any ^reat ipjuiy to the writer of the An- fwer. H r if; h^ had faid what is pretended, there are a ^ij^e)j gi eiif^^Vf^ny Clergymen wlio take care to make his vvbrds y,cocl. There have been many Heathens, who vvquiJ/have blufh'd at the locfi^Tiefs, debauchery and per- jury, with which the whole nation is fenbble they are char^^.^^^able? .prijanely fco^u^g at the nbfolutivn ahd dild" pliiie of r^iuince ujcd in our Church : 1 know not how ih^ .faa;ie,miilake 1 had compiainVi of in the Latin edition is ^peate4.in the Engljh^ in fctting down the Page whence ithis is pretended to be cited. I look'd a^ain for the paf- Hi.^e, but could not hnd it. But who can w^onder, if a erfon treated their Abfolution and lenance with fome ind of fcoin, iince they themfelves have in efiedt miade a jell of it ; pradiifing it only upon the poor, and uljng it ^s a trick to get a good round [urn cf'mc/iej from the rich, f He goes en : caliihg the prajfr which ixie tife in the adniini-* Jiyatipn (J the Sncrcmient^ at the deliiery of the Elements a chayrn.., This pafTage is alfo fallely quoted, but I chancM (o hit upon it. Mr. Burjcotigh had faid the Elements iverq\ deliver 'd to the people with 3 prayer, and there- fore vvpe to )^Q receiv'd kneeling. The irayer is: The hdciy of ciix l^(ird jefvi^ Chrift^^ ixhich .v,_at gize/z for thee^ piefey^\e tljyhdj/ ani foul u\m everlafiifigiife.^^ T^ and eat this in rertieiribrance that Chriji aiedjcr tkes^ and feed en ki'i^ifd thy heart by faith with thanhfgiving, The like, with, a fmairvariation, at the delivery of the Cup : " To '^^wjiich, fays the author oj the Letter, we anfwer : This, '' >yh5ch ycu call ti prayer, founds more like a prieflly he- ^^^nedialicny or a kind of exo) cifn, being repeated overanj " ever to every individual communic?.nt. "' it The Tran- fator has not mifiaken his meaning, when he put charm inilead of e>i'orpJm, And really 1 don't f-c^ how that can b^ I' f See Dr. Kiclols, /-, 350. I p. Fart I. /k P I s s E N T E K s. 281 be callVl a prayer, lince the Minifier fpeaks nut to God, but the communicani. \\ hat is rtfcr'd to a ncerning their Sermons, is not ri;^ht quoted in the Margin. I luppole he may hnd tault with fome of their preacliers, who fluii their Sermons perpe- tually wich the molt bitter invettivcs, and preach v^ry little to the ediiication of their hearers. And with very good reaic.n n:;ay vicious Minillers be caii'd wohesy and the llothful be compar'd to drones^ nor is there any railery or calumny in uiing luch langua^^e concerning them. And now we are come to the reign of Queen A'i:ne^ \t ho, as long as flie followed the counfcls mdcci. and example of her glorious rredecelfor, was favoured by God with the moft remarkable and aftonifhing vidories and triumphs, and &in'd with a glory fuperior to ail her predecefiors, or contem.porary princes ; courted and belov'd of all, as the guardian of the liberties of En- rcpe^ tlie defender of the oppreiied, and the fcourge of tyrants. But abandoning her felf at laft to the direction of High Church Politicians, flie facrihc^'d the nation^'sand religion's honour and fafety together with her own ; ^nd having liv'd to fee her ieif ilighted of her old and faithful Allies, trick'd by her new friends, and miferably embarrafs'd by her darling counfellors, fee died unlamented of all, who were not in a French intereft, and enemies tp ^he liberties of Eirrcfe. In the beginning of her reign Mr. Ednuiyid Calamy^ (now made DocTcr cf Divinity) v:rc>x.(i {ht Abridgemem of ivW' Baxter'/ Lre, Our Authors owns him to be a learned Jjivi/ie ; * and his Book contained a very good Hiitory of cur nation, and efpeciaiiy with refpect to our controverfy, for about hfty years; out of which i'everal things are taken ifito this Hiflcrical account I have been giving of uur txoubies. 7"he i>: and x Chapters of that Abridgement were more eipecially difpleafing to our Adverfaries. In the former he gives a Catalogue of the Miniiiers turnM cut in 1062, adding fome account of their lives, and the w'Orks they pubiidid ; whereby he- has preferved the memory of thofe glorious. Ccnfefiors, who will be more vaiu'd by impar- tial poflerity. Our Adverfaries were griev'd the bafe aciions of their predeceflors fiiould be fo brought to light. But as Dr. CaJamy faithfully related theie hilloral mat- - ' ters, •^137. "^ ~ "* ^^1 ^Vindication t?/ Part T. iters, as he found them, they gave him no trouble about that Chapter, but contented thcmfelves with bcftowing on him occalionally fome general remarks in their wri- tings. In the other Chapter he collcrts the arguments, by which the ejedted Minilters defended themfelves. Thde he- digells into a good order, and delivers them very concifely. In this Chapter alfo he a(^ted only the part of an Hiftorian, delivering other mens arguments rather than his own. 'Tis not cafy to fiiy which Chapter difguded them moft; but lince this latter Chapter conlilfed of argu- ments (tho only hillorically related) they thought th<:ry had a fair handle for contention, and to they eagerly at- tark'd him. Among the reft, two learned and moderate Confor- mifts, Mr. Olhje, and Mr. Hoadly^ the prefent very wor- thy Bifhop of Bangor^ wrote againft him. It happened, as is very ufual v\'ith our Adverfaries, that thefe two de- fended Conformity upon diiiercnt principles. Dr. Calamy therefore in his Anfwer let their arguments one againft another, and fo handibmly defended our caufe (v/hatever Dr. NichU talks of a perfeH conqueft obtained over him) that the DilTenters look'd upon themfelves oblig^'d not only to the Doftor for his Defence, but to his Antagonifts, who gave him the occafion of writing. And neither the Bifhop, nor Mr. Othfe pleas'd the High Clergy by their uTitings. Thefe moderate men endea- vourM all they, could to put a mild fenfe upon the terms of Conformity, and blam'd the Diflenters for the rigid meaning in which they took them; whereas the High Clergy fay we underftand the terms right, and they fhould be defended in that fenfe of theni. They may pleafe to difpute that matter among themfelves. As for our parts, we pay a great deference to the learning and good temper of thofe two writers; and only wiiii they had been con- cern'd in the defence of a better caufe. The account our Author gives of a Book, Vv^hich came out Kuder a counter f eh Title ^ is not much amifs. But lince he has omitted it,' I think it proper to give a brief account of the occafion and delign of that Pamphlet. The High Churchmen, who had taken the oaths to King IViliiam^ always hated him, as bred among the Presbyterians, and 7i 'friend to them. They did not much diflemble their fen- tkt^njs during the King's life^ but no focner was he dead. Part I. ^//^ D 1 S S E N T E R s. 28 J but they openly proclalinVl and ^^loricd in them. '1 hey concluded then, they had an opportunity put into their hands of treading down the poor Dilicnters, and fatia- ting their reven;:c upon them, 'i'hey preach'd thei jtoie the blttereft fermons againft them, that malice could help them to invent ; and did not fail to charge tliem with whatever wc^uld incenfe the Qiieen and iarliamcnc at^ainit them. 1 he very rafcally mob^ following the example e ' IHve ••^. 16. t 20. ii, 150, 1^ p. 149. Part I. the D I S'^EriT ^KS. 287 like nature might be allcdg'd. Thus in the reiftn of Kin^; Charles 1. a Licurgy like tl)e EngliJOy but with the addi- tion of fome other fuperllitions, which the Eriglijo Cler- gy have been hankering after, was obtruded upon the Church of Scotland. And how many and dreadful were the troubles occalion'd thereby 1 The Scuts afterward Ihouk off the heavy yoke of the Hierarchy, which both they and King C/;Wd^j II. moiB: folemnly abjur'd ; and yet no fooner was he fettled in his throne, than he again fet up that government, without doubt by the advice of our Englijh Bifiiops; and by blood and flaughter he eftablifh'd it among them. Nor did the Papifts themfelves, when they had the povv^r in their hands, exceed the Epifcopal party at that time in their cruelty. -1 In like manner K. Charles I. or rather Archbifhop Laudy forc'd the Church of Ireland to conform to all the Englijh rites and ceremonies, in fpite of Archbifhop Ujl^e-ry who was much troubled at it. Farther, when Laud became Archbifhop, he play'd the tyrant mod egregioufly, for he forc^'d all foreigners in England and all Englijh men in foreign countries, to order their worihip according to the manner of the Church of England. But who can do otherwife than deleft his wicked and arrogant lord- linefs ? For if it was a crime for foreigners to difer from the Englijh worfhip, while they liv'd in England; why fhould not Englijh men, who liv'd abroad, be bound by the fame law, to conform themfelves to the practice of thofe Churches, among whom they reCded ? Our Author, aslfaid, fhews himfelf very defircusof a General Council of Prctefiants. ^ But fmce fuch a council cannot be held, till all l^'rcteilant Princes and ftates fhall agree upon it ; our Author was the worft in the world to propofe it, be- caufe he elfe where lafhes K. James I. for the fame thing. ■ JVhen there "dcas^ fays he, fuch a buz> in the zvorld about the Quinquarticular controverjies, ue might harce refted in fence J ij v:e could ha've regulated our ftadies by the ivritings of the ancient Fathers^ and the cujloms of our predeceffors ; and our learned. King had net I'ouchfafd to ftoop below the dignity cf Royal Majefty^ and the cares of govermne}7t^ to Academical exercifesy and i?nport the zur anglings of Dutch Profeffors into his own .Dcminions, \ And why may not Kings and States abroad as well fear, left by fuch a Coun- ^ cil. 288 J V I N D I c A T I o N ^/ Part L cil, as is here proposed, they Ihould iinpovt into their do^ minions the wr anglings of the Er/glijh Divines ? 1 hardly think a more general Synod than that was at Dorty is to be expefted in our times. 'i he Doctor pailes a complement upon us that he may fncvv his ilight of our l^redecellors. Nor are there vjunt- ingy Cays he, a-ftong the D/Jjenting AliniJierSy ef^ecially a- mo}7g the PreibyteruuK^ 7nany 'very learned and pioPU> per- fonsy who entertain a better opinion of our Churchy than their prcdecelJurs have dene. For all the old Adverfaries oj oi^r Churchy who j or jo many years Vgether had made fuch op- pofition againft it {cu in the courje of our relation we have jheivn) are ail in their graves ; and many of the young men who have Jucceeded them in their minijtryy do not bear the fa?ne en?nity to our Church 05 their predecejfcrs ; but they often vouchjafe to [peak kindly to HSy to keep up a charitable CO) refpondence with m, andjometimes to maintain a ftricl degree of friendjhip. ''^' Nor have our predecelFurs been backward to the fame thing, when they could do it with- out danger. If we younger Miniiters have done any thing that is pleafing to them, we are glad of it, and thank them for the kind notice they take of it. But we can't like they (hould commend us, only the more to dif- grace our predecellors. Iror in fpite of all that our Ad- verfaries can fay, thofe moft pious and learned men will be had in everlafting honour. To converfe with the Clergy was formerly dangerous, left our Minifters Ihould be difcover'd by them, and fo caft into prifon ; or left fuch Clergymen fhould bring themfelves by that means tinder a fufpicion, or difgrace among their own party. But, if there were occafion for it^ I could name the Cler- gymen, who not only (hun all correfpondence with us, but very induftriouily teach their people to do fo too. 1 pafs over what our Author has more in this Part, as foreign to our controverfy ; and fhall haflen to the exa- mination of the Defence it felf. A VIN- 1 '- ^ ^■-'^^'^t:'.?:*:, ./-■^ : I ] \ M:. tjA:^. VINDICATION O F T H E DISSENTERS. PART IL In Aiifwer to Dn N i c h o l s 's Firil Part, concerning the Doctrine of the Church of England. Tlje Introduction. I S ufual among the generality of meft, ftifly to maintain the opinions and cuf- toms they have once embraced, without regard to truth or juftice. This hap- pens efpecially when men gain, or hope to gain by it. The experience of all ages has teflify'd, there never is a want of men to undertake the defence of thofe things, which the fu- preme powers are pleas'd to injoln, and recommend by ex- ternal advantage.^ annexed to them. There are always at Z hand tgo' A ViNt)!cATioN of Part II. hand iuch pliable foul*;, as will fubmit to, vindicate, and jcommend every law of the magiflrate, and encourage him to inForce it. Let him require things evil and wicked, they make no difficulty to commend them as excellent, or at leaft as tolerable. Nay, while they pretend a regard to peace, they Hick not to commend, :\s veyjerahle for their great ayitiqmty^'^ the things which they ci\Qem indifferent y and others count finful , and fo they abet that impofing them, which mud unavoidably beget llrife and contention. Had it not been tor this, many of the things in controverfy be- tween us, which are all ufelefs, fome doubtful, and tome unla>a^^^ 156. PartIL the Dissenters.^ 293 In that fcnfe the Church of Scot Lin A ^ nay and thcDifllnrcrs thcnifclves, arc no inconfidcrable part of i\\\s fortrcfs. But our Adverfaricscrafcily confound, ordilh*nc^uifli,thc Church and the Kingdom, jult as they ice it will bell ferve their purpofe. If therefore we here dilh'ngui/li them, as we certainly ought, and the Epifcopal Church is confider'd by itfelf, how is fhe then the 7>wji tm^rc^>ialU fortrej's of the Protejiant religion ? Has fhe deferv'd this eileeni by her rites, or by her faith ? by thofe things wherein me is fuigular, or thofe Hie has in common with other Reformed Churches? If it befaid, /lie has deferv'd this elkem by her rites and ceremonies , the foreign Churches, who have with difdain rejeded thofe rites, will never place much confidence in fuch a fortrcfs. If flie is faid to have dc- ferved it by her faith 5 I grant, fhe has deferv'd great com- mendation, that fhe has brought up many noble champions of the Proteflant faith : but unlefs we will be unjufi: to our Brethren abroad, we muft alfo acknowledge the fame con- cerning their Churches. And if our Brethren confider the faith exprefs'd in the 39 Articles, I fear left the Doclor, and fuch whofe defence he undertaices in his Firft Part, fhould be rather efteem'd by them the betrayers than the fortrefs of the faith. Nor are our Brethren ignorant, that there has been fometimes fuch a garrifon in this fortrefs^ as were for yielding it up to the Papifts, endeavouring to bring about an union between the Church of Rome^ and the Church of England. But if fhe is therefore call'd the for- trefs of the Proteftant religion, becaufe, as he adds in the next words, fhe is a Church which hoafts of frequent and glo- Yiom triumphs over all the poivers of Romifh fuperjxition ; why fliould not other Churches be as truly impregnable for- trcfles as fhe j fince they have in like manner conquered, tho' they are lefs noify in their triumphing and boafling 5 and fince there is no charge lies againftthem, of any trea- cherous dealing with the common enemy ? There is only one fenfe, I can think of, in which the Church of Enz^land can defervedly claim this title of a fortrefs fo peculiarly to her felf ; and that is, becaufe fhe is more than any other Reform'd Church addicted to fighting, and is always arm 'd to defend her own party, and tread down her oppofites by perfecution. In which fenfe we have by fid experience found her a fortrefs, not of the Proteftant religion, but of her own peculiarities. Z 3 Having 2p4 ^ Vindication of Part IL Having thus confidcrM his Introdudion, I fliall proceed to examine what he fays concerning the particular points of our controverfy. Several Chapters in this former Part of his Dffc>2ce are really foreign to ir, and were t'herefore omitted wholly in my Anfwcr Indeed the laft Chapter is almoft the only one of this Part, which immediately affefts our quarrel. All the feveral C'hapters which re- late to doftrinal matters, relate only to objeftions againft fome particular Divines : which though 1 examin'd in the Anfwer defign'd for Foreigners, I fhall wholly wave in this Tranflition, defign'd for theufe of my own Countrymen. The DiiTenters never objefted againfl the Articles, or againft fubfcribing them, that they were Armlnian 3 however they objecled (and very juftly) againft thofe who fub- fcrib'd them, being of a judgment quite contrary to that declar'd in them. I fliould therefore pafs directly to the laft Chapter, were it not that the firft has fomewhat, which has from the beginning of our controverfy been in debate, and that of late there may feem to be fome more than or- dinary reafon, w^hy 1 fhould take notice of it. CHAP. I. Oj Popery charged on the Church of England. I fhall offer fome obfervatlons in general concerning this accuiation, before I particularly examine what the Doflor fays upon this occaiion. * I. We never faid, the Church of EngLxYid w^as Popifh. ^Tis quite another thing, when we charge fome perfons in her communion with Popifli errors. That charge were eafily made good, by producing various examples of fuch a kind of men 5 were not the thing too notori- ous for our Author himfelf to deny it, as we fhall fee afterward. z. What we pretend is, that the Reformation of the Church of Englafid is much more imperfect, than that of the Foreign Churches 5 inafmuch as fhe retains many of the relicks of Popery, which they have utterly re- jected. By p^gt l<^6. Chap. I. r^i^ Dissenters. 295 By Popery, we mean the whole body of errors, fuper- ftirions, or wh:itever corruptions found in the Church of Rofne. Two things therefore are intended by this accu- fation i firU, that the thinf^s themftrlves objected agiinll: are evil ; fecondly, that they are uicd by the Papifts, and were dcriv'd to us from them. Concerning the Litter there is no difpute, iince 'tis granted by our AJvcifaries. *T'\s only in the former therefore we are concerned. Hence it appears how little he talks to the purpofe, p. ic>5, J 66/ 5. When we call the things objected againft yeliclis of Po[?rr\'y we do it not fo much tbr the fake of reproaching the Churclmien, many of whom have, as we have feen, fpoken in the fame manner concerning them , as to excite and urge them, by that confideration, utterly to abolifli them. For fince they acknowledge the Church of Ro;w^ to be the moft corrupt of any in the world, why fliould they not in like manner acknowledge her to be the moft unworthy of imitation ? Why /liould they affect a con- formity to the worfl: of Churches, rather than to fuch as are Reform 'd ? Further, the Church of Rome was for- merly reckoned Antichriitian, as appears by the fiomdtes^ and by the Book, of Common Prayer^ * before Archbi/liop Lai'J alter'd it in favour of the Papifis , as is witnefs'd by Dr. Hty'y>?, ] Nay there were formerly, as there are ftill, many eminent and learn'd writers in the Church of Englayid^ who made no difficulty of affirming, that the Church of Ro-me is the very ivhore defcrib'd in the Re^ceLiuon, And if that be true, 'tis but reafonable we fnould rejeft all her impertinent ceremonies, and avoid all manner of com- munion with her. If wt may believe thofe Gentlcmens interpretations, w^e are thus direfled by the Holy Ghofl-, in thofe Words : Come out of ter my ^eo'^le^ that ye he not partal^rs of her fns^ and that ye receive not of hsr plagues, 11 This argument then, however 'tis counted invidious, plain- ly proves, they were ill advis'd who retain'd thofe Popifli uiages. For what our AdverfarievS here alledge is weak enough, ri^. that theie things were formerly in ufe. They were fo indeed, but it was in the moil corrupt Church in the world 5 whence they were alfo deriv'd after fhe had Z 4 defil'd *. Sii all J)]\ Nichols, f). \ti, \ Cyjr, Ar.gi. jp. \ i 3. }1 Rev. xviii. e,. 2^6 y4 V 1 N D I C A T I o N of Part IL defil'd them with the groffert fuperftition ; but there is no fign of them in the Holy Scripture, the only rule both of our fiith and worfhip. They therefore, who abhor the fuperftition of that Church, are very much in the wrong to affed: a refemblancc of her thcmfelves, or re- quire it in others. For without any neceffity, and in fpite of the Apollle's forbidding of it, they put ajiumblin^^' hlock^ and an occafion of jailing in their brothers ii-ax^ * and raife an evil fufpicion of themfelves in their tiiinds. I know they fay thefe things are older than Popery. But the anfwer is eafy. For in the firfl: place, this is plainly filfe of many of the things in coiitroverfy. And iecondly, Popery grew up by degree.s, and it confifts of many fuperftitions, which did not all rife in one and the fame age 3 but fome of them fprung up in a confiderable traft of time from beginnings that were antient enough, but yet very fmall at firil 3 for which reafon we ought the more to beware of fuch fmall beginnings, and pluck up the feeds of fuperftition, as foon as ever they be- gin to appear. And thus the old Puritans are to be under- ftood, when they cenfure the Church for the relicks of Popery : and we are not a/ham'd herein to imitate them. Nor has Dr. Nichols any reafon to upbraid us, for any hard words ufcd upon this occafion. For w^hat volleys of reproaches does his own fide continually difcharge againft us ? We are by them ordinarily tenn'd Fanatics, Puritans, Rebels, Schifmatics in a damnable condition, worfe than Papiil5:, abettors of Judaifm and Turcifm. And tho' they feem'd a little while to be fo much in hu- mour, as to confine thefe their reproachful terms to us in En-rjand'^ yet we knew when it was ufual with them to load all the Presbyterians in the world with the fame. If the fevereft expreflions of the molt rigid of our fide are com- par'd wMth thefe, they feem very mild. We will therefore now inftance in fome of the Puritans expreflions produc'd by our Author. Mr, Gilby, an old Puritan^ faid^ the hahits and ceremonies ufed in the Church of England ivere carnal^ be^z^^rly^ ylntichrijiian tom^s. A mighty crime ! If the ApofHe was not afraid to call the Jewilh ceremonies carnal^ \ tho' they were of God's t Hcb. ix. IQ. vij. i6. Chap. I. ?^'^ Dissenters. 297 God's own prcfcribing ^ why might not Mr. di'Iy fay the fame o\ the Popifh ceremonies, which never had any di- vine appointment ? If the one callM the Jewifli ceremonies, ivcali^>^^ he^^^cirly tlemcnts ^ * why might not the other call the I'opi fix ceremonies, tt;(r,^ar/)/ fo;;;/;; ? And if they were really ropifli, they were Amicbrtjium too, in the Opinion of the Epifcopal purty that liv'd in Mr. Gilby's time, who all agreed the Pope was Antichrift. So Bi/liop R.idl:y^ altho* once a lliff defender of the ceremonies, when he had the Surplice forc'd upon him, bitterly inveigh \1 againfl: the Jiifhop of Koftie^ calling him Antuhr'ifi ^ f and againft that habit, calling it foolifli, abominable, and not fit for a Vice in a play. So Bifliop je-a-d call'd the garments, relicks of Popery ^ and Biihop Horn term'd them Popifli, as I have obferv'd already from Bi/liop Burnet. Why therefore might not Mr. Gilhy fay, they were Ropififopj^eneSy RomiJJj reltckj-i rags of Antichrlfi^ dregs of difgnis'd Popery ? Mr. Cartzirighty or rather the author of the AA-fnoyii- tio}7y his words are not fairly fet down. Thus they are in the Book itfelf : " And as the names of Archbilhops, *' Archdeacons, Lord Bifliops, Chancellors, Er-c. are drawn ** out of the Pope's fliop, together with their offices j fo *' the government which they ule, by the life of the *' Pope, which is the Canon Law, is Antichrittian and De- *« vilifh, and contrary to the Scriptures." Il Bi{ho^JVkitgift in lijs Anfwer acknowledges, whatever in the Canon Law was contrary to the Scripture, was Antichriftian and De- vilifli. And that this government is contrary to Scripture^ I fliall, if 1 miftake not, fully prove in its proper place. However, I fhould not have lik'd the paffige the lefs, had it been exprefs'd in fofter terms. I pafs over the two next paffages, becaufe they only contain a difpleafing truth. But it feems the author of ^^r^Waa/ (who is not right quoted, either as to the title, the year when printed, or the page) fpeaks of the futperjiitions and idolatrous ahiije of the Liturgy, I could not find the place, but will fuppofe the words fairly fee down. And in anfwer I fay : We have always affirmed, the ceremonies prefcrib'd by the Liturgy favour'd of fuperftition ^ which will not feem ftrange to any one, who ferioully confiders the matter. As to what J;e add^ of the idolatrous ahufe of the Liturgy^ I fuppofe his mean- 'l G^l. W. i. t ^ux M.vrty.', lol. 3. t. 5 00. \\Adwo:?. p. 14. 298 y? ViN DicAT ION 6)f Part II. nieanfnc; is to be fetch'd from the Churchmens extrava- gant aftcC^ion to that Book 5 as the ApoiHe, upon the like account, tenns iO'cetoufnefs^ idolatry. Nor uill any man, who knoWvS their difpoiition, look upon this as a falie charge. The other pafl"i,2;c.s, here alledg'd, relate to doc- trina! matters, and therefore I take no notice of them j but leaving the marginal Citations, come to our Authors 1 ext. Onr ^Jverfaries (^f ftippofe) dont really believe vje are <^Hilty of the thi}?^T^s thty ohjetr a^^^.-iiriji //^, &c. * Our Author is milti- kcn : we are firmly perfuaded of the truth of our objec- tions. And had it been our defi-gn to render the Church- men odious, we had taken a very different courfe from what we have done. We mitft confejs^ th.xt cf later days ti-e have heen lefs annoyed from this quarter. ^ How glad ihould I be, could 1 return this compliment! But truly our .Adverfaries ftill treat us with the fame hatred and reproaches, they formerly ufed to do. We thank God, they cannot crufli us with their wonted degree of perfecution. But what our Au- thor next adds, is amiitake: Not that our Adver fart es have lels pretence for it nnWy than formerly : If we confider the things themfelves, 'tis true, the lame relicks of Popery are now retained ; but if we mind the temper of the age, we may congratulate our felves in its being fome- nh.ic alter 'd. For in the beginning of Queen FJizahetFs f cign, a vaft number of the Clergy, who had been pro- fefs'd Papiils in her Sifter's time, continued in their for- mer opinion, notwithftanding they would not part with their livings. And we are Vv/ell fatisfy'd, what many of the Bi/liops and Clergy in King Charles the Firft's time were. But we chearfuUy acknowledge they are now more averfe to the Papifts. II But the eclumny is groii'it fo iiotorioU'S a)7d palpable y tout r.o body iiill fzval'ow it ^ it being koo ii-eir l^wiin -.lith ivhat vigour^ -Leal^ and conjiancy lie '€pposV, tije Romanifts 3 and hoiu dear and gracious they were to them^ at a time ii'hen all our intereflsj [acred and civil^ ivere in the greateft danger to he lojr. We all believe ftill thofe things were rags or re licks of Popery^ which our anceftors caird by that name. That the Divines of the Church of Enzl'i)\i * p.-'g" 159. t p'^g^ ^^°- II So ive thv4ght T.:hcii ibis vjji^i fifjl tvniUn ; hut, aLu ! iky hjiv?Jir.cs Jiicr a i0.'.;ra;7 co^irjc, and e^cttiMy corrvhic' d us of Wit orrr chaYiLwW error. Chap. I. fhc DissiKTER^. 299 EfviUvd wrote bravely agiiinft the Papilto mV^^wv^'lames the Second's time, is qucltior/d by none ot' us 3 nor do we en- vv them the great honour they deferv'd , but we juflly complain of unfair dealuig, when we are reprcfented as jiding with them, as 1 have obfcrv'd in the former Part. They who refus'd our offer'd fervice, now the work is done, make heavy comphiints for the want of it. ^nd if we werefo'^i\;r/o*<5 at that time ivith tJ^e [loman'i/i 5 ^bov/ came it to pafs they fliould be able to decoy none from among usjwhile they made fo many profelytes among the Church- men ? But what ground is there for this odious charge ? Only, forfooth, becaufe when King Ja?nes delivered us from the moft cruel perfecution, feme of our people, too eafily believing he did it out of kindnefs, gave him abundance of thanks in their Addreffes. But the Djffenters were not the only men imposed upon by his fraudulent practices. As long as he fet on the Churchmen to difturb our religious alTemblies, and break up our houfes, and leizeour goods, they generally extoU'd him with the charaftcr ofj^wfs the Jujt 5 nay, and fet the Diffenters an example, in the no lefs fulfom Addreffes they prefented to him, and his Brother be- fore him. But the Clergy might, it feems, honourably do, what is very criminal in the Djffenters. So miferably does a fond felf-love blind fome mens eyes ! Let it likewife be remembered, with whom our Adverfaries were '^cery^raciou^y when Popilli counfels prevailed, and our Miniflers were turn'd our, andgrievoufly perfecuted ; or when the Bifhops had amain hand in flinging out the Bill of Excluficn,whicli the generality of the Clergy likewife condcmn'd. We are much miftaken, if any ofthefe their proceedings were fer- viceable to the Proteftant religion. But if our Church hears Jo much towards Popery^ hozu came it to j?ajs that the Founders cf'it^ Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer,itw^ others of the greateft fanHity^ fell a facrifce to PoJAJIj ra^e and fury \ Why didr.ot that Church rather embrace them as its heft and fur efi friends'^. Hardly any thing can be faid weaker than this. We never doubted, that the Church 6? England was widely different from the Church of Rome 3 we own flie is freed from innumerable Eo/wv>j fuperftitlons, and we blefs God for it. And yet we are not afraid to afrirm, flie re- tains flill a taft of the old leaven, which ought to be 300 A Vindication of PartJI. riv'd from the Papifts. What then ? Will the Church of Kome look upon them for this, as her Inji aiid jareji friends^ A pleafant Dream! They who think fo, arc fadly deceiv'd, ^nd muft be quite unacquainted with the fpirit of Popery. For Papifts are never fatisfy'd with thofe who differ a hair's breadth from them, or if their ufurp'd authority be in the kaft oppos'd. Since then thofe blefled martyrs had re~ jefted a great many, though not all the ra^s of Popery ^ and had fliaken ofF the yoke of their tyrannical government 5 what wonder was it, that they fell a farnfice to PopiJJj ra^^e and fury ? I would only ask, whether any relicks of Po- pery were left in K. £«^u-arJ's firft Edition of the Liturgy ? If that be granted, as it muft be by every one who reads it, what can be infer 'd by this rare argument? For 'tis cer- tain, the Papifts were as well difpleas'd with their firft pains in altering the Service, as with their fecond, when they made a further reformation of Popifti abufes. Our Author has elfewhere obferv'd, that our Reformation in Erj^Und was made by the Parliament and Convocation ; but there were many of all ranLs in each, who retained their old fentiments, and therefore hinder'd the work all that ever they could. Hence it came to pafs, that thoie relicks of Popery were retain'd in the Reform'd Church o£ England. jN^or was it in thepowerof thofe, who greatly endeavour'd it, to compleat the Reformation according to their defire. But 'tis a bafe calumny, to pretend we think the difference hetv:c£n thofe holy men, and the Church of Row^, wasiJ^ry fmcilL We think they went far from that Church, and would have gone farther, if death, and the iniquity of the times had not hfnder'd them. If ii-e are ftich fond retainers of Romi/h fuperfiitions^ how cayne the chawpions of them to flr'ik^ at us above all other men ? Jf our atiaftors have rightly informed tts^ the GunfJo-icder Plot ivJS not levelld againft the Puritan Minijlers^ or a feix' of tl:e Nobility 'H'ho patroyiizd the7n : hut that fnddcn dejh-iSion ivas prej^ar^d for our Kinz^y who "iv.ts aJiriH dtfender of our Church ; for the whole lody of Bifi}op5 ^ and for fiah of our great men^ ai under Q^EVizibeth'^s Reign had enaBed good laws for the ejlahlijhment of this Church, * How acutely is this fpoken ! Our x^dverfaries think, the Papifts defign'd to fpare the Puritans in the terrible flaugh- ter * ^-i^e 161. Chap. I. the Dissenters. 301 ter they were contriving ! Now I would very gladly fee this a little clearM, that we might comprehend, what cun- ning device the Papiits had to provide for the latety of the Puritan Members of Parliament, both among the Lords and Commons, when they intended with gunpowder to blow up the whole houfe, where they met, and were mix'd with one another. And if our ancejiors haxe rightly tyiforynd «^, the defign of the plotters wavS, immediately after the blow was ^iven, to charge it upon the Puritans, and maffacre them tor it. And if, as he feems to fuggert, the Papirts never attempted any thing againtt us^how comes it to pafs, that the blame of the turning out our Miniflers, and of the per- fecution which follow'd thereupon, is now laid by the Church upon them ? But lo another argument, much of the fame itrengrh with the former, to prove this ! And u-e (anywt forgtt J-oii' the jef nits wider K'. James II. ivhen they flvKck, at the "cery heart of the Keform'^d relhjon^ gaxe no dijiurhance to IJifftntnig Academies 5 hut furioufly fell upon our Colleges y arid begun to baniJI) our Students from thofe feats of Uarmng, Truly I can't tell, whom we are moft oblig'd to thank, the Papifts or the Churchmen ; the former, that they did not take from us what we had not 5 or the latter, that they had taken effectual care to i^rip us of all,lefl w^e fliould have any thing to tempt the avarice of thofe rob- bers. And if they then fll frrioujly upon your Colleges^ and begun tohan'ijlj your Students from thofe feats of learnings they only wrote after the copy you had fet them before, in your ufage of us. The ttories of Faithful Cummin^ and Thomj^ Heathy * are forne of the Church's pious frauds, contriv'd only to blacken us J of which we are as fure,as we can well be of any thing of this nature. This is moft fully prov'd, in the Anfd^er to Dr. Scot'5 Cafe of Forms of Prayer ; to which when I refer 'd Dr. Wells^ who had mention'd them, and urg'd him to an- fwer that author's arguments , he only reply'd, that he did not before know^ of any fuch writing, and never attempted tx) vindicate thoie fooliili forgeries. And I cannot but won- der at the confidence of thoie many authors, who go on to revile us with thofe lies, without firft anfwering what has been fo folidly writ againft them. 1 therefore pafs thefe ftories over. But the reader in the end of the chapter will meet with a Ronlafid for his Oliver, In 302 >i Vindication (?/ Part IL In the next place he argues, that the ^rt>cles (which not: only Cler^ymcyiy but nil Students in our Unt'oerfitieSj are obliged hy their jubjcriptions to ackno-ujUd^e and maintain) do pm it out oj all doubt y that hva^cen and earth are not at 'greater d'lji an ce^ than our religion is from Pottery. * Since the conclufion is not deny'd, we need not trouble our felves about the premife.s. Iseverthelefs the argument is not of any ftrcngth. The Articles of the Church o{ England arc as contrary to Armi- nianifm, as to Popery , and therefore 'tis as podible the Church /hould abound with Papifo, as with Arminians. And if there were any force in this argument, it would as well defend Bp. Montague^ Dr. Heylyn^ Mr. Thorndike^ and Bp. Parkcr^who obliged themfelves, by the fume fubfcrif^tions^ to ack^ioTvledge and maintain the Articles, And yet our Author owns, they have advanced fome PopJL doHrines in their ivri- tings, f Since the Doflor quite miflfes hisaim,and doesnotreally difpute againft our opinion, 'tis very proper I iliould here declare what it is. Our opinion then is : That the will of God, difcover'd in the Holy Scriptures, is the only rule of religious worfhip 5 and that 'tis not lawful for men to devife any new ways of wor/hiping him, or to receive, and praftife any fuch, when devis'd by other men. When therefore religion is become corrupted and defiled, and there is a neceffity of a reformation, we think men ought to go as far back as the firfl: inflitution, and that every thing is to be try'd and correfted according to that flandard. Il But that ive niufi alloiv nothing common ivith tbemy is what we never thought, and much lefs ever faid. Whatever is neceffiry for life, or by a divine command, is never to be rejeded ^ but when fuch things have crept into the worihip of God, as are neither neccflary nor ufe- ful, and have become in traft of time, if they were not at firft, fuperltitious or idolatrous, we think they ought to be abolifn'd. And that for two rcafons : namely, that -we may exprefs the greater abhorrence of fuperftition ^ and that we may nor, by retaining them, lead men into fu- perflition. Thus, for inftance, the moft antient ufe of the iign of the Crofs was not free from all fuperftition, but it pav'd the way to greater afterward 5 and being now re- tained in baptifm, has bred fuperftition in fome Church- men 5 •^ ^ ar^e 1 64. t jb.xge 169. l\ S^s Mr. Calvin'; LiUcr to tin Frct^^Qr. Chap. I. //^ Di ssEK T H R s.* 30 J men 5 which I will de^ionllrate from our Author himfelf. 'Tis certainly fuperlHtious for men to look upon luipti/yn as lame and dtjuteut^ w.hen admi-nifter'd without the addition of this ceremony. And ytt this, our Author fiys, is the opinion of fomc of their people, who, if it were laid afide, would be frij^htcdftom jiich a haftijm to that of the Church ojf Rome. * So that if the xx(e of this fign were not in it- felf fuperftitious 5 yet fince it is known to breed fuper- ftition in ignorant people, it ought to be rcjefted. Thus the reader has our opinion. Let him mind now what infe- rences our Author would draw from it. If this he nglt rcafoyipi^^ ijhy dont thcfe fanUijled 7ncyt hold to tbtir oiiH rule ^, U hy dont tkey^ 'm the abiw dance of their ztal^ rejeB exery thingy that has ever h^^^i touched with jii^erjli- tion ? But ii-e k}wiv very welly they conUnd for one thifigy and fraflife another. They dont pre fently throw away their Bibles^ heeaufe Papifis have perverted them to maintain their errors , or, what is more execrable^ heeaufe they have hceu mij applied by con- jurers and witches, f Who does not fee a vafl: difference between thefe things, and thofe we difpute about ? All are bound by God s command to keep and read the Holy Scriptures , but we are fo far from being commanded, that we are forbidden by him to retain fuperfiitious rites and ceremonies. They dont thinks it agriexoii'sfin to hold their meetingr^ every Loi^d^s Dayy in thofe place Sy which are frophan^d all the wcek^ be- JideSy by the halls and danctngj of light and wanton perfons. I wifh he had told us plainly, whether thefe balls and dancings did in his opinion prophane the place itfelf, and render it unfit to be ufed in the worJTiip of God. If he thought fo, he would have done well to tell us, how it comes to pafs, that the dancers, who as Chriftians are the temples of God, are not themfelves prpphan'd by thefe things, and upon that account excluded from the com- munion of his own Church. Nay, if thefe dances can prophane a place, why may they not be thought as well to prophane the Lord's Day ? But our Ad verfaries w^ere once of another judgment, when thofe dances were allow'd on the Lord's Day, and they pubhfl:i'd to the people the King'3 declaration for them. For our part we know of no place under the New Teftament, that is either holy or prophane any ^ageiecf. \^ag€ 165. 504 '^Vindication of Part IL any loiigei* than 'tis actually put to any holy or prophane ulc. We arc allow'd in any place to lift t

ioiv xery ivell^ they contend for onethbi'^^ and f?raH iff another. They Can themfelves upon occafion hold their affcmblies in prophane places. Thus they do at Sttrhhch FaWy in the open field, in the midft of the fair. Nor does the Univerfity of C^w^n^if^^ think St. Mtry'sChurchprophan'diby their keeping theirCo;w;;7f«nw£»f in it, and by the many bantering, fcoffing and immodeft fpeeches made in it upon that occafion ^ nor do they cfteeni it unfit upon that account to be ufed in the wor- /liip of God, without a new confecration. V>ia to fpcak^ to the praBice of Hezekiah, vihat does It hut mak^ for our praife^. | How very different the courfe Heztl^jah took, was from that taken by our Adverfaries, will appear, if we confider thefe following things. 1. That the fuperilitious, and idolatrous ufe of the fign of the Cro fs had prevailed among the Papifls, for many ages before the Reformation j juft as the like ufe of the Brazen Serpent had prevailed among the Jeu-s in HezekjaFs time. 2. Htzel(iah might aseafily have abolifh'd the fuperftitious and idolatrous abufe of the Brazen Serpent, if he had pre- ferv'd the thing itfelf 3 as the Churchmen might the like abufe of the fign of the Crofs, if they continued the ufe of it. So far there is an exa^t agreement of the two ca- fes : let us now fee wherein they differ. 3. Hezekjahy that he might take away all occafion of fu- perftitionand idolatry, broke the Brazen Serpent, and ut- terly dellroy'd it : but the Churchmen, on the contrary, retain the Crofs in baptifm>and Crucifixes in fome of their Churches. 4. The Brazen Serpent was made byGod'.sown exprefs order , and when its primary defign and ufe was at an end, it was an illuftrious monument of the divine power and ^oodnefs. But the fign of the Crofs was never prefcrib'd by God, ferves no good purpofe, nor can be juftly reckon'd any monument of divine power and goodnefs. So that Hetekjab * 1 Tim. ii. 8, \j^^g' 166. chap. I. f/j^ Dissenters: 305 Hezekiah might have allediT'd much more pLiufiblc cxculcs for his prefcrving the Bnrzen Serpent, while he took away the abule of it 3 thun the Churchmen can, tor retaining in like manner the fi^n of the Crofs. y. Hizel(tah\s aft is commended by every body 5 but this of the Churchmen is fo fir from bein?^ commended by any body, that 'tiscondcmn'd,not only by the Reform d Churches abroad^ but by feveral of their own Chufch 5 and even the PapilKs thcmfelves, whom they feek to pleafe hereby, do but laugh at them for it. But we go on with our Author. For U'f have ahalifi'd all thofe ujajes^ --jjbith had a^y appear ante of fuperjiit'ioytinthem: This J deny. Everyone knows the cere- mony of the fign of the Crofs, as u fed among the Papiffs, fc^^if fome appearance of juperfiition in ity and yet rhey baVc nor abo- lifiVd it. Nay, and let any one judge,whether the reafon al- ledg'delfewhere,againftlayjng.itafidc,doesnofcurry fuper- ftition enough in it ? '^ And lefs than tli^s we could not do^ *' unlefs we would wholly efface this markof the Lord Jefus, ' ** and fo gratify Mahometans and Heathens irt the higheft ** degree.*' * But he adds: and are ready to part with the '/ejt^ ^'heneier itjhall appear to ^, that they endanger oar peoples re-^ lapjhtg into idolatry, . That which has been, may be again j and prudent men fhould take care to prevent it. Our Ad- verfaries are not ignorant, what a handle thefe things gave to Bifiiop Mount a^u^ Bifliop Parker^ and fome others : and why fhould they nor take care that their people may not re- lapfe into ftipetjittiony as well as into idolatry ? Now that they take occafion to relapfe into that^ I have ilretvn already from his own words. Further, why fhould they not take away all occafions of idolatry from ftrangers , as well as their ov^n people ? Popifh ilrangers^- when they go into* the Englijh Cathedrals, with an idolatrous mind, if not with an idolatrous outward behaviour, behold and reverence the Crucifix plac'd upon the altar. Our f'fi Reformers^ 'when they fet about their "^-orl^y did not fo much confider what had been ahus\4 hy fuperftition^ ,ts how to pre- lent Inch ahufe 5 for the future. , Why might not Hezekjah in like manner have fav'd the Brazen Serpent, not fo much coniidering how the Jews had ahi'.s'^d it hy their fuperftition^ as hoiv to prevent I'uch. ahiifes for. the future ? But Hezehiah knew nothing of this method of reformation 3 which, I fuppofe,- receives the greater luftre- A a by ' V- V— .J. i- ■'■■^.- , ^i ■ ' -■>'— .VI 3J3;6 A Vindication of PartIL -by being compar'd with his defeftive praHice 3 which, our Author tells us, makes for their prat fc. He here addsii. very weak reafon : Jfeare not (asthejevjs under Hezekiah ^a-ere) inclinable to the idolatries of our neighs Jjottrs.: rd'f ahomnate tkeir monfirous fuperftition^ above all things in/tht i:ortd, * When the Reformation was firft begun in EngJandyth^ people were really incltneahle to idolatry y:ind came not to Proteltant worihip fo much out of love as fear ^ as has been obierv'd in the former Part. If therefore the Epif- copal party pretend to be led by this confideration , why fliould they not have been then led by it ? And further^ they dont leem fo intirely to abominate their fuperttition, who look upon Baptifm as lame and deficient without the ad- clition of the fign of the Crofs. And fince men are natu- rally more addicted to fuperftition, than to the purity of worfhip, too great caution cannot be here eafily ufed. And indeed, if our Reformers had ufed a little more than they did , I can hardly think the Reformation in England would have been in fo great danger, as it was in the laft Century, or very lately in the prefent. Our Author has told us. That Popifi emiffaries have often her fon at ed Fanatic teachers^ and raiVd in their Conventicles az^ainji the Churchy to the great fat isfaB ion of their hearers f. 1 pafs over the impious and abufive language of the Tranflatory becaufe that is of no moment in the controverfy. As to the thing it felf, whether it be true of the Quakers, or any of the wild Se«iiarievS m Oliver's time, I dont certainly know, and think not material to inquire 5 but I fhall look upon it as agroundlefsaffertion coacerningPresbyterian aflemblies, till it be prov'd, not by fuch fcandalous lies, as thofeof Cimmtn and Heathy but by fubftantial evidence. But tho* we deny the thing, yet let us fuppofe it to have been true, that crafty wretches have deceiv'd plain honcfl: people, and have fupplied the place of a Minifler, perhaps, in his ab-" fence; yet no Presbyterian affembly ever had a Papift for their Paftor, as the Church of £w^/^W has had many fuch, Reftors and Bifiiops • or at beft, many who were very like them. Our Author acknowledges Bp.A^oH?;r^e«andBp.P^r/(fr, \)r,HLy\'n and Mr. Thorndili^ were too much inclined to the Papiils, in feveral important points of the Popifli contro- verfy. I will add feveral more, who were of the fame kid- ney 5 and then coniider,what our Author fiys to excufethem. Bp. Chap. L the Dissenters^ 307 Bp. Moioitcvu owM hi.s Bi/hoprick to his great friend and patron, Archbp. Laud. Now he was made Bp. oi On- rhfjin' in the year id^S, and of Koruich ten years after. * And iince his principles were enough difcovcr'd in his wri- tin<^s before, how can Archbp. Laud be thought to have been free from the fame opinions ? But this Archbiihop is fo much the darling of the Church, that 1 /hall chufc to fpeak of him in other mens words, rather than my own. And in the firil place, let us hear Dr. Robert ^hhot, who was afterward Bp. oiSalishnyy 3 but being, at the time I fpeak of, the King's Profeffor of Divinity in Oxford^ and Vicechancellor of the Univeifity, he preach 'd a fermon be- fore the Univerfity agamd Laud, who had inveigh 'd a little before againll the Presbyterians in the Pulpit; faying, the Presbyterians ivere as bad as the Pa^'ij}s, Concerning him Dr. ylhhot thus gave his judgment : *' Some are partly " Roynijh^ partly Englijh^ as occafion ferves them, that a man " might fay unto them : Are you for us^ or for our ad^cerfa^ " ries'^. who, under pretence of truth, and preaching againft " the Puritans, ftrike at the heart and root of the faith and *' religion now eftablifli'd amongft us. Thi^ preaching ** againft the Puritans, was but the praftice of Parfons and << Cnmj?ians counfel , when they came into England to fe- *« duce young Students. When many of them were afraid *' to lofe their places^ if they fliould profeffedly be thus ; <« the counfel they then gave them, was, that they ihould ** fpeak freely againd the Puritans, and that fliould fufEce. ** And they cannot plead they are accounted Papiils, be- ^* caufe they fpeak againd the Puritans 3 but becaufe, be- *• rng indeed Papills, they fpeak nothing againft them. If ** they do at any time fpeak againft the Papifts, they do but *^ beat a little about the bufh, and that but foftly too, for *' fear of waking and difquieting the birds that are in it. " They fpeak nothing, but that wherein one Papift will ** fpeak againft another 3 as againft equivocation, and the •* Pope's temporal authority, and the like, and perhaps *' fome of their blafphemous fpeeches : but in the points " of free will, juftification, concupifcence being a fin after ** Baptifm, inherent righreou^nefs, and certainty of falva- ** tion, the Papifts beyond the feas can fay they are whol- *' ly tr^eirs 3 and the Recufants at home make rheir brags A a 2 '*of ^ iiu Fdkr'< Ch. Hiil. h- xi ^- tzi, Kcyl Cyjt Angl. p 3^6. 3c8 A Vindication of Part 11. " of them : and in all things they keep themfelvcs fo near ** the brink, that upon occafion they may flep over to them, " Now for this fpecch, that the Presbyterians are as had as the ** Pal'ifts '-i there is a lling in the fpeech, which I wifh had *' been left out : for there are many Churches beyond the ** feas, which contend for the religion eftabUflied amongrt ** us, and yet have approved and admitted the Presbytery. *' Might not Chrill fay, What art thou ? Komtjlj or *' EngliJJj'^. Papirt orProteftant? Or what art thou ? a mun- *' grel or compound of both ? a Proteilant by ordination, *' a Papid in point of free will, inherent righteoufnefs, and ** the like? a Protellant in receiving the facrament, a Pa- *' pifl: in the doftrine of the fjicrament ? What ! do you *' think there are two heavens ? If there be, get you to *' the other, and place your felves there , for in this, where *' I am, ye fliall not come. * In like manner, Bp. Hall thus addrefles him in a Letter infcrib'd to him : " I would I knew where to find you, '* then I could tell how to take direct aims 3 whereas now '' I mull pore and conje£lure. To day you are in the tents *' of the Romdnijis ; to morrow in ours j the next day be- *' tween both, againft both. Our Adverfarles think you *' our5, we theirs ^ your confcience finds you with both, •' and neither. 1 flitter you not. This of yours is the ** worft of all tempers : heat and cold have their ufes j *' lukewarmnefs is good for nothing, but to trouble the fto- ^' niach. Thofc that are fpiritually hot, find acceptation y *' thofe that are ftark cold, have a lelTer reckoning 5 the *' m.can between both is fo much worfc, as it comes nearer '' to good, and attains it not. How long will you halt irt ^^ this indifFcrency ? Refolve one way, and know at laft *' what you do hold, and what you Should. Caft ofFeither *' your wings, or your teeth 3 and, loathing this bat- like *^ nature, be either a bird, or a bcalK To die wavering and *' uncertain, your felf will grant fearful. If you muft icttle, ^^ when begin you ? if you mull begin, why not now ? 'Tis *^ dangerous deferring that, whole want is deadly, and *' whole opportunity is doubtful. God crieth with^^h:; *' J/7.0 i; on yy^v fule ? i:/:o ? Look at laft out of your win- " dow to him, and in a refolute courage call down the *' ^cuiheL that hath bewitched you." t Ihad ■* A>^ I\?nu;-;ciation oir'fcvcral PoTn du^l;iiu> 5 ,J}iii Hcvl. Cvvr. An»l. Z^. 66. Clinp.I. the Dis SENTERS. ' 309 I had not faid fo much concerning Archb. L^/.rt, had it not been certain that all things in the Church were for ma- ny years orderM jud according to his pltafure, and that raft numbers of the Clergy were then fallen in with his principles. Thefe omitted nothing, whereby they might oblige the Papifts j and they would certainly, and without much difficulty, have join'd themfelves into one bcjdy with them, if they had had an opportunity. Hence, during the tyranny of that Archbifliop, almoft all books written againll the Papills were fupj^rcfs'd. I believe all men will grant Bp. GcuuLn was Churchman enough ; and yet he fpeaks warmly upon this head, in his Sermon before the Commons, Novcmh, 29. 1^40. * He men- tions a great many particular corruptions of that time, an(i flaews he vehemently fulpeited they were about to rc-edlfy BabeP^ ruins 5 and at laft fays : ** By fuch dangerous fymbo- " lizing with them in words, and fome outward formali- '^ ties, we do but prepare our minds, and fweeten them, ^* with lefs diftaft to relifh their doclrines and tenets 5 and, " as it were, in a civil way we complement our felvcs out *' of our truth, giving the adverfaries itrong hopes and pre- ** fumptions, as they have difcover'd, that we are inclining *' towards them. " f 1 will here add another ftory out of Mr. Pryr.nc^ which will fhew how much the Univerlity ofCanibyiAie was at that time corrupted with Popifli opinions. One Mr, Jdam^^ in a Sermon before the Univerfitv, ufed thefe expreffions : ^' That a fpecial confeffion unto a Prieft (aftually, where ^' time or opportunity prefents it felf, or otherwife in ex- " plicit intention and refolution) of all our fins committed " after Baptifm, fo far forth as we do remember, is necef- *' fary unto filvaiion, in the judgment of Fathers, School- ^' men, and almoft all antiquity, not only ncct/ptate f-.tce^^r}^ *' but alfo Yieceffitate medii : fo that, according to the ordi- • '• nary or reveal'd means appointed by Chrift, there can be *' no filvation without the aforefiid confeflion. That ** God, being an enerny to all fin, will not pardon any, " if we willingly conceal but one in our conteflion to the ** Prieft. That confeffion is as necefl^irv to fdvation, as ** the miniftry of Baptifm j as neceflary to falvation» as *' meat is to the body. '' \\ Dr. Broimrlg^ the Viccchancel- A a 3 lor* * T'l: LoveofTruihsui Pes:-, ^ 3J) -. t^ ^3 CAr.rcrb, D.om. ^. 19: 3IO A Vindication of Part !!• lor, and fome other Dofl:or5, took exceptions at this fcrmon, as fcandalous and Popifh. Whereupon ^Iv.yJanis was con- vented before the VicechanccUor and Heads, v/ho both re- quired, and perus'd the copy of his fermon : which done, the Vicechancellor, whomorrally hated thePopifli luperllition, drew up the form of a recantation for him to fubfcribc, and publifli before the Congregation , wherein he was to ac- knowledge, the doctrine he had dehver'd was both erro- neous and dangerous, having no warrant from the Word of God, and crofling the dodrine of the Church of En7land, Mv.Mci)72s refusVl to make this recantation. Whereupon, at a full meeting of the Dodors, it was put to the vote, whether this recantation fliould be injoin'd him, or no ? Six voted for it , but they were outnumber'd by thefe Doc- tors, who voted againft it, viz, CcfinSyLary^Stcam (who after- wards were Bifliops) Collins^ Smithy Cumber^ Martin^ and Eden. So far Mr. Prynne. Moreover, " Dr. Cofms was charg'd tq f* have fet up, in the Church of Dnrha-my a marble altar *' wMth Cherubins, with all the appurtenances thereof^ *' namely, a cope with the Trinity, and God the Father in *^ the figure of an old man , another with a Crucifix, and f- the image of Chrift, with a red beard and blue cap. ** Befides, he w^as accus'd for lighting two hundred wax ?< candles about the altar on Chriftmas day ^ for forbidding <« Pfalms to be fung before or after fermon, tho' he made f « an anthem to be fung ot the three Kings, of CoIUn ( by *^ the names of j Gaf^ar, Baltha'iar and Melchior 5 and for entituled, A CoiltH:o:i of private Dexotionsy or Hours of Prayer ^ wherein, befides the form of the book, taken out of the Popifh Horarhs^ and many other things plainly Romifli, he acknowledges feven Sacraments, f Dr. IrtiiTi'i^r^ aflRrms : *' Chrift's body is effentially, Tub- ^' ftaniially, and truly prefent in the Elements. II Br.Kellet fays: '* The prefence of Chrift in the facrament ^' is fuch, as the Eucharifl it felf muft be ador'd. " + And if any deiire a proof of this, he advifeth them to read Bel- larmhi. * Fuller, O.HiO-. /,. ii.^. t7?. t Heylyn.Cypr.Angl. ^.173. |i Ciiad in th: KriiuociAi. u; fcvcrai Pv>^-!fh Du:t. J^- 4- ^ I^ i* 5- Chap. I. the Dissenters. 311 Dr. Godf yy Goodman y the Bifhop ofGtouce/fer^ wa.^ not only Popillily arfefted, but a downright Papjll j and in his lail will and tcllament, he declared he died in that Communion. 1 forbear mentioning Bp. Mount az^u ot Kom-ich^ Bp. Nule of iVtmhejur^ Bp. 'Monyitdin of Loyidoriy Bp. Pierce of /Jar/) and W^f/Zj, and a great many of the inferior Clergy, who were A^ery much inclin'd to the Ripifts in K. CharLs the FirlVs reign. I could eafily give a large catalogue of fuch Bifliops or Priclisat that time, if I were required, tho'for the pre- fent I forbear. Nay, in K. Churlcs the Second's reign we had a Bp. of iS'r. Afa^hy who order'd to be written upon his tombftone : Ora pro anlma mea : Pray for my foul : * not to fay any thing of Parker^ JVatfon^ and others 5 and fome of our own time, Qrcty JVeltony &rc. Let us now return to our Author. I« fuch concejjions as they [Mountagu, Thorndike, S^r.] have ynade to the Romanics, concerning Chriji's bodily prejence in tV.efacramenty the norfiip ofjaints andimages^ and the purity of the Roman Church from idolatry ^they are condemn d hy the toiayii^ fitoui fuffra%e of our oivn Divines, f This is not true of thofe Divines who liv'd in Bp. hkuntagu's time : and tho' the Do£}or believ'd it, and I fliew'd my felf ready to aiTent to the truth of it concerning their prefent Divines 5 yet what has happen'd fince both our Pieces were firft printed, will not fuffer a man to continue in his charitable opinion. The reafon ^a-hy th(y ha'ie never been cenfur^d in Convocation^ is partly hecaufe no ati of Co n\o cat ion is valid without the royal authority : You fee now what fort of a Church that is, which is fo highly extoU'd 5 which is not able to guard againft heretical, fuperllitious, and idolatrous Bifnops , or to pafs any cenfure upon them , unlefs his Majefty thinks fit to order it. Who can now believe, there was never any v:ifcr government than this in the whole Chri/iian worlds, ii Be- fides, had they not Convocations, w^hich had the King's licence, in the time of MountagUy Heylyn^ and Thorndike ? Why then were not they cenfur'd in Convocation ? This therefore is but little to the purpofe. partly becait'e they irere not only very ferviceable to their Prince : The Doctor might as well have left this out. For if, by difcharging their duty to their Prince^ they make amends, in the opi- nion of our Adverfarics, for the greateft mifchief done to A a 4. truth * Collea. of Spcecl^esmP;.rl.conccnii>gtl.cPoriniPlor. Load. HZi p A- t J^ag. 16 8, 11 Sie^ag. 24-. ^li A Vindication of Part II. truth and piety , 'tis plain the Church muft fhcw it felf more folicitous to obey the Pnnce, than God himfelf. hut iil{eivtje have lahntir^A vtry projitably in [owe parts of divinity. How little IS this alio to the purpofe ? The fame thing may be afierted of feveral Popifh writers. Thjpre are few, if any Heretics, who rejecl every truth. If therefore they have lahonr'd pvojitally in defending fome particular truth, muft they be thought to deferve no cenfure, when, by their other mifchievous opinions, they quite overthrow religion ? Our Author tells us prcfently, that Bp. Momtngu v:us mife- rahly hnrrafs'dzi'ith the co^nplaints of Cbp-chme>7^ as -u-ell as Ptiri- tans. Which is true, if by Churctmen are underftood thofe, who were averfe to Archb. Laud's defigns $ but we hear of no rom-^lainti made againft him by any of that faflion, which was then very numerous. Jnd tho' under K, Charles II. the BiJJjops could do little^ hut ivhat the court direBed 3 yet kytouin^ Heylyn '« ^ who, tho' he never has any regard to truth, in the accounts he gives of his adverfaries ^ yet was exceeding ferviceable to our Author, when he was writing his H//forira/Iwrro^«^/o«, and fupply'd him with a large ftore of calumnies. I fhall now, for the reafons I gave before, pafs over all the intermediate Chapters, and come to confider the laft of this Part. CHAP. XIIL Concerning Nonrefijiance^ IF the candor of the Epifcoparians were as great, as they endeavour to make us believe it is, they would freely and ingenuoufly own the very great fault their Party has been guilty of m this matter. The Clergy for many years afted, as tho' they defir'd nothing fo much, as to have our Kings vefted with an abfolute and unlimited power 5 and to have the People deprived of all their rights, and fink into the vileft flavery. But our Author is not over confiftent with himfelf, and feems fometimes willing to vindicate that monftrous opinion 3 and at other times he endeavours to excufe his party for having defended it ^ and then again he makes them innocent, and wholly denies the matter j for which he elfewhere attempts to apologize. But let us hear what he fays. For an fiver to this heavy charge 5 wefay^ that federal hratJcheS of it are fajien^d upon the ivhole Churchy not only iiithoitt reafon^ hut "ivithout the leaji colour : for amongB ti6 have been found as eminent patrons of civil liberties^ as any they can produce on their * ftdi ^ I will not deny, there have been foirfe few of the Cler- gy, who have behav'd themfelves :x$ patrons of our cl-al liber- ties^ when they have been in danger. But as the Popifh opinions of Ahuntagu^ Heylyn^ Thorndikfy and Parker^ are not, in our Author's judgment, fufficient to prove the Church of England pg"- 22 5. 514 ^ Vindication of Part IL £ng!a}7j inclin'd to thofc opinions j Co three or four Clersy- mens diflenting from the red of theirBrcthrcn, is no reafon, why it /hould not be thought the dodrine of the Church, That the ma^ifirate Is t:ot tij^on a>iy account whatever to be rejijiej, Nay, the Clergy ufcd to glory in this, as the peculiar doc- trine of their Church. Nor do I here fpeak of the meaner fort, but of the moll eminent both in learning and hono- rable preferments. And if any then attempted to vindicate the contrary opinion, he was fure to draw upon himfclf the hatred of his Brethren, as well as the fevereil punifliment. A famous inftance of this nature was Mr. Samuel 'Johifoyiy who, for no other reafon,wasimprifon'd, degraded, difgrace- fully and cruelly whipt, to the great joy, as is well known» pf the Clergy. And not only the fermons of the Clergv, but fome other arguments, prove this to hare been former- ly the doftrine of the Church o^ England. For it was de- jcreed in Convocation, in the year 1^40, asl fhew'd in the former Part. All the Clergy likewife were oblig'd to fub- fcribe to it 5 as our Author owns afterwards. Were the Qer- ^y^ fiys he, oblig\i to juhfcrihe one things and teach peofjle ano- ther ? * And unlefs that is to be efteem'd the Church's jdodrine, which all her Clergy fublcribe, how can we pof- ^bly come to know what it is ? But let us proceed with pur Author. To otir Q-xn brave men it is zve owe the prelent enjoyment of our religion and laivSy which the Ob;eHors friends would have bafely hetray^dy at a time when they all lay atfraks. If by thefe h^ave men are meant fome of the Laity, I deny fior, that there were many fuch in the Church of England^ who faw through the deiigns and craft of the Clergy, and hated this their doflrine. To thefe brave men^ indeed, we owe a great deal 5 concerning whom alfo he might b^ thought to fpeak in this place, when another paflfage is compared with it, wherein he plainly gives up the Clergy as no fuch defenders of our civil liberties. If the highjlatesof the kingdom were willing to give away the ffcople^s rights and f^rivi- legcs^ WAS it redfoy:ahle to expecl that a company of helplefs Hriejis fhould d fend them ? | And yet feeing the inquiry is concern- ing the opinion of the Church of En:landy\^/e are to mind her teachers, and what they taught, and not judge by the be- haviour of fuch Laymen as would not be taught or ruled by t ijid. Chap. aIII. the Dissenters. 315 by their Clergy. So that our Author, notwithftanding what he fiys elfcwhere, mull be undtrilood here to fpeak of the Clergy. And it fo, what muil we think of thcfe lYjen ? As long as they thought themfclves out of danger, and found themfelves kindly treated by the King, they bawl'd out their doilrine without ceafing, that the magi- Urate was not upon any account to be rclifted 5 and threat- ned the poor Diflenters with hell torments, becaufc they could not digeft that wild opinion, and ftir'd up all inferior magillrates againft them ^ wherein they imitated the cle- mency of thofe mentioned by the Prophet : Ulich havf faU to thyfou/y hoiv Joivn that iie may go oxer , and to uhom thou haji laid thy body as the grqundy and as the Jtreet to them that go o'oer. * But no fooner did they perceive themfelves in danger, under King ^^ames II, but they prefently, like PyoteuL< of Ktn^ Charles I, n>jA II, ivhen thtfe mat- ters "u^'cre moji "^iirmly a^itatedy our great ynen were drcid^d into parties, 'Twas well for the nation they were not all out of their fenfes '-, but that fome were found , who had the public fafety at heart. But what's this to the purpofe ? If our ^reat men were dividtdj Was it therefore lawful for your Clergy to fpread Blfe opinions, and teach the King to oppreis his fubjefts, and to raife taxes without a Parlia- ment ? Was that reafon enough for their aflerting, that it belong'd to the King, as God's only deputy in the king- dom, to rule it juft as he pleas'd , that however he op- prefs'd, plunder 'd, or deftrcy'd hisfubjefts, he was ac- countable to none but God 3 and that no one could refift him, but under the penalty of eternal damnation ? Thoie^ iL'ho had the great ejf J^j are cfthe royal fa^>:oury "ji-ere of courfe advanced to the highejt ofpces, A fine excufe ! When the fafety of the ftate lies at ftake, the Clergy conform themfelves iuft to the humour of the King and his cour- tiers, and devife and fpread the moft falfe and pernicious principles, to gratify them. This Jiir'd the enxy of the rejl againjl the^n^ "juho fpoj'^d for f;o plots ay:d projfHs to dljfriount them^ and get into ti.eir places. If this were true, I dont fee how it can be of any fervice, to vindicate the Clergy in fpreading wicked notions among the people. But this plea for the Clergy is injurious to our great men^ and fo to the nation itfelf. It reprefents one part of them, as vilely flattering the King, and currying fa- vour with him, by claiming for him an unjuft and tyrannical authority, and the other part of them, as oppoiing, indeed, the former , but doing it only out of ^«^t, and with adefire to get into their palaces. But 1 make no doubt ue had many brave patriots among them, who, without any fuch fordid motives, endeavour'd to remove fuch flittering courtiers from all places in the commonwealth, for no other reafon, but 3t8 ^ Vindication of Part 11. but to prevent its receiving any prejudice by their admini- itration. To do thh^ they confidey'd which way to Jir€ttgi]}en their party : And what wonder ? So men always us'd to do, when they fee their native country in danger of being ruin'd. and fouyid no jitter toolsy for their pttrpofe^ than theNo>ico>iformift5 : theje therefore they iKdeaiour'd to gain by all the officious ways hnajinahUy as^pod word'^ kjndlookj^ courteous behaviour ^ and a nadincjs to \ote for thtm ulon all occafons. In convrrfation with thenty they freely exclaimed az^ahiji the manazjm^nt of ^uh- hc affairs. They [?tty*d their condition^ that thty Jhould be fo l(ept under f ^^l^^fy^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^ wifhes to have it other wife^ and f?ro)wf!ng to affiji thtm with all the power and interefi they had. Thefe arts were foon perceived by di faming men ^ and it became /f rule with them to co:j elude ^ that as foon as any ambitiotps man was dfchargd at Court^ he would prefe^Jtly appear at the head of the Dijpnting party, 'Tis no rtrange thing, if plain honeft men are fometimes impos'd upon by the fubtil and crafty. We deny not that we have been fo ferv'd fometimes. We know we were deluded not only by King C/\tr/f^ II, and his courtiers , but by the Clergy, who have been foirerimes large in their promifes to us, but fparing enough in performing them. But then we are not the only men, who have been thus deceiv'd : the Conformifts, as cunning as they are, have been outwitted fometimes by the fly tricks of the Papifts ^ and had they been only deluded by them, had they done no unjuft adts themfelves, we fliould not much blame them. The queftion now is : whether the Nonconfor- raifts, being impos'd upon by fuch courtiers, have fallen into evil opinions, or ever fubfcrib'd any fuch? If either Conformifts, or Nonconformifts obtain the fa- vour of the King , or his courtiers , by honeft methods, they are to be commended. But that Divines fhould conform themfelves wholly, together with their opinioits and fermons, to the pleafure of the King^ or his courti- ers, is very diflionourable. Wh:it is here faid concern- ing the arts whereby they ingratiated themfelves, vi^. by good "dordsy kjnd looks ^ and courteom behavioi'Sy is the figment of his own brain, defign'd for a rhetorical flourish, rather than a true hiftorical account, and therefore deferves no anfw^er. But they endeavour'd to gain thetn by a readn7efs to ^ote for them uf'on all occafions. In this they are to be com- mended 3 for they endeavour'd to gain thofe who abhorred tyranny- Chap. XIII. rk Dissenters- 519 tyranny, and the principles tending thereto ; and who, being enemies to pcrfccution, lliew'd themfelves zealous friends to the laws and liberties of our country. They, who have had the intereft of their country at heart, have always been ready to vote in our favour. And if they exclaimed az^ainji the inanagement of pnUtc affairs^ all impartial judges muft allow, they had good reafon for it. Nor can it be any wonder, that fuch patrons of our civil liberties fiiould not be much in favour in the reigns of the two Brothers. But if from thofe times we look to our own ^ to whom do they, who lofe King George's favour, now apply themfelves, to the Nonconformifls, or the high Churchmen ? And if they pitied our conditioy^y and ivifi'd to have it othervAfe 3 the Conform! fts have no reafon to be angry with them, unlefs it be for having more of humanity left in them, than they had themfelves. Nou*, if they blame our fuie for heirig too much devoted to otir princes^ have not ixe as great reafon at leaji to complain of themy that they yield themfelves fo tamely to he managed ly feditioM heads , and are fo commonly brought on the Jictge to embroil af- fairs ? * But who are thofe ftditious headsy refcr*d to ? and what felition have they rais'd ? Our Author has contrived thefe things of his own head, and they are unworthy of a formal confutation. Btct we are fo far from denying /f, that we rather glory in af^ ferting^ the magiflrate'^s power to he from Gody and not derived from the people^ nor dependent on their pleafure. No body doubts, that the juft power of the magiftrate is from God , for that power, which the gentlemen who write about Government afcribe to magiftrates, they fup- pofe to have been plac'd in the hands of all in a ftate of nature. That therefore magiftrates in general fhould have power, and that they fhould enad laws for the good of the fociety , is acknowledged to be derived from God^ the fountain of all natural light and knowledge. But that this power was at firft given by him to fome particular per- fons, to be handed dow^n by them to others, by an here- ditary right of fucceffion 3 and that thefe perfons fliould have a right, tranfcendent to all rules of common equity, to fpoil, or murder their fubjefls, and be accountable to none for what they do 5 thefe are the things we deny. If the people * lags 22- 320 A Vindication of Part II, people give that power to Kings, which they themfelves nave recciv'd of God, that power ot Kings may then well be faid to be derived from God : but we maintain, that an abfolute and tyrannical power was never given by God to the people ^ nor to Kings, either by God, or the peopIe-^ If our Adverfaries have any arguments to prove, that kingly power belongs to fome individual perfons, as be- flowed upon them by a divine grant, without any regard to the eleftion or confent of the people, we are ready to hear them. But fince we only allow of refitlance in the cafe of an uniuft and tyrannical government, and our Author himfelf pretends not to defend fuch an one j thefe things are very little to our purpofe. And unlefs Kings are made by the people, by whom, I befeech you, muft they bd fuppos'd to be made ? Where fhall we fearch for thofe inftruments or records , in which God has particularly fpecify'd the perfons to whom he has delegated this regal power ? And if we muft herein be direfted by the pro- vidence of God, how fhall we be able to diftinguifh a rightful King from an ufurper ? In a word, fince God has neither appointed, by any law, a particular form of government 3 nor particularly mark'd out the perfons, who are to be magiftrates, every people is left at full liberty to chufe both. The contrary doBrine^ that all government is founded In I know not "what original contra^ between prince and people^ is not only ridiculous y hut impious^ and flows from the impure fource of IL^i- curean philofophy. That original contrary our Author fpeaks fo flightly of, deferv'd to be treated with more refpeft. For if there were no fuch thing, how could King James II. forfeit his regal authority ? or, by what right could the good peo- ple oi England refift him, and fettle the crown upon King William and Queen Mary ? or upon what pretence could he fwear allegiance to them ? Our Convention Parliament, before they fettled the crown upon them, declared that King James had broken the original contraB between him and his people. If then, there never was any fuch con- tract, how could he break it ? and how could the Eng- lifh fcepter be juftly put into any other hand ? So that if we confider upon what foundation the right of King JVil- Ham and Queen Mary^ Queen Ayme^ and his prefent Majefty King Gtorgey is built 5 we muft acknowledge 'tis no othei' than this, that 'tis lawful for a people to refift a King who breaks Chwip. XIIL the DissE^sriR^l 321 breaks the or'ipnal contra^' j and to fet another Jn liis rr.om. But no marvel it feme of the old leaven yet remains, iince the whole body of the Clergy were not long iince leavenM with it. But this may be fome comfoi't to us, that their trifling fophiftry will avail but little with them, as foon as they find themlclves in danger. For I believe no one doubts, we fliould then prefently fee them renew their for- mer pradhce, and provide for their fafcty, as they d'd in King Jameses time, by refiftance j and that, notwithttanding all their boalling in the pulpit, or the prels. For theie plain-dealers have the art of varying their do6trinef^- and ihifting their principlesaccording to the times, and as they find themlelves to be in fafety, or in danger. But this is ridiculous. By all means ! 'Tis ridicidom the King ihould not be above all laws, and not have it in his power to de- ftroy the commonwealth, for the good of which alone he is made King. But our wife anceftors were of another opinion 3 and unlefs they had, by fuch a contract, fet feme bounds to the regal power, how could the people have fecur'd any of their rights and liberties ? And how comes it to pafs, that we require our Kings to fwear to maintain thefe in their Coronation Oath ? But this is hnpious^ and JJons from the impure four ce o/" Epicurean /?ti/o/o^^^. And will our Adverfaries thus accufe the moft noble Aitembly, that preferv'd our religion, our liberty, and our commonwealth ; and to whom we are indebted for the reign of fuch excel- lent Princes? Will they, I fav, accufe them of adopting an tmj^ious opinion, out of the f?hiloJo}?hy of Eficuru6 ? Will they do it, who have fworn to their fettlement of our Conftitution ? 1 refer thofe who are thus minded to Mr. Lock,^ our noblefl: writer upon the fubjecr of Govern- ment. I refer them to Bifhop Hoadi'ey^ commended elfe- where by our Author himfelf, who has excellently defen- ded our opinion. And I may well call it ours 3 for we differ not at all, from that which he maintains 3 while the Nonjurors (whofe Opinion was formerly embraced by the generality of the En'jlifj Clergy) are moft bitterly in- rag'd againft him. And whv fhould he objeft againft us, Ei^icurtan principles, w'ho is fo difplea&'d with the charge of Popifh ones ? If Epicurus jumbled fome miftakes and fom.e truths together, mutt we upon that account reject the truths ? We take another courfe in natural philofophy j why fliould we not do the like in politics and ethics ? B b And 322 y^ Vindication of Part IL And if EpicuritSy as Diogenes Laertius reports, held there was nothing juft or unjuft in itfelf, but by virtue of covenants, which men have enter'd into, he widely differs from our opinion. But what need 1 ufe many words about this ? Thefe, and the reft of the idle cavils here ufed, have been long ago anfwcr'd by the moft learned and ingenious Mr. Lol\ to whom I refer all thofe for fatisfaflion, who think there is any ftrcngth in them. At length the Doftor afks : And a^ for tyran}?y^ what Ao ive advance to encourage it ? * We fhall prefently be able to anfwer this queftion from his own confeflion. Jince a man may hs very loyal [in the Latin 'tis, to good princes : and he that is not loyal to them, deferves the fevereft punifhment] and yet far from being fond of a 77ierciiefs tyrant. No man in his wits will think thcle things to be contrary to one another 3 or make any difficulty of allowing with our Author, that li'e fee at this day many brave men^ employ'' d by our excellent Queen^ and very dutipd and loyal to her^ who had foiy}ierly Jtgnalizd themfelves in the defence of their liberties a^^ainji arbitrary power. Neverthelefs, we may fay, we fee others who little regard whether Princes rule well or tyrannically y but only conlider how they fland affefled to themfelves, and their interctt 5 and accordingly either reverence, or hate them. But thefe things are only a flourlfli before hand ; and now we come to the main combat. Hear then from our Author our true obieftion : But fo-me of m declared not long fince^ both in preaching and writings that it WJ^ not lawful t9 rejiji the Princess officers^ though commanded by him to aB in the moft arbitrary manner, f And now I appeal to the honeft Terdi£t of our Judges, whether what the Clergy herein advanced, enconragd tyranny^ or no ? See now, how he anfwers. It may be reme^nber^d that they exprefs^d themfelves thus^ at ci time when the royal authority was warmlydifputedy zvhen f^oj^ular fury^ inflamed by faBious men^ was very threatmng and dange- rons both to Church and State: But it fhould be remem- bered, that matter had never been difputed, and much more not fo warmly, had not mercenary Clergymen firft taught both Prince and people that bafe doiirine. This there- *^'rf 232. \ i^^3 : Chap. aIII. The Dissenters. 323 therefore is a very forry defence. For what i Is it lawful for the Clcrpfy to fpre d falfc and mifchievous opinions, when there is a warm difpurc a foot ? Certainly the warmer the difpute, the more need there is of caution. But fup- pofinj/ this Will ferve, if not to vindicate, yet to excufe in fome nieafure the CTergy, in what they did in King Charles the Fjrft's time , what Ihall we then lay concerning bis Son's reign ? The Clergy did not lefs indultriouily pro- pagate that notion in King C''/i/'/<'5 the Second's days, altho* no popular fury ^niflaynd ly faHiOM mtf7^v.\t6 then very threat mn^ atjAdangeroKshth to (Church and State. In truth, everfince this doftrine began to be preach'd, it has brought the State in- to danger. And if the people of E'ri^laud had regarded that kind of pr.e:ichers, and been loyal ro King Ja7n:s IL as they djre<^ied them 5. every one is feniible, what a condition we muft have been in long ago. So that it mufl be own'd, they either imposed horridly upon the Prince, or the peo-ple. But he goes on : arjd when the Parliament had enoRid a laii'y that none Jhould tal:e arms as^ainji the Ktnq^s ojfiie-rs for any canfe iihate'-cer -^ ivhich Lav; exery Oergyman '-jsa^ hound to fnhjcrihe at his Ordination, So then any thing (no matter whether true or falfe) may be fubfcrib'd, if the Parliament requires it, I beieech now our Brethrea abroad, to (ay plainly, whether this fubfcription of the Conformifts was not unlawful and impious ? Whether the terms of Conformity were not in this refpefi: unjuft ? Whether thofeMinifters are not to be efteem'd the right- ful and catholic Paftors of the Church, who chofe rather to be turn'd out of their livings, than fubmit to fuch conditions of keeping them ? And laftly, whether thofe Minifters are not to be efteem'd fchifmatical, and to have come in at a wrong door, who got their livings by fuch unrighteous methods ? If any unlawful term.s of Conformity are required, they are Schifmatics, in the judgment of many of the Epifcoparians themfelves, not who refufe, but who lubmit to them. And I w^ould be glad to know, how the Ccnformifts can in this relpeft clear themfelves from the jruilt of Schifm. yjnd now Is it fuch an u>7pardonah!e crime for the Clcr^y^ isho are not fuppos^d to toiderjiand fiate ajfaWs^ to dtfoid a matter Co exprefly andfohmnly eftahlifi'd by the laws ? And is this the defence we were made to expeft of the behaviour of the Clergy? Who can do otherwife than call it a poor and B b 2. forry 324 'y^ V I N D I c A T I o N 6>f Part IL forry cxcufe, or rather a begf^ing of pardon ? For if the Clergy toidcrjiand not Jrate ajfairs^ why did they meddle -with them ? Why did they pretend great fkill in them ? But they treated not of this as ajfate ciffnir^ but as a point of religion. Whofe indignation does not rife, when he calls to mind with what arrogance they preach'd this per- nicious doctrine, as tho' it had been unquelUonable Gof- pel 5 and thunder'd out the threatnings of eternal tor- ments againft all thofe who contradicted it ? Further, if it be lawful to defend any matter^ which is exprejjy and folemnly ejiahlijh'd hy the /^u'<,without confidering,whether it be true, or falfc 5 what is there, that may not fome time or other be capable of the fame defence ? By the fame argument our Advcrfariesmay excufe the Clergy, who embrac'd and de- fended Popery in Queen Mary's days : 'twas a matter *^ ex- p^e(ly and jolemnly ejiahl'tjlo'd hy the laivs. xsicxt our Author endeavours to remove the blame from the Clergy, and lay it elfewhere. Tf^hy^ fays he, dont the blame (^if any he due) fall upon the grave and wife authors of fuch a lav: ? No doubt, the blame falls upon the lawmakers 5 but it falls alfo upon thofe who firft taught thofe ,^rar^ ^w<^ i:^/^ perfons the doftrine, and afterward defended it with as much zeal and earnettnefs, as if it had been the principal and moft important point of their religion. Were the Clergy ohlig'd to fuhfcrihe one things and teach people another ? No certainly. But fince the doftrine it felf waspoifonous, they ought not to haveapprov'd it by their fubfcription. But fome men, to curry favour, ftick not at any fubfcription, or oath the Parliament re- quires, and then ftun the poor people with their noife about it. They have their reafons for what they do. T^he Laws exprejly and folemnly require it 5 and they muft obey men, rather than God. But he farther afks : If the high eftates of the kj^igdom were willin}^ to give away the people s rights and privileges^ was it reafonahle to expeB that /t company of helplefs Priejis JJjould defnd them ? They iliould have defended them, as our not lefs helplefs Minifters did, who refus'd to fubfcribe the do6trine y and as they afterwards defended them themfelves, in the reign of King James II. 'Tis one thing not to be i^ble to defend the rights and privileges of the people, tind another perfidioully to betray them. The Parlia- ment hearken'd to the advice and deiire of the Clergy, in Chap. XIII. the Dissenters. 325 in making that, and fcvcral other laws j and arc now worthily rewarded for their coniplaiGnce : for t!ie (cler- gy, to excufe themfelvcs, now throw all the blame up- on them. .Thus I have confider'd all in this Parr, which I think is material in our controverfy. I /hall next confider his other Part 3 wherein we fhall fee how ftout a defence he makes of the Hierarchy and Cere- monies of the Church oi Enijatid. Bb 3 A VINDICATION OF THE DISSENTERS. PART III. In which Dr. N i c ii o l s 's Second Part, vindicating the Church of Endanls Difciphne, and Modes of Woriliip, is examined and rctutcd, CHAP. I. Of the Gcvemviciit of BiJIoop. H E former part of the Do£lor's Defence has been eafily difpatch'd, it containing little material in our controverfy. For Calvinifm is fo far from ever hindring men from fubfcribing the Article.^, that they can't honeftly he fub'crib'd without it» Eut now we ar." come to the very he.ixt of the controverfvc The Diflentcrsuftd not to charge the authentic writingsof thp Church v<:X\ errors in dodrine 3 b"ut cniy fome par- ticulajT Chap. I. A Vindication, (j'C. 327 ticubr authors, who have mide innovations in the doiftrine they lubfcrib'd. But we do indeed blame the Church (how yery defervedly our Arbltnitors fhallnowiee) forherefta- bli/n'd dilciphne, and modes of worniip. Our author be- gins this part of his Defence with the vindication of the Hie- rarchy. And fince his party never write with more alTu- ranee and triumph, upon any point of the controverfy, than this 5 nay, fince abundance of them ufe to condemn all the Reformed Churches abroad, as well as the Diirenters at home, for laying afide Epifcopacy ^ I think 'twill not be amils here, in the firil place, to give a particular account of the opinion of the two contending parties. The epifcopal party then, altho' they are greatly divided about the original and foundation of their Hierarc»iy ^ yet the generality of them, efpeciiilly the moderns, are iliffin maintaining a threefold order of Minifters. To the lowed ,order, of Deacons, a power is granted of baptizing 5 of read- ing in the congregation the T{oly Scriptures, Homilies, and Prayers 5 of affifting the Priefts in difhvbuting the elements of theLord's Supper 5 and of preaching, if the Bifliop thinks fit, upon any part of the New Tellament. The care of the poor is likewiie committed to them in fliew, but not in reality. The middle order, of Prietts, or Presbyters, is allowed to preachj read Prayers, adminifter Sacraments, and pronounce the Abfolurion. To the highed order, of BiHiops, (of which there is but one in each Churchj belongs the power of connrming baptized perfons, ordaining Minifters, and gaverning the Church. They look upon the Bifliop's Diocefs, as the lawe(l: fpecies or kind of a Church, and lodge the w^hole government of every Church in its re- fpeftive Bifhop 5 but the Presbyters, who officiate in the feveral parifhes, which make up the Bifliop's Diocefs, are look'd upon as his delegates or Curates. This part of the controverfy was confiderably alter'd in the laft Century. Our moft antient Reformers thought, there was no difference, by divine appointment, between a Bifhop and a Presbyter ^ and therefore required not thofe, who had been ordaiii'd by Presbyters, to be reordain'd by a Bifliop, to qualify them for difcharging the office of a Presbyter in the Church of o As to our part, we do not condemn all manner of pre- cedence, or preheminence. If the Epifcoparians had only aflerted it to be both lawful and ufeful, that among Presby- tersj who are by the firft inftitution all equal, there fhould .8 b 4 b? 328 y4 V 1 K D I c X T I o N 6// Part III. nc one, for order fake^ placed above the reft, and calUd the Bifhop, we ihould not upon that account have contended with them, or feparated from them. Who knows not that the Foreign Churches, which are under Presbyterian go- vernment, have, in their Synods and Clafles, IVIoderators, Prolocutors, &^r. which are by experience found neceffary ? And if men had been intrufted with thofe offices in our Churches, not barely upon occafion, but for life, or as long as they behav'd themfelvcs well in them, I hardly think any quarrel would have rifen upon this he id. Niy, To ear- neilly did our Minifters defire peace, that if our Bifhops had been oblig'd to govern their Churches, wich theconfeut and affiftance of their Presbyters, they would have born with it, rather than have been depriv'd of the public exer- cife of their Mmiftry. For they thus confider'd with them- fclves 5 that it was enough for them, if they preferv'd in- tire the power which they receiv'd from God, and left that confecration, whereby Presbyters are made Biftiops, as a ufelels thing, to thofe who were fatisfy'dof thelawfulnefs f>Y expediency of it. This then is our judgment ^ that the diitinclion cur Adverfiries make between a Presbyter anda Biljiop is groundleis, being no where made in the Scrip- ture 3 and that Chrift is alone a monarch in his Church 5 and that he has never appointed a Monarchical form of go- vernment to be practis'd in it. 'Tis not needful, that I fhould ufe many arguments to confirm this our opinion. I refer my Engltjhresiders to my Letters againft Dr. jVcHs. They will there meet with a full proof of our opinion, fuch as my adverfary could not an- fwcr 5 who contented himfelf with denying the conclufion, v/ithout replying to the premifes , and miferably teaz'd his poor readers with an endlefs repetition of a tale of the am- biguous, and promifcuous ufe, of the names Bifhop and Presbyter. And as to our Brethren abroad, who are all of the fame opinion with us 3 1 w^ould not be thought to doubt of their being fully acquainted with all thofe arguments, which de- fend an opinion as much theirs as our own. Otherwife I might mention, that our Blefled Saviour at his afcenfion left an Ariftocratical form of government in his Church at Jcrufalcm^ the only one he then had upon earth 5 and com.- niitted to his eleven Apoftjes an equal power in govern- ing it, I might mention, that the fame form of govern- jtjicnt obtain'd at E^hejus^ Corimh^ Thejjalonka^ Philijpj^i^ and Chap. I. the D I s s E N T E R sJ 329 all other Churches mentioned in the New Teflament. I mii;ht mention the Apoftlei-^^K/'sexprefsafcribing the Ordi- nation ofTtmothy to the Presbytery. I mii^ht mention, that there is no where the \c:\i\ notice taken in the New Telta- ment of any fuch iacred office, as had the power of adminif- tring Sacraments ; but not of ruling the Church, andordain- ing Minilters. Laftly, I might mention, that two orders of Miniders only are Ipoken of m the Holy Scripture, and that fo much as the name of a third does not there appear. The learned Bp. Burner w:is aware of fome inconliflency in the contrary notion. I fli ill Cet down his words, which are very much to my purpoie. *' As for the notion. Jays he^ *^ of the diftindt offices of Bifliop and Presbyter, I confefs, *' 'tis not fo clear to me : and therefore fince I look upon the " facramental aftions, as the higheft of facred performan- *' ces j I cannot but acknowledge, thofe who are impowcr'd *' for them, mud: be of the higheft office in the Church."* For the fake of brevity, I pafs over thefe, and a great ma- ny other things, which fliew, the form of government, fettled in the Foreign Churches, does much better agree with the Scriptures, than that of the Church of Engl nn J. And if the opinion, which is common to us with our Bre- thren abroad, be true j he muft certainly invade the rights of Presbyters, and afFect a very unjutt authority, who en- deavours to appropriate to himielf all power in the Church, to the exclufion of the Presbyters. But let us now hear our Author, who, when he has fet down our objeftions, prefently proceeds after this fafhion. But let thefe unrighteous accufers kliow^ that the Order they fo loudly declaim againji^ iias injiituted hy Chriji himftlf :, ii'to, jtifl before his afcenjion^ inff^ir^d his A'^oftles ivith the Holy Ghoji^ and ga'-ce them power to remit and retain fins ^ which Apofiles were Bifjojps both in name and thing, f Thefe things are very eafily anfwer'd. For, I. According to the judgment of the Epifcoparians, a Bifhop and a Church go together, and are relata, as Logi- cians would call them : and there can be but one Bifhop in a Church. Since therefore there was at that time but one Chriftian Church, there could likewife be but one Bifhop, according to their own fcheme 5 and yet eleven Bifaops are by our Lord plac'd in it, all endowed with an equal /litre of f Viadicat. of the Chuich of i^cotl pjge 310, ] ^ags 236. 330 A Vindication of PartllL of honour and authority. I have always thought that firft Church at Jerufalemy founded by our Lord himfelf, was the bell platform for us to model our Churches by. She was defcrvedly calTd by the Fathers, in the Synod of Conjlanti- noblcy the Mother Church , * and by Ireyieti^^ the Metropolis ot the citizens of the New Covenant, f And to the like purpofe is that of Ttrtullian ; " Every kind mull be reckoned *' according to its original : therefore fo many and great ^' Churches are that one Church, firft founded by the ^* Apoftles, from which all others are deriv'd. So they are *' all the firft Church, and all Apoftolical Churches, while " they all together demonftrate their being one. "II A Church is to be efleem'd the more pure and perfe£l, the more conform'd 'tis to its original. But all grant the Church of Jerufahm was the original of all the reft : and therefore ^erom's comment is not amifs, upon thofe words of the Prophet : For the laiv JJjall <^o forth out of Sion, ^ind the ii-ord of the Lord out of Jerufalem. '' The Church " firft founded in Jerufalem^ fays /;r, bred all the other '' Churches thro' the whole world He does not fay, the ^^ Lazv fiall he^ or remain in S^on^ or in Jerufalem^ but ftiall *' go forth from thence , that he might tell us, all nations ^ were to be water 'd with the Chriftian doctrine flowmg *^ from that fountain. " + And fince it cannot be deny 'd, that the Apoftles had all equal power in that firft Church ^ I can't fee what can be wanting to make this a tuU and clear demonftration of our opinion. 2 We readily grant, the Apoftles were all Biftiops ^ for we fay, all Presbyters ai*e fuch. Two things are to be con- fider'd in the Apoftles : Firft, their Apoftlefhip, or what was peculiar to them, not to be deriv'd down to any fuc- iceflors: Secondly, their ordinary office, w^ierein they were to be fuccecded by others f it being defign'd to continue to the end of the world. Our Author fhould have prov'd, the Apoftles were Bifliops according to the model of our En^lijh Hierarchy 3 or that, with reference to their ordinary capacity, they were not of the fame order with Presbyters. The Apoftles never difdain'd or fliun'd the name of Presby- ters : I Pet. V. I, 2. 2 EfpiJUe of [John I. 5 Epi/fleof'^ohn r. And as far as I can perceive, that name in the Holy Scrip- ture * Tlieodont. K. E. Ub- v. e. 9. \ Bookiil c. 12 ji 226 6 lie Prjcfcr, c. 10, t U^n Ifa. ii. 3. i Diap. T. the DISSE^^T^RS. 531 ture always fignifies fuch Minifters as were more thanone» and equal in jowcr in every particubr Church. I thcre- fofe uilliniiiy gr^nt, Chrill inlHtuted then the order of Riftiops or l^rcsbyters : the order, 1 fay, it being but one, iince a BHhop and :i Pre.^byter always fi^nify the fj.mc thing in the New Teftiment. And let our Adverfarles, if they can, fliew us the inftitutios of any other order, than this one, and that of Deacons, in the Holy Scripture. Before I difmifs this matter, 'twill nor be aniifs to look into cur Author's marginal obfervation, whereby he would confirm what I have now refuted. UfOH v;hich the author of the Queftions on the Old and New Teilament k.is a pertinent 'rema;\: *' Every body knows,our " Lord ordain'd Bifliops to prefide over the Churches. Be- ** fore he afcended into Heaven, he laid his hands on his '* Anoilles, and ordain'd them Bifliops. " The book is divided into 127 queflions , a5)d it had been ejfy therefore for our Author to refer hisreader to the par- ticular qucilion, where he might find his citation. I com- plain'd of this in the Latin edition , but 'tis not mended in the Tranflation. I could not, upon a fecond fearch, readily find the place, and did not think it worthwhile to look very diligently for it. For whatever the Doctor might imagine, I can't fee 'tis much to his purpofe. Who doubts, the Apoftles were by our Lord ordain'd Bifliops? We affert not only that 5 but likewife that there were no other, of whatever order or degree, ordain'd by him. Further, fince that Author is known to have been of opinion, that there is no difference between a Bifhop and a Presbyter, except that a Bidiop is the firfi Presbyter 5 and fince a Bifhop and a Presbyter in Scripture are the verv fame 5 who perceives not, that the teftimony herealledg'd is very contrary to our Author's judi^ment ? Mind how he difcourfes elfewhere : ^' The Apoftle Paul fhews, that by Presbyter is meant a ** BiHiop, when he gives directions to Timot}y, whom he *' had ordain'd a Presbyter, what were the qualificationsof *' any perfon, whom he fhould ordain a Bifhop. For what ^^ indeed is a BiPaop, but the firft (or chief) Presbyter* " that is, the chief Prieft ? La{lly,a Bilhop calls the Pref- " byters his Fellow Presbyters, or his Fellow Priefls. Doe^ '* he in like manner call his Deacons, his Fellow Deacons? '' By no means 3 bec^ufe they are much inferior to him. '' And 'tis not decent for the chief Judge to fpeak in that ^' manner. For in AU>:andyla^ and through all E^yt>t^ in the • *^ abfence 33^ A Vindication of PartllL *' abfcncc of the Bifhop, a Presbyter confecrates." * By confccratins; here, he can't mean confecrating the elements in the Lord's Supper ^ fince that was the cuftom every where, as well as in E^yj^t ^ and tlurcfore he mull refer to Confirmation or Ordination. And if learned men are not miftaken in their conjecture, x\\:ixHiUry the Deacon was the writer of that pici e,and the Commentary uj^on 6>.Paul*5 Epifiles^ which ufed to be afcrib'd to St. Amhrofe ^ he is known to have held, there was but one Ordination of a Bifiof?^ and a Presbyter, f But if any doubts of his opinion, let him con- fult Mr. Blonde!^ who has well explain'd it. II But I return again from our Author's Margin to his Text. Which Afojiles ivere Bijhops both in name and things and Jix\d their Sees in the chief cities^ ivhich they had concerted, t Becaufe the Apoftles were infpir'd perfons, and ready on all occafions to declare the will of God, the Churches were bound to obey them : and fo there can be no doubt, they govern'd the Churches, wherever they came. But that they Jix^d their Sees in any chief cities^ or commonly refided in them, as the ordinary governors of the Churches therein, may be very much queftion'd. Nay, the moft learned Dr. Earroii' (a Man uho may be allow 'd to have a fmallfjarc ofjnodtfty, at leaft, notwithftanding what our Author pre- lently fays to the contrary) denies it, and endeavours to overthrow that opinion by leveral arguments, in his incom- parable piece concerning The Pope's Supremacy. * If the an- tients feem to fay any thing contrary to this, I fliould be ready to think, 'tis to be attributed to their fondnefs for their own refpective Churches , as it was ufual for them to endeavour to advance the reputation of their Churches, by fetching their original tromfome famous Apottle, as tho' he had been the Bifnop thereof. So i-^^f^r is pretended to have been firft Billiop oi Antioch^ and afterwards of Rome^ and to have ordain'd his fucccflors in both Churches. And if that were true, 1 dont fee why it was reckon'd of old fo fcandalous, for a Bifhop to leave a poor See for a rich one ; or why it was look'd upon unlawful for a Bi/liop to ordain his own fucceflbr, thatis, to make two Bi/liops or Monarchs in one Church. In a word, we grant, the Apoftles ordain'd others to be Presbyters in the feveral Churches , but that they appointed alfo Bilhops of a different order from Pref- byters, * ^^/?. loi. 1 hi I Tim. iii. |i Apol p- 47, &:c. T t>J(ge 2^-^. *^. 82, &c^ Chap. ). L the DissEi^TERs. 333 bytcrs, will never be prov'd by rhofe who earncftly dcfire to do it. But 1 (h:ill afterwards Ihcw how the Apoftles behav'd themfelves, out of St. CUimyity who was cotcm- porary with them. And our Author's bufinefs is not to flicw, the Apofllcj?, as he fays, orAa'ni^d otbvrSy as occ.ifion rcqiar''cl^ which every body allows ^ but to prove they ordain'd them to be eccle- (ialtical Monarchs, or each of them fingly to rule their re- fpedive Churches 3 for that is what we abfolutely deny. Kor isthis queition to be decided by the tellinionies of Fa- thers, but by the Holy Scriptures. Who can make it ap- pear, that Cypriayjy Tttodonr^ or Rah an m Maums^ area fure rule, by which we may difcover the truth ? Our Adverfa- ries rejeft their authority when they pleafe , why then may not we do the fame, as often as they dilagree with the Holy Scripture ? Nor are the words of Cyprian over fairly cited. They are thus : *' The Deacons iliould remember, that the ♦' Lord chofe the Apoftles, that is, Bifhops and Rulers 5 ^' but the Apoftles, after our Lord's afcenfion into heaven, *' appointed the Deacons, as their own and the Church's " fervants. " * Tis to be obferv'd, Cyj^rian does not fay, the Bifhops and Rulers are Apoftles 3 as our Author, in- verting the words in his citation, pretends. He does not fay, Efifcoj^os & Pye conje6l:are of Tkeoclorit^:i BIfhop of the fifth Century 3 which he doesndt confirm by the teftimony of any moreanticnt Father, but only grounds it on the words of the Apoftle. If there be no force in his argument (as I w^ill fliev/ prefently there is not, when I come to fpeak of Epaphroditus) 'tis evident his authority can fignify nothing in this cafe. And of lefs ac- count is the judgment of Rahaiuts Miurm, who liv'd in th^ ninth Century, and /liould rather be reckon'd among the late than the antient writers. But our Author now tells us when, and upon what occa- fion, the Apoftles ordain'd others 3 liz.. i;'b;z the bounds of the Church were jo enlargd^that there ^ivas need of greater nuyn-* hers to yreach the Gofpel. And was this the occafion of their ordaining more Bi/liops ? Let then the Church of Engl and be afham'd, which commits lb many thoufand fouls in Eng- landy and both the Indies^ to the fingle care of the Bifhop of London. One Biftiop is now thought fufficient for fo vaft a Diocefs 3 why then might not twelve Apoflles have been enough for the whole Chrittian world ? For if the number of fouls comaiiitted to the care oftliat one Bilhop, be mul- tiplied by the number of the Apoftles ; theProduft, I dare fay, wmII not only equal, but far exceed the number of all the Chriftians in the w^orld at that time. And yet I hope 1 7noy have afmalljharc of niodefy^ tho' I fay, any one of the Apoftles * ^^g^ 2; 9. ti'-'^f' 2:ii I' Vj^on I Tiuiiiii. Chap. I. the Dissenteks. 355 ApoiUts was as capable of governing fo large a Church, a« the Bilhop of Lo)/clo>u T/'/i eint>iint honour ivid dignity was conju'^d on James fttr^ ijcm'd r/.v Juft, ii'/:o preftdcd over the Church of Jcrufalein viany years with great fan tJiry and ivifdom, Jatt now he pre- tended this order and dignity commenced at the afcenjion of Chrijly when he tnfplr'd the J^oJHts with the Holy Ghoji : and now he fuppofes this honour and dignity to be confr^d upon ^ames^ who was an Apoftle before. And fo at length the Bilhops, the fucceffors of the x\poftIes, are ad- vanced above their predeceffors. Many llrange tales are related by the antients of this ^ames, Photit^ f^iys, he re- ceiv'd his Confccration, and the Biflioprick o( jcrufalein^ from our Lord's own hand. * Niccphorus CalliJIui makes him to have the Church of "jerufalcm committed to him, firft by our Saviour himfelf, and afterward (as fome fay) by the Apoftles. t If any one imagines our caufe hurt by the teftimonies ©f the antients concerning this "3^^^^ h we defire him to take notice, that we little regard that ftory, which they borrowed from Hegejippus 5 which is fo filly, childi/li and falfe, that hardly any fenfibleperfon, whether Proteftant or Papift, now gives any heed to it. If any one defires to fee it confuted, he may confulc the famous Scaliger^ W who has demonftrated many falfities to be contain'd in it. 1 will not tranfcribe his obfervations, but juft mention fome of the filly fabulous accounts he gives of him. I. Hegefjt?j:us relates , that the Scribes and Pharlfees carry 'd this james up to the top of the Temple of ^erilfalem 5 that from thence he might. undeceive the peo- pie, who believ'd Jefus was the Chrift, Now, who can credit this Story ? A Man may well fay the Scribes and Phariiees were abominably wicked f but no man in his wits will be eafily perfwaded to believe they w^ere fo filly and flupid, as to expert that Ja^nes, our Saviour's Brother, Difciple, and Apoftle, fhould thus blafphemoully fpeak againft him before the People, when they could not prevail with him firft to do it more privately before themfelvcs ? This would be as tho' a man fliould hope to * EpiJ}. I IT. p.>^^. 158. t ^»^* ^'- ^' ^*- P^g- ^9^. .\mmadv, in Eufeb. Clironcl pag, x78. Vakfii Koti m E«f -J 33^ ^ ViKDicATioN of Part III. to perfuade the Pope to go up St. Paer's Church at Komey and thence tell the people, they ihould no longer take him for Chrift's Vicar on earth, but for the Antichriit foretold in the Scripture. 2. He gives an account, that James was thrown head- long from the top of that high Temple, and prefently kneel'd down and pray'd, and was then knock'd on the head by a Fuller with his club, and buried in the fame place. But who can be ignorant, that the Jeus (who knew any dead body defiTd, according to their law, not only men, but holy places) would fufter no body to be buried within their city, and much le(s fo near the I'eai- ple ? They would therefore never fufFc-r jamesy whom with deadly hatred they hadjurt before wickedly mur- der'd, to be buried in that very holy ground. 5. Laftly, that tnfler adds , that his monument, or tombflone remain'd in the fame place to his time. But this could not be without a new miracle. For when the Temple was deftroy'd, according to our Saviour's pre- diction, 077 e ftone ii\ti not left tiUon another. How then could this monument of James be preierv'd fafe in that prodigious deftruftion ? Away with fuch impertinencies ! He that can feign fuch tales, or believe them when feign 'd to his hand, hardly deferves any credit himfelf. Upon the whole therefore, what fatisfa^tion can we have cF James's Epifcopacy, from the relatioil of fuch an author ? But fome may perhaps here objefl : What then, will you give no credit to fo many confiderable ecclefiaftical writers, who unanimoufly agree in making this James Bi- fliop of Jerufalem ? Truly, I think they will not have much wrong done them hereby 3 if, as ir feems very probable, they owe their accounts, both of the Bifliop- rick and Martyrdom ofjamesy only to Hi^rfi'j^ns, But that I may fpeak my mind honeftly and freely ^ lince Jenifa- lem was a famous city, and the metropolis both of Jeirs and Chriltians, and very much frequented by both j it might perhaps feem convenient and neceflary to the Apo- flles, that one of their own number ihould always conti- tinue there. If therefore any one fliould contend, that James the Juft^ upon fome fuch account fix'd his refidence there, and fo became the chief teacher and ruler of that Church, and that hence the antientstook occafion to call him the Bifhop of Jcmjiilm 3 I fl:^ould not in the leaft * oppofe Chap. L the DisseIctirs. '5^7 oppofe him- But lti\ any one flioulJ tl'.ink, I nm p:ivmg the \Vay hereby to a Monarchical Church governnienr , 1 add : that an Apoitle had a greater fliare in Church admi- tiiitrations than a common Presbyter, not by virtue of any ordinary eharader he bore, and Was to be tranfniitted to fucceflbrs ^ but by virtue of his extraordinary chara^.ler, as immediately cholen by Chrirt, and immediately infpir'd by the Holy Ghoft. Nor can I believe, the power of govern- ing that Church was committed to '^ames alone ^ the other Apollles being excluded, when prefent. He could do no- thing, which might not be done by any of the reft of rhem* And if you confider him as an ApoftIe,he vallly differs from a Bifhop 5 but if you confider him as an ordinary Minifter of the New Teftament, fo he was a Presbyter, a^ were the reft of the Apoftles : nor was he alone intrufted with the government of that Church in the abfence of the Apoftles^ but had other Presbyters join'd with him therein, whoj as Presbyters, were equal to him in all things, except the elec- tion of our Lord himfelf. I ftioald have done with the Bifhop of 'Jernfalem^ but that I muft take notice of w^hat he here adds ; That he hnd St, Stephen, the Jirji Martyr^ for his Deacon^ o/s the Fathers inform us. This I dotit believe. I think 'tis plain, as 1 elfewherd obferve, that our Lord made Peter the chief Apoftle, and that he afted as fuch, while the Apoftles kept all together^ as they did till fome time after Stephen s death. And we find not any thing peculiar merition'd of this "James in the Acis^ till after that time. James did not go to Samaria to give them the Holy Ghoft, as probably he would have done, had he been in the chair at Jerufakm 5 but Peter and John are fent for that purpofe. So that tho' I fliould allow Jdhnes to have afterwards been in that See 5 yet I cannot tafily do it, during St. Stephen's life^ But who are thofe* Fathers^ who thus inform us? We are here refer'd to Ipiatm Fp. ad Trail, But what'3 the meaning of this ? A forry knave, and a corrupter of the Fathers, is reckoned among the holy Fathers themfelves. For the paffage, here refer'd to, is not in the genuine Epiftle of Ignatius^ hut is the ad- dition of the Interpolator. Either therefore that impoftor is too much lov'd and honoured j or elfe the Do6lor defpis'd not only the DiiTenters,- but the Foreign Divines his Judges^ as unlearned and ftupid wretches, whom he hoped to im- f'oie upon in fo plain a cafe. C G Tfruh 33^ A Vindication of Part III. JJW) the fitme honouraUe ofpce ivas Epaphroclltus inxejitd^ ^ St. Paul tefujies 5 whom for thcxt reajon Theodorit and St. Je- romfule BtfJjof? of the Piiilippians. * The titles of the Minifters of the New Teflament are foiTietimes ufed by the facred Penmen in their common fignification. Thus the word Siako^'Q-^ Deaco>?^ fometimes Signifies any fervant 5 and 'nr^c^Cvri^©'^ Presbyter^ an old man. In like manner, a^^'o^oK®- fometimes is put for any meflenger, or perfon fent by another, 5o/w xiii. \6. Not only foreign Interpreters, but our own, fo render the word in that place, and in 2 Cor. viii. 2;. as alfo in that now un- der confideration, Philip, ii, 25. For tho' that appellation^, 'A'^rSro^®- 'I«^« Xe>«$3', an ylpoftle of Jefus Chriji ^ always denotes a perfon in office, yet the other, ctTrofoK^ viJ-^Vy your A^ojile^ or cltto^ok©- iKKKHJi^i'^ the Churches y^pof thj does not. Now that Etaphroditus was truly an Apoftle, in our fenfe of the word, that is, a Meffenger ef the Church of Phili^pi^ we learn from St. P<^/f/himieif :• chap. iv. 18. I am full ^ having received a/* Epaphroditus the things which were fent from y OH. Nay, he hints the fame in the place before us : Yft Ijiij^pos'd it neceffary to fend to you Epaphroditus, my hr other and com^^ anion in lahoar^ and fllow foldier 5 hut your tL'Tro^ohov^ Mtfjenger^ and he that minijired to my wants. Thefc laft words, and he that miniftred to my wants^ not only prove Epaphroditus was an y^foflle^ in the fenfe we give of the word> r/3L, that he was a Meffenger , but they feem to be added, as an explication of that term ufed by the Apoftle. Set- ting afide therefore all zeal for a party, our Adverfaries can prove nothing by that text, till they can by fome other ar- guments make it appear, he was an Apoftle j in their fenfe of the word. Dr. IVhithy ingenuoufly owns, St. Pj/J'sWords don t prove he was their Bifhop 3 but yet believes it, upon the tefti- mony of Theodorit^ Chryfoftomy and TheophyiaB.-\ But we can't bwild much upon their authority in fuch a matter, fince we are uncertain whether they receiv'd their opinion from any antient writers, or only gathered it from fome places of the New Teftament, which they mifunderftood. Further, nei- ther ThcophylaFr^ nor Chry! oft o-m, give that interpretation as a certain truth, but only as a conjecture ; and call him not their Bifhop, but their Dodlor or Teacher. So TheophylaH explains * £^g 2 J 8. t S^c him Kpfj Philip, i. r ; and his Tref. to that Z^lilk. Chap. I. the t)issENTERs* 3^9 cxplaiiiii the paffagc : ** That is, I give you bnck again hini " who was Tent to me from you , for they had fcnt to the «* Apoftle by him fuch things as he wanted. Or elfe he " (ays your Apoltic, that is, your Mafler or Teacher. " la like manner Chryfojiom : " We give you back what's your ** own 5 or, we fend you him who is one of you, or your *' Teacher. " But let us a little confider Dr. Wkithy's Note upon the place. '' But the word yfj'ojile is never ufed in the New *' Teftamcnt, but either of thofe w^ho were in the ftrici *' fenfe Jl^oflUs of the Lord, or elfe were eminent Minifters " and Preachers of the Gofpel. Thus Titus^ and the Bro- *' ther of St. Paid (which is the ufual appellation of St. T;- ** motYy J feeNoteonHcfcr.xiii.23.) arect'Zj-oroAo/, the.tpojiUs ** of the Churches, 2 Co/-.viii.22,23. " * Thclearned Doctor hardly minded here what he wrote : for he has no Note upon that place to thef/fir. and only refers in his Paraphrafe to his Preface, where indeed he maintains the fame opinion. But befides that ^ altho' here he follows thofe who under- fiand St. Paul's Brother, mention'd 2 Cor. viii. 23. to be Timothy 5 yet upon the place it felf he defends the opinion of the antients, who thought he intended St. Lu^e, But whoever will look into the place, will fee, that he fpeaks of one, if not more, befides Titu^y and T'pnothy^ or Luk^y whom he calls the Jbojllesy or Meflengers of the Churches* And fince Dr. JVhithy can't tell who they are, he is too hafty in aCferting, the word is never ufed of any other, but emiYient Mimfiers and Preachers of the Gofpel. But Dr. Whitby adds : *' And Andronicus and "juniay who had long preached the *' Gofpel, are ftiled, «xl5»i//o/ h lol^ daroToKoi^yCmtnent among *' the J^ojllcs ofChrifi.'' But how does that appear ? Who is it, i\\:\t te([i{i€S they hcid long preach'd the Go,^p€r< Thisatleaft is very uncertain concerning ^r^w'^, it being doubtful whe- ther 'tis the name of a man or a woman. ChryJofioyn^Theo- l?hy!aHy OecnmeniuSy Origeny Hilary the Deacon, Pelagius^ Pr'i- mafiiSy Beday HaimOy and RcmlghiSy read not ^un'a^ but^uHa^ believing her to be a woman ^ as the learned Bloyidel affures us. f They deal very unfairly in citing the Fathers, who, upon the teftimonies of a few of them, make Epajyhroditns Bifhop of Philipp'i j and yet affirm ^uuia wtis a man, and a Preacher of the Gofpel, upon the fingle teftimony of Doro- C C 2 thcuf^- ' Ph'iip ij-aj. t Av<^i 340 ^ ViKDICATlOK of Paitltl. thet/r, has thence his Name. But there ** are four forts of Apoftles : the firft, neither of man, nor ** by man, but by jtfus Chriji^ and God the Father j the *' fecond, of God, and yet hy man j the third is of man, not *' of God 5 the fourth is neither of God^ nor by man, nor " of man, but of himfelf. Of the firft fort may be reckon'd *' Vaiahy and the other Prophets, and the ApolHeP^n/ him- *' felf, who was nor fent of men, or by man 5 but by God " the Father, and ChriPc. Of the fecond fort may hejofiu^ ^' the fon of A'/r;/, who was of God indeed made an Apoftle, ^' but by the man Mofes. The third fort is, when any one '* is ordain'd by the favour and interefl of men, as we fee ** fome men put into the Prieflhood, not by the approba- *' tion of God, but by the favour which they have pur- ** chas'd among the common people. The fourth fort con- *' fifts of falfe Prophets, and falfe Apoftles. '' Who does EOt fee that, according to Jeromy all Priefts, who were or- dain'd agreeably to the will of God, might be reckon'd of the fecond fort, and might be term'd Apoftles ? jerom therefore thought EyaphroJitu^s was ordain'd to fome facred office 5 which feems probable enough, from the Apoftle's words : but that he is call'd Bifhop of the Pkllijpptans by jerowy is very filfe ^ nor does it appear that jerom had the leaft thought of that matter. The argument from the title of an x\poftle fignifies nothing ; for the fame is given by Te-rtidiian to Philips * as a Perfon fent of God, alrho' he could not be reckon'd an Apoftle in our Author's fenfc, fee- ing he was but a Deacon. A third of this order livi^TitUS, calPd the yfpojtle of Churches [of the meaning of which expreffion enough is faid already] qnd ordain'd B'tfhop of Crete. This hardly agrees with the fentiments of theEpifcoparians. They frequently pretend* C c ^ ' that * DcB-niGno, :. i3. 34^ -^ Vindication of Part III. that every city or church fliould have its own Bi/Tiop. So Dr. Hammond: *^ Now for the kclt IkkXhtUv^ 'tis bell ten- *' der'd Church by Churchy i. e. in every Church one Elder or *' Bifliop. And fo y^ei^Tovelu Tpgo-CiyT^pi?? kat iK}ihtiaic/.ry to *' ordain Elders in every Churchy is all one with Kcirct'^'^i^^Tcit ** TTf 5(J^uT^»< Kctri nrohiv^ to conjlitute Elders In every c'lty^ Tit. *' i. 5. every city having a Bifhop in it, and fo call'd a *.' Church, to which the believers in all parts about it be- *' long'd, and that Bifliop having power to make as many f inferior officers, as he thought good. " * lie therefore took Titu6 to be, not a plain Bifhop, but an Archbifhop j and the Presbyters to be ordain'd by him are, in Dr. H's iudg- ment, Bifhops properly fo call'd. And 'tis the common maxim of the Epifcopal party, that a Bifhop and a Church are in a relation to one another, and that there can be but one Bifliop in any one Church. But Dr. Nichols^ tho' he calls not Tit^ps Archbifhop, yet makes him the Bifhop of piany Churches, and therefore fliles him the Jfojile of the Churches^ and prefently adds in the Latin edition, that he had a poiver granted him of governing the Cht{rcJ)cs ^ and by the Presbyters therefore , whom Titu^ was to ordain , hp underilood thofe of the inferior fort. Now I wx)uld gladly have our Adverfaries prove, if they can, that one Bifhop was ever over feveral Churches at the fame time 5 or that any one Church, befide the Catholic, was made up of feve- ral Churches. Our Author's manner of exprcflion is quite different from that of the New Teflament. There is not one place in the New Teflament, where the Chriflians of two or more cities are call'd a Church in the lingular num- ber, as tho' they made but one Church. The Chriftian? of the fame city are alvyays call'd a Churchy but thofe of the country are conflantly term'd Churches, So we read of, pot the Church, but the ChtircJ:es of ZUidea^ Gal, i. 22. I Theff. Vi, 14. 'Macedonia^ 2 Cor. viii. I. - y///^r, j Co>\ x vie J 9, Galatiay I Cor. xvi. i. Gal. i, 2. Upon this place 3^- romh Con^ment is very good : *' 'Tis to be obferv'd, that *' he fays, 10 the Churches cf Gal at: a 5 becaufe in this Epif- ** tic he did not wTite to the fingle Church of one city, *' but in general to all the Churches of the whole province^ ^' arid he calls them Churches^ which he afterward reprove^ ^* for their being corrupted with errors. " ' ' In VpQii Aftsxiv. %^. Chap. I. the Dissenters. 343 In the dlfpute I had fome time fince with Dr. JTW/r, 1 dcnyM there was menticn made in the New Teltiment of any Church but the Church Catholic, or the Church of one particular place or city. That Gentleman was pleas'd to alledge two instances to the contrary. One was the Church of Corinth^ which, he pleafantly fmcied, compre- hended in it all the ChrilHan aflemblies that were in A- chu'ia. This he would gather from the v.'ords of the Apollle : To the Church of Goo\ iihich is at Corinth, "^/tfc all tht Saints that are in all Achaia. * And fo he endeavoured to confound, what the Apoftle mod exprefly diilingui flies. But no body -will eafily believe, the ChriilianvS of the whole region of Achaia were contained in the one Church of Corimh^ when he confiders, that Church did not fo much as comprehend the Chrirtian affcmbly of Cenchrea. The fame Apoftle f^lew^% ihat at Cericbrea^ which was a port belonging to Corinth:^ and very near it, there was fettled a Chairch diftinft from that of Corinth, f The. Other inftance produced by my Adverfary was that of Crete j but no fuch Church is menrionM in Scrip- ture. And they who make Titus Bifhop of Cnff , m.uft hold that all the Crctians made but one Church. Whereas Dr. Ni- chols would have Tttus a Bifhop, and yet thinis the Cretians iinder his care were form'd into feveral Churches. But now if the Epifcopal authority in that liland was, according to this notion, committed tononebutT/f^f^ what were theCrt- Xians to do upon his death ? Who then would have the power of chufing, and ordaining a new Bifiiop? lean hardly think, the Apoftle fo manag'd the ai^iirs of the Churches, as that they had not feverally a power within themfelves of continuing that order, which he fettled among them. And was the,re no other reafon , I could not eaiily fall in with theEpi-fcopal fcheme j according to which no Church •is, or can be, fo conftituted, asto be able to fub.fift without the help of ftrangers , but utterly lofes the power of ordi- Elation, as often as their Bifliop dies. Cbryfoftom^ Oecnmpyjiu<^ ThcOphyla^y and Thtodorit^ all tef- tify, as I fhall fliew, that the Apoftle would not commit fo large an Ifland to one man. And truly, whoever reads the Epiftle to Titus^ without any party biafs, prefently fee^, he .was not fix'd there by Sr. J-'arJ, as the ordinary BiHiop of the Cretiayjs 3 but was only left there for fome fervices ne- C c 4 cciT.iry * i Cor. i. I. 1 Rom. 344 ^ Vindication of Part III; peffary to be perform 'd at that particular time. The A- polHcs traveUing through various countries, preached the Gofpel wherever they came , and then thofe whom they converted, they form'd into Churches : and of thefe iirlt fruits they ordain'd fome to be Bifliops, and fome to be Peacons ; chufing and difcerning them by the Spirit, as Chmeut oi Rqyne tells us. And yet, (fnce fuch young begin- ners were not, immediately upon their converfion, fo fit to difcharge the facred funftion , they were to be train'd up to it by teaching, exercife and ftudy, for which time was requifirc. Whence the Apoftle, while the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit abounded in the Church, forbids the or- dination of a Novice J^ Now when the Apoftle was making hafte to vifit other regions, he could nor, for want of time, ordain Bifliops for alltheOvrmw/, and fet fome other things in order, that were wanting among them. Hence he gives commandment toTitu^^ his companion in travelling, to itay and take care of thofe things : For this caufe left I thee i^ (Crete, that thoHjhouldeJifet in order the things that are uant- in^^ and or dam Elders in every city^ tis I had appointed thee, f He did not therefore fettle him as Bifhop ofCrete^ but left him there according to the prefent exigence of affairs, that, 5vhen he had difpatch'd thofe affairs, he might make hafte to be with him again , as is plain by what he fays, chap. . iii. 11^. When 1 fiall fend Artemas to thee^ or Tychicus, he ^iligent to come to me to Nicopolis : for J have determined there to winter. And if Tuns muft therefore be call'd the Biihop p( Cretc^ becaufe he was left there by the Apdftle ^ why piay he not by the lame reafon be reckon'd theBi/liop of JJ^ahnatidy fince he feems to have been fent thither by him ? II But let us hear what pur Author has further to fay of Titus, His Charge^ u-efind, "^'as not that of a -meer Preshytsr^ to preafh fhe uord anddd)):inifrer the jacrajnents '-> hut more than that^ tp fet in order the things that were wanting, and ordain Elders jn every cil^y in Crete 3 oi-fc/Vfe none hdoiv the dignity of a Bifijoj^ might do^ "d'ithoiit the great efi ziQund and fca\idal to religion. We need not be told, this is the opinion of the abetters pf the Hierarchy. But that is here taken for granted, which }s the main thing that needs to be prov'd. He is of opi- pion, thcrp w^re fom,e |^resbyter§j who ha4 not the power of f i. Tirii. iii. p, \ Tit i. 5- |j ^ '^*^V ^V- JQ* Chap. I. the DissiNTtRS. 345 of ord:iining granted to them ^ which is the chief, if not the only point here in debate, l^ut he is niilhiken, who expe(^ls to find us eafy enough to aflent to this kind of fallacious iconclufions. In a word, I deny there are any fuch Presby- ters niention'd in the Holy Scriptures. As for thofe or- dain'd by Titus, I will prefently jfliew, they had the power of ordination. In the mean time, I think jt worth remark- ing ^ that as Chrilt at firil appointed not a Monarchical, but an Arillocratical form of government in hisChurch (which appears from what I have faid already, and from 'Matth. xviii. 18, 19, 2C.) fo the Apoflles were very careful, after his afcenfion, to retain the fame : who therefore fas we learn from the ^rls) travelled up and down the world, and order 'd ecclefiallical affairs, not alone, but being accompa- ny'd by fome Presbyters. Whence there is no reafon to be- lieve, that Titus alone was to ordain Elders among the CVf- t'lans, Tittif^ I confefs, was to have the chief hand in all adminiflraticrs 3 but if all things had been comn:irted to his management alone, for what purpofe were Zcn^t^ and yfpollos left with him in Crete by the Apoille ? I defire our Judges alfo here to take notice, that they are all charg'd, as authors of the greareji "j^ound a>:d Jcandal to religion ^ name- ly, that being nicer Pre:bytc,s^ and helon- the di;/iity of a Bifio^^y they invade his peculiar office. And who can grudge to be condemn'd by Judges, who will confefs thcmfelves guilty of fo enormous a crime ? Tor thefe reams Eufebius calls Titus a Blfjo^. And who doubts he was a Bifhop ? They, who think there is no dif- ference between a Presbyter and a Bifhop, will never call this in queftion. But fuppofing this had been rendered ac- /lording to the Doftor's mind, that Eufebius/t?y conftiturcd immedi- ately by Chrill himftlf, which /liould be an Example to all Churches 5 there is none, to which wc /liould rather , Nor are there wanting other good evidences of the truth of our opinion. The Bifhop of a Church was not to wander about, but to be fix'd in his own Church. But Ti}uot]-y ftaid not long at Ej^hefm ^ but being fei;t by the Apoftle, traveird thro* various regions : and by the fame right he is reckoned the BiHiop of E^hejusy he ought to be reckon'd the Bifliop of Mi^rf^o//^?, Berea^ Corinth ^ or Theffit- lenica. f And if Timothy was indeed the Bifhop of Ephifui.^ why /hould the Apollle befccch him to continue at Ephefus ? If he had been backward to it, there was more reafon for his commamiing, than befceching him. The arguments which the Doctor brings from the firft Efijile to Timothy^ dont prove him to have been the Bifhop of that Church^ P'or the things, which the Apoftle com- manded Timothy to do, were not to be done by himfelf alone j the Blfhops fettkd before in that Church were to 7oin with him therein. Nor can it be any wonder, that the Apoftle gives a charge particularly to Timothy about them. The chief care would belong to him, as a perfon who by ufc and experience had gained more skill, and wa.s fit to fead the reft. But whatever authority was given to Timothy^ had, before his coming, been granted to the Bi- fliops fettled at Epheft^s^ and belongs without diftinvElion to all Presbyters ; as appears by many clear teftimonies of the Holy Scripture. Nor are other Examples of this way of fpeaking wanting in theNewTeftament. So thofe things^ which belon^'d in comuion to the whole Apoilolical order,'l are * Monitio r.ii LcfV. ad fn. gper. Cypr. p ^3- t ^''' ^ '^^n^- ^^- J^- ^^^* xiii. 23 ABj, \ X 22. and xvii. 15. i Coi. iv. 17- I Thcf. lii. 2- I. .Mat. xvi. «?- John :t\i- I : J 16. Chap.I. the DissentfrV. 347 are by our Siviour himfclf given in charge, and promis'J to Prter particularly, as the firji or ^hf/ of them, as he i$ caird, Mitth. X. 2. And thus many ot the anrients ex- plain our Lord's words to him. Thus TbeophylaH : *' Al- *' tho' it be faid only to Prtcr ^ I -^^'ill give thee 5 yet the " fame was given to all the ApoiHes. " * In like manner Jmhrofe : *' / 'H'lH ,^r.f thce^ fays he, the k/ys of the k^yigdcmt *' of hcaveti, What is faid to Peter^ is laid to the Apoftles " in general. " f Au'^njiwe goes the fame way: *' As *' among the Apoftles, when there were twelve of them, " and the queftion was put to all, Peter alone returns the ** anfwer, Thon art theChriJiy the Son of the livi}?^ God. And " 'tis faid to him , I ivill give thee the l^eys of the kingdom of «* heaven ; as tho' he alone receiv'd the power of binding *' and loofing ^ whereas he made that anfwer in the name " of all the Apoftles, and receiv'd this promife together *' with them all, as reprefcnting the whole united body of *' them. [Tayiqi'.am perfonam gereyjs tin'natis.~\"' \\ But P/:or:;f5 is yet clearer, who, rejecting the interpretation of EidogluSy gives this as the fenfe of Chrift's words : " Altho 'this be *f fpoken to Peter, yet in the perfon of their chief, the " fame power is given to the reft of the Apoflles. " '+ Thus Chryfojlom explains the words of Chrift, ^oay?.xxi. 15, 16. " Why pafling over all the reft, do's he fpeak of t;hefe '* matters only to /-^^f^r? Becaufe he was the chief Apoftle, ** the mouth of the Difciples, and the top of the com- ^' pany. " * Now if our Adverfaries arguments, from what is faid fo particularly to Timothy, will prove him to have had a Mo- narchical power in the Church of Ephefus 5 why may not the Papifls, by the fame kind of argument, from our Savi- our's words to Peter, aflert that he had fuch a Monarchical power in the Catholic Church ? Why may not they talk pf PeicT, juft as our Author does of Timothy ? Eut to v;haf furpofe did St. Paul g^'^'e Urn thefe infinSions ahnnt governing the Church, if he ^a-ere not (inferior to others ? | ThePapifts may ufe exaftly the fame Argument : To -ahat purpose Aid our Savi- our give Peter the^e lnJ-truFtio}:s alotit govirning the Church, if he %ere notfuf^cnor to the reft of the AfoftUs ? But he goes on : " ' if * I^o;;A^s:.h. Kvi. 19. \ Erarf. invPfalm. x^xvi;!- fu'cfin, I; T" Joaiin. .Tra5l IT3. qi Eibiioth. tod. 2co, 2>. 1600. * ia Joann Hcmil. 87- 348 ^ Vindication of Part III. If his rdnl^^ava poii^er were not above that of common Presby- ters^ hov: could he be author ii* Ay not oyily to take cognisance of their mifdcmcanors^ hut likeivife to correhl thofe ivhom he fomd culpable ? I have anfwer*d already, this power was not given to Timothy alone. The power of governing a Church belongs to its whole Presbytery ^ nor is there any Bifliop or Presbyter in the Church, with refpect to whom the Presbytery is not authoriTSd to take coryiizance of his mifdc- ijieanors^ and correcl \\\my ivhcn found culpable. And T/«?ot/y was no more among the Bilhops of Ephefusy than Peter among the Apoftlcs 3 who, tho' he was their chief, might yet fall under the cenfure of his fellow ApofHes. And truly, if any thing particular be fuppos'd granted to Timo- thy and Titus^ above other Presbyters 3 that muit belong to them, not as Bifhops, but as Kvangelitts, or fuch extraor- dinary Minlfters as were to have none to fucceed them in their office. But that I may difpatch this affair : 'Tis moft certain the Presbyters, who were ordain'd, either in the Church of Ephefus by Timothy ^ or in the Churches of Crete by Titus^ had themfelves the power of ordination 3 and confequently neither Timothy nor Titus were Bifhopsi in the fenfe our Adverfaries put upon that word. The Epifcoparians and Presbyterians agree, that the powers of government and ordination go together : if therefore thofe Presbyters had the former, they muft of neceffity have had the latter alfo. But that they had the power of govern- ment appears from the Apoflle j who requires that a per- fon to be ordain'd a Bifliop, fliould be hlamelefsy See. one that rules his own houfe^ having his children in Jubjefiion with all gra- vity : * and gives this reafon for it 3 for if a man kr^ow not how to ride lis o::n hoiijcy how f jail he tak'^ care of the Church of God'i f The care then of the Church of God is committed to them, and they are ordain'd the rulers thereof, as Dr^ Hammond well exprefles the meaning of that reafon given by the Apofllc, in his Paraphrafe upon it. '* For fure he that ** cannot rule fo much a leis province, will be unfit to be ^* made a governor of the Church of God. " The fame js evident concerning thofe ordain'd by Titus : y^ Bifiot^^ (ays the x^poftle, ivujt be blamelefs as the Jieward of God ; that js, fays the fame learned Commentator, *' as becomes one ^ that hath the government of God's family intruded to nuiL : Tim. iil. 2^ 2 [tilted, they 'VJiU give ample tfJihnoKy to the Epifcopa! order, ft he P'^e 55<^ '^Vindication of Partlll. he would have confefs'd the truth, he ihould have faid : Altho' little help can be experted toourcaufefrom theHoly Scripture.*;, and they afford us no tellimonies of any great \veight, yet we need not defpair 5 for that defe£i will be niade up abundantly by the number, if not the worth, of tellimonies of another fort. Suppofe this now to be true, let all thofe arnirnt records give the 7noft ample tcjilmony to the Epljco'^al order : are we to reckon them a rule of faith or d.ifcipline ? Can any thing, upon their authority, be faid to be neceffiry in the Church, concerning which the Sacred Writings are perpetually filent ? Certainly, if the word of God is the only rule of ecclefiaftical difcipline : If a!l Scripture i< given hy iyiffPiration of God^ and is profitahlefor dofl/me^ reproofs corrtBioHy ayidinJhruBion in righteoiifmjs ; that the man of God (that i^, the Minilkr of the Gofpel) ynay bcperfHy throughly furmjiyd to every good uork,-^ * there is no need we fliould heed any other writers , where the Scripture is filent. Whatever is not found herein, if it fliould be lawful, yet cannot poffibly be neceflfary. Further, that I may fpeak my mind freely : If we were certain by the writings of the antients, that the Apoftles us'd fome things, of which we have no mention in the Holy Scriptures, I hardly think we fliould be under any neceflity of retaining them al- ways in our Churches. For befides the Holy Scriptures we have no revelation of the divine Will. God has no where commanded us to make the judgment of anyun- infpir'd men , however antient they were, a rule to our felves for the ordering our faith or difcipline. Whatfoever is in the Church made a rule of truth and goodnefs, muft be obvious even to the loweft of the people, that fo all may be fatisfy'd they are bound by God's command. Now this is true of the Holy Scriptures, but not of the writings of any of the antients. Upon which account therefore I might difmifs the Dodor, with the antient writers he brags of 5 fince he has brought nothing of moment from the Bible to ellablifli the JEpifcopal Dignity* But that there may be no caufe of complaint, I will endeavour likewife to trace their opinion. Now here 'tis efpecially to be obferv'd, that if the Fa- thers are to be efteem'd for their antiquity ; then the older, the more valuable they are, and the more authority they fliould I Tim. iii. 16, lit Chap. I. the Dissenters, 351^ fhould h:ive with us. If the Epircop:irians wil! grant us this demand (and who can help feeini^ the equity of it ? ) there will be no great realon^ for our being afraid of the Fathers hurting our caufe,or for their triumphing in them as the patrons of their own. We have two of the moll antient of them clearly on our fide, viz, Clement of Rome^ and Po!yca>f. There are no iigns of ecclefiallical Monar- chy mCiemcHt. A Presbyterian can hardly declare our opi- nion more clearly and fully than in his words. Every thing be fays of the form of eccleiiailical government exaftly agrees with the Scripture. Hence the Epifcopal writers dif- fer as much about his meaning, as they do about the New Teftament : there are almoll as many interpretations of his words, as there are writers among them, who men- tion his opinion 3 as might eafily be fhewn, if there were occafion. He never diflinguifhes Presbyters from Bifliops^ but thefe names fignify the fame with him, as they do aho with the Sacred Writers. He makes the Church o{ Corinth to be fubjeft not to one iingle perfon, but to a company of Biftiops or Presbyters. He reproves the Corinthians for their making an oppoiition againft their Presbyters. Fi- nally, that I may omit other matters, he acknowledges only a twofold order of Miniflry. Thus he tells us : ** The Apoftles preaching up and down in countries and *' cities, ordain'd the firft fruits or converts of thofe pla- *' ces, difcerning them by the Spirit, to be Bifhops and *' Deacons of thofe who /hould aftervvards believe. '' * To Clement we may add Polycarp^ who alfo mentions only two orders in his Epiftle. '' Wherefore, fays ke^ vou muli ** abftain from all thefe things, and be fubjeft to the Pref- *' bvters and Deacons, as to God and Chrift. " f If then any credit is to be given to thefe two moft antient ^itneffes, an Ariftocratial form of government obtainM from the firft beginning of the Chrifiian Church, Many other antient writers confirm the fame opinion. I do not indeed deny, that in every Church there was one chief Presbyter, w^ho was their conftant Moderator. 1 am fo far from blaming this cuftom, that I think it was derived from the Holy Scriptures, as I have endeavoured to prove in a little Treatife I once had fome thoughts of prin- ting. However I affert, that firft or chief Presbyter was not Epfl. i. J. 43. t ^^cf. $* 55^^ • A Vindication of Pattlll. not of a different order from the reft ; nor was he the fole ruler or Monarch of the Church. The writers of the fe-' cond Century began, I confefs, to dillinguifti the names of Eifliop and Presbyter 5 although that is not done univerlally and conltantly by them. This is not de- ny'd by Bi/hop Burnety who fays : '' And I the more *' willingly incline to believe Bilhops and Presbyters, to *' be the fevcral degrees of the lame office, iince the *' names of Bilhop and Presbyter are ufed for the fame *' thing in Scripture 5 and are alfo ufed promifcuoufly by *' the writers of the two firft Centuries.'* * Nor do any writers of that time confirm their opinion, who hold the offices of Presbyters and Bi/liops, were diftindt kinds or orders of Miniftry. None of them fay a Presbyter, when chofen in the room of a deceas'd BiAiop, had a new impofition of hands to ordain, or, as w^e now ufually fpeak, to confecrate him. The writers, indeed, of the third and following ages teftify, this w:is the practice of their time ^ namely when it was the cuilom for men to be folemnly initiated into fuch offices, as God had no where appointed. Thus in Cy^r'ian\ time, hands were laid upon Ift^ori, (that is, thofe who read the Scriptures in the Congregation, and were inferior to Deacons) if not upon yUofyths and ■Suhdeacons. \ But let us return to our Author. For IlJiinatius, St, Peter'5 Scholar^ and converja^t iiith the j4bojiles^ mentions three orders in the Churchy Blfio^s^ Priejis and Deacons, \\ I acknowledge, Ignatius, in the places refer'd to, mentions Bifhops, Presbyters and Deacons ; but he never affirms,that the power of ruling the Church, and ordaining Miniftersis only granted to the Bifhops. But on the contrary, he always admonifhcs the people to fubmit to the Bifhopand Presbvters. Nor is it any wonder, if the power of the chief Presbyter, whom 1 allow to have been conftant Mo- derator, did by degrees increafe, and was inlarg'd beyond its due bounds. Nay, the more holy, and the more diligent in managing the Churches affairs they appeared to be ^ the more readily would the relt of the Presbyters, and the body of the people leave the chief care of the Church in their hands. And as the name Bi/liop imports Lihonr^ ra- ther * Vindlcat. of the CLurch oF Sotl pa^e 31 r. t ■'^^^ Cyft. E^ift. 38, jj'. Oxf. £diL li F.pift. fid 'Vrall. /o'.-if. at. 'id Phil. fett. 8. Chap. L rk D I s s E N T £ R s. 353 ther tl an honour^ * as Jitgnfune fays, and the chief Presbyter then apply'd himfelf principally thereto j fo that name contrary to Scripture ule, began to be appropriated to him. As to Ignar'iu:^ therefore, altho' in the paflagc alledg'd he dillinguiflies between a Presbyter and a Bi/hop j yet no one, 1 think, will ever be able to prove, he thought them to be of djfterent orders, or that a Bi/liop was more than what I have allowed. If any thing is found in other places of his Epiftles, which may feem to fivour the opinion of Qur Adverfaries , it is partly to be afcrib'd to an affefted way of writing common to the ^fiattcs 5 and partly to the comparifons he ufes, and many times with very little judgment. But let us hear what further evidence he brings from Ignatius. jind comniarjds^ that tho* the Bifjo^? he a youyt<^er man than the Presbyters, they Jhould however JJjeiv him all honour and reffeB. For the proof of this, he brings a palTage out of his Letter to the I^lagnefl^ns , which, tho' it be not fet down at large, or tranflated in the EngUJlj^ as in the Latm edition, I fhall yet prefent the reader with, making fome remarks upon it. 'Tis thus in the Greel^: Ksti Cujlv cTi 'u^^tth /rtr//<5 isnot therefpeak- ing to the Presbyters, as our Author, and perhaps Fo^us imagin'd ^ but to the people ; and that he might the more excite them to their duty, he propofes to them a good example. Now, there was no reafon to fear the people fhould be able to get his Epifcopacy, that is, his power into their hands. This interpretation therefore, 1 think, niuft be rejefled, and the other of our Author be embraced 5 that Igy'dtius does not mean, they fliould not invade his power, but that they lliould not defpife his youth 5 ia oppofition to which he urges them to reverence him. But then the expreffion is harfli and unufual. Again, thofe words ol" /^>/vifir<^, « ^zr^^^AM^oTAf riiv (^cuVoyivvw vivJieiKhv Tct^i'v, feeni very ill rendered by our Author. For what ? Does not vi^J]isi}iYi "Jct^i^ fignify rather, a novel eonftltutioYi^ as Bloidel^ and other learned men render it^ t\id.v\ d juvenile ordination y as our Author turns it? And indeed r^'^*^ never fignifies ardlnatlony I mean in the ecclefiadical fenfe, when 'tis taken for impofition of hands. 'Tis commonly enough us'd for ordination, when thereby is meant only a conftitution. Here therefore the old Latin vcrfion is to be prefer 'd, which renders it ordinem. Now ordo here I take to be put for the office itfelf : and fo the word is perpetually us'd in the New Teftament, as the order o/iVaron, 0/ Melchizedec, S^r. Laftly, t^^jtcAm- ^'oTct'; is here rendered ref^tclentes^regarding 5 without any au- thority. I therefore thus render the paffjge upon the whole : And It becomes yon not to mal^e hold vjith the age of your Bifioj? ; hut to pay hnn all refpeB and reverence^ according t(f the f^ozier of God the Father: as I have k^own hoy men doy vjho ivere wore aged 5 not affuming to themj elves that degree ivhich has lately ajppcar'd in the Churchy hut with a godtff prudence giving ^lace to the Bifiop, Since Ignatius fpeaks to the Church in general, and is urging the people to reverence the Bif]iop,notwithIlanding his youth , I am apt to think, the making ^fiaCuli^a^ in this place refpeft perfons yeirs^ rather than any office, is not difagreeable. However, I fhiU not contend, if any one infiils upon its Signifying Presbyters. The queflion now is : What this new conlti- tution v/as ? To which I anfwer with Hilary the Deacon ; That whereas before this precedence was granted accord- ding to pcrions ago, or (as Eutycliui and 'jev'^rrt fiy of A' ex- ■ ' a^iJf'iiiJ. Cbap.L the Dissenters; 35:5^ andria) according to their ftanding y now It was confcrM according to thtMr endowments and abilities, audio the ycunger were fcmetimcs prefcr'd to the elder. And /s^^i- tins would therefore have thofe, who being older Ind not received this novel order or degree, pay a regard and reve- rence to fuch as were younger and prefer 'd before them# And what is all this to our Author's purpofe, whether it be render 'd his, or my way ? Is it ftrange, the chiefeit refped fliould be paid to him, who was in the chiefcft place? This \^ill not feem a new thing to the Presby- terians, who always treat their Moderators in that manner j and that, however young they happen to be. 1 could not but take particular notice of this paflage^ upon my comparing the larger and fhorter Epiftles, that are attributed to liiiatlus^ together. Mr. IVhiJion has ad- vanc'd a notion, that the larger are the genuine ones ^ and attributes the fliorter to yitlafiajjus, or fome of his parry about his time. Now I muft confefs, the fliorter Epiilles feem to me the more antient, upon the moft impartial in- quiry I could make* I only mention this as a Ipecimcii of thofe evidences, which convince me. For if that in- terpretation I have given of this paffage be allow'd (and indeed no other can be well born) who can doubt, whe- ther it belongs to the antient times of the Church ? Had Axhayiafmsy or 'any of the later Fathers of the fourth or fifth Century, Writ thefe fhorter Epiltles, as an abridgment of the larger, as is pretended ^ what could enter into their heads, to occafion them to fpeak of this as a new order ? The notions of thofe times are quite contrary hereto. But now, if we fuppofe the paflage to ftand thus in the moft antient edition , 'twill not be at all ftrange, that a later hand fliould alter it to what it now is in the larger Epiftles. Do but confider, how at this day, men, who find this paffage difagreeable to their own fentiments, put a glofs upon it, and make it fpeak of a ',ircenile oydrf^atioyi. Juft lo when the writer of the larger Epiftles found this pafTage inconfiftent with his own apprehenfions, and the ordinary practice of the age he liv'd in 3 he altered it, and put it into plain Grfc-ij,, expreffing what it Was natural enough for one of later times to fay. For thus the paffage runsj in w^hat I count the interpolated Epiftles : l^a.i luli' J'ilfcTeiy ■'^tgi ^^i j^y iy Qji' ^^ivr^Tiv, That 15 .* loii ou^l:t not to 55^ ^ Vindication oj Part IIL Aeffije the youth of the Bipop , hut^ accordingto the mind of God the Fathe)'^ yield him all reverence : as 1 have aljo l^joivn the holy Presbyters doy not regarding his ap^are>it youth^ hut his godly ivifdow. Let any one, who is skill'd In criticifm, judge, which is more probable ^ that a dark place fhould be alter 'd to a clear one, or a clear eafy paflage be made dark and obfcure ? Which is moft likely, that an abridger (without making this paffige a jot fhorter) fhould put it into termsutterly difagree- able to his own rime 5 or that an interpolator, not under- Handing his author, Hiould make him fpeak according to the lenfe ot his own time? Who can think any man would change )tdiTct(p^Qv^v tTh nhiKiof:, which is an eafy, natural ex- preflfion, into, (TvyyfJd^aA T/T \]KiyCia^ which is aukward and uncommon j and eipecially when there is no end he can be thought to ferve by it ? But how evident is the reafon of changing that expreffion to the other, to make the fenfe plain ? Compare the terms rrc9aei\i}(po](t^ and clpc^av]cts. Which of thcfe fuits befl: the later ages ? The latter runs eafy, in the ftile of the fourth or fifth Century ^ but the for- mer, according to the true fenfe I have givenof it, can be- long to none but the more antient times. I think, upon the whole, Mr. Whifien has demonfirated, that the fliorter E- piftles are much corrupted, and need great corrections , but I cannot be perfuaded by his arguments, that the larger ones are not interpolated. And till we can get a more exafl: edition of Jgnatitps's Letters, thofe we have at pre- fent feem to me of little ufe. But to return from this digreffion : our Author alledges one place more out of Ignatitt^'s Epiflle to the Philadelphiansy which is this : ^s many as belong to God and Jefu6 Chrtji^ keejf •lijith the Bifljop. But he means only, while the Bifliop dif- charges his office unblameably, and according to the mind of our Saviour. Nor do we make any doubt, whether it be our duty to adhere to fuch Bifliops. Juilin Martyr mentions the Pnjldenr^ or Bij^jop of the Church in bis time. "^ And in the margin thus he confirms it: xTBild ^^9Tzip{]ouT^ T^cer^Ti T^v iiih(poJv dflQ—'See Eufeb. Hift. //t. 4. ^- ^3- This is an inltance of the acutenefs of the Tranflator^ who cites Eufebiu-s for this paffage of Jw/fi« Jvlarty ryV/hich is not *pgi ^4.-'. Chap. I. the Dissenters. 357 not there mentioned, but is found in Jti/tin's f(Coy?cl yfpo!o:y. The truth is, the Doftor in his Latin edition h:id omitted ro •fet down the place in Jnjiin ^ but had allcdg'd another tcfli • monv out of Eu'eh'ins^ to prove the word T^^s^aJ; was ufed by Dio>2\[fiuSy Jujiins cotemporctry^ to fignify a Bifhop. I be- lieve the Doftor was fatisfy'd, by the hint I gave, he had niiOook Eli'ehilii for DlonyfiuSy and fo had blotted out that remark. But his Translator imagined, this reference to Eufehiiis belonged to 3/^ could never yet fatisfy me. I rather think, Juftin makes four forts of perfons in the Church f the Peojple^ theBeacons^ the Brethren^ and the Prefident of the Brethren, And by the Brethren I underftand Presbyters. I think the Scripture ufes the word Brethren frequently in this fenfe. And fince I ap- prehend fome difficulties may be folv'd by this one obfer- vation, 1 will mention two places of many to this purpofe. Rom. xvi, 25. Er2i{\,[iSytheChamber!ainof the city yfaltiteth you'y ^>7^Quartus, a Brother, Who can think, a Brother here Signi- fies only a Chriftian in general ? The Romans would have known by the falutation itfelf, that he w^as a Chriftian , nor was there any need the Apoftle fliould particularly men- tion it : for the Heathens did not ufe to fend their faluta- D d 5 tions ' ^'g^ 161. t Blondel ApoL ^. 22, 23. 35^ A Vindication of PartllL tions to a Chriftian Church. 'Twill not be eafy, I thinks for :i perfon to imagine any other reafon for the Apoftle's c.:!ling (^.artm a Brother, rather than Erafm:^ or any of the /ell who fent their filutations to the Romans. The other place I (hull mention is, Pfc/Zi/?. jv. 21,22. where the Apoltle clearly diilinguifhes the Brethren from the reft of the Saints, or Cbriilians. The Brethrerj^ u-hich are ivith rncy ^reet you. All the, S^vvts faiiite you^ chiefly they that are of Cefar'i hoiifiold. And that ^htjiin ipeaks of the Brethren in this fenfe, may appear from his ov^n words in that Jfoloi^y, A little before he had faid : We bring the ha^tiVd perfon e-r/ r'^i KiyofAvni c^/gxci^, to thpfe caird Brethren. But now if the Brethren fignify'd the whole affembly, why had he not faid, we bring him to the Peoj^le ? But when he fays, thofe called Brethren^ he- without doubt means, pcrfons who were in fome pecu- liar fenfe fo call'd ; jufi as in the paffige I have fet down, fpeajcing of the Deacons, he fays, they irho ivith hs are cafl^d Deacons. Now befide the Presbyters , there are none to whom you can fuppofe this appellation could efpecially be- long. And thus every thing in "^ufiin is eafy and plain. Kor can any one wonder, he fhould mention the Prejidenp cf the Brethren^ when he had before, in his Apology, fug- gefted, that fome perfons among them were in a peculiar fenfe ftiled, the Brethren, The great reafon why 1 under- ftand ^uflin In this manner, is, becaufe otherwife we muft neceiTarily conclude, that in his time every Church was go- yern'd by one fingle Bifliop or Presbyter. ^^tiftin is not, thrcugh his whole Apology, fpeaking of any one particular Churcli, but of all the Churches. in general. And if Pref- Lyters are not to be underftood by theBrethren^ "jufiin muft make no mention at all of them 5 nor can you find any other Miniiler whatever to Ivive been in the Church, befide the Prefident, and the Deacons. But this is contrary to all antiquity. Ecclefiaftical writers with one confent t^ftify, there were always many Presbyters in every Church. I ex-* 1 pt here only Epi^hamus^ who has given us his conjeflure, :.i", I may call it, his dream concerning the ufage of the A}X)ftle3 : '? When there was not a multitude, there were '• not found perfon? to be ordainM Presbyters, and therp f' they were content with a fingle Bifliop in a place. '* ♦ We meet with nothing like this in the New Teftament^ and J <^' .^. :j ^f tki^J^iMi^h ^' >os. Chap.L f/j^ DiSSENTERSc ^^g and therefore I douJbt not Epiphanins \vas mirtakcn. How- ever, I cannot torbe:ir mentioning one obfervation of his, fince he was fo ftififa defender of the Epifcopal Dignity. ** There was need, fays hiy of Presbyters and Deaconj» , for *> by thefe two ecclefi.iftical af£iirs might be managed. *' Wherefore where no perfon was found worthy to be.made ** a Bifliop, that place continued to be without a Ki/liop. " But nowj if eccleliaiHcal affairs might be manag'd by Prcf- hyters and Deacons, Presbyters m.uit have the power of or- dination and government. But to return to jtcfiin : Some may think, I now defend the Hierarc]:y\ by arguing, that 3i. 30-- 3 ^O y4 V 1 T^ D 1 C A T i o K of Paft III. byters ; yet 'jujiin's ^eyi^'^i iriuft not only fignify him, but any other who fupply'd his place in his abfcnce, namely, Tov T^ ?\oyii })^»agi/oi/, him that u'^ the chief fpeah^er : * or elfe wc muft confefs, that neither prayers* could be of- fer'd, nor the Sacramenfbe adminifter^d, but by one perfon in a Church. But I have faid enough of ^uft in : I now go pn to our Author's other arguments. y^nd mt oyily that moft antient HiJ}orian Hcgefippus, hut the great and learned Dionyfius, Bipo^ of Corinth, has left Cata- logues of the primitive BiJJjoj^s. We pay little regard to the authority o( Hegefrppu^ 5 who, from his fine ftory of the Martyrdom of James the Jufi^ ap- pears to have been a man of great credulity and little judg- ment. The famous Bifhop StilUngficet has obferv'd, thole Catalogues are fo very diflferent, that nothing certain can be gathcr'd from them. But let us for the prefent fuppofe, that they who give thefe Catalogues are perfons who de- ferve credit, and that they all exaftly agree in their ftory j 'twill not hence follow, thofe Bifliops were Church Mo- narchs, and that they were the rulers of their Presbyteries. Bp. StiUlngfieet has moft fully and folidly confuted this pre- tence. I wifh no one would henceforth build upon it,with- out firft anfwering what he fays about it. He ftiews, the fame was the cafe among the Archons at Athens^ and the Ephori at Lacedemon , the fucceffion was reckoned by the Archorty or Ephorns^ €-T«Vt>//©-, though he had no fuperior power to the reft. From whence he infers : '' That meer *^ fucceffion of fome fingle perfons named above the reft, in ^' the fucceffions in ApofioHcal Churches, cannot inforc^ *' any fuperiority of power in the perfons fo named, above *^ others, fuppofed to be as joint governors of the Churches *' with them. This argum.ent from fucceffion is weak, ^' and proves not at all the certainty of the power thofe '^ perfons enjoy'd. "f And altho' the fuccefllons in the Church are oftentimes thus briefly and fummnrily given, it being a tedious bufinefs to reckon up all the Presbyters that have ever been in any Church , yet the Fathers, when they fpeakof the (ucceffi^rs of theApoftles in general, and dont need to fpcak fo compendioufly, ufe to fpeak not only of Bilhops, but of Presbyters under that chara(Ser 3 as I have before obferv'd from lre>jcus, Clemens ^ ^V..L the Diss i-t^ r IKS. ^6i Clemens Alcxandrinus tnl^^s yiotice of three JiJimFf orAtrs in his time^ aud makes Preshyttrs the jecond. Mr.Blondcl has well explain'd CUmim\ meaning, and fhewn that he acknowledges only tv/o orders of Miniftry, and calls the fame perfon a Presbyter, who, he had faidjail before, was made a Bifhop by the ApofHe. But 'tis belt to fet down his own words : " Clement gives the name of Pref- ** byter to that fervant of Chrift,to whofe care St. john had ** committed the young man, and whom he had ftiled Bi- «' (hop. For when he affirms, the Apoftle ufed thefe *' words: 0 Bijhoj) refiore "n-hat I committed to your charge : and *^ a little before, writing in Johns ftile, fays : Looking utf- ** on the Eifiojp^zvho i: as fet over them ally he faid^ I commit this " young man to thy care : he prefently adds : The Preshyter «< therefore receiving him^ Sec." * As to the place cited by our Author, where Clement is fuppos'd to make the three difiirtB orders of Minifters to be in imitation of the Angelical glory, it very much favours our caufe 3 as is plain to any one, who confiders v/h3,t Blondel fays upon it. For C/t^^^fwr acknow- ledges not three, but only two, as well angelical, as eccle- fiaftical miniftries , as appears by this paflage of his : ** In *' the Church the Presbyters bear that office, which makes *' men better 3 the Deacons, that which is performed in at- *' tending upon and ferving them." [I conceive his mean- ing is, that whereas Presbyters were delign'd to improve mens minds by inftrufting and teaching them 3 the Deacons were intended to ferve them in external concerns. He then adds] '' The Angels perform both thefe fervices to God."f [That is, by waiting on God, and doing his will, they may be confider'd as refembling the Deacons 5 by inftruding men, they refemble the Presbyters.] I will add two paflages more, which B/o/:^p/has not taken notice of. The formerof them clearly pro ves,Presbyrers were in his time efteem'd the Paflors and Rulers of the Church : and confequently, according to the Epifcopal fcheme, en- dowed with the power of ordination. For thus he, who himfelf was but an ordinary Presbyter of the Church of Alexandria^ fpeaks of himfelf, and thofe of his ftation : '' We " are fhepherds, fet over the Churches, according to the ** example of the good fhepherd 3 but you are the fheep."ll But if the Bifhop alone is the Paftor, or Shepherd, and Ru- ler i^- \ Styom. llh' vii- ^. 70i, 702 j: P*d::g lib- i. c. 6. ^ 99* 3^1 A Vindication (?/ PaitllT, ler of his Church, as our Adverfarics fay, how could Ckment fpeak after this rate concerning hiinfcif ? The other tefli- niony /hews, that Presbyters ufed, in his time, to lay on hands in blefling perlons 3 which mufl be cither in confir- mation, or in reconcihng penitents 3 the power of per- forming which is thought to have belonged only to thofe, who had the other power of ordination. His words are ; ** Upon whom /liall a Presbyter lay his hand ? whom fliiU *' he biefs ? Not the woman thus adorn 'd [with falfe h lir} ** but another perfon's hair j and in blefTing that, he blef- ** {q.% the head of that other perfon. '' * Our Author next pafles to Origen 3 but feeing he has not refer^d us to any place in him, I forbear to fay any thing of him. If any one defires to know his mind, let him con- iult the learned Blondel, f As to the Fathers of the fucceeding ages, I fhallnot de- tain my reader with a particular examination of their tefti- monies. I readily grant what our Author afTerts, that Billiops w^re then reckoned fuperior to Presbyters. But if our Englijlj Biiliops would follow the example of Cyl?rtan^ and do nothing without the confent of their Clergy, our controverfy about Epifcopacy would befoon over. But 'ti& well known, jf^ro^w was a ftifF defender of our opinion. "Wherefore fince our Author has ventured to attack his repu- tation upon that account, I think 'twill not be improper for me briefly to defend it. Concerning him then the Doftor fays thus : At laji came St, Jerom, tho^ not hill ahove three Centimes after the J^oftles times 3 ii'bo valuing him j elf upon his learnings which indeed ivas very great , and being provoked by the infolence of fonts Deacons^ ivho jet themfelves above Presbyters y to the end he might Tiitaintain the dignity tf his order dgainft fuch arrogant perfons^ he iidvcinc'd a notion never heard of bfore^ viz. That Presbyters li-ere not a different order from Bifjops 3 and that a Bifjop ivas only a more eminent Presbyter^ chofen out of the rej}^ andfet over thetn for preventing of Schijms. II How untruly ^erom is reprefented as the firft patron of our opinion, may appear by what I have faid already. But who does not perceive, the Dodor fpeaks here out of pre- judice ? When jeroni overthrows the foundation of the Hierarchy, then he values fci^y^./haughtily npqnhis learning ; but • ?*dag lio.\ii. u. 2. ^, 243. t A^ol. /. ^y \\£S'gc 24:. Chap.I. the Dissenters. ^6^ but when it makes for our Adverfirics purpofe, his autho- riiy is equal to his learning. But I am atraiv!, our Author, "jaluiti^ ^i^J^'''f ^P^^^ '-''^ /*'>^/«^, affirm\l that which he was not able to prove 3 namely, that "jcvom's being proxolCd !y the tnjoUiUc of Jome Dtacou, was the firfl occafion of his em- bracing our opinion. This might be faid with greater probability, if we were to learn what was his judgment in this matter only from his EpiiUe to Evagrius ^ but fince he delivers the fame in his other writings, how /liall we be aflur'd, he firil fell into our opinion upon that occafion ? By what arguments can it be prov'd, that Jerom did not write his Commentary upon Tuusy and his Epiftle to Occa- t:us (wherein he defends the lame opinion) before he wrote his Letter to Eva^riu^^ and fo before that occafion was given ? And altho' the Doctor here mentions tke infdencc of fome Deaco}7Sy that he might reprefent the provocation as very great, by its being oflfer'd by feveral, combined together in a defign , yet ^Jerom himfelf makes mentipn only of one ob- fcure perfon, whom he fpeaks of with contempt. " We ^' read, fays he^ in Ifatah 5 Jl foolifj perfon will fpeal^ foolifh " things, * I hear of a fellow, who has broke out into ** that extravagance, that he prefer'd the Deacons to " Presbyters, that is, to Bifhops. " Neverthelefs we dont build fo much upon ^erom's authority, as upon the flrength of his arguments, which have never yet been fairly anfwer'd. But next comes a pleafant fancy concern- ing hiiti. But at lafiy when hegreiv more cool and confiderate^ he granted that Bifhops fucc ceded iyi the room ofthe^pofrles 5 a>7d inhere as much above PreslyterSy as Aaron ii'as above his fons. And for the confirmation hereof, he cites, in his margin, that fame Epiflle to Exagrius. And is Jerom's great lear>iing atlaft come to this, that he fhould be thought to write inconfiftencies in fo fhort an Epiille ? While he was penning the begin- ning of his Epiftle, he was fo/'>oro!;'c/, that he ad^ancd a notion never heard of 'before^ that Presbyters 'were not a diffe-- rent order from Bifjops ^ but by that time he got to the middle of his /liort Epiftle, he greu^ cool and coyif {derate ; and then hegra>:tSy the Bijhops jucceedtd in the room of the y^pojiles. But what fliall we fay to the latter end of his Epiflle ^ Was Ji.e then afrefh provok'd ? Had he loil again his coolnefs and !::.xii. 6. 5^4 'A Vindication of PartlTL and confuleratton ? Let Bp. Crofts of Hereford anfwer this : *^ And now I defire my reader, if he underltand Latm^ to *' view the Epiftle of St. Jerom to Evngrius : and doubt- ** lefs he will wonder to fee men have the confidence to ** (juore any thing out of it, for the diftinclfon between ** Epifcopacy and Presbytery , for the whole Epiftle is to *' fliew the identity of them."* And if j^fro^w calls Bifhops the fucceffors of the Apoftles, can he be thought to deny the fame to be true concerning Presbyters ? Muft not he neceffirily aflert the fame thing of Bifiiops and Presbyters^ who fays, there is no diftinflion between them ? But he produces another paffage out of '^erom^ to fhew what he granted after he was grown coo! and conjiderate, 'Tis taken from his Epiftle to Hellodorm^ wherein he fays : Ti; not ealy t^flandin the Jiead of Paul, to be of the fame degree with Peter, who now both reign with Chrifi. And thus Jerom ^rows cool and confederate^ ^^^g before he could, according to our Author's opinion, have been provok'd. 'Tis certain that Epiftle to Heliodorus was writ by him when he was very young, long before the other to Evagrim, This is attefted by "^erom himfelf. ** When I was a young man, fays he^ •' and in a manner a boy, and was checking the firft fallies ** of my wanton age with the hardfhips of a wildernefs *' life, I wrote to thy uncle Heliodorus a Letter of exhorta- " tion, S^r. t And by that Epiftle itfelf it appears, "Jerom was not ordain'd, when he wrote it ^ whereas that to Exa- grim was, by the Do6lor's own confeflion, writ by him when he was a Presbyter. And altho' the words cited by the Doftor dont at all exprefs that Father's opinion con- cerning our queftion y yet 'tis evident by other paffages in the Epiftle, be was not then of the fame mind, that he was afterward, when he wrote to Evagr'ms. To give there- fore a juft account of this matter ; When '3^:rom was a youth, and almoft a boy, he favoured the tenets of the Epifcopa- rians 5 but when he was come to maturity of age, was or- dain'd a Presbyter, and had fpent much time and ftudy in reading the Holy Scriptures, he acknowledged the truth of that opinion we defend ; and, tor ought appears, he per- iifted in it to the end of his life. Our iVuthor adds : In his Catalogue of writers^ he owns James was ordain d B:fi)o^ o/Jerufalem. "Jerom there produces the words • Naked Tiuh^ jt'. 45. 1 l^^^iji- 2. to Nqotiaa. Chap. I. rk D I s s E N T E R si 365 v.oTds of Htgefyl^K^^ who delivers that ftory. And it his being Bifliop of JttuJaUm be underflood as I have ex- plain'dit, none ot our fide will deny it. Lartly, Jerom's Epiftle to Nef^otianus is referM to, where- in he fays : ** We know the Biihop and Presbyters are, what ** j^aroH and his fons were. " But this is not inconfiftent with the judgment of I/^row, mentioned before. For in the fame manner does he exprefs himfelf in that very Letter to Eva^rius^ wherein he ftoutly defends the equality of Biftiops and Presbyters. ** What ^^row,and his Sons, and *' the Levites, were in the Temple , the fame let Bifhops, ^* Priefts,and Deacons, claim to themfelves in the Church." Dr. 'HammoYiA argued from this paflage, that "Jeroyn either maintain'd the divine right of Epifcopacy, or elfe contra- dicted himfelf. But Bp. SulUn^fleet gives a good anfwer to this : *^ The plain meaning then of Jeroyn is no more but ** this : That as Aaron and his Sons, in the order of the ** Priefthood,were above the Levites under the Law ^ fo the *' Bifhops and Presbyters, in the order of the Evangelical *» Priefthood, are above the Deacons under the GofpeL *' For the comparifon runs not between Aa-ron and his Sons ** under the Law, and Bi/hops and Presbyters under the *' Gofpel j but between Aaron and his Sons, as one part of " the comparifon under the Law, and the Levites under ** them, as the other , fo under the Gofpel, Bi/hops and " Presbyters make one part of the comparifon, anfwering " to Aaron and his Sons, in that wherein they all agree, ** "Six. the order of Prieflhood 5 and the other part, under ** the Gofpel, IS that of Deacons, anfwering to the Levites *' under the Law/'* Let the reader apply the fame obfer^ vation to the paflage our Author has taken from hisEpiiUe to NepotlatiU'^y and he will eafily fee, 'twill as well* fit that alfo. I will fhut up this debate concerning the difference between Bifhops and Presbyters, fo far as it receives light from the Fathers, with the words of the fame learned Bi/liop I juft now menfion'd. *' As to the matter itfelf, *' I believe, upon the flrifteft inquiry, Mf^i;?^'s judgment '* will prove true, that Jerom, Aujiin^ Amhrofe^ Sedid'ius^ Prl- '' mjJuiSy Chryfofiom^ Theodorlty ThcobhylaBy were all of Aer'iu: *^ his judgment, as to the identity of both name and order ■ " of Bi/hops and Presbyters in the primitive Church."! We * liCn ^ 26?. t^rcn. b 276^ '^66 'A V I K D I C A 1 1 O N of Pdtt IIL We now come to atiother kind of debate. Dr. Nicho!$ attempts to vindicate the titles and honours of our EngUJlj Bifhops. Few of our fide, efpecially of late, have given our Adverfaries any trouble upon this head. For tho' we never lik'd Bifhops iliould be entangled in fuch offices and bufinefles, as muib of necefTiry draw away their minds from facred things ; yet fincc the objeftion might feem invidious, they have fcldom heard of it from us 5 except when they have forc'd us to take notice of it, by their mentioning it firft of their own accord, and endeavouring to defend it by frivolous cxcufes, rather than arguments 5 nor fhould I have faidany thing about it, if our Author had pafs'd it over in filence. I dcfire my readers to obferve, the matter in debate is not, whether refpefl: and honour is to be given to perfons in the facred office? A man mufl: be a great ftranger in our controvcrfy> who thinks we make any doubt of it. Nor are we much conccrn'd, that fome Minifters are diftin- guifh'd from the reft by thofe honourable titles they (o fondly feek. Let them, who are tickled with fuch intice- ments, keep to themfelves thofe honours v/hich to us feem ro way neccflary. The queftion which is here chiefly in debate is : Whether Minifters, and efpecially thofe, with whom alone, according to the judginent of our Adverfaries, the care of the flock is intrufled, ihould be entangled with thofe afF.iirs of ftate, that are mofl: foreign to their funftion? Let us now fee how our Author defends the Bifliops. Thus then he difcourfes. But hy the ObieFfors leavcy ^tis more reafonaUe to fay ^ that thofe *i:ho are once invcjied with this high dignity in the Church j fiould hy no mi ans decline the 'marks of honour annexed to it. For juch titles and terms of refpeH are the main fences of authority ^ whereiy the magifirates refutation and power are fecur^d and guarded 5 it heim natural for mankind to he much taken with whate^cer is fplen- did and glorious^ and to yield a ready obedience to their f up er ion ^ 'while thty rejetf the government of their equals with contembt, ^Twas thtrfore wifely provided hy the laws^ that Bif^'opSy who are to rule Presbyters in the Churchy fjould he adorned with the highej} honours : hecaufe if they were no better than common Ec- clefiajiicSy they would be fo far from governing their Clergy ^ that they would not he at all regarded by them. Our Author has now fpoke out plainly. But in the mean while what I'ort of Bifliops are thefe, fo obnoxious to contempt, that without theic annexed marks of honour they cannot efcape it ? Surely they are very different from Chap. I- the D I ssi^r tv.s: 3^7 the nioft anticnt Bidiops 3 for they, without the help of any ot thefe titles, prelervM their reputation and authority well enough. Nor are they lefs unlike to the Paftors of the Reformed Churches abroad , who are not contemn'd by their flocks, notwithrtanding they are not made Lords, But IS it to be believed, that our Saviour was ignorant of this? or that he did not forefee his Minifters, without theU main fenas of ^«rb>/ rjy, would, in time to come, fall into contempt? Shall we fay he was fo void of forecaft, as never to fecure his Mmifters from that inconvenience 3 nay, that on the contrary he fliould warn them to beware of thefe honours? But Jejus calhd them untB him^ and j aid, Ye ktjoiv that the pri>7ces of the Gentiles exercije domimon o^cer thtm, and they that are great ^ exercije authority u^on theyru Diet it fiall not he fo amonz you : hut ivhofoever will he great ciynong youy 1st him be your minifier : and ivhofoever will he chief among you, let him be your fervant. Even as the Son of man came not to he miniJireJ unto, hut to minijier, and to ^^ive his life a ranfom for many, ^ But I fuppofe 'tis enough for the Diflenters, and for ordinary Presbyters, to imitate our Saviour in that low eftate, in which he liv'd while he was here on earth 3 but it becomes the Bifhops to bear a refemblance of him according to his prefent circumftances, as he is exalted and glorified. But Chrift himfelf has well taught his Minifterr., to fecure their authority in quite another method. Further, fince our Englifj Bifhops have not only thofe titles ofhonour, but as Peers fit in the Houfe of Lords to manage the great affairs of ftate, by what right can they attend upon thefe things? Will they alfo fay the fame thing was lawful for Timothy, who, as they pretend> was himfelf a Bijhop ? St. Paur% words raife lome doubt in my mind about it. Thou there- fore endure hardnejs as a ^ood foldier of Jefus Chrlfl:, No man that warreth^ entangUth himfelf it hh the affairs of this life , that he may f leaf e him, who hath chejen him to he a foldier. f But if the opinion of the Epifcoparians is true, jerom had good reafon to fay a Bifjop was a 7tame of dignity, II How-ever, *twas our Author's happinefs he had alw-ays the antients ready at hand for any fervice. Kor^ fays he, is their title of Lords unprecedented, having the praHice of the primitive Chri/itans to fupport it 5 who gave likf honours to their Bifjops, as heir7g fupr erne governors in the Church .r For U ^*'a '■ Yv ~'' ^' ^^'^-^ ^"''^^ '-'''''' ^'» ^- t 2 Tim. ii. 3; 4. 368 A V I N D I c A T 1 0 N .(?/ Part III. For the proof of this he alledges the Eftjile to Julius B'tfho^ oy Rome, in Sozomen, Book 5. c. 23. which is infcrih^d : TcJ KveUfi uAK:iei(^ru,7(f>, To the moji happy Lord: and fome other paflages of the like nature. Who now can help perceiving, there is no /liapc anti- quity cannot appear in 5 no purpofe it cannot ferve ? What can there be, that m:iy not after the fame rate be defended by it ? However, I can't but wondernioreantient examples of this kind are not alledg'd, fince they were not far to feek. What ? fliall we think Julius Damafus^ Jm- hroffj and Jngujiine^ Bifhops of the fourth Century, were the firft who had the honourable title of Kveicty which our Author renders Lords^ given (o them ? I muft be fo fair as to acknowledge, there are much older inftances hereof. Thus Philips ^ohn xii, 21, and Paul and Sitas^ ABs xvi. 30. arecaird Kver^h Lords. I hope our Countrymen will re- member this, if ever they undertake a new tranflation of the Bible 5 that they may take care to mend the faults of thofe places, and change that civil compellation of S'rr^ which is in the prefeiit editions, into the more honourable one of Lord. Certainly our Author fliould have prov'd, the Bifl^ops were antiently rank'd with the Nobles of their country , and that this title was not given them as a civil compellation, but as an expreffion of their honourable qua- lity. Every one knows, perfons of an ordinary rank ufed, both among the Greeks and Romans^ to be befpoke in this manner. And the DifTenters are as much flrangers, as the Epifcoparians, to the clowniHinefs of the Quakers ^ and are ready to ufe this civil addrefs, not only to the Bifhops, but to any perfon who makes a tolerable figure in the world. But to fpeak fcrioully j what valuable antiquity claims thefe civil honours and offices for Bifhops ? The Jj^ojioUcal Ciimns^ as they are call'd, determine quite otherwife : *' Let " not. a Bifhop, Presbyter, or Deacon undertake worldly ** bulinels , otherwife let him be depos'd.* Wehavefaid <* a BiHiop fliouldnot meddle with the adminiftration of ** public affairs, but attend upon ecclefiaftical bufinefles. ** Let him thercforebeperfuaded to forbear fuchmeddlingf ** or let him be dcposM. For >70 man can ferve tzio mcijhrs^ ** as our Lord has told us.f Let aBifliop, a Presbyter, or a ** Deacon, who goes into the army, and defires to hold the ** office of a Rowj;; magiftratc, and the prieflly admini- " ftratlon * Ciin. 7. \ Can. di. Chap. I. the Dissenters* 3^p " {lr:ition together, be deposM. For r/.v r/;f^y o/*Q,Cw- bc- *' long to Cij^iy 5 :ind the thinys of Godyto GoJ.y * 'I'Ue lame ordc IS given by the Councils of CmIcccIo>i^ ^-^'^^t^i;^) t^Kint-^ VL^dTihur. The tciliniony or(J)'/?naw, inthfiscaf^^ is very reiliarkable : '' Dear brethren, /.ly; /;^, I aiid jny .colleagues «* who were prcfent, and, our tellow Preibyici.^, ^hu i'xt ** with us, vyere very much troubled, when we kfiewthat *' our brother, Ganinius Vulor^ when he dicd^ in his Uii->i'ill ** named a Presbyter to be guardian to his child ; it having *' been fome time fmce order 'd, }i^ a council of ]^ii]>pps, *' thac no man fliould by hi5 wUi liiake any or tf^e .^kt^y, '* or God's Miniiters, a guardian or truilee 3 f^'it^^^U^ho *' are honDur'd with the divine Pri,ditu^od, and-<5x{t^inithe ^* Miniftry of the Clergy, ought taiconfine the;./; fefrvige to *' the altar and facrifices, and ihquld give tKei^felve^ to " prayer. For 'cis written : Noynanthat'^ji-arretky^.ehtayi^Uth " hiinfelfwitb the affairs of this life jt'^thiit i'^J^^^^V^^J;^/;;:^ >^'^^ " hath chofn him to he ajoldier, -i^driincje'th^^^igagoken *' of Chriftians in general 5 hq^. n^ud^i more-ftughtncK »the •"* Clergy to entangle thcmj elves, u-itHctbe affairs and f hart s.^ this *' Ufe 'j who, being taken up about divine and fpiritual af- ^' fairs, are not to depart from the Church, and niind f^cu- ^' lar and earthly bufinefTcs? ''f And, a little after, l)e. fays : '' They judii'd therefore, that no Brother, wheaJ"u? left the *' world , fliould name any Clergyman to be- guardian or *' truftee 5 and if any one did, norofFering fliould be made '• for him, nor iliould any facrifice be obferv'd.for the yeax- " ly commemoration of nis departure." So that death it- felf did not exempt men fiom punifhmenr, who gave.oc- caiion to the Clergy to entangle themfelves in civilpflfairs:^ but a fevere wound. was given to their memory. Chfyfoftom is yet more firait handed to the Bifhops. His words de- ferve to be well obferv'd by cur Clergy, who often boaft mightily of him, and other antient writers. *' .1 fay (they are his own words) " the Bifliops Aiould have nothing but ** food and raiment, that they may not have their delires " drawn out after thefe things. '' ll Further, when St. Jeromy as our Author tells us, in his Letters to St. y^u^iifiineyftlles him : Do/nlno vere funHo S^hea" tiffimo Pafje Auinftlno : An^, ^ffi^ 17, 18 : 'Tis evident, Bor mn7iis here mud be underflood in the more loofe and com- E e mon C*n. 83' 1 Eyifl:. i. jj. i. ^ Horn. iLv/n* i Tina, in »jrj/ v. 17* ^57 o ^ Vindication of PartllL mon fenfe, and anfwers to that title, we familiarly give to ■perfons we dont know, of AV, or Mafter^ &c. For the fame ^^£rom has elfewhere well obferv'd, that Bifliops Jhould con- fider they are Priefts, and not LerJs : non Dompjos. * t'-' fiut fo much for the Fathers. Let us next defcend to %Tore modern writers, I mean, to our Reformers, whofe au- thority cannot be rcafonably rejefted, fince the Do6lor in another p'itice fpcaks th'us of them : When ive want authority for any of theft th'm^s^ ive can quote our Tyndals, Cranmers, LatTmers, Hoopers, ynojl learned divines^ and hlejjed martyr s .^ 4 /h^;rf therefore now bring all thefe as witneffes and de- *fendyr5-of otjr opinio^. * ' L^t Tj'^/J^/ be firft heard, who ufes thefe words : *' Let " them [Kifigs] rule't'heir realms themfelves,with the help ** bf'iaymen that are fage, wife, learned, and expert. Is '*rit not a-ihameaboveallfhames, and a monftrous thing, '** that no^ niati fliould be found able to govern a worldly *** kingdbhij'taveBifliops and Prelates, that are taken out ^*;^'c/f the world, arid^ appointed to preach the kingdom of «' God? " And having cited 3ob^^ xviii. ;5. Luke yin, 14: and i>t.6'2. Matth,\'u 24. he goes on thus : *' To preach *' Gad's word is too much for half a man. And tominif- ^* ter a temporal kingdom is too much for half a man alfo. " Eitber other requireth a whole man. One therefore can- «' not well do both. "II ' And in another place : " Where- *' fore if Chrift's kingdom be not of this worM, nor any *' of 4^is difciples may be otherwife than he was 5 then ■** Ghrift's Vicars, which minifter his kingdom in his bo- *' dily ab fence, and have the overftght of his flock, may be *^ none Emperors, Kings, Dukes, Lordsj Knights, tempo- *^ ral Judges, or any temporal officer 5 or, under any falfe *' names, have any fuch dominion, or minifter any fuch *' office, as requireth violence. " + Next to Tyndal follows Cranmer^ who thus writes in a Letter to my Lord Cromzi'el : " Even at the beginning of *' Chrifl's profeffion, Diatrephes defir*d gerere primatum in ec- *' clejia^ to have the p-reheminevce in the Churchy as faith St. ^ohn " in his laft Epiftle. And fince, he hath had more fuccef- ^* fors, than all the Apoftles had 3 of whom have come all ^* thefe glorious titles, ftiles and pomps, into the Church. " But * Epiil. IT. a3 Ncpot. \ Jld.p. lit. li Obedience of a Chrillian Man: ifi his zmdsy p. 124. i The Pha. of the Popifli PtcLl«^, p. 342- I Chap. L r/j^ DissBNTiRs. 371' *' But I wouldj that I, and all my brethren the Bifliops, ** would leave all our ttilcs, and write theltile ot our offi " CCS, calling ourfelves the ApolHes ot 3'^y«> Chriji: fo chat *' we took not upon us the name vainly, but were fo even •' in deed : fo that we might order our Diocefs in fuch fort, ** that neither paper, parchment, lead nor wax, but the " very Chrittian converfation, might be the letters and ^* feals of our offices 5 as the Corbithlans were unto Paid^ to " whomhefiid: Ye are tkc letters ar2d feals of our Jj^oftle/Jj't^,'"* Another of the bleJfedMirtyrSy whofeauthority the Doflor fo highly values, is Latimer^ who, in his Sermon of the Ploughy fpeaks thus ; ** But this much I dare fay, thatfince " lording and loitering hath come up, preaching hath come *' down, contrary to the Apoftles times. For they preach- " ed, and lorded not. And now they lordj and preach not. " Ever fince the Prelates were made Lor^y and Nobles, " the plough flandeth, there is no work done, the people " ftarve. " A little after he fpeaks of the excufes they make : '* They are otherwife occupied, fome in Kings mat- ^' ters, fome are EmbafTadors, fome of the Privy Council^ " fome to furni/h the Court, fome are Lords of the Parlia- " ment^ fome are Prefidents, and Comptrollers of Mints., " Well, well. Ls this their duty ? Is this their office ? Is *' this their calling ? Should we have Minifters of the *' Church to be Compttollors of the Mints ? Is this a meet *' office for a Prieft, that hath cure of fouls ? Is this his /* charge ? I would here ask one queftion : I would fain ** know who comptroUeth the Devil at home in his parifh ^ ** while he comptroUeth the mint ? If the Apoftles might " not leave the office of preaching to be Deacons, fhall w^e *' leave it for minting ? A Bifliop hath his office, a *' flock to teach , to look unto 5 and therefore he cannot ^' meddle with another office, which alone requireth an " whole man. He fhould therefore give it over to whom ** it is m.eet, and labour in his own bufinefs, as Paul writeth ** to the Thejfaloniayis : Let every man do his own hufinefs^ and <* follo-iv his calling. Let the Prieft preach, and the Noble *' man handle the temporal matters. " f The next witnefs is Bp.Hbo/^rr, from whomlfliall tranf- cribe the following paflfages : " I^ook upon the Apoftles ^* chiefivj and upon all their fucceflfors, for the fpace of 400 E e 2 ** years, * Stryp Life of Crir4iDi. yfrp W. j>— o- t Lat. Scrm. j?. 11,12^15. 1 5^2^ A ViKDiCATioK oj Part III •* years, and then thou fhalt fee good Bl/hops, and fuch as ** diligently applied that painful office of a Bifliop to the •' glory of God, and honour of the realms they dwelt in. *' Tho' they had not fo much upon their heads as our Bi- *' /hops have, yet had they more within their heads, as the ** Scriptures and hiftories tellify j for they applied all the *' wit they had unto the vocation and miniftry of the *' Church, whereunto they were called. Our Bi/hops have *' fo much wit, they can rule and ferve, as they fay, in ** both (tatcs j in the Church, and alfo in the civil policv. *' When one of them is more than any man is able to fa- '' tisfy, let him do always his beft diligence. If he be fo " neceflary for the court, that in civil caufes, and giving " of good counfel, he cannot be fpared , let him ufe that *' vocation, and leave the other 5 for 'tis not poffible he •' ihould do both well. 'Tis a great overfight of the Prin- ** ces and higher powers of the earth, thus to charge them ** with two burdens, when none of them is able to bear *' theleaft of them both. They be the King's fubjefts, and *' meetfor his Majefty to chufe the beft for his court, that *' be of the realm j but then they muft be kept in their *' vocation, to preach only the word of God, and not to *' put themfelves, or be appointed by others, to do things *' that belong not to a Bifhop's vocation. " * *^ They [theBifhops] know, that the primitive Church *' had no fuchBifhops,as be now a-days-t — If the fourth ** part of the Bifhoprick remain'd unto the Bifliop, it were " fufficient 5 the third part to fuch as /liould teach good *' learning 5 the fecond part to the poor of the Diocefs ^ *' and the other to maintain men of war for the fafeguard *' of the commonwealth 5 it were better beftow'd a great *' deal. For now it is ill ufed and bellowed, for the great- *' eft part, upon thofe that have no need of it ^ or elfe up- *' on fuch ill men, as fliould be maintain'd with no man's ** goods. It were well done to provide for fuch, as, by ill ** bringing up, cannot now otherwife live , and provide ** fuch means, that hereafter no more offend in that kind of *' life. If any man be offended with me for my thus fay- ** ing, he loveth not his own health, nor God's laws, nor *' man's, out of which I am always ready to prove the thing ** faid to be true." || And * U^oo the Coinmandm. j). 78. \ Ib.^.T^. "4- K lb. j>^^. Chap. I. the Dissenters. 375 And have not now the Diflcntcrs good reafon to glorj', tjiat thefe fo very great men have been of the fame opinion with them ? Nor \s it fair to reprelent this as our objection jM^cuIiarly, fince the things objected againft were difplea- iing to our firrt Reformers, to the anrient Fathers, and to oar bleffed Saviour himfelf. And altho' I have only al- Icdg'd four of our Reformers, men whofe authority was moft valued by our Author , yet I could add abundance more of the Church's BiHiops, Pre.^byters, Martyrs, or Con- feflors. Such were Frith^ Mors^ Braafordy Alltn^ Coxerdale^ Par- kst'y Beaco>7y and .-Jyhner^ that I may name no more. But who- ever defires to fee their tellimonies, which are well worth reading, may confult Mr. P/-^'>^«f, to whom I am indebted, for hinting feveral of thefe. * The Epifcoparians, as I have obferv'd before, hold, eve- ry Bifhop is the only Governor and Paftor in his Diocefs, that is, his Church. But now, if we fliould grant, that Chrift appointed a Monarchical government in his Church j yet fince fome of their Churches are of fuch a prodigious extent, as for inftance, that of the Bifhop of London^ which comprehends Middle fex^ ^Jp^y P^irt of HcrtfordjVrre^ and all the Engiijh colonies in both the Indies 3 we can never be per- fuaded, that any nngle perfon can be fit to govern fo vaft a Church. And we cannot but wonder any Proteftant Di- vines, who have declared againft the Pope's having the government of the Catholic Church, fliould be fo forget- ful of fome of their own arguments, as to claim fo vaft an authority for one EyigUfo Bifhop. And yet our Author next proceeds to defend this great abfurdity. But no-ji'y a^ to the boioids of antient BifiGpricl{>'^ comf^ar^dwitb OHiS : "ivherexs it Is ^retended^ that the pri?nitive Bipods power wus co>ijind to one congregation 5 ii-e anpiier infiortj that our j^dver- furies are very much mifiak^yi^ if they th'nik the antient Bifhops poner nxas limited to o)ie fingle village^ or Church, \ It muft be own'd, fome Diflenters have been of that opi- nion, that no fingle Church ought to exceed the limits of one congregation. Nor are there wanting fome plaufible arguments for that notion, as a very learned Gentleman of ^ the long robe, now in one of the higheft ftations of his pro- feffion, hasfhewn, in aTreatife, which ourAdverfarles have i)ot yet had time enough to anfwer, tho' it was printed five E e 5 and * Antipathy, t- ^il^ SvC. \ -jg. 374 ^ Vindication of Part III. and twenty years ago. * But the account given of the Church of Jenijaleniy in the ^fJs of the Jf^oftleSy convinces me, and fevcral more, that the other opinion is the truer ^ nor have the very learned and ingenious arguments of that au- thor been able to drive us from ir. As for my own part ^ I thinkChrift left the Church of J erufal em under the govern- ment of a plurality of Presbyters, all equal in dignity and power. The Apoftles, following his example, fettled the lame order in all the Churches they founded. Hence each Church of old was govern 'd by one Presbytery in common. So that a particular Church is to be limited after this man- ner : That as long as all the affairs of it can be manag'd by one fuch Council of Presbyters, it fiiould remain one fingle Church 3 but when it is fo inlarg'd, that one fingle Presby- tery is not capable of hearing and determining the feveral cafes of all the members, that fhould come before them ^ or that the Presbyters, living at fuch remote diftances from one another, cannot meet together to manage the affairs of the Churchy as often as is needful j then a new Church, and a new Presbytery, fhould be fet up. But that two or more congregations in the fame city, or neighbourhood, may be under one Presbytery, and fo make but one particular Church, is a matter pafl doubt with me. And I defire the reader to take notice, that thofe, who are of the contrary opinion, did not feparate from theConformifls upon this ac- count. For when King Charles^ upon his refloration, had promised, in his Declaration, to take care that the Bifliops lliould not for the future govern their Churches without the confent and affiftance of their Presbyters 5 our Minis- ters, whether of the one opinion or the other, waited upon him publicly, with an Addrefs of thanks, and hop*d that this would produce a lafting peace. But this by the way. Our Author next gives a reafon of his opinion : It being «o- toriotis that it [the Bifhop's power] exte>7ded citjirfi all over the fay^efi provinces. Not only the great citM of Ephefus, hut all Afia Minor ii-as Timothy'5 Diocefs : Titus was Bifhop of the ivhole ijland of Crete, famous for its many Cities, f Dr. Nichols ♦ thought it was Chryjoftom's judgment, that Timothy was by the Apoftle conftituted Bifhop of all y^fta Mmor^ and Tttus of all Crete 3 ctherwife what he fays is nothing to the pur- pofe. * Inquiry into t^;eConriItut. Difcipl. ©rj. of thr Primit. Church. \ Chryioft in i Tim. v : Qr- 2 Tini. iv. Id. in Til. i. , Cliap.L the Dissenters. 375' pofc. For the queftion under debate is this : Whether the primitive Churches were of the fame extent with xhcEngl'tfi fciocefles ? Whatever power Evangchfh (as Timothy and Tittis were) may be faid to have had in any Churches , yet all the writers for the Hierarchy grant, every Church fhould haveitsownBifliop, andmany of them plead, according to C^'f/'itiw's judgment, that no one is a Bifhopover Bifiiops.'*' Wherefore, if there were feveral Bifliops in yijia andCVtf^, there muft of neceility have been feveral Churches alfo. And iince our Adverfaries hold, our Bilhops are fucceflurs to Timothy and Titus y not as they were EvangelilVs, but as they were Bifhops , it only remains to be inquir'd, whether they afted as Bifhops in the whole region ot' y(fjay or Crete ; that is, whether there were no other Bifliops befide them in thofe Countries ? This is what our Author endeavours to prove, if I underftand him right. Of the thing it felf I have treated before out of the Holy Scripture. Now we inquire, what Chryfofiom thought of it. But 'tis certain, Chryfoftom thought there were other Bifliops in Cretey befide TitK^s. " That thou mayejl ordain Elders^ fays the Apoftle : '*' He means Bifliops. In evoy city^ fays he : for he would " not have the whole ifland committed to one man ; but *' that everyone fhould haveandmindhisown propercure: ** for fo he knew the labour would be ealier to him, and " the people to be govern'd would have more care taken *' of them 5 fince their teacher would not run about to go- «' vern many Churches, but would attend to the ruling one *' only, and fo would keep it in good order. " f In like manner TheophylaB : '' He means here Bifhops, *' as likewife in his Epiftle to Thnothy. He fays. In every *.^ city: for he would not have the whole Ifl:md committed " to one man ^ but that every city fhould have its own *' Paftor : for fo the labour would be the eafier, and the *' care taken of them the more exaft. '' II Nor does Oecumenius differ from them : '' He had left ** him, /rt)'J hcy having made him firft a Bifliop himfelf, that " he fhould ordain Bifhops in every city. For he *' would not have the whole ifland of CrctCy being a large '* one, committed to the care of one man j but that each '* city fhould have its own Paftor. But the Bifliops he >* here calls Presbyters. " r E e 4 So * In Co.T;ii. .C.iihag. t la Tit. i. f . i. In Joe. ^ la hz. 57^ ^ Vindication of Part III. So that 'tis clear, that C'^rv/o/?ow, Theopbyl.if} and Oecume- fi'uiiy thour^ht rhc whole iflind was not committed to T/f«5, as the Bifliop thereof. C-yfojiom's words, in the beginning of that Homily, led our Author into his mirtake. There, he fiys : " This Tuus- was one of Paul's company, well •' elleem'd of by him. For he would never have com- ** mitted the whole ifland to him , he would never have *' commanded him to fupply what was wanting^ (for he " lays, That tl.ou fhriiild'ji jet in ordtr thelh'w2st]:at are iiartt- ♦^ lug ) nor would he have left to his judj^ment the making *' fo many Bifhops 5 if he had net plac'd a great confi- >' dence in him. " * And he difcourfes to the fame pur- pofe elfewhere : ^' This Tttm^ jays he^ was a very extra- *' ordinary perfon , fo that the Apoftle would commit a ^' whole idand, and that a very large one too, I mean ♦' Crete, to him. " Now thefe paffages dont contradict what I alledg'd be- fore out of him. Ch-ryloflom aflferts, St. Pan! would not commit the whole ifland to Tiths^ as the ordinary and fole Bifliop thereof; but that he left him there upon this ac- count, that he fhould go over the whole ifland, and plant a Church in every city, or fct in order fuch as were planted before, and ordam Elders in them ; and perform, as foon as he could, fuch other things, as the Apoflle, byreafonof the flraitnefs of his time, was hindered from doing himfelf. And when Titus had done thus, he was then (as ChyyfoJh)n leems to have thought) to undertake the government of one of thoie Churche3 thus conftituted. The reader may apply the fame anfwer to what is alled^'d concerning Timo- fhy. But if Timothy was the only Bifliop of Ephefus and all JftaMmor^ as our Author pretends; what will become of thofe particular Churches oi Jfut, I m^^n Smyrna^ ^^l?^" miiiy-Thyatira^ SarMsy Philadelphia and Laodlcea ? We muft then, alas ! lofe all thefe Churches ; and, which is a much nrore melancholy thing, we muft lofe their Bifliops alfo. Thefe things do not well agree with the fentiments of the Epifcopal party. After this rate, thofe famous Churches, exprefly mentioned in Scripture, muit have had no Bifhop but Timothy ; nor a Bilhop and a Church any longer be look'd upon as related in that manner, which they ufe to pretend. Nay , the Angels of thp jcxtn Churches will be depriv'4 ♦' ^om, ?c. in % Tim : i?i c. iv, ;(i, Chap. I. ?/j^ DissiKTBR^. 577 J.c?riv\i of their dignity, anci be turn'd inro mcer Presby- ters, the more to inlarge the authority and the Church of 'I'in'Otlyy their oidy Bifhop. But our Author produces fonic otlicr examples From cc- clcliailical Hiflory : Demetrius, /^{//^o/? o/ Alexandria, lad all i^{l,y\*t for his j?roviyice. * Eujcbwys words arc : " In the tenth year of 61"jfr/?fj Lctus *•' had the prefecture oi Alexandy'ia and all K^Jl^t 3 but IJe-mc- *' tr'ius had lately fucceeded '^HltanuSy as Bi/liop over the pa- ** rifhcs that were therein/* But either Dr. Nichols^ or Eu- fehius is greatly niittaken. For if only one Bi/hop rul'd all E^vpt 3 how could BioyjyJtiiSy who, alter HeracUs^ fucceeded Demetrius^ write letters to the Bifliops ofEjjj^ty to Conon of HermapoltSy yhmnoyi of Bcrenicey and IjafjItJci o\ Ptntafolis ? \ Nay, Pamphiliis and EuftbinSy in their Apology for Origf^?, make mention of Demetrius and lome other Bifliops of Ezyj^t, II There were therefore more Bi/liops in that province 3 but the Bifliop of Alexandria manag'd the aif!iirs of the Church thro' all ^^r/-% TkehaiSy &c. as Archbifliop, as Ep:p}:anins obferves f who mentions the 3ifhops of E^ypr^ and fully clears this matter, t But now, fince our Adverfaries di- flinguifli between an Archbifliop's Province, and a Bifhop's Diocefs 5 we have no reafon to believe, the limits of a Church are to be determin'd by the former of thefe. Cyprian V juyifdiRion extended beyond the populous City of Alexandria [fallely printed for Carthage^ all over the mighty provinces o/'Numidia and Mauritania. Cyprian's words, refer'd to, are : " But becaufe our province *' fpreads it felf very wide, {or'Numidia and both the Mauri^ '* tania*s are pin'd to it." * Our Author thought, Cyprian^ Church reaclVd as far as the province in which heliv'd.The great abfurdity of which muli eafily bedifcern'd by anyone, who isconvcrfantinhis writings. Cyprian elfewhere fpeaksof all the Bifjops that were in his province^ or beyond the feas : f oi AgrippinuSy and the reft of his fellozvBiJhopSy who at that time govern'd the Lord's Church in the province o^ Africa and Numidta : II and of the Bifhops that prefided in Numi- dia, t But what need many words ? 'Tis certain from the Council oi C^irthage^ there were many Biiliops in Nionidia^ Mauritania ^ \u. * EufcH. E. H. lih. vi. c. t. [hg. 2.^ ] Eufrb. E. H. lib. vi. r.47. B c 26. II J'id. Photii Binliuth. cod. cxviii. ^. 298. ^^ Hxt. lx.v.v- (^ir£- eji M'i^thi:.^ f:H. I. "^ Epitt. i. iv. eh ^. aHjii:ji i4 //; ei;^ Djtoii. t EpiiV. 43. 378 A Vindication of Part IIJ^ Mauritania^ and Zeti^ttana^ wherein Carthage flood. If any one queftions it, he need only confult the learned Bifhop of Oxford's notes upon that Council. If it were not for this miftake of Oy/?r/^«\s meaning, I fhould hardly think it worth while to take notice, that it was the cuftom in thofe days for all the Bifhops in a province to meet together fre- quently, to confult about ecclefiailical affiirs. The pro- vince then, wherein Carr^;f was, contained Z^w^/'/iiw^, Nu- midia^ and both thQMaurttama*s^ and in each of them many Billiops Churches. Hitherto our Author has brought nothing, that makes for the defence of his caufe , now therefore he betakes himfelf to the authority of Socrates and Sotomen , refering us to four places in them , three of which are falfe printed, and are not now mended in the Tranflation.* But fince I am paft doubt, that city Churches at that time confifted of fe veral congregations 5 and fince I diflike not they fhould do fo, I have no mind to difpute about thofe paflages. But I would here obferve by the way ^ that our Author does not rightly conclude from Cornelius ;indOptatm compared together 5 That every Presbyter in that city [Rome] had his proper Church and congregation to himfelf. For the congregations at Rome had each of them two Presbyters to take care of them 5 as Dr. Maurice has obferv'd out of Hilary the Dea- con, and thinks no body took notice of this before him- felf: t tho' Blondel had made the fame remark long before, and given many examples of it. II And FaleJiU'S in vain en- deavours to defend the opinion of Baroniu^^ concerning this matter, againft Rlondel. + Laflly, our Author pretends, that ^erom appropriate? the power of ordination to the Bifliops , becaufe in that famous Letter to Evagnu^^ wherein he has demonftrated the identity of a Bifliop and a Presbyter, he fays : Quid enim facity except a ordinatione^ Ej^ifcoptis^ quod Presbyter non fa- ciat ? * But who can believe, that Jerom^ the moft learned of all the Fathers, fhould in fo very fliort an Epiftle write in- confiilently ? 'Tis but fair to admit any fuch convenient ex- plication of an author's words (efpccially if he be a learn- ed man) as will make him beft agree with himfelf. But our Author makes a difficulty, where there is none. For Jeromes * pjg. 2C4 t D'f of Dioccf, Epif f. 4-'- H Ayo\ t> 224; 225- i Not. in Eufct). L. H, ]iu. vi. i. 4^* * }-^g' ^45. Chap. II. the Di'ssekters, 3-79 "Jcrom^ meaning is plain enough ; who, when he here ex- cepts ordination, does it upon the account of the cultom of the Church, not of any command of Chrift. His words therefore are thus to be underilood : ll'hat do:s a B^fioj\ (now according to theprefent ufual pradice of the Church) excef>t Oi duiat'iOYj^ "nhich a Presbyter may not dol So that Bifhop Crofts did not without caufe rcprcfent it as a vain and con* fident attempt, to fetch arguments from that Epiille, to eftabliili the diitinilipn between Epifcopacy, and Presby- tery. * CHAP. 11. Of Deans and Chapters, IF a man compares the power which our Adverfaries fay , belongs to Bifhops, with their ordinary praftice, he will find a confiderable difference between them. For tho' they afcribe to the Bifhops alone the power of government in the Church 5 yet they allow a large jurifdiflion to Deans and Archdeacons, who are Clergymen 5 and to Chancel- lors and Commiffaries, who arc laymen. And which is ftrange, they pretend antiquity for both. Dr. Nichols has here heap'd a great many things together, which are fo- reign to our controverfy, and fo will need the lefs refuta- tion. The firft thing he pretends is, that we object againft thefe things only out of emy. For none of the Puritans^ fays he, ever decldDnd agalnji Ca- thedfiil dignities ^ till hy their Schifm they had cut the^nfehes off from all hopes and poffihility of enjoying them. Humphreys, Whittingham, and Fox^ chief men among them ^ could bear the inflde of a Cathedral uell enough ^ till Cartwright 7nade an abfo- lute defeBion and feparation from the Church, j" The Tranflator here has been guilty of an egregious blunder, by rendering : y^nte Schifma a Cartwright 0 fufaptum : Ti// Cartwright made an abfolute dtfeBion'and feparation fromthe Church, Carfd-right made no feparation from the Church ^t all. But as to our Author, what he here fays does not: well hang together. For when the Puritans began to find fault yvith thefe offices, they had not cut thanfehes offfro-^n all f Naked umh, t. 4—— — — ^i— — ■— — ^■^™^^— ^^ ' ■ ..I ■ mm. ^ -^^^e 24?. 3B2 A Vindication of Part III But fuj^pojin^ there were no need of their prudence^ to afjtji the Bijhop tit the ajfuirs of his Dioccfs : We apprehend the Dean pnd Chapter are not oblig'd to affift the Bifhop, nor the Bifliop to feek their help or advice, according to the con- ilitution of the Church of England, If the matter be other- wife, it ought to be made appear 3 elfe what he faid juft before is fuperfluous. But let us fee v/hat ufe they ferve for, fince they are of none in the government of the Church : yet it -aoidd he for the tntereji of the Churchy that fuch a body of Presbyters fhotdd live together in the Cathedral of the Diocefs^ if it ivere but to attend on the daily fervice of the folemn Prayers. And muft men be hired at fo dear a rate, to be prefent at the Prayers of the Church ? In parochial Churches, where only two or three Minitters have falaries, prayers are read often enough. But here the prayers are more folemn 5 namely^ by reafon of the curious finging of the Chorifters, and the melody of the Organs, which is the fubjeifl of the next Chapter, and is, according to our pro- verb, Mjre coji than iiorfiip. The Do6tor adds : That fuch fervice being duly and rezidarly perJorm''d hercy tnight ferve for a pattern to Minijiers in more remote parts of the province : * God forbid ! May that fole>72n finging at leaft be confin'd to the Cathedrals 5 tho* it were much better laid afide in them alfo. But if once it fhould fpread it felf, together with its appurtenance of Choriflers and Singing-men, into our parochial Churches, we may bid adieu to religion and piety. that the laity'' s omi[J:ons in this duty ynight be atond for^ in fome meafure^ by the Clergy's great diligence, I wonder our Author did not here alfo appeal to the antient writers. For who does not know, that our Anceftors fome ages ago were of that opinion, that the Clergy ought to have a flock of merits, ready to clear the fcore of the people's fins ? A moft gainful doftrine this has been to the Clergy, as the Papifts find it to this very day. And if it were certainly true, I fliould think the wifdom and prudence of our na- tion deferv'd great commendation, that has fo prettily pro- vided by a public charge, that no one fliould mifs of a fhare in thefe hired merits : nor fliould I think the advan- tage dear, at any price that would purchafe it. But perhaps thefe nicn are exceeding ufeful, as our Author next pleads, by their frequent preaching. Nor in- deed * f-*^^ ^-^» Chap. tl. the Dissenters- 383 deed will I deny, they may be of fomc ufc in this refpefh But whoever compares the number of Termons they peach, with the profits they receive, will readily own they are well rewarded for their pains 3 and that they cannot make amends for the mifchief done in thofe Cathedral towns and cities, by the tribe of Singing-men, Organifts, and fuch like fellows. In the next place, our Author proceeds to defcribe the(e Dignitaries, as fo many Gaitis'sj hofpitably entertaining both the Clergy and the laity. * But tho' 1 have not heard much proof of this, I will not particularly examine what he fays, fince it might feem invidious. But heJideSy there is a further uje of Cathedral dignities^ Viz, That the more learned Divines may have encouraging rewards he-^ fore their eyeSy to incite and fir them uj? to more than ordinary pains in their Jiudies. They would defcrve great commen- dation upon this account, if they were truly beftow'd according to mens merit. But the Doftor prefently ac- knowledges they are not : ^nd ii-hereas per fans of no greater fnerits than their neighhoursy do fometimes enjoy the fe preferments 5 the fault is not to he laid upon the Churchy hut rather upon the comynon error of all nations and agesy in 'which amhitious and con- fident men have ever inftnuated themfelves into the favour of the great ones 5 and hy affuming much to themfelves ^ and alloiving little to thofe that deferve hetteTy have aim'd at thefe very prefer- ments y and left no fiene unturned ^ to obtain them fpeedily, f Since then, flothful and ignorant men fometimes enjoy thefe preferments, and the Church has taken no care to pre- vent it 5 without doubt /lie muft be in the fault that they obtain them, who are unworthy of them. There is yet one argument more our Author makes ufe of: If it were not for thefe Cathedral prcfennentSy ive JhouU have nothing in the Church to confer upon learned Foreigners. For they fca^ejver attain to fuch a majiery in our language y as to he jit for preachings and other duties of parochial Cures, But feveral of them have found an honourable refuge in our Cathedrals y ^hen they have left their own country for the love of our Churchy or been fore' d from it hy the feverity of their Prince, il What a wretchedly poor nation has he now made ws ! Who can believe the EngUJh have no other way of providing for foreign Refugees ? The Dutchy and other Reformed coun- tries, * ^^g- 251. t Vil P- 2:3, ,; ^T^ 2S2. 3S4 A Vindication of Part III. tries, tho' they have none of thefe dignities, have ye't ho- nourably entertained and provided for many of our Bre- thren, who fled out ot France^ for the fake of their rehgion. And indeed, fo few Foreigners have ever obtain'd any of thefe dignities , that this niuft needs be look'd upon as 4 feign'd excufe, that has nothing in it. But fince thefe Deans and Chapters have nothing, as we have feen, in antiquity to defend them 3 fome may inquire. Whence had they their original ? In that, Bifliop imrnet informs us : " The Deans and Chapters, fays he^ had their *' authority at firll by Papal Bulls, and have now their *' exemptions and iurifdiftions continued to them only by a ** Proviio, in the Statute of the 25th of Henry VIII. '* * And he affirms they do all the a£tsof Epifcopal jurifdiction.t Which, as I obferv'd before, is very contrary to the Epif- copal fcheme. I will conclude this Chapter with the words of the great Mr.CW^v^^. '' Thofe Cathedral dignities are of no ufe at *' all for the true government of the Church , much lefs *^ Chancellorfhips, and the reft of thofe rafcally offices. *' Where fliall we then place them ? Truly the word of *' Chriil, and the practice of the primitive Church, ex- *' eludes them from the honour of Presbyters. And yet *^ they fay they are Presbyters : but we mufl pull off the ** mask 5 fo we Ihali find their profeffion widely different, •^ and moft remote from that office of Presbyters, which *' the ApolUes defcribe to us, and was found in the antient *' Church. And therefore, fince all fuch kind of offices, " whatever titles they are honoured with, are newly in- *^ vented, having no foundation in any divine appointment, *' or in the antient pradice of the Church ^ they ought to " have no place in the defcription of that fpiritual govern- *' ment, which the Church has receiv'd, as being made ** facred by the word of the Lord himfelf. Or if they ** would have me fpcak more plainly and coarfly : Since *' Commiffaries, Cinons, Deans, and fuch like idle fel- *' lows, do not, with fo much as their little fingers, touch *' any part of that office, which is neceffarily requir'd in *' Presbyters, 'tis not to be born, that they flaould, by falfe- ** ly affuming that honour, profane the holy inflitution of ** Chrift. " II C H A P. * Pv, HjC' . on Atterb. Bool; of the Rights, &c. of a Convocat. j). lo. t ^"^^^ II. j. Inlh . ':6. iv. c.s.Jecf, 10. Chnp-IIL the DissENtEfesi; 38^ CHAP. III. Of Singing and Mifjic in Churches. THere are three things which we muft here carefully diftingui/li 5 and the rather, becaufe they are con- founded by our Author. Firft, Plain Singing, which we affirm has been in ufe from the beginning of the Church, and is grounded upon the example of our Saviour, and the command of his Apoftles. Secondly, Cathedral or Antiphonal Singing, which we take to be neither ufefulj nor very antient, being the device of the fourth Century. Laftly, Mufical Inftruments, joined with Singing in the Church, which we fay are the invention of a yet much later age, viz. the thirteenth or fourteenth age of the Church. Now let us hear our Author. .. Theyfioidd conjider hoiv uy^jujily they condemn xoca! afidin- firumental niufic^ ivhich even nature^ hy a tacit approbation^ h^s brought into ufe. * We never condemn vocal mufic^ without which there can be no finging. Nay, our Author himfelf tells us, U'e are for the mojt part extremely addicted to Jjnging- Pfalms. f How do thefe things then agree i But let us go on with him : . For^ fays he, not to enter into the JiHions of the f/oets^ [^namely in the ages moft venerable for antiquity] concerning /r, heii} "d'oods and ii'tld beajis have followed it^ and the dead he en-- raised hy it ^ iie jind^ hy our own ahjervation^ that brute crea- tures are fenfwle of it^ and Jr and fill I to hear it, 'Tis a Won- der he fhould here omit to mention the antient writers of the Church, of whom he ufes continually to boaft. For' not only the flibulous poets^ but fome of thefe alfo, have long ago made the faiaie obfervation. So CU^nent oiAlexan^ dria fa-ys, deer and horfes are delighted with mufic. But what he there adds is very remarkable, that thefe inflru- ments are futer for heafts than men.W But the Doflor reckons- up yet more of the admirable efFeCls of muiic : That bar- barity itfelf is mollified by an harmonioips variety of founds ; that unfociable rttlr'd people may be prevailed on by it to leave their fo- litudey and be pleased with our company and diverjzons, • F f Noiv^ 3S6 'A ViKDicATioN of PartllL ^ov!^ Ji>Jce our fouls are fo much accujiornd to worldly matters^ as to be very cold andjlow to the love of God -^ we have need of fuch kelps as thefc^ to warm our afftBionSy and put them in motion. That there is a great force in mufic, and that it wonder- fully pleafcs men, is certain. Nor are we fo unmufical as to deny it. But the queftion is : Whether it be fit for the worftiip of God ; or can, by its own virtue, excite devout and fpiritual affedions in us? Plain finging we acknow- ledge is pleafing to God, and ferves to raile pious affec- tions, becaufe *tis commanded under the NewTeftament : nor can that, I think, be doubtful to any Chriftian. But from a general command concerning finging, it does not prefently follow, that we muft ufe mufical Inftruments in our worfhip : that furely muft be prov'd by other argu- ments. Nor is it enough, that they are able to ftir and chear our minds 5 for 'tis not lawful for us to bring in all fuch things, of our own heads, into God's worJfhip. Who Icnows not, that wine has the like virtue, to chear mens minds, and warm their affections ? And yet 'tis unlawful to ufe it in the worfhip of God, except where 'tis com- manded, in the Lord's Supper. Vain therefore are the allegations of our Author, in defence of his Party upon this head. And unlefs our Adverfaries can prove, that our minds are carry'd toward fpiritual and heavenly things, by fome hidden virtue, that nature has planted in thefe mufical Inftruments, or by a certain divine grace accom- panying them, as God's own inftitutions ^ they really fay jiothing to the purpofe. But it may not be amifs here, to take notice of an obfrrvation, which our Author make* elfewhere, and which is very pat to our prefent purpofe. •* The Chriftian religion, fays he^ fhines brighteft in its " own native drefs 5 and to paint it, is but to deform ** it. " * for thefe reafons Mufic was ufed in the Temple at Jerufalem^ hy the appointment of God himfelf f The Tranflator has here mended our Author, who fays, in the Latin edition : Tor thefe reafons the antient Church of God ufed Mufic in their worfhip^ in the Temple at Jerufalem, God himfelf approving ofit^ This I take to be a great miftake. For the ^^lijs us'd not mufic in their worfhip for any fuch reafons, as our Author has before alledged 5 but only» becaufe *i»gez^i, ti"^^* 3[i5» Chap.III. the DissEKTERSi 387 becaufe God had commanded them fo to do 5 as the Scripture moll exprefly telljfies. And he Jet the Levites irt the houfe of the Lordy uith CymbalSy utth PJalterieSy and iiith Harfs^ according to the commandment 0/ David, and of Gad the King^s Seer^ and Nathan ti>e Prophet 5 for fo v:ai the com- mandment of the Lord l-y //; Prophets. * God had forbid the 5^'J^'^> to bring any thing into his worfliip of their own head. Hence he net only fhew'd to hlo'es the pat-^ tern of the Tabernacle, and of all the utenfils thereof t but when the Temple was to be built at Jencfalem^ he fhe\^*d to Dwjidj by his Spirit, both the form of itj and all the indruments to be ufed in it. As to the Tranllator> who would feem to turn the expreflion to import, that God for our author's reafons appointed the jf^'"*:^ to ufe thefa mufical inftruments , 1 will then believe, he knows what God's reafons were, when he fliall pleafe to inform us, in what part of his word he has acquainted him with them* No man now will wonder our BUffed Saviour^ who reproves all fuperJiitiOHS rites and innovations which he found introduced into that Churchy fhould fay not a word a^ainj} l^tfic 5 fincC it was exprefly appointed by Godhimfelf 5 andfo could not be reckon'd a luperjittious rite, or an innovation introduced into that Church. But it does not hence follow, that he would have it continu'd in that Evangelical worfhip he ap- pointed. But at length our Author propofes what we really objeft. But fioWy that the ceremonies of the Jewifll law are aholif^Ji it feem s not "cery a'lreeahle to Ckrijiian fjmplicity^ that in our gravefl affemhlies^ there fiould he fuch chanting of Voices and Ot^anSy Singing Men and EoySy taking their turn on each fide the Quire. To which he anfwers : But why do thefe ObjeBors condemn themfelves hy their own praBice ? For they arcy for the mofi party extremely addiFfed to flnging Pfalms ^ and fuch Pfalmt Of are very much vary^d from the Ori^inal^ hy the nieafures and rhymts into which they are f^ut. f Sinf^ing^ as I faid before, is a duty commanded in the New TeOarr.ent : herice fome mufical meafures are neceflary, fince without them it can- not be performed. We therefore obey a divine command by CngingDavid'sVCuilmSy not as thiy came out of his n^outhy F f 2 as * a Chron xxix. 2^. niqtuty^ as his own expreffion is, vindicates this way of Singing 5 why has he not alledg'd fo much as one word out of antiquity in the behalf of it ? This is a vari- ation from his ulual cuflom, who upon other occafions is wont to dun us with the teftimonics of the antienrs, which are little or nothing to the purpofe. But I will prefently pull off this- mafk of antiquity, under which he fo often tries to hide himfelf, whe^i I come to /hew, the ufe of mu- fical inftruments has been but very lately brought into the Chriftian '£^tgi 2i7. Chap- III. the Dissenter s. jSp Chriftian Church, But iirft I will confider ^wbat he fays of the AfiUfhoyial way of Singing. And it is [rrobahle^ thur th "Jery fi;fl iivrjhil? In ihf Chrijiinn afj'^mblies v:iis fcrfoym'd hy fuch fiupn^of i\fal)KS ; f^r Piiny mf«- tions nothing elj'e thty did therCybHr Jiny //>'/««;, fee uni inviceilJ, jty turns, or in pdnsy to Chriji ^ to G^d. Our Author would never have thought this paffige was to his purpofe, if he had not read it with a party prejudice. Of all the Critics, whofe Comments upon thatEpiitle oiPlwy 1 have met with, Catcuu^m^ an Iralum Papi:ft, is the only man who takes no- tice of this way of Singing, tho' they ufe not to omit any thing relating to the culloms of the antients. Dr. Nichols thinks thofe words, dicere fecum inviceni^ fignify tojin^ hy turnsy or in parts, I think they mean no more thanroy?^/g toiether ; or, as Voljius explains him : " His meaning is, that *' the Prieft was not the only per fon who fang , but others *' finging alfo, they .flir'd up one another. Whence Tertul- ^^ Ijan^ in his Jpolo'iy^ c. 59. after he had fpoke of their '*' Love Feafts; adds : After fays he, it has been forbidden to make a fearch after us. 5' For when P//«//^5 6>f«W/*; was governor of a province, ^^ and had condemned fome, and made others comply, be- *' ingdifturb'd by the great multitude of the Chriflians, he '* confulted the Emperor Tr^/a^^ 5 acquainting him, that, " befides an obftinate averfion to facnficing, he could dif- *' cover nothing concerning their mytteries [_de [acramt72tis'\ *' but that they held aifemblies before day, to fing to Chriit " and [or ^] God, e^r. '* * The Antiphone, or chanting of the Pfalms hy turn^ ii.tdken KQtice of hy Socrates, as a very early praH'tce of the. Eaftern Churches 5 for he ma^-^fs St, Ignatius to he the ant] or of it^ That muft be a rare caufe, that needs fuch fabulous fto- ries to defend it. Socrates himfeif owns, he tells this ftory upon a common report, which we all knpw is little to be credited in fuch matters ; and perhaps he himfelf did nor "F f 5 believe * 4Vi Chat a. 7 39o "A Vindication oj Part III. believe it. Thus he concludes his relation : *■ And fuch is •' the report concerning thefe Antiphonal Hymns.*' And if this fiory has any truth in it, how came it to pafs, that it /hould never be mentioned in the leaft by l^natins^ in his Epijilesy by the Writer of the account of his Martyrdom, or by any other author before Socrates ? But to Socrates I oppofe Thcodorit^ as antient a writer, and as good a wltnefs 5 who tells us, Flavianus and Diodorm were the firlt authors of this ufage. ** Thefe fir{t,/ J'^^y^ ^^) he blames fpme, who told them, from the *' vifions they had of Angels, that they were to abftain *^ from meats : 'Touch tiot^ &c. r And it U-0S joon received in other places. I grant, it fprea4 very mych, after it was once fet on foot, But this was not till the middle of the fourth Century. Nor are any more antient authors of it to be found, than Flavianus and Diodo^ rtis^ who were both of them laymen, when they invented it. And in onj3 of them, vit. Flavianus^ our Adverfaries have no great caufe to trii^mph j fince he was guilty after- VV^ards of grofs perjury. * And none of the antient Fathers mention it otherv^ije^ than as a Xfry laudable and pious ufage. To prove this, he cites Bafjl 5 tho' in the pafTages refer'4 to, * E. H. lib. ii c. 24. t ^i^' i- *' 17. t! Co^ ii. }9.' i A^v. Marc, /iy. V- c. t<^ * Soz- lib. vix. q. } ^ lu Chap. III. the Dissenters^ j5fi to, he is fpcaking of Singing in general, and fays not a word of this alternate way. See Baft!, Horn. In I'falm, i. f^. ii6y 117. But tho' Baji! fj,ys nothing of it in that place, yet it muft be own*d he zealoully defended it 5 as in his Epiflle to the Clergy of Neocefarea^ who were much offended at the bringing in of this ufage. * Nor does he deny, that the antient manner of Singing was alter 'd in his Church. Farther, not only the CAergy of Niocefarea^ but Augujilne al- fo, iudg'd not this ufage to have been '\:ery laudable and piou6. *' The pleafing my flerti, which I fhould not fuffer to " weaken my mind, often deceives me, while my fenfe •' does not fo accompany my reafon,as patiently to follow *' it 5 but endeavours to outrun and lead it, tho' it is only " to be minded for the fake of the other. And fo in thefe " things I fin, not perceiving it, tho* I perceive it after- *' wards. Sometimes, while I guard exceffively againft ** this deceit, I err thro' a too great feverity 5 but this is " very feldom. So that I wifh all the nice Singing of Da- *' W^s Pfalms were removM from mine and the Church's ** hearing 5 and that feems fafer to me, which I remember ^' I have been often told ofAthanafius the Bilhop of Alexan- ** dr'ta^ who made the reader of the Pfalm found it with fo *' little alteration of his voice, that he was more like to ** a perfon delivering a fpeech, than finging. " f Nor do the words of Jerom much favour this Cathedral way of Singing : ** We muft therefore fing, and make melody, and ** praife the Lord, rather with the heart, than the voice, ** For this is what is here faid : Singing and maktnz^ melody In ** your heart to the Lord. Let young men mind this ^ let ** them mind it, whofe ofificeis to fing in the Church. We *' muft fing to God, not with the voice, but the heart. '* They are not artfully to fupple their jaws, and their *' throat, after the manner of the tragedians, that theatrical ** notes and fongs fhould be heard in the Church 5 but ** they are to praife God with fear, with good works, and ** the knowledge of the Scriptures. If a man has an un- •' pleafant voice, if he has good works, he is a fweet finger ** in God's ears. Let the fervant of Chrift fo fing, that *' not the voice of the finger, but the thing fung mav ** pleafe ^ that the evil fpirit, that was in Saul^ may be caft F f 4 ** out ♦ E^id. ^3. \ Coafeir. lih. X. c. 33. 59i ^ Vi INDICATION of PartllL ^' out of thofe, who in like manner are poflefTed by him 5 ■' and not be let into thofe, who have turn'd the houfe of ^' God into a ftage. " * But what would ^erom have faid, if he had ever been prcfent at fuch Cathedral Singing as ours ? Further, the two and thirty Commiffioners, appointed by King Edivard VI. who were the moft eminent perfons in the natron, either for divinity pr law, found fault with this manner of Singing, and advis'd the laying it alide. Hear what they fay themfelves : *' In reading Chapters, and *' finging Pfiln^s, Minifters and Clergymen muft think of *' this dilgently 5 that God is not only to be prais'd by *' them, but th^t others arc to be brought to perform the *' fame wprfhip, by their counfel and example. Where- *' fore let them pronounce their words diftinftly, and let " their Singing be clear and eafy, that every thing may be ^' underftpod by the auditors. "So that 'tis our pleafure, ^' that the quavering, operofc" Muficp which is call'd^jwvV, ^' fhould be wholly laid afide 5 fince it often makes fuch *' a noife in the ear«of the people, that they can't undcr- ^' ftandwhat is faid " f ' And fo mlich for this Cathedral way of Singing. I coiiie nov/ to fay fomewhat of the antiquity of Muiical Inftru- ments. But that thefe were not ufed in the Chriftian Church in the primitive times, is attefted by all the antient writers v/ith one confent. Hence they figuratively explain all the places of the Old Teftament, which fpeak of Mufi- cal Inftruments 5 as I might eafily fhcw by a thoufand tefli- mpnies, out of Clement oi Alexandria^ Baftly Jmhrofey Jerom^ Jugtijime^ Chryfojiom^ and many others. I can hardly for- bear laughing, when I meet with fome of their allegorical interpretations. Thus, an Inftrument with ten firings, ac- cording to them, fignifies the Ten Commandments, as the pnknown author of the Commentary upon the P f alms ^^tmong 7^ro^;:'s works, often explains it. H But the pleafanteft fan- cy is the explication of thofe words : Pralfe him whhjirin^ed Jyifirn-nen'ts arid Organs A ^* That the guts being twifted by " reafon of abftinence from food, and fo all carnal defirei *- being fubdu'd, m^en arc found fit for the kingdom of God, *' to ling his praifes. " But Chryfofiom talks more handfom- Jy : '* As the ^f ii-i prais'd God with all kind of Inftiruments ^ * lu r.yh. V. 19. \ Reform. Leg. Eccl. tit. Dc Div. O^C. Q. 5. Chap. III. ths Dissenters- 393 *' fo we are commanded to praife him with all the mem- *' bers of our bodies, our eyes, B'c, '' * And Clement of yilexa)iJria talks much to the fame purpofe. | Befides, the antients thought it unlawful to ufe thofc In- flruments in God's woifliip. Thus the unknown author of a Trcatifc, amonc! jtijtin Martyr's works : *' j^ If fongs were ** invented by unbelievers with a defign of deceiving, and '' were appointed for thofe under the Law, becaufe of the *' childiflinefs of their minds j why do they, who have re- *' ceiv'd the perfed inftrudions of grace, which are moft *' contrary to the forefaid cuftoms, neverthelefsfing in the " Churches, jull as they did, who were children under the ** Law ? Anfv:. Plain Singing is not childilli, but only the " Singing with lifelefs Organs, with Dancing and Cymbals, *' &c. Whence the ufe of fuch Inftruments, and other *' things fit for children, is laid afide, and Plain Singing *^ only retain'd. "II Chryfojhm feems to have been of the fame mind, and to have thought, the ufe of fuch Inftruments was rather al- low'd the ^ews in confideratian of their weaknefs, than prefcrib'd and commanded, t But that he was miftaken, and that Mufical Inftruments were not only allow'd the 5^u'j, as he thought, and IJiJorus oi Pelufmm^ (whofe tefti- niony I ftiallmention prefently) but were prefcrib'd by God» may appear from the Texts of Scripture I have before re- fer'd to. Oementyd.s 1 have mentioned already, thought thefe things fitter for beafts, than for men. And tho' Bajil highly com- mends, and ftifly defends the way of Singing by turns , yet he thought mufical Inftruments unprofitable and hurtful. He calls them, the iyiventions of Jubal of the race of Cain. And a little after, he thus expreffes himfelf ; " Lahan ^' was a lover of the Harp, and of Mufic, with w^hich he *^ would have fent aw^ay jacob : Jf thou had/} teld me^ faid ** he, 1 iioiilA have feyjt thee aiiay ivltb mirthy and mufcal Injlru- ** mentSf and an Harp, But the Patriarch avoided that mu- '' fie, as being a thing that would hinder his regarding " the works of the Lord, and his confidering the works of 1* his hands." * And a little before, he fays thus : *' In f* fuch vain arts^ as the playing upon the Harp, or Pipe, or " dancing. * hi Vf. ci. t P^a^g. Uu.Ai c. 4- II Refp. sd Ort-.o^ox. ^ 394 ^ Vindication of Partlll. ** dancing, 03 foon as the aftion ceafes, the work itfelfva- " nifhes. So that really, according to the Apoftle's expref. ** fion, The end of theft things is JeJiruHion.'' * Iftdore of Pelujium, who liv*d fince Bafil, held, Mufic was allow'd the Jeii's by God, in a way of condefcenfion to their childifhnefs : '' If God, fays he, bore with bloody facrifices, *' becaufe of mens childi/hnefs at that time ^ why fliould •* you wonder, he bore with the Mufic of an Harp and a ** Pfaltery ?"t Nay, there are fome ecclefiaftical officers in the Church of EnglanJy who J for their very profeffion and employment, would have been kept from the communion of the Church, except they defifted from it. So we are informed by the ^foftolical Conjiit lit tons : " If any come to the myftery of ** godlinefs, being a player upon a Pipe, a Lute, or an « Harp 5 let him leave it off, or be rejefted. " II From what has been faid, it appears, no Mufical Inftru- ments were ufed in the pure times of the Church. It be* came Antichriftian, before they were received. Bellarmine himfelf does not deny, they were late brought into the Church. *' The fecond ceremony, fays b, are the Mufical •^ Inftruments, which began to be ufed in the fervice of the •' Church, in the time of Pope Fitatian^zhont the Year 660y ** as Platina relates out of the Pontijical 5 or, as Aimonim ** rather thinks, lib. iv. De gejiis Francornm^ c, 1 14. after the •' year 8zo, in the time of Lewis the Pious.'* + Dr. N. would hardly have denied, the Church of Rome was become Antichriftian, when they were firft brought in ; even tho' we /hould allow Bellarmine^ firft date of them to be the true one. But a Reformed Divine may well be afham'd of that antiquity, that does not exceed the rife of Antichrift. But I am fully fatisfy'd both Bellarmine'^ dates are falfe, and that Inftrumental Mufic, in the worfhip of God, is much later than either of thofe accounts allow. For as to Platina^ he feems to fufpeft the truth of what he wrote : ^^T'ltalian^ fays bey being careful about the worfhip ** of God, made an ecclefiaftical rule, and order'd the ** Singing, with the addition (as fome think) of Organs. " * Again, Bellarmtne\ Aimonim is not the true Atmonim. For (as Dr. Ca-^e fays) Aimonius of Fleury^ who wrote, De ^ejiis Fran- * p:t^e 955. \ r.pif>. lib. 2. ep. 176. 1 Lih.Tiii- libii* ;. 15. Ircxn, Dc bon. Oper. lib.i' c, \i. C.12. fDcMifTa, « la \'iul. Chap. Ill- the Dissenters. 595 Intrtcorum, flouri/h'd about the Year lOOO 5 and his Hiftory, which begins at the deftru6lion of Troy, is brought down as far as the coronation of King Pip'njy or to the year 752, For what comes after that, and makes up the fifth Book, and the litter part of the fourth, is the continuation of another hand. * Farther, that thefe Inftruments were not ufed Jn God's worfhip, in ThomM Jquinas's time, that is, about the year 1250, he himfelf is witnefs. '' In the old Law, fays he^ •' God was praifed both with Mufical Inftruments and hu- *' man Voices, according to that Pfalm xxxiii. Praifc the *' Lord with Harp^Jjng unto him v^itJ) the Pfahery^ and an Injiru- •' nient of tenjirings. But the Church does not ufe Mufical •* Inftruments to praife God, left fhe fhould feem to ju* •' daize. Therefore, by a parity of reafon, fhe fhould not ♦* ufe Singing."! The likeobjeftion is made by our Author. But Thomas anfwers : " As to thisobjeftion, we muft fay, ^* as the Philofopher, Lib. viii. Polit. that Pipes are not to *' be ufed for teaching, nor any artificial Inftruments, as the ** Harp, or the like , but whatever will make the hearers ♦' good men. For thefe Mufical Inftruments rather delight *' the mind, than form it to any good difpofition. But ** under the Old Teftament fuch Inftruments were ufed, ♦* partly becaufe the People were harder and more carnal ; •* upon which account they were to be ftir*d up by thefe *' Inftruments, as likewife by earthly promifes , and partly ** becaufe thefe bodily Inftruments were typical of fome- ** thing.'* Upon which place Cardinal C^;^t^w gives ui^ this Comment : ** 'Tis to be obferv'd, the Church did not ** ufe Organs in Tnoma^^s time. Whence, even to this day, *' the Church of Rome does not ufe them in the Pope's pre- " fence. And truly it will appear, that Mufical Inftruments " are not to be fuffer'd in the ecclefiaftical offices we meet ** together to perform, for the fake of receiving internal " inftruftion from God , and fo much the rather are they ** to be excluded, becaufe God's internal difcipline exceeds " all human difciplines, which rejected thefe kind of Inftru- «* ments. " 11 If any one obiefts thepraftice of fome Foreign Churches, I anfw^f with Mr. Hickman ; *^ They are laid afide by moft *' of * Hift. Liter, p. sn- t Sccuikla fccundx Queftio 91, art. 4. &> c^itclnf- 4. I Cit, Hoifm. i«ez, voce yUJlsa. 39^5 A VjiJDicATi.t)N qf Part ill. " .of the Refurm'd Churches ; nor would they be retain'd '" among the LutVerat-s^ unlefs they hud forf.iken their own *•' Luther 3 who, by the confefTion of Ecl^ard, reckon'd Or- ** ^^ayjs amon^ the enfigns of Baal, That they ftill continue in •* fome of xXit Dutch Churches, is agiinft the minds of thje ** Paftors. For in the National Synod at 'Middlehur^^ in the •* year 1581, and in the Synod of HolUyfd dud Zea!a>2cly in ** the year 1 594, it was refolv'd, That they uould endeaxowr *' to obtain of the mai^ijirate the laying afide of Organs ^ and the *' f^^P'^^y '*^''^^ t}:em in the Churches y exen out of the time of uor- *' fhifPy. either before or after fermons : fo far are thofe Synods ** from bearing with them in the worfiiip itfelf. "* The Church of England herfelf had formerly no very good opinion of thefe Mufical Inftruments 5 as may ap- pear by her Homilies: *' Laftly, God's vengeance hatli *' been, and is daily provok'd, becaufe much wicked peo^ " pie pafs nothing to refort untg the Church 5 either for *^ that they are fo fore blinded, that they underftand no^r *' thing of God or godlinefs, and care not with devilifh •* malice to offend their neighbours : or elfe for that they *^ fee the Church altogether fcour'd of fuch gay gazing ** fights, as their grofs phantafie was greatly delighted *' with y becaufe they fee the falfe religion abandoned, and •^ the true reftor'd, which feemeth an unfivory thing to *' their unfavory taft, as may appear by this that a woman ** faid to her neighbour : Alas ! goflip, what fhall we now ** do at Church, fince all the Saints are taken away 3 fince •^ all the goodly fights we were wont. to have are gone ^ *^ fince we cannot hear the like Piping, Singing, Chaunting, *^ and playing upon the Organs thiit we could before ? But, *' dearly beloved, we ought greatly to rejoice and give. *' God thanks, that our Churches are deli ver'd out of all " thofe things, which difpleafed God fo fore, and filthily *' defil'd his holyhoufe, and his placjS of prayer. " f A great number alfo of the Clergy in the firft Convocation, of Queen Eliuibeth in i ^62^ earneftly laboured to have Or- gans, and that pompous theatrical way of finginglaid afide, and mifs'd the carrying it but by one vote, as I obfervc elfewhere. And in this Archbiiliop Parl{rr concur'd with them, or at leail did not oppofe them. I will ' Apol. ^. 139. \ Horn, of the pla;c and time of priycr, jf)j»rt. 2 t. 131.* Chap. III. the D I 9 s E M T B R 5. 397. I will add one or two teftimonies of Pnpifts ni^aind- this C.ithedral way ot worfliip. The fifil fhall be PolyAo-m^ Having taken Notice of ^uj} he's* d) dike of that way of finging in his time, he thus proceeds : ** But in our ** time it feems much lefs ufeful to the commonwealth> " now our Singers make fuch a noifeii^our Churches, that ** nothing can be" heard, bcfide the found of the voice ; " and they who come there (that is all that are in the city) ** are fatisfy'd with the Confort of Mufic, which their ears ** itch for, and never mind the fcnfe of the words. So '' that we are come to that pafs, that in the opinion of the **common people, the whole affair of religious wor/liipia *« lodg'd in thefe Singers 5 altho', generally Ipeaking, there *' is no fort of men more loofe or wicked ;' and yet a good " part of the people run to Church, as to a theatre, to hear *'' them bawl ; they hire and encourage them j and loot *' upon them alone as ornaments to the houfe of God. •*^ Wherefore, without doubt, it would be for the interefl: *^ of religion, either to cafl thefe jackdaws out of the *' Churches 3 or elfe to teach them when they fing, they <«' fhould do it rather in the manner of reading, ' than " bawling 5 as Juftine fays Athanafms orderM, &"€. '* * Next hear the judgment of Erafmus : *' Let a man be " more covetous than Crajpps^ more foul-mouth'd thau^ " Zo'ilus^ he fhall be reckon 'd a pious man, ifhefings thofe ** prayers well, tho' he underftands nothing of them. But *' what, I befeech you, muft they think of Chrift, who *'' can believe he is delighted with fuch a noife of mens *\ voices ? Not content wath this, we have brought into ** our Churches a certain operofe and theatrical Mufic 5 *^ fuch a confus'd diforderly chattering of fome words, as *' I hardly think was ever heard in any of the Greda>t- *' or P^oman theatres. The Church rings with the noife of ** Trumpets, Pipes and Dulcimers 3 and human Voices drive •' to bear their part with them. Men run to Churcl^ *' as to a theatre, to have their ears tickled. And for this ** end Organ-makers are hired with great faUries, and a •' company of boys, who waft all their time in learning ** thefe whining tones. Pray now compute how many ** poor people in great extremity might be maintained" ** by th€ falaries of thofe fingers. '' f La%, * De Invent. R:r. //*;. vi. c 2. ^. 579. t ^' • ^^ ^^^'- ^>' 35>8 'y4 Vindication jk^ the Holy Spirit uould dtjcend to the fw^ularitits ofthefeTheoloq^iJhy yet rxe ^nuji not charj^e l:im with ftub cOntrarictus ayid clajhings as they are guilty of. Who, I pray, are thofe Arminians among us ? Our Author perhaps here meant the Quakers, or foine of the Anabaprirts. But if we will fpeak the truth, the Arminians themlelves are hardly Arminians, in offering up their prayers to God. But if there be any ftrength in this objeftion of our Author, the Conformifts niuft neceflarily quit all pretence to the Spirit's affifting any of them in prayer , for they offer the fame prayers to God, which, Ibme of them underfland in a Calvinift fenfe, others in an Arminian. Thus in the Burial office they hefeech God, that it may pleafe him, of his gracious goodnefs^ fjortly to accom-^ plifj the number of his eleFK No\^ fome of them hold, that none were elefted by God from all eternity, who, when they hear this expreffion, imagine none elfe are meant by the eleft, but good and holy men. Others prefently, ac- cording to the Calvinift fcheme, think of fome certain per* fons ordain 'd to falvation by God's eternal decree. Why then may not another perfon, with a fmall variation of our Author's words, by the fame argument fay : If we conflder the different fenfe they put upon their bwn Prayers ^ fome of them taking them in a CalvinijTica! y and others in an Arminian meaning , tho^ we could thinly the Holy Spirit iiould defcend to the fngularities of thefe Theoloz^ijhj yet we nmj} not charge him [which were an impiety to be abhor 'd] with fuch contraries ties and clafjings as they are guilty of^. And is not the Church of England in a fine condition, according to this argu- ment ? But let us hear what follows. Some of xhefe Dexotionifxs [of which term of reproach I /hall take no notice, becaufe 'tis only the Tranflator's] in the beginning of their Prayeys can hardly fpeal{ , after much cough" ing and hemming^ with much ado a few broken words drop out : a while after y their cold tongues fe em as it were thaw^d^ and move more glibly • and then prefently you have a torrent of words ^ and they are in raptures. Now thef motions are eafy to bs accounted firy by aljtznlng them to the blood or fpiritSj which circulate in the body flower or fvfter at different times. But what man in his "wits can thinl^y that the Holy Gbq/lfiould be at ajfand for wordSy and want to be helped out by hems and coughs ? This is exaftly according to the manner, in which our Advcrfiiries ufe to treat us. Nothing is fo facred with G g them, 402 A Vindication of Part III. them, but whenever 'tis to their purpofe, they will turn it into ridicule. Muft the Holy Gholt be tlius abufively treated j and if he alTifls men, who are pious, but yet im- perfeft, and perhaps under a bodily indiipofition, muft he prefently be charged with all the dcfefls and infirmities which they difcovcr ? But why may not this be an ob- jeftion againft his caufe as well as ours ? What Chriftian would like to be prefent at thofe prayers, in offering which, he could not expeft the help of the Spirit ? And yet a Con- formift may have occafion to }:em or cQngh^ as well as thofe moft comtemptible creatures, as they think, the Noncon- formifts. What the defign of this kind of arguing is, I can't imagine, unlefs it be to deny that the Spirit helps any Chriftians in prayer. We ought to judge charitably, and not upon flight evidence 5 and therefore 'tis not haftily to be prefum'd of any one, that in his prayers he coughs on purpofe, and without occafion. But if any one, whe- ther Conformift or Nonconformift, is chargeable with this, I fliould fay he was indeed guilty of a great error , but not that he was therefore certainly and utterly deftitute of the Spirit's affiftance. No man lives without faults, he isbeft who has leaft. But where's the hurt of a man's beginning with a low- voice, and raifing it by degrees ? They who treat of the art of fpeaking, dont ufe to condemn this. *' In every ** voice there is a medium^ fays Crajjn^^ and each voice has *' its own peculiarly : hence 'tis both ufeful and fweet to *^ raife the voice by degrees, for to fpeak aloud at the be- ^' ginning is clownifh. " * To the fame purpofe Qulnti- lian : ** A foft pronunciation is commonly moft proper at *' the beginning. " f Nor do I think the Apoftle Paul ^ tho' he had the largeft meafure of the Spirit , abftain'd^ fro 11 ufing any art m fpeaking, with refpedl either to his voice, or gefture. II Sudden co}7ceptions are generally crude ayjd corifus^dy ii':t}:ont ary method or order : many things In them are ohfcure and unintelli- ^'ihUy ivhichy for hafte of utterhig^ the mind cannot digej}. But now in our composed Ojpces exery thing Jiands in its prober place, + We grant the prayers in a Liturgy may be fo difpos'd 3 but we fay too, that other Prayers without a Form may be exprefs'd * Cicerone Or. /.ill. c. 6r. vid.lui. ?.d Her. c. 12. t laftit. Orat. lib. xi. f. 3. U Ste Aa^xxvi. ^ ^Ag^2to. Cliap. IV. the Dissenters'; 405 exprdVd diftjn«fHy, and in good order enough 5 provided :i MiHiiUr is well versM in, and accurtom'd to reliaioui du- ties, and is not very unhappy in his elocution. Nay, he hardly Teems quahfied to difcharge the facred Office, who is not able to compofe both his own Prayers and Sermons. And whereas people are, when they join in fuch prayers, uncertain what will come next, that is no prejudice to them, fincc by this means their minds are kept the more attentive to what they are about. And whatever our Au- thor is pleas'd to fay of confujion^ and want of method , I muft needs fav, our Prayers would very much difpleafe me, if the confufion of them equall'd what 1 have obferv'd iri their composed Liturgy. The pio^le have nothhig to ask^of GoJ, hut what they may well weigh and corijider of at home : and if they meet with any thing which they dont well nriderjiand^ they may have recourfe to the expoJjtio>7s of learned Divines^ which are eajily had. But extem- porary Prayers have men at afiand^ whether theyfiould fay Amen to themy before they have corfide/d whether they contain nothing contrary to found faith j and Chrifiian virtue^ nothing but what is jit to be prayed for. In prayer no words are to be ufed, but what are plain and eafie, which leave not the people at any fan d^ but are as foon underftood as utter'd 5 fo that they prefently know, without any difficulty, whether they /liould aflent to them, or not. Nor does God impute to any man thofe Petitions, to which he does not affent. Further, if a man finds good reafon to diflike the Liturgy, which he has well weigh 'd and confider'd at home, our Author's objection then re- coils upon himfelf. And as on one fide, the expoftions of learned Divines are eafiy had , fo on the other, learned Di- vines themfelves may be without difficulty confulted. And 'ti^ no fmall inconvenience of our Liturgy at leaft, that the things which, perhaps, were formerly proper enough, but upon an alteration of circumftances are found to be otherwife, cannot be alter'd without a grievous offence* This will be plain by giving an Inftance. Our Adverfaries, in King lamss the Second's time, were difpleas'd both with his religion and defigns ^ and thinking themfelves to be in great danger, they pray'd heartily for the fuccefs of the Prince of Orange in private 5 but when they ufed the Liturgy in public, they pretended to pray that God ^'o\ilA ^' ftrengthen King J^m^c^s that he might vanquifh G g 7. *' and 404 A Vindication of Part III. *' and overcome all his Enemies," * And fo in the Litany^ they ufed thefe words : *' That it may pleafe thee to keep ** and ftrengthen, in the true worfhiping of thee, in righ- ** teoufnefs and holinefs of life, thy fervant James, our moft *' gracious King> and governor. That it may pleafe thee *' to be his defender and keeper, giving him the virtory •* over all his enemies. " Which no man can promt fe for them hefore hanj^ who remfm* hers what prayers were made hy the ^reat 7nnJ}ers of this art in ouf late trouble] ofne times 5 how confus^dy how feditious^ how hlafphe- ntous they manytim^s were, j" We doubt not thefe things might be true of fome Sec- taries, and Heretical perfons, who then invaded the facred' office. But what's tnat to us ? Our Author fhould have Ihewn, that the Presbyterians were guilty of fuch things. 'Tis very unjuft to blame us for thole Actions of frantick men, which we deteft. But if any thing may be infer'd from our Author's argument, by the fame reafon all fer- mons mufl: be put down, and men be tied up intirely to the tife of homilies. For, no doubt, they talk'd after one and the fame rate, in their fermons and prayers. But 1 have had occafion to fpeak of this before. But every pious per f on may fully and freely ajfent to our Com^ mon Prayers^ lecaufe he can he acquainted with them hefore hand^ and may he very hearty in hii petitions^ as being well ajfur'd that he asks nothing amifs. But what if thofe Common Prayers, being known before hand, and read too with the explications of learned Di- vines, appear unfit for us to afTent to, or to ufe ? And fuch indeed they feem to us. But our Author does not meddle with that, which we look upon as the greateft inconve- nience in Forms 3 namely, that mens wandering minds will very hardly attend to the fame thing, repeated over a thou- fand times. Hence the Minifter's tongue frequently out- runs his thoughts ; as has appeared, when they have inad- vertently pray'd for any of the Royal Family, who ufed to be nam'd in their prayers, after they were dead. Which might be proved by the teftimony of fuch as have been prefent at the time. In foorty a Mintjier^s unpremeditated prayers can hardly kfep t^ the gravity of his ajfemhly 5 7nany things dropping from hinty which * Mot't*' afid E'VSn. Frayer, \ ^-tg- 26 1« Chap. IV. the Dissenters. 405 ^'fc/r/; are triflings and unhecom'tn'^ a Divirje 5 beJiMs the'lofs he is fcmetimes at for matter^ which forces fc/?w, rather than he quite mtttty to vent very impertinent incoherent Jiuff^ fuch ai provokes 4he fphen of mcn^ that are otherivife ferious enough. Thus 'tis the manner of fome> tojjpeak^-evil of the things they l^rwiv not, * Our Author here ihews., he knew nothing of our aflembh'es, where men dont ufe to laugh andjejl^ which is his cxpreflion, eoccept fuch happen to drop in, as treat all ferious things m that manner. But fuppofing Minifters •drop'd a lefs proper expreiCton^they ought not to be thought worthy of fuch treatment 5 efpecially lince the prayers of the antients were not always the moft exadt, to fay nothing ^orfe of them. This is taken notice of by Auftin^ who, by a prudent advice, endeavour'd to prevent honeft mens being iaugh'd at upon that account. *' When they,yay5 he^ come ^' to be made Chriftians, who excel others in the art of •" fpcaking, we muft inculcate upon them one thing, over ** and above what we do upon other illiterate perfons 5 ^* namely, we muft diligently admonifh them to be clothed *' with Chriftian humility, that they may learn not to de- *' fpife thofe, who, they will fee^ more carefully avoid a *' fault in their anions, than in their expreflions ^ and may ** not dare to compare aji eloquent tongue with a pure *' heart, tho' they have been ufed to give it the preference* *' Mike them underftand, that not the voice, but •' the affeftions of the foul, reach God*s ears : for then *' they will not laugh, if they obferve any of the BifiopSy and *' Minijiers of the Churchy are guilty ofharhartfms^ or folecifmSy *' in their praying to God j or dont underftand, but blunder *^ in the words they pronounce. " \ Whence, by the way, 'tis plain Bifliops and Minifters were not bound up, at that time, to the ufe of a fet form of words in prayer. If any extraordinary occafien happenSy either for prayers or thank^igivings ^ the BifiQps are ii-npavjer^d ly our Uv:s to combofe fpecial Forms. ]| We are glad this is done now and then 5 but experience tells us, there is good reafon to complain of the long time fuch Forms are preparing. Thus, forinftance, in the year 1705. we had a moft terrible ftorm, that affrighted the whole nation : This happened on aSaturday^ and the next Lord's day the DifTenting Minifters every where humbled Gg 3 them- * Juie -er. 10. t De CAtCwb- ruiib. c. 9. torn- iv- f ■ 2??, 1". Pag it 2. e 4o^ A Vindication of Part HI. themfelves before God, and bewailing their own and the nation's fins, e:irneftly befought him to turn from the fierce- nefs of his cmger. But the Churchmen were forc'd to wait fome time, till the Bi/liops could meet together, and draw Vip a Form for this purpofe, and get it printed and difpers'd through tlie nation. This I mentioned in one of my Let- ters, that I might /hew the ufefulnefs of Free Prayer 5 but I found fome were fo extremely fond of their Forms, that tho' they could not deny there was great reafon for the whole nation earneilly to feek God upon that account ; yet they chofe rather to deny there was any neceffity of their doing it, before the Bifhops had provided fuitable Prayers, than they would let the honour of their Liturgy fuffer in the leaft. Or if any thing unufual hapf?ens in the circumjiances of private berfons ^ if it he any way fit to he 772ention^d in prayer 5 it may conveniently enough he hr(mght in hy the Mmtfier^ in his Prayer before Sermon, Now 1 congratulate my felf, that thofe extempore Prayers^ which our Author has been hitherto bantering, areat length acknowledg'd to be at all ufeful. But *tis well known, that many of the Church of England wi/h this liberty was en- tirely taken away. And among the reft, this feems to be the ienfe of thofe, who had the care of this Tranflation. for the Tranflator has quite alter'd the Do6lor's words, ^nd has render'd them thus ; And u^ for the unufnal circHm- Ji^nccs of private perjons, they ixant not jnfficient helps and di- regions in fuch cafes. Now what are thofe helps and direc- tions, I pray, in fuch cafes ? 'Tis phin, by his thus quitfc altering the Ienfe, he is againft a Minifter's bringing thofe cafes into his prayer before Sermon ^ and where elfe he ^an bring them in, 1 can't imagine- So that the true meaning of this dark and blind expreffion muft be, that he needs no help in thofe cafes^ being directed to let them alone. I fuppofe one reafon of this alteration is, the earneft ^ndeavpur of fome men lately, to lay afide the Minifter's praying in the pulpit before fermon 5 and the Tranflator, being of the fame mind, thought it improper to mention the P'vlinifter's inierting any thing in th^t prayer, which he ^ould not have him ufe, 1 come, in the next place, to inquire, with our Author, jfjto the antiquity of Liturgies. Now here we objeft, a$ h^ fays, That the primitive dtirch affords them no pattern of (f litffny. And to this h? apf^^yer§ }\v^s j I Chap. IV. the Dissenters* 407 If they mean the yfjpoftolic age^ lie freely own there were >jo Litu)^ie5 therjf compos d with fuch accnracy and exaBnefs^ as they were afterwards. There is little fairnefs in this paffige. I wifh our Au- thor would plainly deny or affirm , there were Liturgies written in the ^pojhltc a^e. If he denies it, he mull own the Diflcnters herein follow the example of tlve Apoftles. If he affirms it, I defire fome good evidence of his affertion. He has to do with adverfaries not very credulous, who, when any thing is proposed to them, as ufed in the Apoftles time, and therefore fit to be imitated, infill upon its being prov'd, by clear and undoubted teftimonies, to have been then receiv'd. But what means this expreffion : There were no Litiiriies then^ compo^^d wiw fuch accuracy and exciBnefs^ as they were afterwards'^ Does he think there were any Litur- gies at all ? By what mifchance were they loff, or couid they be loft, fince they would have been as continually read, and as carefully handed down to pofterity, as the Bible itfelf ? And what neceffity was there they fhould, after the Apoftles deceafe, be composed with greater accu- racy andexaBnefsj than when they were alive ? If there had been any Liturgies in their time, I fhould fancy they would be fir above the polifiiing of all after ages, as being com- posed, or at leaft revised, by the Apoftles themfelves. But our Author was of another mind. And hence our Adverfa- ries had rather appeal to the writers of the after ages of the Church, than to the Apoftles. The order taken by the Apoftles had not, forfooth, fufficient accuracy and exa;y a^(^ of the Churchy ivherein there ivere not fame Forms [the Trinfl:itor adds, of ^rLiycr'\ In the piMic iiorfj'^. We grant it, if he intended it of Forms for finging. We difputc not about them, nor about the Lord's Prayer, The quellion is, whether there were, in the firft ages, any Forms of prayer of human compofition, which the governors of the jChurch were obliged conftantly to ufe ? The Jews, ii-hoje plan of iiorjljif? our Saviour follov;^ A in many ^hingSy ufed a public Liturgy in. their Synagogues, * And what then ? Are Chriftians therefore bound to ufe a Liturgy ? Whatever Chrift has transfer 'd from their wor/hip into his own, we think we ought carefully to embrace. But fince he has only deliver'd us one Form, what fignify the "je-jsij^ forms to us ? But this public Litur;:y of the ^e-^vs was coyn- pos^d hy Efdras, and the great Synagogue j U6 learned men con* jeilure. But we are not to be direfted, in our worfliip, by learned mens cQnjeHures. We fhall foon make a fine bufinefs of it, if we are. And if thofe learned men were right in their conjeflure, why is not their Liturgy reckon 'd a part of Canonical Scripture ? And whatever fome learned men may think, there are others not inferior to them, who look upon this as ^xjewijh and old wife's fable, that deferves no credit at all. In the firjl place^ they fokmnly confejjed thejjns of the people : then they gave thankj for God^s merciesy in Hymns pre: crih^d for that pur pofe : next they prayed to God for their o-^n^ and the people^ s fafety : and after ally the Mafter of the Synag07ue difmtfs'^d them 'with a folemn henediBion. Every body fees this ivu6 all Form and Liturgy, If this was all Form and Litur-jy^ our worfllip muQ: te all Form arid Liturjy aifo. The fame things, tho' in a dif- ferent order, are performed in our affemblies. Tho' I make no doubt of the jt'-^-s ufing a Liturgy, yet this does not prove they did fo. Ngr was ther^ any celebrated mafler among themy ivho did not teach his fcholars jome particular Form of prayer^ ivherthy they might be kl'Oiin to belong to hnn. In compliance with this cujlom^ our Lord taught his Difciples that which we call the Lord^s Prayer, Since then we have one only mafter, even Chrift, why iliould we not be content with that one Form of his pompofing, and not fuffer our felves to be tied to the ma- py Forms of pther men ? As to what the Doflor adds : And * ^ape 263, 4i6 ySf Vindication of Part III. ^nJ when he "^-as on the crop^ he repeated a pfalm o/" David as a Form of prayer : wc know, fome men have fo conjectured, but with no great probability. Nor do 1 fee how it can be prov'd. But let us fuppofe it to be a thing certain : it will not thence follow , we are always bound to ufe the fame Forms, drawn up by men, of their own heads. ' Far be it from us, to think our fpotlefs Redeemer labour'd under the fame malady with us miftrable creatures , that he was liable to the fame infirmities we are, or that he needed fuch a remedy as we do. We have no difpute about the ufing a Form in finging, as our Author could not but know. And therefore pafling over Pliny's teftimony, who only fpeaks of finging, I pro- ceed to Clement, What "d-as Clement^ prefa-ih^d Canon of Liturgy ? * namely, hut a Form of prayer ? If Forms can be eftablifli'd by Cle- mentis authority, 'twill be paft doubt, that they were ufed in the Apoftle's time 3 for he was cotemporary with them, and , as all grant, wrote that Epiftle not only before St. John's death, but before fome at leaft, if not before any of his waitings were publifh'd. But he fpeaks not a word of Forms of prayer. That the paflage refer'd to by the Doctor may be the better underftood, we muft take notice, the quarrels in the Church of Corinth^ and the fedition rais'd againft the Presbyters of that Church, gave occafion to the writing that Epiftle. Hence he gravely admonifhes the Corinthians, to do all things orderly. " We ought, fays he^ *' to do all things in order, which the Lord has commanded *' us to perform. " For this end he fets before them the or- der of the Jeu'ifj Church : " To the chief Prieft are given '' his own (Liturgiesy that is) offices 5 and to the Priefts is *' affign'd their proper place 5 the Levites have their pecu- •* liar minittries 3 and the layman is bound by thofe pre- " cepts, which concern the laity. " f Then follows the paflage, our Author had in his eye : " Let every one of *' you, Brethren, give thanks to God in his own rank, ♦* having a good confcience, not tranfgreffing the prefcrib'd " rule of his office ^ " that is, the place God has fet him in. ri Now what has this to do with Forms of prayer ? 'Twas no fmall miftake of our Author, to interpret that moft antient writer, by the modern way of fpeaking. For, r^^' 2^1'. ■ j^jj. 40. !; Corr:^.B^.Hiofct} ofLcat, j^.JOjI Chvip. IV. the DissiKTERS. 411 For, A€/7rfp>/^') neither in Cltmeytt's time, nor In feveral af?cs after hiin, was ufed to fignify a Form of prayer. ]ui\ thus the Khcm'Jh pretend, thoie words of St. Luki\ hul^oyHur^i^ (tur^f^ * fhould be rendered, as they were jaynrz^ maj's. Or "j.'hat elfe ii-as tke one Prayer in Ignatius ? f Hear what l^natitis fays : " Neither do you any thing without the *' Bifliop and the Presbyters. Neither endeavour to let ♦' any thing appear rational to your felves apart. But ^< when you meet together in the fame place, let there be *^ o>ie prayery one fuppl teat '1077^ one mind, one hope, in love, ** and joy unblameable. *' By the fame argument our Author might prove , all the Diflenters ufe Forms : for whenever they alfo meet together in the fame place, they have one prayer , and one fuVj^Iicatioyi , in common to them all. For if the Minifter leads in prayer, and all the con- gregation agrees in his defires, there is then certainly but one prayer, whether he prays with, or without a Form. Unlefs our Author had been in a great want of teftimonies , he would not have endur'd to produce fucK frivolous ones, which are nothing at all to his purpofe. Much of a fort with thefe are his two next teftimonies, which I /hall however briefly examine. Or the common prayers in Juftin Martyr ? iVe mahe^ fays he, common Prayers. Thus the£'>7ir/{/?' Liturgy is call'd. Com- mon Prayer. Whence our Author thought it paft all doubt, that Ji'Jiin^ when he fpoke of commoy: prayer^ muft mean a prefcrib'd Liturgy. But cur prayers are not lefs common, though we ufe no Forms. But "jnftm prefently after fhews the reafon why he calls thefe prayers common. " After ** that, fays he^ we rife up all ^c/^'T, in common^ and offer *^ prayers to God." Ifjtijiin^ or any other antient author, had mentioned their reading prayers, it would have been to the purpofe 5 but prayers of any kind, cannot but be com- mon to all thofe who join in them. Indeed, "jiijiln's ex- preflion of making prayers, might be much more plaufibly alledg'd on our fide, than his other oi common prayer can be on theirs. Mr. Erajmus Warren^ a writer of fome note, ii> a Sermon, wherein he highly extols the EngHJJj Liturgy , explains the Apoftles expreffion, ^oizi^'^At /s We/s', that pray- ers he ynade^ W to mean the compofing a Liturgy. If that were true, why fhpuld not jnJUn's words be in the like manner underr * Act xiii.a. t "A-d Magn. fe^. 7. il » Tim. li. i. 4ii -A Vindication of Part III. «nderftood concerning the compofition of the Prayers ? For no body will imagine the whole congregation made a Liturgy, and efpecially that they did it every time they met. But I ihall have occafion to fay more of Jujim here- after. ^rtd the public prayer in Cyprian ? Whoever reads the whole Paffige In Cyfyian^ prefently fees^ how little this delerves an anfwer. For Cyprian there comments upon the Lord's Prayer after this manner : '* Above all, the ** teacher of Peace, and mafter of truth, would nor have *' men pray, as in a fingle or private capacity, that when ♦<- a man prays he /hould only pray for himfelf. For we ** dout fay, /wy Father, which art in heaven 5 nor^ give me ** this day my daily bread 3 nor does every one pray to ** have his own debts only forgiven 3 nor when a man asks *' not to be led into Temptation, or to be delivered from " evil, does he ask thefe things for fc/Vw/fZ/'^/owf. We have *• a pMie and common prayer 3 and when we pray, we " pray not for one perfon , but for all the people .; becaufe ^* we, the whole people, are one. " * Who does not fee now> in what fenfe Cyprian fpeaks of puhlic and common prayer ? But let what he fays elfewhere^ be compar'd here- with : ** Let every one pray to God, not for himfelf ^ alone, but for all the brethren 3 according as our Lord ** has taught us to pray 3 where he does not prefcribe tp ** each perfon a private prayer, [that is, a particular prayer ^*' for himfelf] but has commanded us, mth a cotmnjon «t prayer and harmonious fupplication , to pray for « all. " t Now the Doftor paffes on to the compofers of ]Litur- gies : Gregory Thaumaturgus is [aid to have heen the 4w- th§r &f the Service us^d in the Church of Neoca^farea, from tvhich they thought it not laiiftil to makf the leaft variation. This is no where f^ld of Gregory. The l)o6tor thought 'Baffl affirm'd it, but he miftook Baftrs meaning. He is in the place cited by the Do6tar difputing againft thofe, who thought it Unlawful, in pronouncing the doxology, to fay,i:7t/^ theSl/trit,\\ He endeavours therefore^ to (hew from the writings of the antients, that fuch a form of fpeech wa^ ufed in their time. And firft, he alledges the Epiftle o^Dionyfuis oi Alexandria 3 then OYlgen& Comment upon thp Pfalms J I ♦ DcOiAt. \ %lft. xi. ^ 16. H Dc JTp. i c. 25. Chap. IV. the Dissenters.* 415 Pfalms y and next, Jfricanm the Hjftorian's Epitome of thyies. Thence he goes on to Gre^oyy Thaumatuyy^u^y and having fpoken highly in his praife, he adds fomewhat con- cerning the Churches of his country, which Dr. N. has thought to be to his purpofe : *' They have added to the " Church, neither deed, nor word, nor any myftical figure, •* befide what he left them. Nay, many thing5, which ** are done among them, feem defcftive by reafon of the •* antiquity of their conftitution. For they who fucceeded *' in the government of the Churches would not bear t^ •* receive any addition of things found out after his time ** And then he appeals to the received cuftom of that Church. But I fhall mate a few remarks upon this paflage of Bafi. 1. The temper of the fourth Century is plainly here difcover'd 5 namely, that they were wonderfully deligh- ted in inventing new rites 5 which, therefore, in a fhort time, were increas'd to a prodigious number. For BaJH intimates, that a vaft alteration wa5 made in moft Churches, lince Gregory's time. 2. 'Tis not probable Gregory composed any Prayer boo1c» becaufe Bafii does not mention if. If any fuch book had been extant, how could it happen that when he cited Orlgen and Jfricanus's writings, he fliouid fay nothing of this book of Gregory^. By this means Gregory's opinion might have been certainly known, and the controverfy Bafi! had with the Clergy of Neoc^farea might have been foon ended. Nor is it to be thought, that Bajjl would rather appeal to the pra£}ice of the Church of Ncoc^efart a ^ for Gregory's opinion, than to his own writing, if there had been any fuch. 3. Bajjl mentions no Form of prayer composed by Gregory^ or any body elfe. And the fame argument, by which our Adverfaries would prove, that none but Grezory^ Prayers were ufed in the Church ofNiec^efarea 5 will likew^ife prove, that nothing was read in that Church for Sermons, but only his Homilies. For Bafrs words may as well be under- ftood of fermons, as prayers. 4. Let the learned confider, whether Bajll does not elfe- where fay, what is diredly conrrnry to this. Vvhen the Clergy of Neoc^farea complained, that the finging by^ turns, which Bajil us'd, W'as not praftis'd in GYe7ay of finging. I am of our Author's mind, who fa underftands that expreilion 5 altho* 'tis much at one to me, if Dr. B's interpretation fhould be prefer'd. For if we un- derftand Naz'umun^ as Dr. N, does, concerning their way of finging, 'tis manifeft then this tellimony relates to Hymns, and not to Forms of prayer properly fo call'd. But if we follow Dr. B's verfion, and fuppofe he means Prayers faid at different times, fome in the prefence of none but the Bap- tized, others before any perfons whatever^ even then there will benomentionof Forms, except 'tis irl that word rfV©-. Now that, I conceive, in Nazicwten fignifie^; a Rw/V, rather than a Form. In which fenfc 'tis ufed by the Apoftle : » ha-jg oh^y^d from the heart that Vorm^ rvVcJ', of doF.rine^ "thereto H h ye 4i8 ^^ViKDicATioNof Part lit. ye were dd'ixnd. * Upon which place Oecunienlui has this re- mark : iv-TTov J'i tpmi StS'dLyJ'iiy oiov o<^yV )y )cctvlvx, that is, the Apoftle means, the Rule orCa>ion of doBrine. And thus the verb ruT^v is of the fame fignification with yo^O'3^9T«r, and is join'd with it, as fynonymous, in the fame Homily* by another writer, f And that tuV©- muft be thus unde'r- llood in Naziafizen^ is evident, becaufe he fpeaks as well ot a Form, that is, a Rule, of puni/liing offenders, as of prayer. And indeed the Emperor might borrow from the Chriftians the alternate way of finging, or the dividing their prayers into parts, according to the ilate of the audi- tors : but forms of prayer he could not learn of them, be- caufe they were in ufe long before, among the Pagans. And I oblerve, Dr. ii^w^^thimfelf, however he contends earneftly that 7VW&- can fignify nothing but a Form, yet chufes to fpeak as I do of one part of the ti'^& mention*dby NWz.mw- xen. " St. Gregory Naziamen affuresusj fays he^ that Julian " intended to copy after them, and to eftablifli Rules for the *' puniHimentof Heathens, according to their demerit.*MI And tho', I obfcrve, fome would make ^c'^^^eii^v to agree with ivx^i^^ + y^^ in my mind the fentence coming between fhews, it is a force upon Nazlanzcns words 5 and therefore ir.y rendering his words is in that rcfpeft better. Next to Nazianze7t comes hlsfrieyid Bafjl^ from whom our Author quotes one or twopaflages. The firfl is in his Let- ter to the Clergy of Ncoc^Jarea^ where he brings them in as making this objection : But thefe thhiz,s [^X.hisw2iy of alternate fingingl 11 er c fw^ praHis^Jin the Great Gregory^ s time. And to this he anfwers in the next words : Noriverethofefuppiicatlons^ ixhich you ywv: make. This, as our Author underftands it, is direftly contrary to what he makes /i^^/z/iay in the preceding page. There he tells us : Gregory Thaumaturgus/^/^/Vtotax^ been thcauthor of the Service ufed inthe Church 0/ Neocseiarea, /row ivhich they thought it notla^afid to make the Icaji variation. And for this healledges the {imeBafirs authority. Now how can this be, if he drew up the Service, and they had altered it ? But I dont think Pi\jV\n thefe paflages contradifts himfelf, whatever he docs in others, if he is the true anthor of them. For he does not here fpeak of the very words ufed in prayer, but of the manner of praying. He means, that there was a great * Rom. vi. n. t "^^^^ Homil. contra fos, qui die Pafch. jejunant, inter t>pcra Cluyioaonii. |i Brief Hilt. ^. i^y. 4^ Vid. Not. lu NaziaaJ. lavcwt. ia Jd. cdir, a Aly^tiigL^^ ^f> ti. Chap;lV. the DisusE^TiKs] 419 great diflTercnce between Gregoyy's and their way of praymg* Vor he pray'd with many tears, and a t^odly lorrow j thi-y without exerciiing any repentance : he was always in chanty; they fwelling with paifion when they ofter'd to God their lupplications. Thus he explains himfelf : '' I dent fpeak *' thele things out oi a defire of accufing you. I could wifh ** you fpent your lives in weeping and continual repentance, ^' torafmuch as we alfo do nothing elfe but pray forthe for- ** givenefs ot our fins 3 only we dont endeavour to remove *' the anger ot our God, as you, with the words of men, but ** with the oracles of the Holy Gholt.'* As tho' he had fiiid : I dont fpeak out of any ill will ^ but have there- fore only blamed you, as unlike to Gregory^ that I might pro- voke you to follow his example in his tears and repentance. And if I could do that, we iliould never fall under your cen- fure, who in that very way feek the remiilion of our fins, ufing the Pfcilms of i)^^v'«^ for that end. The next place quoted from Bafil is this: ** I know that ** communion in prayers is very advantageous.* " And who makes any doubt of this ? Our x\uthor, lure, thought there could be no communion in prayers, unlefs they were read out of a Liturgy. If fo, how could there be communion in prayers in the y^^njlles duys^ ivhen there ix-as no occajioyi for fuch helps y "-Ji-hen Prayers ivere confejjedly made hy infpiration oj the Holy Ghoft ? t But our Author further fays o( Baft!^ that htntdde a corn- pleat Litury^yfor the ufe ofhts oii'n Church, Now this I fee no reafon to believe. For Bafil^ and the other Bifhopi of his time, indurtrioufly concealed the myileries of the Chriftian religion, and all the prayers relating to them, from all thofe who were not admitted to them. *'They, fays he^ meaning ** the Fathers^ were well inftrufted to preferve the veneration .*' of the myfteries by filence. For how could it be proper, ** publicly to proclaim in writing the doctrine of thofc •* things, which no unbaptiz'd perfonmay fo much as look ** upon ? II Many fuch p.nTages occur in the writers of that age ; fo that 'tis not probable, Bajil would commit fuch things to writing. Jerom mentions not any fuch work of Ba/tl's j -and tho\ 'tis true, be does not fpeak particularly of all his writings 5 yet had he ever publlfli'd fuch a work, of fo pub- lic ufe in the Church, 'tis not likely ^aom ftiould not come H h 2 ' to 393. • % 262. r I^f %ir' S i. 27 42 o A V i K/D I c A T lo K of '-'Part III. to the knowledge of it, or that if he did, hd would fuy no- thinc» (>t It. '1 he chief Foundation of this opinion is, Nazi- nitijy up the writings of Ba'jil^ but givnng an oratorical account of his great care of the Church, t 1 here is no neceffity therefore of our fuppoling, he meant a particular writing composed by him y 'tis enough, if up and down in his works he gives rules con- cerning the rightmanner of praying • and manv fuch arcilill to be met with there. Or elle this may relate, perhaps, K) the alternate way of finging,w hich Bajtl brought into his Church, and fignify the orders he gave about it. I the rather incline to this, becauie of his joining herewith ivKoa-f/iou t« !6i)uctj@'y the haudjome ordering the Cbancci Upon the whole,. 1 think 'tis not probable, anv Liturgy was forg'd in the name of Bcifilj before the lixth Ccnturv. And fo much for i^^^A/, whole au- thority, I confefs, is of little account with me, confidering he liv'd fo near the beginning of the Ancichriliian times. Ambrofe hath much ta this j?itrpofe^ and is himjelf refuted the authrr of certain Forms. He is fo reputed, but fallly ; whence neither Du Pin^ nor Dr. Cavp, mention any Liturgy among thofe works of his, which are loft. Dr. Ca-cc's words deterve the reader's oblervation. '^ There are not wanting, /^iv^ hey *' fome who would perfuade us, th.it the yJmWoflw Miffal *' was firft composed by St. Barijakt:^ the firft Archbiftiop *' (as they fay) of \fila>i^ and the founder of that Church y •' that it was inlarg'd bv St. Miroclens ; that at length it was *' brought into its prefent form bv St. y^mhrofe^fYom whom *• alfo it took its name. But thev offer us mcer trifles, who *' tell us iuch dreams as thefe ; nor can they produce the '' lerUl teftimony of what they fiv from the antients. The " firil: that, I know, exprelly mentions it, is Ji\t!afridi'.s Stra- '•' ho^ about the year 842 9 who tells us, Ltl\ de Reh. Eccl, ** r. li. that y^'yyihrofe^ Bifhop of Milan ^ fettled the order of ** the Mafs, and other offices for his Church, and his neigh- ^* hours the Lz^/ir/\z^7/. " II And trulv our Author has no where alledg'd anv authorities to lefs purpofe, than what he pretends to bring from this writer. Of the five places he refers to, the firft onlv is yfmbrole's writing, but relates not to 6uv controverfy. But I ftiall briefly go over them all. • The firft is upon Luc, xv. and is wholly about the alter- nate •^\id. Cave IIiiV. Lit. ;>. I94" 4 Oyt.. ;o, L Hifb. Lit. ^^. 758. CIk^P^ IV. the Diss e-n t e r s. 42 1* natc lingin^- Hut what fignifies that to prayers ? Forms of hymns for fini^int;, wc all grant, arc borh lawful and ufcv ful. As to the alternate way of linging, j^mhrafv niij'^ht well mention it ; for he was the firil perlon who brour^ht the ufc of it into the (Church pf Mil^w, All tiie reitof his telHiiionies are from works faUly fither'd upon Jmhi^fe ^ two of them, namely the firll and latl, be- long to Hilary the Deacon, who is thought to be the author of that Commentary upon l\iul's EpiiUes- But that author in neither place fays one word of Forms of prayer. He fliews, upon i Tim. ii. I. what they us'd to beg ot God tor Kings. And if that proves, they ufed Forms of prayer 5 the Diflenters may be prov'd to ufe them alfo, by the lame argu- ment, taken irom the Dinf^ory^ or their Addreffes prefenteJ to our Princes. For therein we declare, what we delire in our prayer.N to God for them. In the latter place, Rom. xv. qo, ;i. thefe are his words-: " P^iui begs he might be help'd *' by their prayers, that he might be delivered out of the *' hands of the unbelieving 3^-i 5 not becaufe he was iefs *' likelv to prevail by his own prayers ; but he has a regard *' to due order, that the Church fhould pray for their gover- *• nor." So that, if I underiland the Do6tor, he muit have thought, there could be no praying without a Form ^ and tjiat therefore, wherefoever the antients mention prayer, they murt certainly fpeak of Forms. The Treatife De Saaw.n, lib, iv. r. 4. fpeaksexprefly ofthe Form of prayer in adminiftring the Lord's Supper: and no wonder ^ for the author lived, undoubtedly, after Forms had crept into the Church. He fets down the very words of the Form, and no teftimony more certain or exprefs concerning any thing can be produc'd, than that is. And whoever vyill compare this teilimony W'th thofe alledg'd before, will pre- fently perceive a vail difference between them ; whence 'tis eaiy to conjecture, the practice of the antients was very dif- ferent in this refpect from that of later ages. Why elfe (liould.we not. meet with as exprefs: and plain witnefles for Forms iji the one, as the other ? But neither Anhro/e^ nor any of his cotcmporaries, was the author of thefe books. Du Pin acknowledta^ who was of much the fame judgment with Rivet concerning them. * Bp. Rur>7et fays, 'tis generally agreed, thefe books were writ fome ages after Amhrofe*^ Peath. f The remaining Treatife cited by Dr. Nichols^ as written by j4rnhroJ€^\s t^tVeTJignitate Sacerdotali, But this is not the true jimhroje^ but Gerhertm^ who was Pope Sylvifier II. who died at the beginningof the eleventh Century. Du t^hi ac- knowledges 'tivS his 3 II and Mahillon has, upon the credit of a MS. copy, publifh'd it under his name, and with this title: De hforniatione fyifcoj^orum. Dr. Cave^ in treating of v^m/n'o/^'^ works, afcribesthis to him 5 + but afterwards he was fenfible of his miilake, and own'd it might juUly be doubted, whe- ther it was a genuipe treatife of Amhrofe^ or no ; fince it had nothing of Amhroje's fpiritand good fenfe : and he commends Theophiliis Raynaudw^ whojudg'd it to be more like Jnfelm's^ than JmhrojVs writings. * And yet when he is treating of Gerhertu^y he agrees with Mahillon^ in attributing it to him. f And this was his laft opinion, as appears by what he fays in his fecond volume. II But our iVuthor fays, it "d-onld he endlefs to relate all thathath heen [aid of Litwrgies by Chryfoftom, Jerom^ Auftin, a>jdlVrtter$ ofthe folloii'iytgages^ doiin iothe Refoirtnation, Whatever our Adverfaries can alledge, from thofe lefs pure ages of the Cburch, can by no means hurt our caufe. For befidcs that many corruptions were then crept into the Church, w^e never yet condemned every kind of ufing Litur- gies, as unlawful. The Doftor gives an account elffwhere of Mr. Baxters compojtng a Liturgy, which he and his Bre- thren delayed to have pjiahlijlj^d^ in lieu of the (joynmon Prayer Book,,'^ But Mr. BdXttr was for having many things left to Mtni- fters difcretion, and that they fhould not be oblia'd to ufe always juft the fame words 5 for he thought it fufficient, if, when thev pray'd, they kept to the fenfe and defign of what was expreis'd in the Form. This is is alfo praftis'd in fomq Churches abrond, where the Minifters fometimes pray with, and (bmetimes without a Form, before or after fermon. But the great matter in difpute between us, if our Adverfaries would butpleafeto mind it, is, Whether Minifters, to whom God has given an ability of conceiving their own prayers, ought ■ — - ■ ■ ■"- — ' r ~n mr* ' yro ■■■■■■.■ m —>, ^ Hitt. Lit. p- 214- t Expof. of tKe xxxix Art. p, 533. ji Annt^l.tom. i«- p. ^i^ ■ -^ Hift. L't. p. 214. * In AddcndiS; p, 216. t I-^*^' i*- -V4- J Chap. >. IV. the Dissenters. 423 ought to be Co tied ug to a prefcrib'd Form of words, as tha^ they may never vary tVom it ? This is what wc chiefly de- ny 'y and our Adverlaries will not eafily be able to prove, there was any iuch order anciently in the Church, even after Forms began to be ufed in it. For what can be more cer- tain, than that Bafily Chryfoj'totHyZnd yltnlvnji^ were not bound up to any particular Forms ^ if they composed themfelves, as our Adveriaries pretend, new Liturgies for the ufe of the Church ? In the year 597> when Forms were in ufe, every Mmirter was allow'd by the third Council of Cartha^^f, to ehufe, or compote, his own Form j upon this one condition only, that he fhould firll confer with his more underftanding Brethren. * Xow tho' we pretend not to pay much deference to the cuftoms of that age , yet if our Adverfaries went no farther than this, we fiiould not oppofe them. No Council then, or Emperor, prefcrib'd the fame Form of prayers to all the Minilters in a province. Chryfojiom indeed, in the Ho- milies cited by our Author, gives an account of the method of their prayers 3 and largely relates how they prayed for the Catechumens, and what inftructions they gave them be- fore prayer. And if he uied a Form, which may feem not unlikely, it fignifies nothing to us, who never refused the ufe of a well composed Form 5 altho' when the Church is blefs'd with able Miniilers, we thir>k free prayer is to be much prefer'd to it. Next follows "Jerom^ who, according to our Author, fpeah of faying the FfJms alternately^ Ad Kt. 4 : 'Tis not ftrange if he fhould fpeak of this, which all acknowledge was ufed by Bafi! and Jmbrofe, In Eflt, St^b, mentions the Tn- fa^on: What Treatife this is ofjerom's^ I am not able to guefs 3 nor does the Tr^^nilator help me. I thought, perhaps, there might be a miftake of the Printers, and that he meant Efitdphmm Faltolce -^ but I was out in my guefs. But what- ever treatife he cites, the T iiazinn belongs to the Hymns, not to the Prayers. Comm, in pfalm, xxxviii. has thofe Litur- pc phrafes ; Sljare H6 %ood Lord, Remember not our offences ^ nor the ejfences of our forefathers^ &c. Thofe Commentaries are not ^erom'sy as Du Pin and Dr. Cave both acknowledge. Be- fides, there is no fach thin^ in the place refer'd to. In Lib, adv, Lucif. he comnunds Hilary fo-' ynakjn^ a Liiwxy^ and a bro^i iff hymns. But why fhould he commend him for it, if there H h 4 \\ as * CaR. 23. 424 A Vindication of Part III. was a Liturgy mafde bt?forc. None of the Eplfcopal party now commend Mr. Basirr for writing a Liturgy, different from that which they ufed long before his wri'tmg. But I would tain lee Strom's own word«, for i find no fuch paf- f-ige in the treatife here cited. And now Aijiin brings up the rear 5 and we are told, he fpeaks of Litarjlc Forms iifed throuzhout the Church. Jd ^an. Ef, cxviii. 6f Ue Eccl. Do^^tn, He fpeaks largely of fe- veral cuftoms, in his I^ettcr to "januanus • but there is not a word in it of Liturgic Forms. The other book, T>s Do^- matihiis Ecclvfiafticis^ was not writ by Jujihi^ as all men own, and as the editors in my edition acknowledge. The firit part of it is the work of Gemiadiu^s M.if/t'ien/tSy viz. as far as chaf^. xxi. The reft is of fome later author f parti- cularly chap. XXX. cited by our Author, is attributed to Cel fi'nie^ and is to be met with among the Additions, at the end of his epiftlc. * For ddejiine's Letter confifts only of the firft Chapters ; and the other part is the addition of a later hand ^ and the tenth Chapter of it is the thirtieth of the Treatiie, Be Dosm. Eccl. Befides, whoever was the au- thor, there is no mention of Liturgic Forms in that Chapter. Aiifiin is faid to fpeak of Pra\ers^ which the Church ever hady and ii'il! have^ De Dono Perfe^j. yfujiin there onlv fpeaks of the matter of their public Prayers, and not of any- Form of prayer. Some were afraid left the doctrine of Per- feverance Should throw men into delpair. In anfwer to fuch, he fays : '' But I wifti they who are ftow of heart, or *' weak, who cannot, at leaft as yet cannot, underftand the *-' Scriptures, or the explication given of them, would fo, *' or not at all, hear our difputes upon this queftion, as ra- *' ther to mind the prayers, which the Church has always *■ had from its verv beginning, and will always have to the *' end of the world." f But if he were fpeaking of Forms^ \yho can think he could have dreamt, that the fame Forms were then ufed in the Church, which were ufed from the ▼ery beginning of it ? But hear how he goes on more fully to explain himfelf: '' For as to this matter, which we are *' now forced not only to fpeak of, but to defend and vin- " dicate, againft Heretics newly fprung up, the Church *' was never jilent about it in her Prayers ^ altho' iometimes '' llie * Vid Y.^\\\. Crl*f>. ■pro Augullino, inter opera Av^uIV, Par. 16^5, tern. v\\, p 6i2. 613. ] C. xxiii. *' Clup. IV. the Dissenter 9. 41 5 *' llie did not think it nccelTary to publifh it in her vScr- *' moil's, when Ihc was not urg\l to it by any adverfnrv. *' For "nhen ^las it thttt prayers ijere nor 7»juk in the Chunh for " iifjidels a>ici oiemies^ that tluy ml^^ht believe ? IV hen had any *' O.rtjiian a friend^ a nci^j.hour^ or a wife thitt iras an irijidel^ *' and did not pr^y that God would ^i'^e hint a 7nind 6bfdie^it to " the Chrijuiin faithl Or who ever did not pr^y for himfelf^ *' ^that he might perfeve)-^ in the Lord ! Or Whoever beard 2, ^^ Vriett makina recjudl to God for the fiithfiil, and would ** venture to find fault with him, not in word.*:, but his ** very thoughts, if he happen d to exprcjs hi^nfelfthas 3 Grdrit •* him^ 0 Lord^ toterfevere in thee to the end. '' Concernincj the exprcflion of Common prayer^ and the Surfum Corda^ I fhall fay nothing here, having had occaiion to fpeak of^ them already. ^ .' --• Next, he proceeds to the Reformers, Luther^ Cihin artd-^ X«o.v,"who, heobffives, all composed Liturgies for tlveir followers ; but their Liturgies are contcmn'd and defpis'd by him. He might have added Mr. Buxter alio to their number, of whofe work he fpeaks with the like contempt/ But the truth is, our quarrel is not fo much about a Litur-' gy in general, as about that of the Church of England. He adds, And'l dont l^now of one Church i7i the whole Refor- ynatlon^ hut what approves of Forms ^ and owns them to conduce much to true devotion y it being the fole prgpe-rty (or honour ^if they pleafe^ of our Konconformifis to deiptfe and rejeFl them. * But how does it appear, that we deipifl Forms of prayer ? What have we ever faid that was difrefpeclful of the Forms ufed by the Cilvinifts ? Have we exprefs'd any fuch con-- tempt of them, as I have taken notice our Author does? All that our Adverfaries can pretend to blame us for, is, that we treat their Liturgy jult as thev do their Neighbours. 'Tis true, we think free prayer, if well managVl, tends mofl to the edification "of the Church ^ but it does not thence follow, that we defpjfe all Forms. Further, it c.an- not but feem flr'^.n^rc to m,e, o'lr Author /hould not know of one Church in t e w'^ole Reformation^ hut what approves and ules Form'. One would think, a per'on, fo well acquainted with the ftate of all the Churches beyond the feas, fliould not h^ utterlv without any knowledge of one fo near as North Britain. For who does not know, that they neither :lvc fond of ?-''^' 2(^ 426 'A VI^^DICATION of Part III, M)j thent^ nor ufe them^. This ignorance muft therefore be only pretended, unlefs he did not judge the Church of Scop^ land to be a true and Reform'd Church. But now if we will own the truth, fincerc piety is no where found to flourifh- more, than in that iamc Church of Scotland^ which ha& laid afide all Forms. Compare with them thole who arc fo fond of our En^lijh Liturgy, I am afliam'd to fay, how great the difference is. Whence Dr. Edwards did not llick to reckon this among the advantages of the late Union r *' That we fliall be encouraged not only to ftriftnefs of •* difcipline, but gf life, by the example of our Brc- •' thren, with whom we are now united. " * y^s for that invidious cavil at our Liturgy^ that it v;as com- pird out of Popifj hooks J 1 anfiver infiort : That our Reformer i tool{^ nothing from Juch bookj^ but what was tal^enfrom the oldeji Zffriters, Tho' It were eafie to fhew by many inftances, that our Author here fpeaks unadviiedly,and contrary to the truth 3 I will, for brevity fake, only mention one thing, which I think is deftitute of the authority of any good antiquity. The prayers in the EngUJlj Liturgy, particularly In the Lita- ny, are divided, fo as to be faid partly by the MInifter, and partly by the people. This was never done anticntly that I can find. I dont fpeak now of fuch Interlocutions, as, hift up your hearts^ U^e lift them up to the Lord^ mentioned by Cyprian 5 or mutual falutatlons, as, The Lord he with thee^ and ivith thy fpirit^ ufed In Chryfoftom's tlme^ but of that break- ing of Prayers, properly fo called, into parts, which is ufed in the Church of England ^ but would be In vain fought for In the antient Ecclefiillical writers. JVe have many things out of the Greek Liturgies of Bafil and Chryfoftom 3 ^nore out of the Litanies of Ambrofe and Gre- gory. All thefe Liturgies are fpurious, or at leaft corrupted. Of thofe pretended to be compos'd by Bay?/ and Amhrofe^X have had occafion to take particular notice already. I fhall here fay fomewhat of the other two briefly. Both Du Pin and Dr. Cave agree, the Liturgy that paffes under Chy- foftom'*s name is not his, at leall in the prefent ftate of it. They think it was at fird compos'd for the ufe of tlie Church of Conjiantimple 3 but has been varioufly Interpo- lated * Sermon oa t>ic Union, ^. :>o. Chap. IV. ?k D I s s E N T £ R s. 427 la ted lince, according to the culloms and ufages of various Ages. * And if this be true, how can they tell what they have out of Ckryjojiom's Liturgy? Du Pin gives the like judgment of Gregory's Liturgy, that 'tis not now as it came out of his hands, that many things are fince added, and what is his cannot be diftinguifh'dfrom what is not. But if it were exaftly as he wrote it, it would be a copy un- worthy of the imitation of Proteilants 5 as may appear by his other works, which dont want for fupcrftition. f Feyy much out of the antiertt Forms of the Churchy d'lf^ers^i in the iior}{S of the prhnit'rce Fathers^ who 'ixrit lon^ enough be- fore the Roman Breviary^ or Canon oj the tAnjs ivere thought on. I grant, many things are put into the Romun Liturgies, which are borrowed from the fifth and following Centuries, when abundance of fuperttition had crept into the Church : but tho' the Books themfelves, in their prefent form, are of a later date 3 yet the matter of them may be trac'd much higher. In flj^^rt^ our Liturgy pre ferves all thofe ant lent Forms pure and uncorrupt 5 whiiji that of the Roman Church hath 'mingled much error and Juperjinion ii-tth them. This cannot be true, fince many Ceremonies of the antient Church are rejefled, which, without doubt, had their particular Forms belonging to them 5 if all their Service was, as our Adverfaries pretend, performed by a Liturgy. The Church of England's Litur- gy has nothing of the antient Chrifm, of the mixture of milk and honey mention'd by TertulUan^ as given to perfons prefently after Baptifm, of the white Garments fuch per- fons ufed to put on. Where fliall we find in the EyigltJJj Li- turgy fuch prayers as they join'd with their oblations for the dead ? Where are their prayers for the Angel of peace ^ for the deferring the end of the ixorld^ and many other fuch things which the antients fpeak of ? And altho* we ac- knowledge the Roman Liturgies abourui more with fuper- flition than the more antient ones, and than that of the Church of England:, yet we dont think thefe were wholly free from fuperftition, as I have obferv'd elfewhere. Now, who will believe Forms of praver were in the three firft and beft ages of the Church' injoin'd, or fo much as us'd 5 when our Adverfaries, who have made fo ^ ' dili- ^ See Du Pin Nouv. BiW. tow. ii:. ^38. Cave H. L. ^. 258. tNguv.Bibi, tom.y. f. 143. '428 >5f V 1 N D I c A T I o K of Part IIJ, diligent and nirrow a fcarch, are not able to produce any thini; trom the writers of that time, that carries in it lo much as a plaufible appearance of evidence and proof? 'Tis in vain to learch in that time for Forms, or the com- pofers of them ^ nothing can be alledg'd from thence con- cerning Liturgies, concerning written prayers, or the read- ing ot prayers in the Church : nay, we have many con- iiderable tellunonies ot the antients to the contrary. And let us hear in the firil place Irhr.nas^ a moil: antient writer: '' When, /a)'^ fc^, a mm, who has the fpirit of *' God, comes into the Church of juft men, who have the '' faith of God, and prayer is made to God, then theHo« *' ly Meflenger [or Angel] of the divinity fills him with the *' Holy Spirit, and he fpeaks in the Congregatioprtt^God *' would have him." * Who that MelTenger is, I t'onfeft^ I know not, unlefs he means (thrift. Jujiin Martyr gives this account of their manner of pray- ing in the Church in his time ; " He that is Prefident *' offers prayers and thankfgivings according as he is able, *' 07\] cfvvff,yj^ duTfo, " I Our Adverfaries think he meant only the ardency of his defires 5 but that does not feem pro- bable : for then the expreillon would as well iuit the peo- ple as the Minifter 3 nor would he have fo confin'd it, as he has done, to him. But let us compare this place with ano- ther, where he fpeaks of himfelf and his Apology, and ufes the fame expreffion. '^ Having therefore exhorted '' you according as we are able, oTn c/^uVct/x/^ yrfi/jpc-^Aixivoi *' vu£iy both by reafon, and by a vifible fign or figure, we *' fliall be henceforth blamelefs, if you do not believe. "H Since then the expreflion there manifelHy relates to the conftruftionof his Apology, why fliould it not in theothe^ place ns well refer to the compofing of their Prayers? Butouc Adverfaries alledge another place, where IJujliH ufes, they fay, the fame exprelTion concerning not the Minilter, but the Peoples praying. But that cannot feem llran^e, fince ^ujf n there fpeaks of the prayers ChrilHans offered pri- vately at home. I will tranilite the whole paflage, that his meaning may the more clearly appear. " That we are not *' Atheifts, who worfliip the maker of the univerfe ; who, ^' we fay (as we are taught) needs not blood, or facrifice, '' or jj Ibid. J>. 151,' ' Chap. IV. the Dissenters.' 429 *' or the burninf^ of inccnlb 3 whom wc \\tx'iCc as wc arc *' able, oVh cPbiAuii cfjpHvm^y with prayers and thanklgi- *' ving, tor all the oooil things we live upon, ip' 6ti^ej^7ii- '** ^iui^ct ^otiTip: having received it by tradition, that the *' only honour worthy of him is, not to confume in the fire *' what he has made tor our food, but to bellow it upon our- *' felve5, and fuch as need it ; and to be thankful to him, ex- " prefTuig m words our folemn prai fes for our birth, and all *' the mc^ans of health '•, for the feveral qualities of thing'^, " and the vicilTitude of fcafons^ and to ask of him that *' we may obtain immortality thro' faith in him : that ** we, I fay, arc not Atheiifs, what man who is in his *' fenfcs will not acknowledc^e ? " * 'JiifiiH fpeaks not a word here of a Chriftian aflembly, but only of the ufe thev made of thofe things w^hich the Gentiles offer'd in facrifice. Ptnoyiius indeed in his verfion has render'd, €^' 0/f 'nrCpT'pi^^ai^fi ^iV/j», i'n ns omnibus qtae o-fferhnr.s ; but that is only to ferve his ?opifli caufe 3 for the fenfe plainly carries it as I have render'd it, for all the good th'in^^s ii-e Itvtiipon^ 'ix'e life^ or eat 3 and in like manner has he elfewhere rendered it himfelf. 'E^/ 'tstaji t5 0*/^ ^^(Jt^^iJ.i-'^a. ivKoy'Suiv raV ^4fOi\)Triv r^^ 7rctvT0}v : in omnthns qiuhus nwmir.\ It is no great wonder Papifts catch at any thing in the writings of the antients, that looks like the mention of oblations 3 but in my mind Proteftant writers fhould not herein imitate them. And with as little reafon, by the way, do they llrain another expreffion, in that Apology, to the fame pur[X)fe : 'Ap7©- T^^(r^4pi7^? ^ ^iv©-. For [}njlin docs not there fpeak of their being off*er'd to God, but to the Minil fter 3 and therefore a little before, he exprefs'd himfelf more fully : '''^■TireiTcl^^97Z'^^'^iCfJ T^ 'TT^QiTC'^ri TCOV dSi\^^v i'pT(&"'. So that upon the whole, I think all things concur to Ihew we rightly interpret ^ujxin's meaning. Ori^^en fpeaks of their praying in like manner : ** Wc *' worfhip, fays he^ one God, and his one Son, who is his " word and image, with fupplications and honours, accord'- *' hfr^ to tnir iihilitv^ offering to the God of the univerfe ^' prayers and praifes thro' his only begotten Son. '' H And again : *' But the Grecian Chriilians in Gretk, the Romans \n *' Liit'in^ and every one in his own proper language, prays " to God, and prailes him as he is able. " r . / Tt'rtkl!ia}i * Ibid. ^. 139- \ ^- 1^2. U Contr- Celfun:. lib- rni ^ 3«6. -^b./^o^> 430 ^ Vindication of Partll!; Tertiillian is our next witnefs, who gives us this deicrip- tlon of ChrilHans in their prayers : *^ We Chnilians pray ** for all Emperors, £^r. looking up to heaven with our •' hands expanded, bccaufe guiltlels , with our head un- *' cover 'd, becaufe we are not afham'd 3 dcmq-^ fine inoyu" ** tort\ cjuia de petlort' ^. LtjVyy "Without a monitor^ hecauj'e our *' prayers jiovj pom our o-j,h mmds, " * The Church- men, in their dilputes with us, frequently reckon it among the advantages of their Liturgy, that the e^es being fix'd upon the Common Prayer Book, arc kept from wandring. But how contrary is this to the cuttom of the anticnt Chri- ftians, who, following the example of our Saviour, looked up to heaven when they pray'd ? But the queftion is, What Tertiillian means by thoie words, fine monitore^ quia de petJore ? We think he meant, that Chriftians prayers were not read out of a book, becaufe their own breaj}^ that is their own mmds fuggefted them. Our Adverfaries rejedl our inter- pretation, and fay, this de feBore is all one as memorher^ by heart. Let our Arbitrators now judge whofc interpretation is beft. For if Chriftians ufed then to fay their prayers by heart, and if their prayers were very long (as they a«Slually were) there was great need of a monitor^ or, as I Pliny calls him, a cujios^ that fKould attend and be ready to prompt them ; fince no man can be fecure his memory ihall never fail him. But how indecent would it be, if the Miniiler, who leads the congregation in prayer, fhould (land mute thro^ the failure of his memory? i\nd a moyittor fignifies properly one, who helps a perfon when he is at a lo{s, and fuggefts to him what he is to fiy. Whence per- fons, whofe bufinefs this was on the ftagc, or in courts of judicature, wer*? call'd monitors. Hence Cicero fpuke in that manner : '^ I dont mind what you will fay ; for I fee *' 'tis not you who are to anfwer me, but that book which *' your monitor has in his hand. " II In the lame fcnfe /*//- ry ufes the ward in complementing Trajan : *' It was very •* pleafing, that you call'd the Knights by their names •* without a monitor. " 4: Further, the matter of the exer- cifes among the Romans was call'd a J>:0/7iror • and from thence fome would explain Tcrtullians words, but they are miftaken ; for the Minifter who officiated, without doubt. Was, in this fenfe, the -moynior to the congregation. And therefore • ApoL Q. 30. \ li. N. Uh- xxviii. ;. 11. li.Dc Divinat ia Vcrr. i Panc^. c 23. Chap. IV* the D i s s £ n t e r sJ 431 thcretorc TiTtidiian could not luve laid they prayM without luch a monitor. But if our interpretation be received, no- thing could be Ipokcn more pertinently. For 'tis all one as it he had faid : '' There is no occafion for a monitor " with us, who fliould prompt the Miniiler when he prays j *' for his prayers are not learnt from a book, but flow from •' the pious and vehement defircs of his heart. " But 'tis objefted : That /^^^to fignjfies the ?«^wory, but is never ufed in that fenfe we take it in. * But it fecms very wonderful to me, that learned men will venture to deny what every one, who has at all conversed with Latin au- thors, mull needs have obfcrv'd. 'Tis well known, the antient Fathers of the Church did all in a manner agree with the Peripatetics and Stoics^ in making the heart or breaji the feat of the foul, j And there have been many among the more modern Philoiophers and Divines, who have embraced the fame opinion. Hence peclm is ufed figuratively for the foul, or for any faculty of the foul, not only by ecclefiaftical, but by all other authors, either in profe or verfe. Nothing more common in Latin authors, than pfSh^ apertnyn^ jidnyn^ amicum ^ and dtviAum^ fordidum^ fe^r. 'Twould be endlefs to reckon up all the places where feBiPi is thus us'd by antient authors. I might mention feveral ^ but if the reader underftands ovXy Eyignjh^ they w^ould fignify little to him ; and if he underftands Latiyi^ I refer him to the Latin edition, II where he will find enough to this purpofe. There is another place of Teytullia^, from which, one may reafonably conjecture, no other Form, befides the Lord's Prayer, was then prefcrib'd. For he> feems to have been of this opinion, that tho' it were lawful to ufc other prayers after the Lord's Prayer 5 yet theright of pre- fer! bing Forms belong'd to God only. *' God alone, *' fays he, can teach us how he would be pray'd to. *' The Duty therefore of prayer, which was order'd *^ by him and his Spirit, even then when it came out " of our Lord's mouth, being embolden'd by this privilege, afcends into heaven, commending to the Father, w^hat his own Son has taught. Yet fince our Lord, who fore- " law men's neceflities ; after he had deliver'd the Rule '^of * 5>rf Ber.net. Br. Hii*:. p. 99. t S« Tjrt'jli df Anima- c. xv. Hicron, '/^^i ^A Vindication of PartllL *' of prayer, faid particularly, ask^ and you .pall recttve y *^ and there arc i'cveral things which need to be ask'd» *^ according to every one's circumltances, the rightful and ** crdhuiry prayer [the Lord's Prayer] being firil us'd, as *^ a foundation, vvic may lawfully add other deliresj *^ and build other petitions upon it^ only we mull reniem- *' ber his precepts, leit we as much fall Hiort. of being •*' heard by him, as wc do of obeying his precepts."* Sa that they us'd to pray de pe'dore^ xh3.t is, froiB their heart. Which is what God hears, as the fame author tells us in another place: '' God hears not the voice^ *' but the heart, which he alfo looks into."! And I mull own, there fecms little weight with me, in the obieclion made againtt this interpretation: Th^at it fig- nify'd nothing to the Emperor, whether they pray'd with, or without a Form ; and that therefore, it was not likely, Tertiiliian would trouble him with any account of it. Jor it fignify'd as little to him, whether they pray'd with their hands expanded, or, their heads cover'd, or not. And lince notwithif anding that, he relates their cuftom in the one, I fee not any reafon, why he might not as well in the other. 1 will now add a tellimony or two of the fourth Century. Bafil us'd free prayer, without a Form, as he witneffes of hin^fclf : '' When I was lately praying with the '* people, and concluded with the Doxology two feveral *' way^ j fometlmesto God the Father, 'H'i.th his Son, and *^ with the Holy Ghoft 5 fometimes, 'to God the Father, " through his Son, * iy the Holy Gholl : fome that •" were prefent reprov'd me , faying I us'd not only Grange, *.' but inconfillent expreffions. " II Another inltanee like this may be (c^n in Theodorit^ H. E. lib, it. f. 24 f and Phi- lojlorgim^ lib, iW, X. 1%, From what jB.^/?/ fay.«, it appears •there was no certain form of words prefcribM for their iDoxologies 5 and yet one would think if any part of their :praycrs were tied to a fet form of words, it fhould have been that which was ufed in their hymns as well as prayers, and ufed to be often repeated, efpecially in the Greeks Cliurches ; w^hence fome have thought the Doxology, at the end of the Lord's Prayer, was not added by Chrill himfelf, but crept into St, Mattbizi-'s Gofpel, from the cuftom ' De C.-.it. :. IX. t UiJ. c 13. P De Sp S. c. r. irif.n i Chap. IV. the Dissenters* 433 cullom of the Greeks, In like manner Amhrofe thought not himfelf tied to a fet of words , but took notice in his prayer, of a cafe that happened fuddenly, while he was admini firing the Lord's Supper. '* While^y^j^ he^ I was *' offering, I underflood one Cajlulus^ whom the y^rians caird ** a Presbyter, was feiz'd by the People. They had met " with him as they were going along in the ftreet. I be- ** gan to weep moft bitterly, and, in the very oblation, to *' befeech God, that he would help, and that this man'51 " blood might not be /lied in the Church's caufe $ and " truly that my blood might be fhed, not only for the fafety " of the people, but for the wicked themfelves. '' * 'Tis objefted this was a private prayer 5 but Jmhrofe's words will not admit of that, who fays it was, in ipja ohlatione^ in the very oblation. Laftly, That I may pafs over many things, which the learned Mr. Clarkfon has collected upon this headj I will clofe this Chapter with the teftimony of Epiphartiu^^ who writes thus in his Letter to joh>2 the Eifliop of jerufalem : *' I could not alfo but wonder, when I heard that fome, ** who ufe to carry reports backward and forward, adding " always fomewhat of their own, in order to flir up grief *' and ftrife among Brethren, have difturb'd you, and faid, *' that when we pray at the Lord's Supper, we ufe to fay *' thus upon your account : Lord grant John may believe " aright. Dont think us fo clownifh as to be able to fpeak *' this out fo openly and plainly. Altho' I always pray " thus in my heart, yet I never exprefs'd it in the hearing *' of the people, left I iliould feem lightly to efteem thee, " my beloved. But when we are toward the end of our ** prayer, according to the manner ufed in the Sacrament, *' we fay thus for all, and for thee : Keef? him^ that preaches *■* the truth. Or it may be thus : Do thou^ Lord, ajjijl and ** keep him^ that he may preach the truth • according as it hap- *' pens beft to fall in, and agree with the order of our dif- <* courfe. " t I i CHAP- Bpift- 33, ad Marccl]i;^^i»b 1 Inter O^^-rra Hicrou, 434 -^ Vindication of PartllL CHAP. V. Of the Sign of the Crofs in Baptifm. IT will not be difagrccable to my defign, nor I hope to my reader, if, as m Tome former Chapters, fo here alfo I give an account both of the Conformills, and our own opinion concerning this rite, before I come to confider what our Author fays in the defence of it. I.- The Conformifts think, the fign of the Crofs is alfo a fign and pledge of the merits of Chrift. This appears from the following words of the Convocation : " At what ** time, if any had oppos'd themfelves againft it, they *' w^ould have been cenfured as enemies of the name of *' the Crofs , and confequently of Chrfft's merits , the Sign *' whereof they could no better endure. '' * What kind of Slgyi they meant, we learn from the Lathi edition of the Ca- nons, which puts two words inftead of one, and calls it Tef- jera.&P Ji::^niim nieritorum Cbrifli 5 whereby they manifeftly rcftrain the expreffion to fuch a kind of fign, as is alfo H pledge. And there is the more reafon to judge of the fenf6 of the Church by the Lati-a edition, becaufe the prefent Archbifliop of Canterhwy has inform 'd us, that it is more authentic than the EngUfi. He finds fault with the very title of the Engl'iJJj Canons, and alters it 3 and then adds : *' This is the true title given to thefe Canons, and was fit *' to be thus particularly taken notice of 5 becaufe in our *' En'Z^l'p Book^ofGxnons^ which is of moft common ufe, this *' infcription (as well as many of the Canons themfelres) " is very imperfeftly render 'd, and may be apt to lead men *' into fome miftakes concerning thefe, as well as othef *^ matters. " f But we, on the contrary, think it unlaw- ful for any man to devife figns and pledges of the merits of Chrill, fince our S-iviour himfelfhas already appointed fuch in his Sacraments. 2. Our Adverfaries think, the water in Baptifm relates only to the virtue and operation of the Holy Spirit, and not to the blood of Chrift. Hence the mofl learned Mr, * A. itoi. C*n. 30. t Bp- ^Hifee's Appeal, ^ 2i Chap. V. the DissEKTHRs. 435 Mr. jo/t/^fc Wr^ obkrves, there is no mention made of wa/liing in the blood of Chrilt, thro' the whoU Oliice for B.ij.^tifm in the Liturgy. And rcmarkabic aie the words, in which they pray fur forgivcnels for the child to be bap- tizM : •' We call upon thee for this infant, that he coming " to thy holy JBaptiUn, may receive remiifion of hisfijs by ** jytntUiil re:cne,\iuon, '' We, on the contrary, fay, there is a twofold fpiritual waihing, damely, from the filth, and from the guilt of fin : the former is done by fpiritual re- generation, the latter by the blood of Chrift 5 and both are fignify'd and feal'd by tae baptifmal wafliing. Hence we judge, that the myttical fignification of the merits of Chrilt, which the Conform itts, as 1 faid, attribute to the fign of the Crofs, belongs really to the baptifmal water. 3. Oar Adverfaries fometimes feem to be of opinion, that as the baptifmal water feals the benefits which are beftow'd upon us by God 3 fo the Itipulation or covenant on our part, whereby we engage ourielves to God, is- repre- -fented by the fign of the Crois. Hear again what the Sy- nod fays : *' And this Sign they [the primitive Chriftians] " did not only ufe with a kind of glory, when they met '* with any 3^ii'-S hut fign'd therewith their children when " they were chriilen'd , to cLd'cate them hy that bad;^ to his *^ fervice^ whofe benefits bejioii'A upon them in Fapttfm^ the " the name of the Crofs did reprefent.'' * Every one fees the benefits bellow'd by God m Baptifm, are carefully here diftinguifn'd from the dedication of the infant, which is made by the badge of the Crofs. To which purpofe like- wife are thefe following words of the Canon : '' The *' Church of EniUyid hath retain'd ftill the Sign of it in " Baptifm 3 following therein the primitive and apoiloli- *' cal Churche^s, and accounting it a lawful outward cere- *' mony and honourable badge, whereby the infant is dedi- *' cated to the fervice of him that died upon the Crofs. " AVe, on the other hand, believe Baptifm is a pledge and to- ^ken both of the benefits which God is gracioullv pleas'd to beflow upon us, and of our acceptance of them, and the /promife whereby We oblige ourfelves to him 3 and that therefore no other Sign hereof fhould be ufed. 4. Our Adverfaries feem to allow the Popifh diftin<^ion between the flock of Chrift, and his militia. Both they and I i 2 the * Can, io. '43^ A Vindication oj Part III. the Papirts hold, perfons are admitted into the former by Baptifm ; but as the Papifts think we are hlled into the latter by Confirmation, our Adverfaries think this is done by the lign of the Crols. This appears by the words ufed at the making the Crofs. " We receive this child into *' the congregation of Chrift's flock, and do fign him with " the fign of the Crofs, in token that hereafter, he fliall '' not be afliam'd to confefs the faith of Chntt crucify 'd, *' and manfully to fight under his banner, againft fin, the ** world, and the Devil, and to continue ChrilVs faithful " foldier and fervant unto his lives end." * Where thofe words alone , lie rece'txe this child into the congregation of Chrtji's jioch^y relate ro Baptifm, as the Convocation ex- plains them ^ all the red belong to the fign of the Crofs, which therefore is'accounted Chrift's banner. So that we are made Chritt'^ flieep by Baptifm, but his foldiers by the fign of the Crofs. And thus Dodlor Hammond makes the Crofs the banner or enfign of Chrift's militia, which every one Ihould refort to, and fight under , and the fym- bol by which men are inrolFd in the Chriftian militia, and fays : *' They retain it in their folemn entrance into Chrift's ** camp, in token they mean voluntarily to fight under his *' banners ^ and in confidence that he that thus fign'd to *' Conftantine victory from heaven, will thus give grace, and ** feal to us vifl-ory over our ghoftly enemies."! Nor is this inconfiftent with their fpeaking of God's benefits hejioiv^d in Baptifm. For no other benefits are meant thereby, than regeneration, remiiuon of fin, and admiffion into Chrift's Church : but that other benefits, and particularly thofe which help us in yielding obedience to the laws of Chrift, may be attributed to this Sign, is plain enough from the Liturgy it felf. And I have prov'd at large elfewhere, that fuch a virtue is afcrib'd to the Crofs, not only by Do6tor JiLi-mmond^ but by their famous Mr. Hooker, II But we ac- knowledge no fuch diftinftion between the flock and mili- tia of Chrift, and therefore reje6t this badge, which they have devis'd of the latter. 5. The Epifcopal party hold the fign of the Crofs was us'd in Baptifm from the very beginning of the Chri- ftian Church. Thus the Convocation tells us : " The " b.onour * Can. ^o I Opt. W. li- p. 243. ti Confiierit. on the vith chap, of tliC Abnd^incnt of the London Cafes, concerning the Crof;?, ^-li' 6wc. Chap.V. the Dissenters. 437 '^ honour and dignity of the mime of the Crcifs begat a *' reverend ellimation even in the Apoftles times ( for *' ought th.it is known to the contrary) of the fign of the " Crofs, which the CUriiHans fliortly after us'd in all their " aLlions. ** * Bat we have very different apprehcnfions of this matter. And in the firll: place, 'tis very probable this Sign was brought into ufe by Heretics, v'm., the / a- lentinians^ as I have fliewn in the iorefiid Treatife.j From them the Montanifts received it, and the firfl plain exprefs mention we find made of it is by Ttrtiiliian^ about the year 200, after he fell into that Herefy. Secondly, the ufe of this Sign was very fuperllitious from the very beginning of it. And fo Bp-rCVo/fj owns : '* The fuperllition of th^ *' Crofs and Chrifm, W;ere in ufe in the fecond Century. " l! Laftly, this Sign, was not us'd in Baptifm in TeHnluans time, nor in the three firft Centuries. Mr.'Daill former^ ly aflferted this, t and I have lately defended his opinion. Upon the whole then, we look upon the baptifmal ufe of this Sign to be the contrivance of the fifth Ceqtury, or the latter end of the fourth. And now having thus given-an account of our opinion on both fides, I return again. tq pur Author. N01V all this ado is^ for ivant of obferviyi'Z^ that the Crofs ii\ts ^ufed in Bappifm mayiy ages before the Church ivM i>fetl£d u-ith Romifj errors."^ This is a great miftake. Tho' it matters very little with us, whether the obfervation of our Author be trueornot^ fince the Scripture, and not their practice, is our only rule. However, as I faid, this cuftom was not known before the fourth Century, when the Church fell into abundance of error?^, which are retain'd by the Papifts to this very day. For, had not mott fham.eful fuperiiitlons (jrept in at that time about the relicks of the Mariyrs, celi- bacjs this fign of the Crofs, and many other things ? Nay, if we place the beginning of this ufage as high as Ttrtnllinny prayers and oblations for the dead will be found as old, fince they alio are mention'd by him. lor ^tis rnentlou'^A hy the oldeji ivriters, TertuUian, Cyprian, J^aftantius, Pr udcntius, PauHnus, Bafil, Chryfoftom, Aufl-'n, ^ a rite of Baptifm ufed in their times 3 and they extol it a. fvery reli^ioa^ ufage^ highly becoming the prof/fon of Chrijr, I li 3 grant, a * Can. 30. \ tar. 5-r. ^ Nak. Tru.li, ^/?. 10. i De Cuiub. Lat. 438 A V I N D I c AT I o N of Part III. grant, yfyjiin an iri_the other Book De Cororia^ that is, concernw^ the ^IdtefS' cf^&'iun or garland^ he fpeaks not of the baptifmal ufe of this Sign. Nay further, many things ufed at that time are mentioned by him elfewbere, and in that very place which is citedby our Author, of which there is not the leaft footilcp to be met with in the Church o{ En:d. 'Twill not therefore be aiilifs to fet down the whole paflage. *' Laftly, f7^ reckoned Chrifm, and many other rites, among the indifferent things, which no one doubts might be commendably us'd, or let alone at pleafure. * But they can't even fo efcape Bdjirs cenfure. For if they will ftand to his judgment, thofe rites can't be reckon'd among indifferent things. ** Some, fays he^ ** of the decrees and inftitutions obferv'd in the Church, *' we have deliver 'd to us in writing, and fome we have *' receiv'd by Apoftolical tradition, handed down to us ** in a mytlical manner. They have both of the^n the fame *' influence upon reli^^ion. Nor will any one deny this, who " is but moderately skill'd in ecclefiattical laws. For if *' we fhould attempt the laying afide unwritten cuftoms, ** we rtiould, before we were aware, injure the Gofpel ** in fome of the chief points of it : nay, we fhould reduce *' the preaching of it to a bare name." Upon the whole, *tis not certain from Bafirs words, they us'd the Crofs in Baptifm. I might farther add, that the Treatife it felf, or efpecially the latter part of it, here cited by the Doftor, is thought by Erafmi^y and other learned men, not to be Bcifil's own writing, f But I fhall now leave our Author's Margin, and go on with his own words concerning the Crbfs. BcJtdiSy it v:ould he very unreafonahUj that ii'e fjould lay nfide a piom r'lte^ ivhich the Church hath as^d alnwji Mvcc years y only hccaufe fome amonr^ tps exclaim cL^ainJl it. II Whether this be true, let any impartial judges deter- mine, from what has been now faid. It feems to be the device of a very corrupt age of the Church. And we are all on our fide very unanimous in declaring it unlaw- ful. If this, our opinion, is more ov/ing to the weaknefs of our underftandingf, than the ftrength of our arguments 5 yet they break the law of charitv, who chufe rather to drive their Brethren away from their communion, than to part P/cr vi)],iv. p 869. Dcconiirin. i Vid. Cod Cv-nfaiiim, f. 127. 1' Z'. 269. I Chap. V. the Dissii^riT^s. 443 part with a thing which they thetnfelves account fniall, and their Brethren judge unlawful. And indeed what do we defire, but that we may follow the direction of our confciences, without debarring thole who are otherwiie minded, from the free enjoyment of their own opinion ? And who will not grant, thefe are very reiifonabic con- ditions ? This way of arguing of our Adverfaries is made ufe of by the Papills, when they defend themfelvcs in many of their corruptions, and /liew an utter averfion to any reformation. 'I'he celib.icy of the Clergy, is in it felf, witho :t doubt, lawful and ufefuL highly extoU'd by the Father*^, 2iy hicaitfe jome exclaim azaivji it ? *Tis as eafy for the Papills, as our Adverfaries, to pronounce whatever is faid againft them, to be only fome perfons exclaaning againft a thing. But let us fee how he goes on : When at the fa',ne time niiiny more dont only reverence ity but are really much in loxe iiith it. So that ify for the fnl^ of our Adverfaries^ ive fiould part ivith it ^ ire are not fure ive fjall herehy rccoricile them to the Church 5 hut ire run a manffl hazard of frightin^z, ai\ay fencer al of our oiin people fiom fuch Baptilm^ ( lame and deficient in their opinion J to that of the Church ojTRome, as more azree* ahle to primitive praBice. They cannot indeed be fure they /hall herehy reconcile u^s to the Church, For, unlefs other con- ceflions are made befide this , I will pafs my word , the Diffenters never will be reconciled to her. But we are much oblig'd to our Author, for fetting out the temper of fome of his party fo well to the life. Every one will rec- kon this no calumny, but a certain truth, fince he himfelf has related it. And who will henceforth think, we have not good reafon to diflike this ceremony, which has led their people, by their ovv/n confeflion, into fuch a fuperllitious conceit ? For, as our Adverfirics take pretty near the fame courfe with the Scribes and Pharife^s of old , * we argue both from the example of the Apoffles, and from the declarrition of our Saviour, that this ceremony fhould be abolifh'd. For building upon fuch authorities, we think * Alaith. XV. Tj 2, 3->i:. .Maikvii i. "; 6';. CQ>T:yr: Col. ii. 2Q, '444 ^ Vindication of Part HI. think it unlawful to worfhip God with rites not appointed by him, but by the rulers of the Church, even tho' thofe rites fhould be innocent in rhemfelves. In vain^ fays our Saviour from the Prophet, do they x:orJIj]p me^ teaching for doHrines the commdyidnients of men. But our Adverfaries tell us in anfwer, that then only is the ufe of fiich rites iinful, when they are us'd not as indifferent, but as things ne- ceffary, and that of themfelves pleafe God : and that there is this difference between the Pharifees and them, that the Pharifees commanded their rites as neceffary, and the Church of Enj^land hers as indifferent. * However, they mutt nowM)f neceffity grant, this ceremony occalions their own people's finning, who ufe it not as indifferent, but exceeding neceffary 3 fince they would look upon Baptifm itfelf as lame and deficient without it, and would run from fuch Baptifm to that of Rome, But if our Adverfaries were more careful to purge the Church, than to gratify the evil difpofitions of fome perfons, fuch kind of men, fo defperately fuperftitious, and fo unworthy of Proteftant communion, fhould rather be diligently fought, that they might be caft out of the Church, than be fo greatly courted to keep in. And I may well apply to thispur- pofe, whdLt Bucer faid of the Popifli Garments : '* If able *' Teachers are plac'd in every parifh, good men will be *' pleas'd with the taking away the Garments : and as to " wicked men, their favour (if we would be the fervants ** of Chrift) is by no means to be fought 3 much lefs their ** fuperftitious humour by any methods to be encouraged, " and promoted."! But hecatife the Paffijis have made a fuperftitious ufe of thefizn of the Crofsy our Reformers have cleared it f^om fuj^erjiitlon^ and reduced it to its firji fiat e, I Ihould be glad any one would iliew us at what time, from the firft inventing this Sign, it can be fiid to have been clear from fuperftition. And truly, if the moft antient ufe of it might be thought to have been thus clear^ that was not in Baptifm, wherein jflone the (^.hurch of En<^l and rex "xmsit 3 bur in the common ^ftions (>f life, as the Papift^ ftill apply it. This is ac- kiiowledg'd by Bifhop Burnet : " We find, fays he^ the " p:in:itive Chriftians us*d the making a Crofs ir^ ^' the * See Sanders'5 Srrm. upon Mat xv. 9. Patrick"; Friendly Debate, |. 151. \ Scrijpta Augl. jj 458. Chap. V. the Dissenters. 445 •' the air, or upon their bodies, on many occaCons. After- *' wards, when a divine virtue was fancy 'd to accompany **■ that ritual adion, it was us'd in Baptifm as a fort of *' incantation 3 for, with the ufe of it, the Devil was ad- •' jur'd to go out of the perfon to be baptiz'd. Such an *' ufage made it a lacramental and fuperftitious action. ""^^ He owns therefore the common ufe of this Sign to have been more antient than the baptifmal 3 and that the bap- tifmal from the very firft made the aftion not only fuperfti- tious, but facramental. For lie ne-^er itje it idly\ ayid ujfon every flight f car. ^^ But who does not know this ufe ot it was the mott antient ? Our Author cited a little before Tcrtidlian^ as an abetter of this Sign. I defire then to know, whether they did not ufe it idly, when, as he fays, they crofs'd themfelves ti^on every motion y iihen they ii'ent out^ or came in^ when they put on their cloaths^ or their Jijocs^ "d-erit into the bathy came to the tahle^ lighted candleSy fat down^ or ivent to bed ? Now if thus they iifed it idiyy why do our Adverfiries urge Tertidlians autho- rity ? If they did not uj^eit idlyy why does not the Church continue the fame ufe of the Sign as the Papifts do to this day ? The primitive Chriilians of the third Century had a moft fuperftitious conceit of the ftrange virtue of this Sign. Do but hear what LaBantins fays : '' Nor can the Devils >* approach to them, on whom they fee this heavenly mark; ** nor can they hurt thofe whom this heavenly Sign, as an *' impregnable fortrefs, defends. " || If this were true, who would not think the Papifts the moft happy people, who are every day thus defended ? No doubt they, who had fuch an opinion of the Crofs, would, n^oyi every flight feary fign their foreheads with it. But if they, good men, were deceived in their opinion, their authority fhould fig- nify nothing with us. But now hear our Author's brave reafon, why they retain it in Baptifm. u4ytd lefs than this 'ue coidd not doy unlefs ive ivoidd iiholly efface this mark^ of the Lord Jefus, and fo gratify Mahometans and Heathens i>t the hi^hejl degree. If the abrogating the ufe of this Sign be a gratification to "Mahometans and Heathens, the Church men have gratt- fy*d them long ago, by taking away all ufe of it, except in folemn worfliip, at which Mahometans and Heathens are ne- ver * Four Difcourfc* to the Ckrgy, p. 2fi. \ ^^^g- 270. II luftit lib. W. C. 27, 44^ A Vindication of Part III. ver prefent. They fee the Papifts, when they crofs them- felves upon every occafion ^ but the Church ofEnrla^td's ufe of this Sign they can never behold, becaufe 'tis only us'd in the Church. Our Adverfaries have been thought to have gratified the Papifts by retaining this ufc of the Crofs , but we never heard before, that our Brethren abroad had gra- tify'd Mahomet arrs and Heathens by rejecting it. And how comes this to be the mark, of the Lord ijtfus ? We truly ac- knowledge no mark to be his, which he has not made io by his own appointment. And the more we fee men define any mark, they have devis'd for him, ihould be efteem'd as facred, the more vile and abominable we account it, and as fuch avoid it. Ouri\uthor next ftarts another of our objefllon^ : Bz fatd^ we make a neiv jacrament of this ft :n of the Crofs, To this he anfwers : Let thele oyjeFrors k>ioiv^that this riteytsitis explain' d hy uSy and all the Ke formed Churches^ is a^ far as ^ojible from the nature of a facramcrn. This is wrong tran{l:ited 3 it fhould be : This rite is as far as jJOjfihle from the feature of a facrameut^ as that ["jiz.. a facrament] is explained hy as ^ and all the Reformed Churches. And the next words, and the Doilor's argument fliews this was his meaning : For^ according to our drcin'ny^ can any thim^ be a jacrayntnt^ hat what was injiittited hyChriJi hi/u- felfi Dr. N. had here his eye to the definition of a facra- ment, in tht? Church Catechifm : That 'tis " an outward *' and vifibie fign ot an inward and fpiritual grace, given *' unto us, ordaih'd by Chrift himfelf, as a means whereby *' we receive the ixme^ and a pledge to aflure us thereof. " This is the divinity of the Church oi Eyr^land^ wherein we find no fault. For hence it follows, there are but two fa- craments of the New Teftament, fince fo many, and no more, were ordain'd by Chrift ; as appears^ by the Holy Scriptures, and is acknowledg'd by all the Retorm'd. Nor are we fo ftupid, as to object againft our Adveriaries, a nevj facrament injiitntcd hy Chriji. But what we blame them for, is, That they have brought into the Church a rite, which has no warrant by any divine inttitution, and to which they afcribe in a manner the fame nature and virtue with facra- ments, tho'at the fame time they deny it to be a facrament. But fince our Author icems therefore to deny this Sign to be a ficrament, becaule it was not inftituted by Chri tt himfelf 5 I wifh he had told us plainly, whether he did not think it was appointed by the Apoftles ? If it had been fo, it would be a facrament in our opinion, wherein Bp. Eurntt . ' agrees J Chap.V. the Dissenter si 447 ngrccs with us. *' Whatever, fays he^ his Apoftles fettled> ** was by authority and coitomiffion from him ; therefore *' 'tis not to be deny'd, buty that if they had appointed '* any ficramenral adion, thVt muft be reckoned to be of ** the fame authority, and is tp be efteem'd Chrifl's inlli- •' tution, as much as if he himfelf, when on earth, had *' appointed it." * And truly, if the Church has n'ed this ritg ulmoji i.i'DCC years ^ as our Author told us a little before ; I can't imagine, who could be the Author of it, but Chrift himfelf, or his Apoftles. But he goes on, and not only denies its being a facrament, upon the account of the au- thor of the inftitution 3 but denies it has what is princi- pally neceflary in the nature of a facrament, I have fhewn already, out of Bp. Buryiety that it v/as antiently a facra- mental action : but let us hear our Author's reaibns. If it JhouU he granted [which no man in his fenfes can de- ny3 that here is an external fi^n of a facrament^ I ixoidd fd'in kyiQij ivhat in-Sijiklc grace is conftr^d ivith it ? The baptized perfon is fign'd, " in token that hereafter he fhall not be ** afliam'd to confefs the faith of Chrift crucified, and man- ^' fully to fight under his banner, 2gainft fin, the world, ** and the Devil, c^r." But who will deny Chriftian for- titude to be a grace ? Who, befide a Pelagian^ wmII doubt whether this grace be confer'd by God ? The fign of the Crofs therefore is made a pledge of this. But he further asks : Did e-cer any- of our Jide affirm^ that this Sign is the caufe of any divine infujion [influence] or any means of eternal fal'-jation ? They have indeed affirm d it. Thus I have obferv'd before, that Dr. Hammoyid fays : '' He " that thus fign'd to Conftantine victory from heaven, will ** thus gwc grcice^ and feal to us vitlory ever our ghcftiy ene- *^ mies." And if that be true, I can fee no reafon why it fhould not be efteem'd a means of eternal fahc'tion. Nay if, according to the Convocation, it be a fign andfledi^e of the 7nerits of Chrift 5 or finally, if it be a token of Chriftian for- titude, as it really is, as our Adverfaries ufe it ^ it may with good reafon be call'd, a means of eternal faixat'ion. But now take another of our Author's arguments : What pledge do our Divines hold to he in this rite^ ^ivherehy ei- ther the hope of a Chriftian is ra'is^dy or his faith coyjirm'd^. Mr. Ho^^^r, a molt admir'd author with our A.dverfarie.s has I Uptth Alt t 2^?. cc 448 A ViNDicATioK of Part III. has attributed an extraordinary virtue to this Sign. " Sure- ** ly, fays he^ the mind which as yet hath not hardened it " felf in fin, is feldom provok'd thereunto in any grols and '* grievous manner, but nature's fecret fuggeftion objefted '* againrt it ignominy, as a bar. Which conceit being enter'd ** into that palace of a man's fancy, the gates whereof \_viz. •' his forehead^ have imprinted in them that holy Sign, which hrin^j^eth forthvjith to mind^ whatfoexer Chrtjl hath urou^hty a>id ive xowed a^ainjl Jin ^ it Cometh hereby to ** pafs, that Chriftian men never want a mojT cfftclnal^ tho' ** a filent teacher^ to avoid whatfoever may defervedly pro- " cure fhame. So that in things which we /liould be <* afham'd of, we are by the Crofs admonifh'd faithfully of •' our duty, at the very moment when admonition doth " moft need."* The fame author has much more to the like purpofe. But I return to the Doftor : There is nothi}2^ in this injiitntion of our Churchy can more de^ ferve the name of fiiperjhtton^ than the Independents holding up their hands in tol^n of ',oimng themfelves to ^rather^ of receiving perfons into] their congregations. For ivhyjhould it he more ido- latrous and impioftSj to admit a perfon into a Chrijiian fociety^ hy makjng a crofs with one finger ^ than hy Jir etching out jixe ? f Every body that compares thefe things together, muft needs fee how very different they are. 'Tis the way of the Independents, to admit none into their communion, without the confent of the people. And therefore, when the judg- ment of the people is demanded concerning any one who offers himfelf to them, they declare it by holding up the hand, or any fign of that nature, rather than by the lefs de- cent muttering of yea^ or no. But they place no religion in any fuch ufage, nor pretend to do any thing, but what 'tis common for aflemblies to do in giving their votes. And upon this account we never charg'd them with introducing a new facram>ent. Nor are we in this matter more favou- rable to them than the Church men. We never charg'd them with bringing in a new facrament, by appointing kneeling at the Lord's Supper, bccaufe w^e know it is an ordinary fign of reverence, and is order'd by them as fuch ; altho' at the fame time we diflike the thing itfelf, as will appear after- wards. CHAP. ♦ Eccl. Pol. Uh. V. /-^^^2:j. Ghap. VI. f/j^ D I s s E N T E R s* 451 life. So that if Dr. AT. has truly defcrib'd thccuftonis of the antients, *tis manifeft the Church of£«^/rtw^ has herein forfaken them. I fay nothing here concerning the pradice of the Jeii'Sy becaufe we difpute not about li'ttr.ejjts of the co- tenant made j and fuch witneffesare all thofe who are pre- fent, when any one is bapciz'd. Enough has been faid of what next follows. Let us therefore go on to the reft. BeJjJeSf this furetifi'ip^ which tvas begun in the oldeji and heji times y hath been coy^tinned do'-^n to us witYout jcrn^le^ and in- terruption^ except the clamours of Anahapttjis and Puritans ^ vjhich have been raised againji it of late years, * And for this purpofe he produces jujiin yiartyr^ or ii^hoever luas the author of the Anfwers to the Orthodoxy who fays : Infants are thought '-^'orthy of the benefits of BaptiftVy by reafon of their faith uho bring them to it. And thus the pafTage oi jufiin is well ren- dered, which the Do6lor had mangled at a miferable rate, and made it fad nonfenfe, in his tranfliting it, tho' eafy Greeks, into Latin. There is nothing in the words thus rightly underflood that difpleafes us. We are next refer'd to TertuHtan^ whom the Doctor had mifreprefented by ch'dngmg parxtdos mzo parentes. There is /nothing in the place that concerns us, but the mention he makes of ponfores^ which may as well be the parents as others, if his words are fairly reprefented. There was another paffage cited cut of the fame au- thor, which I believe neither cur Author, nor any that have commented upon Ttrtullian^ underfl:ood3 but which in the Latin edition I have explain'd fo, as to fliew it figni- fies nothing againft us. In the next place Cyril o? Alexandria is alledg'd as a wit- nefs againft us , and his words are thus tranflated ; The furety fays Amen for the infant. The place is not in 12. Evang. Joh, but ^ohn xi. 16. But this is not a fair cita- tion 5 for he only fays : He that brings the infant, &c. And. why may not that as well be the parent? But beiidesjwhat . is here like the Church of England's anfwers ? Did he that: brought the infant undertake for him, that he believ'd all the Articles of the Apoftles Creed, that he fhould a^c^^ God's i holy vsill and commandments ^ and '•jjalk^ in the fame all the days of his life ? This is what our Godfathers undertake 3 but Cyril only fays, that he who brought the infant, at the end of the prayers in Baptifm anfwer'd for him Anun. And wh:it is Kk z this * t^g^ 2 7 4. 45^ ^ V I N D I c A T I o N c)f Part 111. this againft us ? We diflike not, that both he who britigs the child, and the whole congregation too, lliould do the fame. The next author vc^e are refcr'd to is ^/f/?/w, who really fpeaks our fenfe well enough. *' Children^ fays ke^ are of- *' fer'd, that they may receive the fpirltual grace, not fo ** much by thofe in whofearms they are brought , though *' by them too, if they are good Chriftians , as by the whole *' Chriftian fociety." And he prefently adds,what Certainly proves parents were not in his time, as they are in ours, for- bidden to offer their own children in baptifm. *' You may *' fee, fnys he^ many are not offer'd by their own parents^ *' but by fome ftrangers, as flaves are fometimes offer'd by ** their mafters. And iometiYnes^u^hen the parents are deaJy " children are baptized, being brought by thofe, who could ** fhew fuch mercy to them. '* * And herein we do not differ from him. In the laft place, the authority of that vile impoftor,the fjam Dionyifjus^ whofe books are fluff'd with abundance of fuperftition, is urg'd againft us. But if his Words quoted are well confider'd, it appears, that he fpeaks only of the children of infidels being deliver'd to Sponfors^ and that the faithful were then truftedintirely with the care of their own children. His words are : '* They fay, and 'tis tru^, ** that infants, who are inftrufted in the holy law, willac- *' quire a holy temper of mind, being free from all error, " and wickednefs of life. When our divine inftruflors *^ confider'd this, 'twas thought fit that infants fliould be *' receiv'd after this holy manner , that the natural parents *' of the child, that was offer'd, fliould deliver him to an *' initiated or baptiz'd perfon,who ihould well inftrucl him *' in divine matters, under whofe care he is to be after- *' wardvS,as under a Godfather, or Sufceptor in Baptifm. "f Hence 'tis plain, he fpeaks of fuch natural parents as were not themfelves Chriftians ; or why fhould they otherwife, upon the account he mentions, deliver their children to ethers ? Further, it appears he was for having the intire care of the children's education committed to thefe God- fathers : to which purpofe are the Scholia of Maximusy and the Paraphrafe of Pachymcrcs, If this was required in our nation, there would foon be an end put to the pradice : for the * Kjil^. XXIIl. \ Eccl Hicr. c, VIIL Chap. VI. f /j^ D I s s E N T E R s. 453 the people in England have quite another notion of the mat- ter. But fince Archbi/liop Ljljer has from hence argued the fpurioufnefsof thofe writings which pafs under hisnanje; it will not, I fuppoi'e, be amifs to fet down his words,before I take leave o{ Dionyjitis, *' Beiides, fays he^ he fpeaks of *' Godfathers in Baptifm, of whom no footileps can be *' fhown in any antient writers, Grcek,or Lattn^ for a long " time after Dionyfms 5 altho' they plainly defcribe the ** ceremonies ufed in Baptifm. '' * So much for our Author's teftimonies 5 I now proceed to his other arguments, yind no good rcafon can he gicen^ '^'^J', even in pur daysy the faith and care of fome grave perfonsfjould not he engaged^ that the Church fho id d receive 770 damage hy any one's turning Injidel after Baptifm, f In like manner, fay I, fince parents of old ufed to offer their own children to Bap- tifm, and to come under engagements for their Chriftian education , nogoodreafoncanhegiven^\fj\\y they fliould now be hinder 'd from doing it. Our Author prefently acknow- ledges, 'tis their ^2;r£'^r bufjnefs to give their children a religiom education. Why then may they not be permitted to promife it ? If the debtor himfelf is able to pay, why ihould we refufe his bond 5 and then defire fome other perfon, ^ bankrupt perhaps, to take the debt upon him ? Our Author, as I faid, owns 'tis the great huftnefs of parents to give their children a religious education ^ but he pleads, that neverthelefs this praftice may be of good ufe, becaufe/^^t- rents are many times fn at cVd aivay hy deathy before the children are grozvn up 5 or they are too negligent in this particular y &c. And what does he infer from this ? Why, that the engage- ment of the parent is of no confequence. A fine way of reafoning indeed ! But whence will it appear, the God- fathers only oblige themfelves upon that condition ? This is only the fancy of fome private men, which is no where niention'd in the Liturgy or Canons of the Church. And if it were mentioned, 'twould fignify but little, unlefs more care w^ere ufed in admitting perfons to ftand as Godfathers. But I will not ftay to infift upon thefe things j but proceed to the arguments of our fide, which he comes next to con- fider. K k 3 But * DiflVrt. dc Script. Dionyf. Ar. fuppoHt ad fin. Hift. Dogmr.t. p. ?37 454 !^ Vindication (?/ Part IIL But 'tis a r'ldiculom and ahfurd thtngy they fay ^ to (?ut quejlions to hfcOitSy ivho can make no anfwer, * You lee here the argu- inent only c once rnsinf an ts^u^ho can make no anfwer. For when the fame queftions are propounded at Baptifm to perfons of riper years, who can anfwer for themfelves,we find no fault with them 3 for they are agreeable and proper enough. Nay,if the Godf ithers only promis'd a diligent care about the child's education, we ihould never blame them for pro- pounding queflions of that naturc,for we ufe them ourfelves. 'Tis to no purpofe therefore, that our Author fpends a whole page in talking of baptifmal interrogatories in ge- neral, as tho' any doubt were made of the ufefulnefs of them. I fliall therefore pafs over what he fays on that head, and come to that part of his anfwer, which really relates to our objection. j^s to the propounding the queJitonSy ive dont put them to the infants 5 hut demand of the Sureties in the antient form : Dofl thouy in the name of this child^ renounce the Devil ? DoB thou he- Vieve in God the Father Almighty ? &c. Wilt thou he haptiz'd in tins faith ? -j" Whether the quejlions are propounded to the infants^ or not, may be eafily difcern'd by the Liturgy ^ according to which the Pricft thus fpeaks unto the Godfathers and Godmo- thers I '' Wherefore thts infant mufi alfo faithfully for his part^ *' promije by you that are his Sureties (until he come of age ** to take it upon himfelf) that he will renounce the Devil ^' and all his works, and conftantly believe God's Holy *' Word, and obediently keep his commandments. I de- *' mand there: ore : Doft thou, in the name of this child, re- " nounce the Devil and all his w^orks, the vain pomp and *' glory of the world ? &c. A, I renounce them all. ^' M Doft thou believe in God the Father Almighty ? S'r. *' A. All this I fledfaftly believe. M Wilt thou he baptized *' in this faith ? A. So is my defire. M. Wilt thou then *' obediently keep God's holy will and commandments, ^* and walk in the fame all the days of thy life ? A, I will.'* Who now is fo blind, as not to fee, the Minifter ail along asks the infants themfelves thefe queflions ? Of whom elfe can he ask, whether he will he hapttz'd^. or who elfe can an- fwer, J will ^. For the Godfathers and Godmothers have been baptiz'd themfelves long before. 'Tis plain then the God^ '^J>^g.2l6. {p^-- Chap. VI. -t^^ D I s s E N T E R s. 455 Godfathers are not properly ask'd thefc queftIons,and that they anfwer them for no other reafon, btit becaufe the in- fants are not able to fpcak for themfelves. Which to many feenis abfurd andchildifli, and unworthy of the gra- vity of a Chriftian aflembly,and the folemnity of the ordi- nance of Baptifm. Hereto we may add the words of the Catechifm ; " Q^ Why then are infant6 baptiz'd, when, by *' reafon of their tender age, they cannot perform them <' [rej^entance and faith']'^. A, Becaufe they promife them <' both by their Sureties, &=r." And truly they fcem by this method to betray the caufe of infants to the Anabap- tifts. For, if an exprefs and aftual profcflion of repentance and faith is neceffarily to be required of every one before he is baptiz'd, Infant-baptifm can never be defended , iince a vicarious profeflion is not founded upon any text in the whole Bible. The Doftor now argues from the method ufed fometimes in civil affairs. But thofe ftate examples he brings are fo very different from the matter in hand, that tho' they may feem to illuftrate it 3 yet they can n^ver eftablifh the ufe of it, or prove it is lawful. But let us brie£y confider each example : By an old law of the Romans their ^dilis was ohlked^within Jive days after adml/fon to his office^ to taJ{e an oath toohferve the laws. Valerius Flaccus, ^ftcr his eleBion^ was hindered from Ming this. His brother -^ as his proxy ^ was fworn in hisjiead : and the Commons p^fs^ J an aH^ that it Jhould he all^ne as if he had fworn himfelf But what are we concern 'd in tlvofe quirks and fetches, by which Commonwealths have -endeavour 'd to help the defefts and imperfeftions of their laws ? We are not here inquiring, what the Sena-te or the Commons did at Rome^ but what our Saviour himfelf has determin'd in his moft perfeft law ? And indeed, that vicarious oath in the cafe of C. Valerius Flaccm^ * was then a thing new and unheard of among the Remans ^ and needed a decree of the Senate, and an ad: of the Commons on purpofe, to make it valid. Wherefore let our Adverfaries fliew where fuch a method, as they plead for, is prefcrib'd by our Lord Chrift, as the other was by the Roman Senate, andthey prefently put an end to this controverfy. K k 4. When. * Lav. lih''xx%i, caj^, 50, 45^ 'A Vindication of Part III. Whenever infant Kings are indu^urated^ fome of the nobility^ dtfuted to reprefent them^ take the ufual oaths for them. The in:iugurwition of Kings and Baptifm fo far agree,that both of them are covenants , the one between thp King and the peopl-c, the other between God and men. In the former, if the one party only requires fuch a vicarious oath of the other, they muft reft fatisfied in it. Nor will we deny the ^ame to be true with reference to the latter, whenever our Adverfarics will prove that God, with whom we enter into covenant by Baptifm, has required fuch vicarious ftipula- tions, or at leaft fignify'd they are not difpleafing to him. So do embajfadors for their principals y at the ratfying of any league or articles. There is a confiderable difference between this example, and the thing 'tis brought to confirm. For embaffadors execute the commands they have receiv'd from their prin- cipals, with their confent and authority , but this neither has, nor can have any place in the Baptifm of infants. Be- lides, in every oath, we either affert the truth of fomewhat paft or prefent 3 or we promife fomewhat for the time to come. In the one is required the fure and certain knowledge of the thing, in the other that it be in our own power. If therefore embaffadors, taking their oath in the former man- ner, teftify that their principals have folemnly confented to the ratification of the articles, no one can make any diffi- culty of it. But as to promiflbry oaths of fuch things, as *tis not in the power of thofe who take them to perform j let them confider how they are to be defended, who ven- ture to bind themfelves with them. I fhould be glad our Adverfaries would firft prove fuch kind of oaths are lawful in civil matters, before they attempt to vindicate the ftipulations of their Godfathers by them. There's one example more behind, but as little to the pijrpofe as thi^. ' The fame do guardians fpr their pupils. This is true, nor IS fuch a compafl vain. For if a guardian makes an agree- ment vyith any one in the name ofhis pupil, he at the fame time gives him a power to conftrain the pupil to perform the conditions of the agreement 5 as our Author obferves in what he adds : y^nd the pupils ^ when grown up ^ are hound by the laws tofiand to what was thus tranfaBedfor ttern. But who can For^e one baptiz'd in his infancy, after he is grown up, to be- lieve all the Articles of the Creed, to renounce the Devil ati4 9.11 his work5^, and to walk in God'5 cgmmandmentq ? Chap. VI. the Dissent brj. 457 But it fcems this is mention'd and defended by u^ufi'm. For thus our Author obferves in the Margin : When Boni- face asl(dSt, Auftin the reafon why infants were thus interro- gated 5 Auftin anfwer'd : Sicut credere refpondetur, ita etiam fidelis vocatur , non rem ipfa mente annuendo, fed ipfius rei facramentum percipiendo : i. e. The receiving of the jacra^ ?nent is enough to denominate them faithful^ without an aBn^l ionfent of the mind, * But as Boniface thought he herein propounded a moft dif- ficult queflion, fo I can hardly think he was fatisfy'd by j4i'J}ins anfwer. j^uflins meaning is, that when 'tis an- fwer'd concerning the infant, //^ heliexes in Gody a regard is had to the facrament of fiith 3 and the infant, altho' inca- pable of faith, is faid to heliexe^ or to have faithy becaufe he receives the facrament of faith. But I am very apt to think, this explication cannot pleafe our Adverfaries. For the in* fant anfwers by his Sponfors, that he believes^ before he re- ceives the facrament of faith, that is, Baptifm. But, as I faid before, we pay but little deference to the cuftoms of the fourth or fifthCentury, and efpecially fuch unintelligibly ones as this. After I had written this, I obferved, the moft learned Mr. Dailli had the fame apprehenfions of the judg- ment Aufiin gives of this matter. Having fet down his words, thus he difcourfes upon them : *^ Whether thefe ** things fatisfy'd Boniface I know not. To me, I confefs, *' they feem ftrange. How can the infant, ofFer'd to Bap- *' tifm, be truly faid therefore to have faith, becaufe he has ** the facrament of faith, /. e, Baptifm, at the time when ** he has not yet rcceiv'd Baptifm ? nay, who is for no *' other reafon ask'd the queftion, than that he may obtain ** Baptifm, which as yet he wants ? As tho'none ought " to be baptiz'd, who does not believe: An Infant is pre- *' fentecl to the Minifter to be baptiz'd 3 the Minifler, as *' tho' he thought it unlawful to baptize even an infant, *^ except he believes, demands, and which aggravates the " abfurdity, he demands of the infant himfelf, whether he ** believes? tacitly implying, he may not baptize him,un- ** \e(s he does fo. Here the Godfather, that the infant ^' may be capable of Baptifm, anfwers, as his Surety, that " he believes. When Boniface was in doubt, how the God- .^* father could trifly and certainly aflSrm this 5 u^ujiin an- " fwers, * ia^.iif. 45^ ^A Vindication oj Part III. *• fwerSjhe could, tho' the infant had not yet faith jbecaufe " when he fays he beh'eves, he only means, he has the ** facrament of faith. Is not this a brave folution of the •* difficulty ? But, I fay, the infint has not what vou call ^' the facrament of faith 5 nor if he had, would there be " any occafion to offer him to you to be baptiz'd. And *' therefore, in that very fenfe Aujlin puts upon the anfwer, ** the Godfather lies, when he fays the infant believes, " 't,e, has the facrament of faith. '** The reader may fee more there to the fame purpofe : where he fliews this very abfurd cullom was the device of the fourth Century, tranf- fer'd from the Baptifm of the adult to that of infants, thro* a perverfe imitation of antiquity. But our Author proceeds to another of our arguments : B«r they boldly engage for the children^ that they fi all l^eep God's trill and commandments^ and ivalk^in the fame all the days of their life. Now mind his anfwer : Well^ no more is meant hy this^ than that the Sureties ivill ufe their bejl endeavours^ that the Chil- dren may be tnfiruBedin true Chrifiian doBriney calling upon them (often to ferve and fear God^ reproving them for any thing that they do amifs^ and labouring to reclaim them, | Truly, if the words of the Liturgy would bear that fenfe, we /hould not quarrel about thofe Ilipulations 5 for we al- ways require fome of this nature. And yet it would be very unadvifed to exprefs thofe anfwers, the fenfe of which ought to be as plain as poflible, in words that were at leaft doubtful and intricate, and might perplex the confciences, not of the common people only, but of thofe Iikewife,who were perfons of more underftanding. But the words will not admit fuch a meaning, as is plain by what I have faid. Nor do the words of the Office, cited by our Author, prove it : for the beginning of that exhortation confirms our fenfe : *' Forafmuch, fays the Minifter, as this child hath ^' promised by you, his Sureties, to renounce the Devil, S'r. *^ ye muft remember, that 'tis your parts and duties to fee ** that this infant be taught, &c. '* But our Author could not any longer refrain from trium- phing over his Adverlaries, as totally routed 5 and tells us what a nobleoccafion this affords of extolling their Church- Much of the beauty and triumph of ^his expreffion is loft in theTranllation, which is comparatively flat. Jnd herein our DcCult Lat. Rdig. ;^. 91 Chap. IV. ]fk DissEK TERS. 459 ^ur Church is hi<^hly to he commanded for her ivtje fprovijiofty and Jtn^ular care of little children : hut envy itfelf can hardly jinJi uhat tc hlamc her for in all this. Wc leave the thing itfelf to the judgment of others. But this boafling, vapouring temper of our Adverfaries, has brought a great difgrace and reproach upon the nation. Every one knows, the Englijh are, almolt every where abroad, reckon'd proud and haughty. Nor could I, as often as I have thought of it^ ever difcover a more probable reafon of our paffing under fo bad a character, than the temper of our Adverfaries, in fa fondly doating upon, and extremely admiring all the ma- ny impertinences of their conftitution. Nay, our country- men, to the great prejudice of piety and Chriftian charity^ are from their very cradles accuftom'd to defpife and vilify all thofe Churches, which approve not of thefe things. But leaving this wide field of glory, to thofe who are dif- pos'd for a vain triumph, I haften to what's behind. CHAP. VII. 0/ Conjirfjiation. SINCE we apprehend fome things are not amifs, w^hich our Author has faid upon this head, and yet utterly dif- fent from him in many others 5 that we may not fight in the dark, I fhall firft lay down our opinion in a few pro- pofitions briefly, which will give light to what I IhaU have to fay afterward, 1. We do not deny, that 'tis very ufeful, that fuch as were baptiz'd in their infancy, fhould, after they are grown up, publicly profefs their faith, and renew the baptifmal covenant by their own flipulation before the Church . 'Tis well known, we have always own'd this 5 and therefore, whatever our Author has alledg'd from Buxtorf^ concerning any practice of this nature among the Jeu^s^ I fhall pafs over, as foreign to our controverfy. 2. If impofition of hands be confider'd only as a gefture in prayer, or as an antient manner of bleffing, which im- ports the defignation of the perfon who is blefs'd ^ we are not much concerned about it. But the thing we find fault with is, that our Adverfaries ufe it as a fign of God'sfavour» For thus the Bifhop prays, according to the Office of Con- firmation ; " We make our humble fupplications to thee ^^ ♦' for 4(^6 A Vindication of Part III. ** for thefe thy fervanrs, upon whom (after the example of •' thy holy Apoftles) we nave now laid our hands, to cer^ ** tify them {}^ythis Ji^n) of thy favour and gracious goodnefs to- •* wards them." We think this ceremony, thus ufed, comes too near to the nature of a facrament ^ and the rather, becaufe we find fonie affirm, 'tis retained in the Church, not Indeed as a facrament generally neceffary to falvation, but as a facramentaL * 3. We think the conditions of Confirmation are too loofe. For he that is confirmed, may prefently come to the Communion , and no other qualifications are required, than what a child of five years old may have 5 namely, to be able *' to fay the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten *' Commandments ; and anfwer to fuch other queftions, •* as in the fhort Catechifm are contained." 4. We own, hands ufed to belaidupon fuch as were bap- tized from TertuUUns time 5 fo that we need not trouble our felves much about the teftimonies of later authors. 5. The antient impofition of hands was very different from that which is now in ufe in the Church of England, That always was join'd with Baptifm, this moftly follows it at the diftance of many years. 6. We diflike the antient ufe of this ceremony. For the Holy Spirit was thought to be given by this external vifible fign, and a greater virtue was attributed to it, than to Bap- tifm itfelf. 'Y\\\xsTertuUian^ the moft antient author that mentions this rite : " Not that we obtain the Holy Spirit •^ in the baptifmal water 5 but being cleans'd in water by " the Angel, we are prepared for the Holy Spirit.- — Then ** comes the laying onof hands, to invite the Holy Spirit by ** that benedidion. Then that moft Holy Spirit freely ** comes down upon our bodies thus cleans'd and ble{red."t In like manner does Cyprian difcourfe : *^ If a man could be •* baptiz'd out of the Church, according to the faith of He- ♦' retics, and yet obtain remiflion of fins ^ he could, ac- " cording to the fame faith, obtain alfo the Holy Spirit ^ ** and there would then be no need that hands fhould be •* laid on him, that he might receive the Holy Spirit, when ** he came over to the Church." II But our Author affirms, their prafllce is warranted by the example of the Apoftles. JVe kave^ fays he, the autho- rity * SeeYity\yn Cypr. Angl. j). to. t Cc Sap t. c 6, 8. tl Epii^. 73. ^i Jubaj; j). 201. [ Chap. VII. the D i s s i n t b r s.' 461 Tity of the J^ojihs on ourJiJe. tor when it was reported to thent^ that the Samaritans hacl receixdChr'tJi'jan Baptijiny two of their orMr 'li-'ere deputed to gOy and pray over then?^ and lay thtlr hands on thon^ that they mi^ht receive the Holy GhoJK^ To this I an- fwer : The Apottleshad indeed received thatpowerof giving the Holy Ghoft, by laying on their hands, which our Ad- verfaries have not yet prov'd to be beftow'd upon their Bifhops. If the Bifhops claim the power of the Apoftles^ why dont they give a proof of it, by healing the fick with the laying on of their hands ? Certainly they muft either give us fome fuch evidence, to convince us of their power 5 or they muft at leaft acknowledge, the Papifts have with equal reafon taken up Extreme Un6lion and Confirmation, in imitation of the Apoftles. But tho' we look upon thofe gifts of the Holy Ghoft, which they gave, to be extraordi- nary ; yet we dont fo much urge that, as we do this : That the Apoftles themfelves were endow'd with an extraordi- nary power in giving thefe gifts, by the rite of laying on hands. So that our Author does not really meddle with our principal objection, but propounds another : If it he faidy that thefe were extraordinary gifts of the Spirit y common in thofe times j let them tell us^ how they will make it prohahle^ that the power of working miracles was confer^d on almofi a whole nation ? For St, Paul, hy a [mart quefliony denies it^ as a very ahfttrdy incongruous thing : Do all fpeak with Tongues ?f Can we thinks it becoming the whole body of the Jpojlles^ that they fjould fend two of their principal men ^ to hejlow promifcuoufly upon a whole nation^good andhad^ the power of working miracles $ which yet is no part of Chriftian religion^ nor any ways conduces to good livings the main deftgn ofourprofcffion ? II But that thefe were extraordinary gifts, it is prov'd by two arguments. The one is taken from another Text, concerning the laying on of hands, which is very like to that above mentioned : And when Paul had laid hishands upon them^ the Holy Ghoft came upon themy and they f pake with tongues^ and prophefted.j^. Since then thefe were extraordinary effefts of the Spirit, 'tis plain the gift itfelf was extraordinary. This place our Author pre- fently cites, but prudently forbears to mention thefe two extraordinary effefts, which quite overthrow the very thing he brings it for. Thus he goes on to argue, thefe were not extraordinary gifts : It can hardly hefuppos^d, that mojl of them would ^ag. 2!io. t iCor. xii -O- \i pag 231. 4^ AGs xix. 6. 452 A Vindication of PartllL ivoulJ employ this gift fo much for the eftahlifhlng of religion^ as to make ojlentation of ivhat they could do. Yet this is certain^ that ^^hem St, Paul had laid his hands on twelve men newly hap- tiTL^d^ they were jilPd with the Holy Ghoji. The other argu- ment I urge is this : Unlefs thefe had been extraordinary gifts, Simon Magt4^s would never have offer'd them money, to move them to give him this power ^ that on whomfoever he laid his hands^ he might receive the Holy Ghoji, * The ordinary gifts of the Spirit, which cannot be perceived as foon as they are beftow'd, would not have raifed the admiration of that wicked man 5 much lefs would he have thought it worth his while to part with his money, topurchafe an ability to give them to others. But the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit could not but be confpicuous to every one prefent 5 fo that 'tis no wonder, that fuchan illuftrious difplay of the Apoftle's power /liould raife the admiration of the vile wretch, and an earneft delire to have the like himfelf. Nay, that the Apoflles did not lay on hands, as our Ad- verfaries pretend, to give the Spirit to enable by his grace chear- fully and readily to perform all good duties ^f but to beftow his extraordinary operations , leems plain to me from hence : That St. Peter did not lay hands on Cornelius and his Com- pany, who receiv'd the Holy Ghcft before they werebap- tiz'd 5 II which yet he would without doubt have done, if it had been fo very neceflfary and ufeful for this purpofe. Fur- ther, 'tis not yet clear to me, that the Apoftles laid hands on all the Samaritans without any difference. The Apoftles beftow'd thofe gifts for the advantage of the Church, and did not intruft them all with every perfon, on whom they laid hands 5 + but gave to fome one kuidof gift,and to fome another, according as they defign'd them to perform this or t'other office 3 and they herein difcern'd and approv'd men by the Spirit. But be that as it will, our Bifhops, as I faid, have not yet prov'd, that they can impart the Holy Spirit by the laying on of their hands. And let me here take no- tice by the way, that our Bifhops feem to me to imitate not only the Apoftles in their Confirmation, but our Saviour himfelf * in their Ordination, with too j^reat a boldnefs. For when they ordain either Priefts or Bifhops, they aflume his words, and fay : *' Receive the Holy Ghoji j for the office " and *Aasvni.i8, 19. ^Ti^l^. a 87. I! FjW. Aa X. 44, ^c. ^nd. I Cor.xii. • John XX. 22. . ' Chap. VII. the Dissenters.' 453 ** and work of a Prieft [or Bifhop] in the Church of God, ** now committed to thee by the impofition of our •* hands, S^r. " But the Doflor goes on : u^nd the fame ^fojile j^eakj ofBaptiJtn^ aiid layim on of hands 'jointly^ as initiating rites^ hy iibich all candidate i of Chrtjiianity *u;ere admitted to the profejjion ofit."^ Since the Apottles ufed impofition of hands for various purpofes, one cannot eafily be certain of the meaning of that place. It may be under- flood as relating to ordination, the healing the fick, or the power granted them of working miracles. Nor is it any prejudice to this interpretation, that the Apoftle calls it a foundation. The Apoftles and Prophets are fo cali'd : ^nd are built upon the foundation of the ^j'ojrles and Prophets, f Nay, the foundation of the Church is laid in the inftitution of the facred Miniflry, and its perpetual edification refts upon it. II And if the Apoftle be thought to have refpeil to the extraordinary gifts of the fpirit, they might well be cali'd ihc foundation^ as they are fome of the chief and moft certain evidences of the Chriftian religion. But 'tis not good to be pofitive about fuch a doubtful paflage. Our Author next aflSrms,that Confirmation has notthefeal t)f Jpofiolic authority alone ^ hut is warranted hy the prafJice of all following ages, ^ We grant it was ufed from TertuUian^s time, as the Dodor prefently takes notice. For after he has men- tioned fome antient writers as witneffes of what he fays, he adds : So that they^ who are no hearty friends to ity do however grant it to be as old as TertuUian, and that it accompanied the Baptifm ofthofe times ^ tho^ they will not allow it to he a thing in- tirely difiinB from it. * We make no doubt it began about the time oi TertuUian^ and v/as at firft annex'd to Baptifm, Whether our Adverfaries, who think otherwife, are in the right or no, we fliall fee by and by. But fince we own this rite to be as old as TertuUian^ we need not confider the Doftor's other teftimonies, which are all later than his time, I only takenotice,for the fakeof the reader, that he miflakes in placing the fecond Council of Aries in the year 390. For the 28th Canon of that Council cites the 2d Canon of the Council caird Valenfe^ which fome think means Faifon^ others Bazas. Now this Council was held in Pope Leo the Firft 's time, about the year 440. But ^ Kcbr vi. 2. t Eph "' 20. |j Ibid, iv. 1 1. &c. i^P^g -32 * ^^i' ^*-5' 464 ^ Vindication of Partll ButI return to Tertu! Han ^ whofe meaning is mifunderftoc by our Author. I /hall tranflate the words literally, accor( ing to our Author's citation : *' The fle/h is wafli'd, tl ** flefh is anointed, the flefh is figned : the jlejh isjludedi *' laying on the handy that it maybe inli^htend both by the foul a) ** by theSpirit. The flefh is fed with the body and blood ^ ** Chrift."* I have follow 'd theDoaor here exadly, th^ 'tis plain by Tertullian^s own words, part of the middle pa fage fhould have run thus : that the foul may be inl'ighten d I theSjfirlt, Upon the place the Doftor makes this remark . I fpeakj diJlinBiy of three Chri/iian rites ^ Baptifm^ Confirmation y ai the Lord's Supf^er^ But he is miftaken in thinking Confirm; tion is to beconfider'd, not as a rite that adher'dtoBaptifn but which ufed to be performed feparately from it: of whic he afterwards fpeaks more at large. But I will prove tl contrary from Tenidlian himfelf. For he, in his Treatife ( Baptifm, gives us this account of the virtue and efficacy ( Baptifm in general : " The guilt being taken away, tl: *• puniihment is remov'd alfo. Thus man is brought bac *' to God, to his likenefs, who was at firft made after h •' image. The image belongs to his fhape [^effigies {ctms\ •* be thus ufed here, and in his Treatife, D^v^w;m^,r. 9.] tl: *' likenefs to his eternal duration. For he receives the •' ihatSpirit of God,whichhe hadat firft by God's breatl ** ing it into him 3 but afterwards loft by his fin. 'f Henc 'tis certain, TertuUian thought the Holy Spirit was alwa] given in Baptifm 5 and yet he moft exprefly denies he w: beftow'd before the laying on of hands. Whence 'tis ev dent, the laying on of hands was always join'd withBaptifn JSfay, tho' he had difcours'd in the beginningof that Treatii concerning the great virtue of water 5 yet here he cautior his readers, not to think that the Spirit was given in the w: ter. *' Not,/^jy5 hey that we obtain the Holy Spirit in th *' water 5 but being cleans'd in the water by the Angel, w *' are prepared for the Holy Spirit. There was fomewh: *' like this before: For thus 5o^« was firft the forerunner ( *' our Lord, and prepared his way : and thus the Angel th: *' prefides at Baptifm, makes way for the coming of th *' Holy Spirit, by that cleanfing from our fins, which 01 *' faith obtains, being plighted to the Father, Son, an *' Holy Ghoft. Then being gone out of the water, w * /'i^. ^. 272 edit. Lat. t c. 5. Chap. VII. ?/j^ DissBNTiRf;. 4(55 *' are anointed with the blcfTcd unition, according to the *' cuitom under the law, when they ufcd to ,bc anointed to *' the PnelUiood with an horn of oil." * I ^efiae thi,s \r.:\y be taken notice of for two reafons. Firft, becaufe the Dodior thinks this rite of anointing belong'd properly to Confir!i:a- tion : for thus he preiently brings lj^^,rheoph:!u; ~o£ ytnt'wch^ as ra/;/«i^ notice of the C\rrif-*n ufed in Cotpnnatioa. Bijit this is very falfe : for the unfti^n andConiirmat'on, mention'd hy TertuIlLwy differed both in their order and, their end, Unftion preceded, by which all Chriftians were -anointed to thePritilhood : impofition of hands follow'd after, for the giving the Holy Choft, as we fliall fee prefently.. There is therefore no ftrength in the Doclor's argument^ when he would prove Confirmation from the anointings Secondly, if this anointing belong'd to Confirmation, yet it would from thispafifage appear to have been perform'd im- mediately after Baptilm. T/;^^, fays he, hein^^one o^t.of the. "ji'dtery we are anointed. Nay, whoever reads the w^ords of TertulUan^ according as they are.fet down by our Author^ and obferves the pointing of the fentence, the diflindiou which the Italic character makes of the parts of it, and the remark which he has fubjoin'd, can't but fee that the anoint- ing of the flefh is plainly feparated fi'om impoiltion of hands 5 and that the former is comprehended in Baptifm, and the latter is, as a diliinfl: ceremony, feparated from it. i fhould therefore be glad to underfland, how that place of TertuUian can poffibly agree v/ith the words of Theophilus^ according to the account our Author gives of them. But I proceed to that paflfage of Ten ui Han which he cites. And that his meaning may be the better uhderflood, I fhall fet down his v^ords more at large : '* After that, hands are laid *' on, to invite the Holy Spirit by that benediction. Shall ** the artof man be able to bring a fprit into the water [by fiirit he means air^ for he fpeaks of thofe mufical inftru- ments, which werecaU'di^Jrc^w/iir^, wherein the pipes were fiU'd with water, and the air,forc'd into the bottom ofthem, by the agitation it caus'd, made the mufic] '' and by the; *' motions of the hand animate the pipes they have join'd *' together, to givt fuch a noble found 5 and fliall it not be " in God's power to make the mofl noble fpiritual mufic ^' in his inftrtiment^ by the means of fuch holy hands ? L i ^' Then k * 0^1 ii 4^5 A Vindication o] PartllL " Then that Holy Spirit comes freely down from the Fa- ** ther upon our bodies rhus wafh'd and blefs'd, and refts *' u^on the ivaters ofbaptifrn^ as tho' he had found his anticnt " feat. He defcended in the fliapc of a dove upon our ** Lord, that the nature of the Holy Spirit might be figni- ** fied by an innocent and harmlefs creature, and which has *' no gall in its body : and therefore, he ye^ fays he, inm- *' cent .a doves. This alfo was myftically fhadow'd forth ^^ before. For, as after the waters of the flood, by which the ** antient iniquity was purg'd away, that is, as I may fay, " after the Baptifm of the world, the meflenger which ** brou^^ht the news to the earth of God's anger being ** pacified, was a dove, let out of the ark, and returning ** with an olive branch (which among the Gf«r/7f5 alfo be- *' tokens peace) fo by the like ordering of the fpiritual ** blefling, this dove the Holy Spirit ^ being fent from heaven, *' where the Church is, that was fignified by the a^rk^ flies to *' the earth, i, e, our flejh^ g^^^^^J^ out of the it' ^r^r after our *' old fins are wafh'd away, and brings the peace of God *' with him."* From this place, wherein Ttrtullian ex- prefly treats of this matter, we are to explain his meaning in the other paffage, where he only m.entions it by the by. Nor does he there in the leafl: hint, that impofition of hands wviS ever fever'd from Baptifm. And now fince I am fallen upon this fubjefl:, I will firft make an end of it, before I confider what our Author fays of the antiquity of this rite. Let us therefore hear what he holds concerning it. The primitive Church made Confirmation and Baj^rifm two dif- tinB things ^ fo ^'f. Cyprian ajjures //•% "d^ho calls them tivo Sacra- ments in exffrefs iiords. Cyt?rians words alledg'd in the mar- gin are : '* It fignifies little for them to receive impofition ** of hands, unlefs they have the Baptifm of the Church. *' For then only can they be wholly fiinftified, and be the *' fons of God, if they are regenerated by both facra- " menrs.'*t No one doubts the baptifmal wafhing, and the laying on of hands were two different rites. But the only queflion here is : Whether the latter did not antiently always accompany the former, except perhaps when fick perfons were biiptiz'd, or when Deacons adminiftred the or- dinance ? Now when infants arc baptiz'd in the Church of En^landj Confirmation is always defer'd, which we think is C^p.9. t ^'pift. Chap. VII. the D i s s i n t e R si 467 is quite contrary to the cuflom of the antlents. Nor does Cyprians teftimony confirm our Author's opinion. For an argument from the word Sacrament is of no weight. For thus Cyprian fpeaks of the Sacrament of the Lord's Prayer : and the Bifhop of Ox/or^ well obfervcs upon the place, that no ziorj is of a more loofe Jjgnijication in ecclefiafiical writers than this word Sacrament. * And therefore we need not trouble our felves much about that. But our Author goes on : That ivhich made fome thlnh^y that Confirmation iins 'much the fame thing with Baftf^n^ wa^ this ^ that adtiltf?erfonSy who were commonly hnptiz'd in thofe daySy he^ ing at years of dfcretion^ and able to give an account of their filthy were immediately confirmed as foon oi they were carried Qut of the water. | You fee now how exaftly our Churchmen order all their matters according to the rule of antiquity. Such as were of age when they were baptiz'd, had hands, you muft believe, laid upon them immediately , but when infants were baptiz'd, that rite was defer 'd till they were grown up, and were able to give an account of their faith. So Dr. N. would perfuade us. But by what authority or ex- ample will he make this appear probable ? Truly the con- trary is evident from Cyprian^ who informs us, that all bap- tized infants v/ere then admitted to the Lord's Supper ; which cuftom continu'd a long time in theWeftern Church, as it does in the Gr^^^ Church to this day. II But there is a profound filence in all ecclefiaftical writers concerning per- sons being confirmed, after they had receiv'd the Lord's Supper. But I will tranfcribea notable pafTage oi Cyprian^ whence 'tis certain all baptiz'd perfons were antiently thought fit for Confirmation. He is difputing againll Pope Stephen y who was for having thofe who came off from the Heretics, receiv'd into the Church by impofition of hands, without another Baptifm 5 and thus he writes : " Or if '* they attribute the eflfed: of the Baptifm to the majefty ** of the Name, that whoever are any where, or any how •* baptiz'd in the nam,e of Jf fus Chrift, muft be reckon'd ** renew'd and fanCtify'd 5 why fhould not hands as well *' be impos'd among them in the fame name, that men may ** receive the Holy Ghoft ? why fhould not the fame ma- L 1 2 j<^fty * Dc Orat. Dom. p. i^2. ^ p.^g. 234. |1 De Lajs. /•. 132. 7'7.>?. ?ii:gu^. He peCiTat. meritis6c remiu. c, i-v ^' ianocer^t. EiUl, ad Concii Miic^u. if,t:f '4^8 A Vindication of PartllL *' jcfty oftlre fame name, which they plead' i3 able to *' f:mdifv their Biptifm, be more able to ratify their impo- *' firion of hands ? For if a man being born out of the *' Church may become the temple of God ^ why may not *' the Holy Spirit be pcur'd out upon a temple? For- he *' that^ havnij^ f^'nt off his fins in Ba^tifm^ isfanHijiedy atiA fl^irittc- ** ally fortn^d into a neiv man^ is mcidejit to receive ti.e Holy Ghojh *^ Since the Apottic fays : yfs many of you as are hat^tiTidint^ ** Chrijl^ hai^e ['ut on Chriji: he that can put on Chrift, being " baptiz'd among the Heretics, can much more receive " the Holy Ghoit, whom Chrift fent. But thus he that is •" fent^ ivouldbe greater than he whojent him ^ Jo that a man haf- *' Mdout of the Church uould begin to put on Chriji^ hut not be " able to receive the Holy Spirit • as tto' ChriJl could be put on *' rAthout the Spirit^ or the Spirit be fepar at ed from Chrift. . And .*' fince the fecond birth is fpiritual, by which we are born *' in Chrift by the laver of regeneration , 'tis fimple for •' them to fay, that a man may be fpiritually born among ,*' the Heretics, whom they deny to have the Spirit. For *' ivater alone can t wafo away fns^ and flmRify a 7nany unlefs *' they have alfo the Spirit. Wherefore they muft of neceftity " grant, either that the Spirit is there, where they fay ** there is Baptifm ; or that Baptifm is not there, wliere ,*' they fiy there is not the Spirit 3 hecaufe Baptifm cannot be " without the Spirit.''' * Hence he calls impofition of hands the Lord's feal, and fays, the baptiz'd were compleated there- with.\ So that impoiition of hands always accompany'd Baptifc, whenever it was adminiftred by thofe who had the power of bleffmg in this manner ; at leaft it did fo al- ways, except when fick perfons were baptiz'd in their beds 5 in which cafe the laying on of hands was defer 'd in the Church of Rome. I faid in the Church of Rome^ becaufe that appears from Pope Corw^/i«5'sI>etter, who writes thus: " But *' neither did Novatlan, when he recover 'd from his di- *^ ftempcr, partake of thofe other things, which a man *' ought according to the law of the Church, nor was he ** feal'd by the Biftiop. And fince he receiv'd not this, *' how could he receive the Holy Ghoft ? " II But perhaps there may be reafon to doubt, whether this was the cut torn in other Churches* I am apt to fufpeft it was not in ^ * Epift. ad Pomp. 74 i*- 21 i . t Epa'>. ad Jubajaa. || A^ud Eufl'b. H. £. iJlf. vi. c. 4i. CJiap. VII. the Dissent IRS. 459 in the Church of Carthaie^ from what Cyprian f .ys con- cerning pcrlons fo baptizM : '' Have they [thcfe Chnics} *' obtain'd the Lord s favour, but only in aklTcr nieafure ** of the divine gift, and of the Holy Spirit ; fo that they *' may be reckoned Chriilians, but vet may not be equaled *' to the red ? Nay, but the Holy Sj)irit is not given by '' meafure, but is wholly pour'd out upon him that be- *' lieves."* Wherefore fince Cyprian does elfewhere plain- ly enough hint, that the Holy Spirit was given by inipoli- tion of hands, as I have fliewn already , we muft con- clude, either that at Carthage hands us'd to be laid imme- diarely upon fuch perfons when they were baptiz d 5 or elfe, u\:\t Cyprian s words njuil be explained by that rule which he delivers in the fame Epiftle : " That in the ia- *' craments of our falvation, when ne:eility urges, and God ^* grants his difpenfation, divine abridgments convey the *' whole benefit to believers.'* f I would not here poii- tively determine any thing, but leave it to the judgment of the learned. However that be, it can never be prov'd^ that in the antient Church, fuch as were baptiz'd in their infancy, had hands laid on them after they were grown up. Nay, they that thought the baptifm of Heretics in- valid, and pleaded, that fuch as had been baptized among them, fhould be admitted into the Church by a new and catholic Baptifm 5 yet would not have fuch perfons bap- tiz'd, if they had been a good w^hile in the communion of the Catholic Church. This is exprefly afferced by DioKyfiiis oi yllexandriay an earned: defender of that opinion. •! And moft certainly then, they would not lay on hands upon thofe, who from their infancy had ufcd to receive the Holy Communion. But I jliall now 00 back to what our Author favs of the antiquity of this rite : But they are quite mtjiah^n ur.o thinks TertuUian ivas the jirjt that mention d it. For before him Ire- TtXns Jpeal;s of ity as iihat the Valentinians had corrupted. "^ And in his Margin he refers to what is fet down m the Latin edition : That amon^ the myjieries of the Valentinians, -u/.vV/j they recei'j^d from the Orthodox^ Iren*eus mentions ^ Re- demption to perfefJion 3 I am conjirm^dy I am redeemed. Pre- jtmly he adds : ^fcer that they anoint ^ &c, I /liall fet down L I 3 the E^ifl:. adXtagnuQJ, /. 1S7, t ^- ^36, (1 Af ud Eufsb.K. E. liu. vii. 470 A ViKDiCATioN of Part HL the place prefently. But I can't but wonder at our Author, that he fliould re^reknt Iren^us as affirming what he does not fo much as mention. And if any wou'd fee how fairly he deals with us, I would earneftly defire them to read that whole Chapter in Irenceus. * He there relates the abo- minable worfliip of the Heretics, wherein they differed very much from one another. But he no where fays they borrowed thofe things from the Orthodox. He fpeaks or their ceremonies, as brought in by Satan (and I hope he was not among the Orthodox) to the denying of the Baptifm of regeneration towards God. Hence they ipveiev' At\it\r redemption tQperfeUion^mem\on'Ahyi\\e'Do&.or^ to Baptifm 5 and faid, according to their nonfenfical divi- nity, wherein they diflinguifh'd between Jefus and Chrift : f' That the Baptifm of the appearing Jefus was for the *' remiffion of fins 5 but the rf^fw^f;o>2 of that Chrift, who " came down in him, was for perfeHwn.'^ But let us fee what the myfteries v/ere, which the Valentinlans had bor- rowed from the Orthodox. " Some of them, fays he^ pre- *' pare a bride chamber, and fo initiate perfons in their ** myfleries, ufing fome profane words over thofe that are *' initiated, and this they call fpiritual marriage.-— Others ^' pronounce certsiin Hebrew words, which might amaze and f affirjght thofe who are initiated, as : Bafima Chamoji^ «* Baaionora^ &c. And thefe things are faid by thofe who *' are the initiators. But he that is initiated anfwers t V I am coYijirm'd^ I am redeem'* d : and I redeem my foul from ?' this ^ony and every thing in it in the name of JJ^P^ *' who redeem'd his foul for the redemption that is in the f' living Chrift. Such as are prefentanfwer : Peace be to f* all upon whom this name refts." And is not this fine ftufFj for the Falentlnlans to borrow from the Orthodox ? But Irendens goes on, and adds what our Author has cited* f After this they anoint the perfon whom they initiate, f* with the juice of balm. And they fay, this ointmentJ f' is a fign of that fweet favour that is upon the univerfe. Y Some of them think it needlefs to bring a perfon to th^i *^ water 5 but mixing water and oil together, with fuchl *^ kmd of words as I mention'd before, throw it upon th^ *' head of him that is initiated : and this they would hav^ ^^ to be redemption," Panvins the Jefuit, in his Notes up- JL'.h^i. c. 13- I Chap.VIL r/j^ Dissenters. 471 on this laft paflage, cited by Epiphaniusj fays they herein aped the Catholic Church : and Dr. Hammond agrees with him. * But no body before Dr.N. ever faid, Ireticeus fpeaks of this among the ^nyjieries uh'tch the Valentinians lorrcic'd front the Orthodox. And indeed a Proteftant Divine fliould be afixam'd to to explain Iren^usy however it may be born in a Papift, For it may indeed favour the Papirt>^to the *' ivatery and Philip baptizd him. Andivhen they departed from M the ivater^ the Spirit came upon the Eimuch.'' | And Dr. Mills tells us, this reading is found in feveral very antient copies* Hitherto 1 have confider'd, and, I hope, fufficiently re- futed, what our Author has alledg'd, both for the antiquity and ground of this rite of Confirmation, as 'tisufed in the Church of England. He now propofes fomewhat we very much diflike in it : But ii-e^ as ^ell as the Papijis^ exalt Con- firmation to the dignity of aSacrarnent, To this he anfwers: Ho-iv do the ohjeclors know this ? Can they fear ch our hearts^ and fee our thoughts ? We neither can do it, nor do we pretend to it 5 but we gather this from the very words of the Li- turgy, as was faid in the beginning of this Chapter. Our * Fa^. ?35. \ Dia). adv. Lucif. 'if]6 A Vindication of Part IIL Our Author here reckons up the advantages of Confir- mation 3 but I forbear to fiy any thing concerning them, becaufe our opinion may be ealily enough perceiv d, by what has been already faid* We dont much find fault with the rite itfelf; nay we think it might be made ufeful. However, I cannot but wonder, our Adverfirics, who attribute io great ufefulncis to it, have hirherta taken no more care of their own people, and have not made it their bufinefs fo to order matters, that all pcr- lons of their Communion may be in a capacity of receiving this fo great benefit. How many baptized pcrfons of their Church are there here in England^ who never have any opportunity of being confirm 'd by the Bifliop ? Nay how many are there in both the Iridic s^ who muft abfolutely defpair of it ? If the advantages of Confirmation are fo very great, and none but Bifliops have the power, why dont they create more Bi/hops to adminifter it ? "Why do they commit to the fingle Bi/hop oi London fo vaft a Diocefs, which 'tis impoffible for him to ferve, in this moft profitable rite ? Certainly if our Adverfiries believe themfelves, when they are extolling Confirmation 3 they feem to have a much greater regard to the honour of their Bifliops, than to the edification of the Church. Our Author in the conclufion of thus Chapter cites Mr. Cahcin^ who fays : Such an mbofition of hands^ only by 'way of henediBtony I like ^irell^ and iiould gladly fee It rejior^d to its primithe [rather, its pirre^ tfc.'^ And he might have cited feveral Diffenters, wlio have in their writings faid as much for it as Mr. Cahcin. But any one who reads all that Mr.Ca/^vVz fays about it, will find that he fhrewd- ly expofes our Author's opinion, and the arguments witl) which he defends it in this Chapter. CHAP. VIII. Of the Surplice^ and other Ecdefmjlkal Habits. I Will here premifc, as I ufe to do, a few things, that the reader may be acquainted with our opinion, and eafily fee what is the thmg here in controverfy. I. We * }^ag.^i. Chap.VIIL the Dissenters. 477 r. \Vc dont iay, ihe H:ibits we difpute about are in thenifelvcs unlawful. The form, the color, or the matter of mens Garments, is of itfelf, neither good, nor bad. And if thcie Linncn Garments were from their common ufe reckon'd decent, no body would deny them to be alfo decent in divine fervice. Wherefore, 2. Since thefe Linnen Garments are neither in their own nature, nor by any ufe received among us, more decent th.in others ; and yet our Adverfaries pretend they are injoin'd by virtue of the Apoftles words, who commands all thhigs to be cone dtcemly and in order , * we think they have no reafon to alledge the Apoftles authority in behalf of their appointment. In St. Paul's account, thofe things only are indecent, which ar^ contrary to the law of na- ture, or Scripture, or to the common ufe of the country, where we live 3 as is manifeft to thofe who compare the xiv and xi Chapters of the i Corinth, together. If diere- fore thefe be avoided, all things are done decently. 3. We fee a kind of fanclity and holinefs attributed to thefe Garments. Thus Dr. N. calls Minifter's ordinary habit profane 5 and thinks it not fit they fhould come in it to offer up public Prayers, or to adminifter the Sacra- ment. But to us it feems fuperftitious, for men to place an holinefs in a thing, in which God has placed none 3 and therefore we are of opinion, that the Garments which are common toMiniflers with other men, and which are decent in their ordinary ufe, are alfo fit enough for Minifters in the execution of their facred office 3 nor do we make any diftinflion here, as tho' one Garment was hoher than another. 4. Since thefe Garments are reckon'd among the cere- monies of the Church o£ Etj'^land^ what ihe declares of them in general, fhe muft be underftood to think of thefe Garments in particular. Now thus flie expreiles her opinion in the Preface to the Liturgy : '' Other *' [ceremonies] there be, which altho' they have been ** devifed by man , yet 'tis thought good to referve them ** ftill, as well for a decent order in the Church, (for " the which they were firft devifed) as becaufe they *' pertain to edification, whereunto all things done in the " Church (as the Apoftle teacheth) ought to be refer 'd.'* And I Lir. xiv. 40. 47^ A Vindication of Partlll. And afterwards fpeaking of the Chriftian religion, they fay : 'Tis '* content only with thofe ceremonies, which do ** ferve to a decent order and godly difcipline, and fuch •' as are apt to ftir up the dull mind of man to the ** remembrance of his duty to God, by fome notable and " fpecial fignification, whereby he might be edify 'd." Now what could the Pharifce fay more, of their ceremony of wafhing hands before meat ? Why ought not we then to reje£l thefe ceremonies of the Church of En^Undy by the lame righr, that the Difciplcs of Chrift rejeded thofe of the Pharifees ? Will not our Saviour's words as well ferve to defend us as them ? 5. By the confeflion of our Adverfaries, thefe Garments have been defil'd with the moft abominable fuperftition by the Papifts. What reafon then can there be, why a Reformed Church ihould afFeft a likenefs to the Whore of Ko^^ ? 6. The ufe of thefe Garments in the Church is not very antient 5 nor did it begin before the Church was in a very corrupt flate. 7. Thefe Garments have been all along an offence to very worthy men, ever fince the Reformation 5 not only to our predeceflfors, who were call'd Puritans, but to many of the moft confiderable Bifhops of the Church of EngUndy as I have /hewn in the Firft Part of this Vindica- tion. 'Tis certain, that upon the account of thefe Habits, and fome other ceremonies, the Church has been depriv'd of the labours of very excellent Miniiters, and that the confcicnces of others have been grievoufly wounded. Now put the cafe we are decei v'd in our opinion of thefe things 3 yet it cannot be deny'd, we are deceiv'd in the company of very wife and good men. And iince the things them- felves are ufelefs, if they are lawful, they who join in them, and without any neceflity give an occafion of offence to their Brethren, and for fuch a trifling matter deprive them of their Miniitry, as tho' they were unfit for the facred office, nay and rend the myftical body of Chrift for 3 thing of nought, muft defervedly be reckon'd guilty of a very grievous fin. Let us now come to our Author : who in the firft place defends the richer attire oj Bifioj^Sj a>:d other Dkn'itar'us, * ■ ■ -^^ " ^ ^ Chap. VIII. the Dissenters. 47^ I have already treated of thefe dignities themfelves, and therefore think it necdlels lo add any thing concerning the Garment belonging to them. But whereas he fays: Such ornamefHs are u/eful^ in that they ^ain re/petl and ^ood cjleetnj among the common ^to^Uy to him that i: ears them : It feems tO me little and mean, that the Minifters of the Church /hould by fuch arts court the favour of the ignorant common people. Chrift never recommended to his Apo- ftles the alluring people by them. And if Minifters dili- gently mind their bufinefs, they will have no reafon to fear their being defpis'd by the common people. Lazy flothful men may think it worth while to ufe thefe arts to gain popular applaufe5 but other Minifters may, indeed, well be afliam'd of them 5 efpecially they who continually boaft of antiquity, fince an old Council has decreed : ** 1 hat a Bifhop ftiould have cheap or ordinary furniture^ *' and keep a poor table, and maintain the authority be- ** longing to his dignity by his faith, and a good life. '* * And again : " That a Clergyman ftiould ftiew his ** profeflion both by his Habit, and his gate, and there- " fore jfhould not endeavour to be fine in his cloaths or his ** fhoes. "f Dr. AT. does more than once appeal to this fame Council, and therefore he ought not to rejeft their authority. But he goes on : The Surplice^ iihkh is indeed to he uornhy officiating MLniJierSy cannot jtijxiy he thefuhjeB of lo much clamour iD^d contention. For would thefe querulous men have Minifters appear at the Prayers and Sacrament Sy in the fame drefs .ps they go about their common affairs in ? We do not think any modeft decent garb \s profane. If our Adverfaries Hiy (as our Author here does) the ordinary Habit of Minifters is ^r/y profane^ we fee no reafon why it ftiould not be lawful to ufe fuch a profane Habit. Truly the Apoftles and Minifters of the primitive Church, perform 'd the facred offices in the fame drefs, in which they ii:ent about thefrects. Under the Old Teftament indeed, holy garments were prefcrib'd by God*s command 5 but under the New we acknowledge no diftinftion between facred and Drofane garments. And if the Gown the Minifter ufes in tne ftreet, is not fit for di- vine Service, why fhculd not the fame be true of his gloves and his ftioes, which ordinarily gather more dirt? And if * Coac, Caith. it 480 ^A Vindication of PaitllL if his ordliiary garb is not holy enough for him to read the prayers of the Liturgy in, why fliould it be thought fit for the prayer in the Pulpit before fermon, and parti- cularly the Lord's Prayer ? To attribute an holinefs to Garments, that have really none, is not only idle, but very fuperllitious. Our Adverfaries themftlves dont negltcl this : hut uhen they officiate iH their congregations^ they put on a long blacky Cloaks for the greater dijiinBion, Why then JJjould they quarrel at m for ufiiJg a iihite Garment ? In ufing a black Cloak, we attribute no holinefs to the form or color of the Garment , nor do we condemn other Garments as profane. It is reckoned among us a grave and decent habit, and therefore us'dfor mourning, when men fludioufly avoid all finery in their drefs. Nay, the wea- ring black for mourning, is not only the cuftom of many foreign nations to this day, but was anticntly us\l by the ^eivs and Romans. And h id Tertullian faid as much in commendation of the Gown or Surplice, as he has done of the Cloak, our Adverfaries would never have made an end of dunning us with it. But we ufe a Cloak fometimes for our convenience, as 'tis with lefs trouble put on or off , but prefcribe not to any one the ufe of it. And whereas 'tis faid, whether the Minifler ufes black^or ivhite^ the mat- ter is not great : I have fhewn the Liturgy fays the con* trary. And fince our Author himfelf is of opinion, that if ive are rejirain^'d to any particular Garment^ it Jhould he of fine ivhite linnen^ rather than any thing elfe : * let us hear what examples he alledges to confirm it. At oar Savtourh transfi^iiration\ he himfelf y together unth Mofes and Elias, appear'^d in bright raiment as ^a-hite its fnow. Tfctf Angels in their appearances are generally faid to have appeared in ^^hite. Let our Adverfaries then ftay till they become as the Angels, and appear in glory 3 and in the mean while be content with a lefs honorable garb, like that which our Saviour ordinarily wore, while he was here on earth. Further, fuppofing all that our Author fays to be true 5 tho' of Mofcs and Elias 'tis only faid they appeared in glory 5 do then Chrift^ Mofes^ Elias, and the Angels feem to have appear'd in white for this end, that they might teach us in what colored Garment a Miniiler ihould perform divine officesr £.zge 290. Chap. VIIL fk Dissent ERsr 481 offices in the aflembly ? If fo, why fhould Kot the fame color be moll fit for the whole congregarion ? They ap- peared with a great brightnefs, that they might give fome illuftrious tokens of their prefence, and command the more reverence. But what is this to Gofpel worfhip, which is a very plain thing, and a ftranger to all fuch pomp and magnificence ? And if our Clergymen m-uft appear cloathed after the manner of our Saviour, when he was transfigur'd and glorify 'd • why do they not ufefome art to make their countenances Ihine ? Why are they not ^irt about the paps "with a golden girdle ? for fo Chriil ap- peared to joh>u * Certainly it has been a prejudice to the Church, that the Clergy have chofen to imitate our Sa- viour rather as fliining in glory, than as he liv'd humble and mean in the world. Our Author likewife alledges the Elders in the Revela- tlon. But if there is any force in this argument, the Papifts may likewife by it defend their ufe of incenfe. But I re- fer our Adverfaries to their own writers, Mr. Mede^ Mr. Whifion^ &c. who fhew that Jerufcilem is the fcefie of that vifion, and that all the emblems and figures, made ufe of in it, are taken from the ^eunjh worfhip. And if any thing could be concluded from this example,what a flrange kind of Chriftian worfnip fhould we foon have*, adorn'd with an ark, with harps and trumpets ? The Doctor therefore has very little help'd his caufe by the Scripture. Now then he attacks us with another argument, and en- deavours to overthrow our caufe by our own concef- fions. Let it be ufed hy jeivs, Pagans^ Pap'ijis^ men of all nations^ aytd all religions , is not this common confent the ^'^orice of nature^ telling m that tho'e who -mnifter in holy things Jhould he thus put in mind of that fan^ity and purenefs of life ^ which becomes their funHion 5 efiecially fince the Spirit of God hu^ approved them as proper emblems of this ? f But what have we to do vvlth the childi/h worfliip of the Jews^ or the fuperftition of the Egyptians^ and Papifts ? Surely they who defire to be accounted Chriilians, and Proteftants, iliould lay afide all fuch things. Cbrift left his religion free from all thefe trifles : by what right then are they commanded by men ? Such doBnnh and co7n- M 111 niandmc77ts * Re.', i, ii. \f''fgs i>t. 484 A Vindication of Part III. what Garments were requifite in Chriftian wor/hip. *' That there are holy and ipirituiil Garments, the Apoftle *' teaches us, when he fays ; Put ye on the Lord ^efus *' Ckri/i. And in another place: Put on ho'iveh of mercy ^ *' ^oqAt7efsy humility^ meeknefs^ and patience^ &c. '' But what difference is here made between the Hahit in the ml- ^ifiry^ and that in comiiion uie ? According to Jtrom's opinion, it fignifies nothing in what habit a good man worlliips God, fo it be but clean and decent, as he hints a little before. By which we learn, '' we ought not to *'" go into the Holy of Holies with the dirty cloaths,which ** we wear every day, in our ordinary bufincls 3 but that *' we fliould take the Lord's fiicraments with a pure *' confcience, and clean Garments. Another place of 'ijerom is alledg'd, which might feem more to the purpofe. * That we may the better underftand it, we miift obferve that the opinion of Pelagit^s, which ^erom undertakes to refute, was, that the glory of cloaths, and ornaments, was difpleafing to God. Wherein he had no regard to any religious ceremonies, but only to the finery of the cloaths, which people ordinarily wore. Now Jerom thus anfwers him : " What ojfence is'tt^ I hefeech *' you J a^ciinji God, if I have z fine [or clean, mundiorem^ *' coat '^. If a B'lfhop^ Preshyter, Deacon, or any of the *' [other] ecclefiafl'tcal orders, ivear a ^a-hite Robe, at the per- <« forrruuice of the f acred off ces ? Have a care, O ye Clergy, *' Monks, widows, and virgins 5 you are in danger of *' iinning, unlefs the people fee you in dirty and ragged *' cloaths. I lay nothing of the Laity, who, according to *' him, openly declare war and enmity againll God, if *' they uie col-Hy and gay cloaths. " I havefet down the paffige a little more fully than our Author has done. The only thing here that would incline one to fufpeft this linnen Garment was us'd in Jerom's time, is the men- tion he makes of Candida "vejiis, which is tranflated a "white rohcy but which fignifies no more than a fine garment. That the word candidm has this fignification, I have evi- denced by fufficient teftimonies 3 for which they, who un- derftand Latin, may confult the Latin edition, page 559. And fince all thofe epithets, clean, fne^ W^(r> and gay ^ which are oppos'd to Pelagi^s^s opinion, who condemn'd the glory of cloaths and ornaments in general, fignify the fame * Lib. i. adv. Pclp-g. Gh:ip. VIII. the Dissenters. 485 fimc thing in 3rro7n j and fincc he does not fpcilc of a black, but of a Mrry and ragged garment, in oppofirion to this vefiis €a>ididd ^ I think jeroyn is manifeftly to be thus explained : *' What oft'ence, I befeech you, is it againft *' God, if a Bifliop, Presbyter, &c. at the admin iflrac ion *' of the Sacraiwenr, fliould wear a fine Garment?'' iSot that they a<9iiaUy did/o 3 but he asks, what hurt ther^ were in it, fiipp()iin<» they fhould ? The like infwer may ferve to his laft. authority, from Greg. Nat. hifom, de Arto-fiau tentj^lo i, as I have fhewn in the Lar/« edition. -^['^ '/ — ^ ^^'^'^ *^-^ .^"*- Now, I will prove, that the orthodox Clergy, m'tKofe days, did not ufe white Garments, by a notable Itory^ About that time S'^finnms^ Bifhbp of the Noxatinn?^ at ConJiaYitmopley affefted a magnificence in his garb and man- ner of living, which is taken notice of by Hiftorians, as an unufual thing in a Bifhop. For when (as Socrates re- lates it) * he made a vifit, cloathed in his white Garment*?, according to his cuftom, to Arfactm Bifhop of the Catho- lic Church there, one of Jrfacim's friends ask'd him this quellion : *' Why he wore a Garment unfit for a Bifliop, ** and where he found it written that a Bifhop /hould ** wear white ? Stjinmns anfwer'd him : I would have you *' firrt tell me, where 'tis written that a Bifhop fhould " wear black ? But when he that proposed the firft quef- " tion was at a lofs to anfwer this crofs queflion, S'fmnlws *' added : You can never fhew me that a Bifhop fhould be *' cloathed in black 5 but Solomon gives me a direftion, ** when he fays : Let thy Garments he always white. And " our Saviour, we find in the Gofpel, ufed a white ** Garment, and fhew'd to his Apoftles Mofes and El'uts " cloatu'd in white." This anfwer of c5'?//«>?iriius in his anfwer would have omitted to mention it. The fame fiory is related by So^omeyi^ Lth. vili. r, i. Our Author is miflaken, in thiiiking the vain opinion of men, who ufe white fometimes to fignify purity of life , or the cuftom of fome nations, who wear it in mourmn"^ he- M m 3 caiife 4?^ ^A Vindication oj Part 111. cuiifeex(fre/ftve of the paletiefs ofDeath 3 will ferve to defend tba ufe of tHe Surplice, becaufe that alfo may properly denote funtlity of ffe. * For, who does not fee the difparity of thefe things ? We difpure about a facred, and not a civil ufe of garments. Nor are brides among us ever dreft in that manner, upon any fuch account as he mentions, that ever I heard of ^ nor could they go to be married in fuch a garb, without being derided in the fireet$^, But if we may but woifliip God with thpfe rites only which he has pr^fcrib'd, we are not much concern 'd about others, that are ufed out of worfhip. But who can forbear wondering, our Author fhould be fo angry at pur faying,- they niake theSiirpUce iignifypu- rity.o? life ? The reafon he brings, is, becaufe (if we may believe him) there h not in any j^nhltc all of the Churchy one ivord of any purity of Ifeft^nify'd hy it, | And that you may fee he i? pot a little mov'd, be adds : To QhjtB thisas a crime to the-Ch^ivchy *which fhe fitv^r once mentionf, lool^s not fo like the accnfition of a fair Adverfary^ its the fpittful outrage of a harden d for ehcddy and intemperate tongue. But bv his leave, if this ceremony be *' apt to ftir up the dull mind of man, to *' the remenibnince of his duty to God by iome notable ♦^and fpecialfignification, whereby he might be edify 'd 5'* as the Church declares of her ceremonies in general ; what can the notable and [pedal fi^nif cation of this ceremony be, if it does not fignify purity of life? And further, how is it the outrage of a harden^dfqrehead andintemperatf toy:gue^ to f harge a man with believing, that which he himfelf fays may be defended by the authority of the Holy Spirit ? Where- fore, fine e Dr.N. and other^Clcrgymen, not only acknow- ledge this fignification of tbe Surplice, but endeavour to prove it by the Holy Scriptures , they have noreafon to tak^ this accufation fo heinpufly, if the Church did not (as flie f-pally does) mention it. tt has always feem'd flrange to ^ne, our Adverfiries fliould efte^m the Papifts idolaters^ and yet be fo fond of their fuperttitious garb. Surely Ter- tidltan was of quite another mind, when he faid : " If it ,'* be unlawful to fit in an Idol's temple, what is it to be 5' feen in his habit ? What communion is there between f ' Chrift and Belial ? And therefore flee from idolatry." I| And in another place ; ^' No one can appear clean in un- ''"''■ f^ ckan fr"^ 255. t/'^5-293- tl De Coron. ^ 10, Chap.VIII. the Diss enters. 487 ^ clean garments. If you put on a filthy garment, that •** may not perhaps be defird by you 3 but you can't be ^•* clean by reafon of it." * CHAP. IX. Of the Ring in Marriage. I Shall difpatch this matter in a few words. We think the eflence of marriage lies in the mutual compadl be- tween a man and woman, whereby they bind themfelves to an indjflbluble fociety, as long as they both live. The rites and ceremonies of marriage, we judoe, are purely x:ivil3 and fo 'tis the magiflrate's parr to appomt them. For is is very much to the advantage of the commonwealth, that the contra £i fliould be public, that fo the breaking x)f it may be the better prevented. And therefore let the magiftrate prefcribe whatever civil and decent rites he will, to teftify and declare the marriage, fubjects are bound to comply with them. And as the giving a Ring in marriage is a civil rite, and not unlawful in itfelf, all perfons are oblig'd toufe it, fo long as 'tis prefcrib'd. We need not therefore trouble ourlelves much about our Author's argu- ments. The onlv thing here in queftion is : Whether it would not be much more advifeable in a Proteftant country to abrogate this rite, or at leaft to alter fome things in it, that fo no one Jhould need to fcruple it ? The Papifts reckon matrimony a Sacrament. And in Ertgland they only are counted the fit miniflers of it, who ufe to adminifler the Sacraments ; and a Popifh rite is rctain'd in the moft folemn parr of marriage, being us'd with the fame words which are recited in one of the Sacraments. For thefe are the words in the Liturgy : " Then Oiall they again loofe *' their hands, and the man fhall give unto the woman a *' Ringjaying the fame upon the book, with theaccuftom'd *' duty to the Prieft and Clerk. And the Prieft taking the " Ring, fliall deliver it unto the man, to put it on the ''fourth finger of the woman's left hand. And the man '* hold'ng the Ring there, and taught by the Priefl, /hall ^' fay : Vv^ith this Ring I thee wed, with my body I thee M m 4 '' wor- > I ' II I I ■ I n I I n 1 II I I » * DeXJol : 19. 488 'J Vindication of Part III. " woifliip, and with all my worldly goods I thee endow, *.' in the rjame of the Father^ and of the Sor?^ and of the Holy *' Ghoji, " Now I apfieal to all impartial judges^, who are moft to blame 3 our fide, who have defir'd thegovernment to alter this 3 or our Adverfaries, who have oppos'd us herein ? But our Author alledges Tirtnllian^:xs a defender of this rite. * And truly a man can hardly be in his fenfes, who difapproves of Teriullians judgment 5 that the ceremonies of the Heathen, which are defil'd with no fuperftition, may lawfully be us'd by Chriftians in civil matters. But every one knows, he much diflik'd all their fuperftitious rites, as appears by hisTreatife De Corona. But that we may be the more certain of his judgment, I will fet down the place our Author refers to, a little more fully than he has done : '* Let them fet up lights that have no light " themfelves. Let them place at their doors lawrels,which *^ are afterwards to be burnt, for whom fire is prepared in *' the other world 3 the figns of darknefs, and the prefiges *' of punifhment may well belong to them. Thou art the *' light of the world, and a tree always green. If thou *^ haft renounc'd their temples, dont make a temple of *' thy own door. Nay which is more, if thou haft re- *' nounc'd thofe whore-houfes [idolatrous temples] dont *' make thy own houfe look like a new one. " f What could be faid better, or more agreeable to our opinion ? But he goes on : " As to the ceremonies of private and *' ordinary folemnities, as the plain Gown which young " men wore, Efpoufals, Marriages, and giving Names, I *' dont fiippofe there is any danger from the idolatry which *^ they praflife upon thofe occafions. For the reafonsare *' to be confider'd, for which any thing is done 5 and thofe ^' I think are innocent of themfelves ; becaufe neither "^' mens peculiar garb, J/or the Riwc, >;or matrimony^ is derived *' from the ixorjlji^ of any Idol. " Thefe laft words in Italic are what our Author cites. 'Another advocate for the Ring is Juftin 3 who we are told calls the Ring, the fponj] [?i^n74S^' the bridegroom's pledge 5 and arrhaJJjonfaliSyt\\ehtttothing pudge. Aug. Serm. [de tem- pore] ctxxix. This Sermon is attributed to lukenumy and is xlviii among his works ^ but, according to the '^1 Critics, ''jj.^^eiy;. j De Idolat. ::. :5. Chap. IX. the Dissvt^ r ^Ks. 489 Critics, is neither his nor y^njuns. Whoever was the au- thor, he fays nothing of the Ring in marriage, but alludes to a chain. He does not call x\\'\sfpor?Jij?l':^r7ns^ for lpo}?Jihe- longs to Jili't. " G radi tint tir cum domino jilii fioyiji^ fi^mt^ ac- *' cipturi Spiralis SanHi^ i. e. The ApolHcs, the children of *' the bridegroom, go along with their Lord, being about " to receive the pledge of the Holy Spirit. He [that is, ** Chrifl-, Luke'>ixiv, 50.] lift up his hands, and blefs'd *' them, he gave them the precious pledge of the marriage " gift, a chain not adorn'd with gold and jewels, but made ^ up of the links of charity , being bound with which ^* they might follow him to the Lamb's wife^.to Jemfalemy " their everlafting country." d 'ir/jq-' As to thofe words, with my lody I thee ^iorJLip^ they are differently underdood. Mr. Selden interprets them : J. gixe thee my body, * But perhaps our Author's fenfe of them may not be amifs : for the En^lifi verb, to worJJjip^ is us'd with reference not only to God, but to men. Thus i Chron. xxix. 20. All the congregation lowed donn their heads ^ and wor- lliiped the Lord and the King. And fo the fubftantive, wor- fhtp^ is once ufed by our interpreters : Lt'\e xiv. 10. Then Jhalt thou have worfhip. But this fenfe both of the verb and the noun^ is very much out of ufe, and hardly taken notice of by the common people , tho' we ftill retain it in fome nouns^ ViS^your worfLip^ and worJhipfuL But methinks however the Churchmen reckon antiquity their glory in other things 5 yet in a Liturgy written not for the Clergy alone, but for the people, words that are commonly us'd and eafy to be underftood, fhould be prefer 'd to thofe that are antient and obfolete. CHAP. X. Oj Kneelirtg at the Sacrameiit. THis controverfy arifes from the Rubric in the Liturgy, thus expreft : " Then fliall the Minifler firft receive •* the Communion in both kinds himfelf, and then proceed " to deliver the fame to the Bifliops, Priefts, and Deacon5, ■ ^ ' " ■ " *' [if ■»■ ■! ■ J I II I. ■■ I ■ ^' ■ ■» *Ux. Hcb. lib/u. 0.21. 490 A Vindication of Part III. *' [if any be prefent] and after that to the people alfo in ** order, into their hands, all meekly Kneeling." There are therefore three things here in debate. I. Whether this poilure be fit and proper in receiving the Sacrament ? z. Whether our Adverfarics have a power to impofe it upon all ? And whether it be lawful for a Minifter to refufe the Holy Communion to all thofe, who i'cruple the poilure, as unlawtul on that occafion ? 5. What was the cuilom of the antient Church ? Dr.N. in thefirft place tells us : TheGofjpelhas no where pr e- Ccrih'doiirgeflnre at the Lord s Supper. * And we acknowledge, It has not any where, in fo many exprefs words, command- ed it. But why iliould not an argument drawn from Chrift's own, and his Apoftles example, be thought by our Adverfaries fufficient ? If the poilure they us'd be not ne- ceiTiry, yet what/hould hinder its being thought lawful? By what right then is it forbidden, as tho' it were unlaw- ful ? If our Adverfaries dont fo much like it themfelves 5 yet certainly there is no equity in their denying thofe their liberty, who are of another mind. Shall it be thought enough to confirm their uLiges, if they can find, even in fome later ages, any cuftoms a little like them ; and fliall it not be lawful for us to follow the example of Chrifl: and his Apoftles ? After this rate, we mufl not fo much pro- pofe t*o ourfelves, for our imitation, our Saviour and his Apoftles, as the Chriftians who liv'd in after times 5 and we muft lay a greater ftrefs upon the authority of the lat- ter, than the cuftom of the former. But, if we may take our Author's word, this whole mat- ter is lejf free to the ^overyjors of the Church to order it as thty pleafe. But how do they know, Chrift has left it to the governors of the Church to make a law about this, which he would not by any law determine himfelf , and to make fuch a law as iliould be direftly contrary to his own prac- tice? When he fent out his Apoftles, he order'd them to teach men to ohjerve all things^ whatjoever he had commanded them, f Why then fhould men impertinentlv obtrude, not Chrift's, but their own laws upon us ? Dare they affirm, their own prudence, or care of the Church, is greater than Chrift's ? Our Author therefore had no ground to fay^ Chrilt * Iirg.2i^, \ MAttli. xxviii. 20. Chap. X. the Dissenters* 491" Chrill has left this lihol'y to the ^o\ernors of the Church ; name- ly, to make laws in doubtful cafes, after their own pleafure. Let us fuppofe fome perfons are (as they really are) in doubt, whether it be lawful to receive the Sacrament Kneel- ing : What will the confequence be, if this pollure is re- jquir'd of all communicants ? Truly, they who are thus doubtful, muft either wrong their own confciences by com- inunicating, or they mull withdraw from the communion of thofe that make fuch a law. But now fince there can be no pretence of any neceifity of making fuch a law 5 and fince there is no controverfy about the other pofture, wherein thefe people defire to be left at their liberty 5 *tis evident fuch a law is not for the edification, but the deftrudion of the Church. So that the governors of the Church cannot rightfully make any fuch law 5 becaufe 'tis contrary to the end and defign of that powder which is lodg'd in them. But our Author asks ; V/hy dent our Adverfiries tread more e^pHIy in thejtffs qfChriJl ? 'T/5 ivell )^woiv'«, that ivhen he injii^ tuted tbn Sacrament y he lay alongy according to the ctiftom of his country y and all his Difciples lay on beds by him. Why dont they refore this antient and long dtfufcd cnjlomy that they ynay the more religioujly conform to the pattern of Chrijl ? * To this I anfwer : I. There is no great difference between our fitting, and their manner of lying. For theirs was a kind of fitting, wMch a little more leaning of the body than ours. And the difference of thefe two is fo very fmall, that our Interpreters take no notice of it ^ but always, as far as I remember, tranflate the word, whereby their pof- ture is exprefs'd, hy fttti}?z. And when the Churchmen pourtray Chrift giving the Sacrament to his Difciples, they reprefent him not as lying, but fitting after our fafhion. Thus does Bp. Patricl^ in a copper Cut, prefixed to his Chriftian Sacrifice, But whatever difference there is be- tween our pofture, and that which Chriil ufed, 'tis to be afcrib'd not to any religious confideration, but only to our different manner of eating. Wherefore, fince our Adverfa- ries endeavour to defend their Kneeling by the antient Chriftians ftanding, a pofture expreftive of adoration j why may not we as well defend our fitting, which is a table pofture, by Chrift's lying along ? Certainly there is not a greater J i'-^^ '^99. 49^ yi Vindication of Part III. greater diffL^rence between our pofture, and his • than there is between our Adverfarics Kneeling, and theantient Chrif- tians funding. 2. From the example of Chrift and his Apoftles, 'tis cer- tain, they did not pretend to a pofture of adoration in re- ceiving the Sacrament : And therefore no good reafon can be given, why fuch a one fhould now be requir'd. * :;. Theobjeflions of our Adverfaries,thu iittinir is a too hvid and fazvcy j.o^iure^ far from a btcomiri'^ modrjiy and humility ^ or a monjhoHS atid ahom'mahle impiety • * are prov'd by the example of Chrift and his Apoftles, to be impertinent ca- villings. For all thefe things may with as much, nay with more reafon, be faid of lying along, than of fitting , as- any one who will confider the matter, will eafily perceive. 4. The reafon why our Saviour chofe that pofture (if we do not miftake it) makes very much to eftablifli our opi- nion. For he feems to have defign'd, that we fhould at this banquet place ourfelves rather after the manner of per- fons feafting, than of thofe that are adoring. This was pra6tis'd of old, in the like lolemnities, with God's appro- bation ; and our Saviour feems upon that account to have fet us his example in this ordinance. I think the ^ezvs al- ways fat (I mean in their manner) in all their eucharittical feafts, if we except that one only which they kept in Egy\)t. 'Tis probable they celebrated that feaft, which they ap- pointed in honour of ^€hova^\ Exod, xxxii. 5. in the fame manner they ufcd to do thofe which he himfelf had com- manded. Now they are thus dcfcrib'd keeping it, v. 6. And they rofe nj^ early on the morroii\ ayid offered burnt- offer mz^s ^ andbrow^ht p e are -offerings -^ and the f^eojple iat down to eat and to drink^, and rofe up to j?lay. Nay, we find God himfelf ap- proves this pofture in euchariftical feafts 5 Ezekj, xliv. 5. I Sa}i7, xvi. 5. ri. Hence therefore, we fay, a table pofture is, in the judc^ment of God himfelf, proper enough for a feaft of thankf^jivinc^. Nor is that cuftom to be lightly alter 'd, which Chrift has tranft ited from the^ew'f/h worfliip into his own, and has confirm'd by his own example. Further, our Author demands : If^hy zve dont redtue the ':v^-oIc luimhcr of commicyii cants to fu^elve ? The acutenefs of thefe men is admirable. They would perfuade us, 'tis as indifFtrenta matter to reduce the con^municants to a cer- tain 00 C\ . c ^. I Chap.X. the Dissentirs, 495 tain number^ as 'ri.s, whether we receive the LonVs Supper in an adoring, or a table poiture. And yet the contrary is nianifelt from the pradlicc of the Church of EnilanA \ for ctherwife, why have they not as well made a law for the one, as for the other ? Befidcs, we know from the writinfjs of the Apoftles, that no preciie number is fix'd. For who is not lenlible, the whole Church fliould partake of the Lord's Supper? But where, 1 befeech you, has Chrilt hin- ted to us, he would not have any (church of his exceed the narrow limits of the number twelve ? Does the whole Church of Corinth^ which ufed to come together into one place to eat the Lord's Supper, feem to our Adverfaries to have been of no larger extent, than this ? I appeal now to all impartial judges, whether thefe fo trifling, foolifh ar- gum.ents, are not a fign our Adverfaries want better ? And much of the fame fort is his next queftion : JVljy ive dont celebrate it In the u^er room of tJ.^e houje ? To anfwer which, would be only to abufe the reader's patience. Let us there- fore proceed to the reft. But there is no necejpty^ zihy ive JJjOuld he conjiyi^d to receive th^ Sacrameyit in the fame ^ojlnre li*^ nfe at cormvon feajis, * Nor is there any neceffity, why you fhould prefcribe that pofture alone, which we never read was ufed by Chrift and his Apoftles. But he adds his reafon : All things are not decent i» the one cafe^ ivhich may he very j?roper in the ether. Who knows not that ? Who ever faid, or fo much as dream'd the con- trary ? We dont think all thofe things are decent in the Sa- crament, which are very proper in feafts ^ but only thofe which our Saviour had been pleas'd to take out of them. Dr. N. therefore does but lofe his labour, while he endea- vours to fhew us, wherein the Eucharift differs from a feaft. Nor is what he infers from thence much to his purpofe : T^owjince thefe ciiftoms at other f of s are not admitted here^ why may not fittings for the jame reafon he changed^ as too hold and faucy a 'pofture ^ far from a becoming humility and modefty^ ivhen "ii'e are fo immediately in the pre fence of God ? Say you lo ? Do you think the j^ojiure the Apoftles ufed, with our Savi- our's approbation, was too hold and f aw cy^ or not fnfficiently humble and modeft ? Dont you fee whom you injure by thofe reproaches ? truly, not fo much the DiiTenters, as the Apoftles, and our Lord and Saviour Jefus Chrift himfelf. Juft * pxg? :oo. '494 ^ Vindication of Part III, Juft like this is what he fiys, when he calls fitting ^ won- Jirous and ahom'nmble impiety : * And when he asks, as he thinks, wittily ^ but, as I think, fawcily, not to fay wicked- ly : Whether we fliould fit ftill like untbifikjng u-retcJ'eSy as if ive li'ere thinkjng ofjomething elfe^ or as if we had too mean an oft- ftion of the ordinance to rife uj^ to it ? \ But fince thefe things ftrike at the Maftcr himfelf, it becomes us, his Difciples, to bear them patiently. Further, there is not the fame rea- fon for the other circumilances of a feaft, mentioned by oui* Author. For thofe cuftoms which he fays are caji out of the Sacrament, were really never ad?nitted into it, as the Tranfla- tor has exprefs'd it 5 nor does the leaft fign of them appear in the firil inftitution 5 and therefore they are defervedly kept out of it : but the pofture in receiving it is as old as the inftitution itfelf. Normuft that be as lightly rejedled, wherein Chrift has been pleas'd to fet us an example, as that wherein we have him not for a pattern. Nor does the tmmedtate prefence of God deter us from imitating our Saviour in this matter : fince his prefence was as immediate, when our Lord fat at the table. The jeii's alfo celebrated their euchariftical feaft s fitting, in the immediate frejence of God. For they eat before the Lordy Dent. xii. 7. 18. xv. 20, &c. God at the fame time giving them to partake of a part of thofe things which were his, as being firft offer'd to him* Thefe yewifi folemnities were (as our Author calls the Lord's Supper) the ficred pledges of divine mercy ^ II nay, and of the communion and friendfhip there was between God and his people. Hitherto we have found our Author very angry with us, for our celebrating the Lord's Supper after the manner of a feaft. But now he changes his mind on a fudden, and com- mends his own fi^e, becaufe they, as much as we, imitate the cuftom of thofe who are feafting j and, nor very con- fiftently, makes that to be a matter of praife and honour in them, which juft now was a great fault in us. Thus he difcourfes : But our Adverfarics thenifdves^ by their pofiure cfflttin-7^ 710 morcrrprefent ^ faft than "^'e do by Kneel in':;^. But with his good leave, fince fitting has been the received pof- ture in all feafts facred and prophane, and we read nor of Kneeling's being ufcd in either 5 in this refpe^ft we cer- tainly come neareft to the manner of a feaft. Nor can he ftrengthen *j^xg-3c^ li--:©;- \\Ii'id^ Chap. X. the Dissenters. 495 ftrengthen his argument by what he adds . For they dor.t place themftlves yonnd about a tahify rvith their lervatits at thtir backs 'y * What's this to the purpofe, iince neither do fer- vantsrtand at the backs of tiiofe that kneel ? but Jit differs i .zbout tkeir 'Meeti»2^-hoHJe^ j4 at other times ; and the elements are brought to them by tOme principal man oj the con<^regationy while they Jit and look^about them more like fpeffators than guejis. But we com: and kneel down about the ho^y table^ and the elements are admlnijired to us by the hands of the Priejis and Deacons , ani fo we ha'-je the reftmblance oj a fenj}y tlo^ averyfacred anJ vene- rable oney full of the higheji devotion and piety. When Chrift firft gave the Sacrament t-o his Apoftles, they could all con- veniently enough fit together at one table. But what courfe they took afterwards, when the number of com- municants was increased 3 whether they ufed to come to the table one after another ; or whether the elements were carried to them, being at a diftance from the table ; this, I fay, is altogether uncertain: and therefore I would never contend with any man about it. This, however, I think is certain, that it was not antientlv efteem'd abfo- lutely neceflary that perfons fliould come to the table. jtiJiinMartyr tells us, the Deacons ufed to give the elements to every one prefent, and carry them to thofe that were abfent. \ Since then he fays nothing of the people'^ coming to the table, and tells us, thofe who.were abfenr, and could not come to the table, ufed yet to receive ^ 'tis not probable the cuftom then obtained, which our Author fo much commends : And if they had us*d all to come to the table, he that adminiftred might have deliver 'd the ele- ments to fome at leait, if not to all the communicants, without the Deacons affiftance 5 as we fee it pra6lis'd in the Church of Evi^Jand, I take it alfo to be uncertain, whether Chriil delivered the elements himfelf into the hands of each of the Apofiles , or whether he gave them to him that iat next to him, to be handed round from one to another. In this we take different ways, without quarrel- ling with one another. But the cuftom our Author difip- proves, was not long fince receiv'd in his own Church, or at leaft not forbidden 5 as appears by the words of the Synod of ic^4'j. *' We judge it fit and convenient- that all '' communicants, with all humble reverence, fhall draw *' near -g. l':>i. \ Ajoi. ir. 49<^ -^ Vindication of PartllL •' near and approach to the holy table, there to receive the ** divine niylleries, which i^a^^^e heretofore in Jome places been ** unfitly carried up and doivn by the Mimjier j iinlcfs it fliall be *' otherwife appointed in refpefl: of the incapacity of the *' place, or other inconvenience, by the Birtiop himfelt *' in his jurifdiction, or other Ordinaries rcfpeitively in ** theirs. " * And to fpeak the truth, in many of our aflem- blies the communicants could not come all to the table, one after another, without a great mconvenience. But even in the Church oi lin^land^ no one comes to the table, but the Miniiler. Our Churchmen, dreaming of I know not what holinefs in the table itfelf, inclofe it with rails at about fix foot dift ince 5 and fo the vile Laity come but to the rails, being thought unworthy to come to the table, tho' they are counted worthy to receive the elements. This bafe kind of fuperltition our Lord reprov'd of old in the PharifecSy Matth. xxiii. id, 17,18, 19. But how, I befeech you, do thefe things, as our Author pretends, fuit a feall ? who ever knew thegueftsatafeaftkept off from the table, by rails fet round about it ? Surely this no more expreffes the refem- blance of a feart, than the poflure they ufe. As to the nature of this Sacrament, we have the fame notion with our Adver- faries j and our Author is unjuft in going to fatten another upon us. 1 therefore think it needlcfs to fay anything of the two next Seftions, till he comes to thefe words : Indeed the Socintans^ "ivho own nothing in this Sacrament hut a commtmorat'ion^ doy agreeably enough to their principles^ Jit at the receiving of it : but for our Adverfaries to imitate thefe men^ iihofe opinions in other things they detefty Jhews a geniws not dif- pos^d to weigh things impartially^ but precipitate and prejudiced in favour of a partyy and not apt to confult the common intereji of Chriflianity, f We fear not to call this an odious calumny, fince we herein imitate the cuitom of Chrift and his Apo- files, and not the Socininns. But 'tis a /hame for a man to be chargeable with the fault he reproves in others. See how very eafily his argument may be retorted upon himfelf and his party. The Papiits indeed, who think the bread and wine in the Sacrament are chang'd into the very body and blood of Chrifl, doy agreeably e>;oi(gh to their own pr'inciplesy kneel at the receiving of it : but for our Adverfdries to imitate thefe * C»n. 7. t ^^g 303. Chap. X- the Dissenters.' 497 thffe meti^ ii-hoU oph7iohs in other th'Dirs they detejiy^kti's dgimm vox clij^os'd to va't^h thi>i:s im^'artiallyy .&'c. • ' But our Author ufcs ahothcr argunienr, nntrjclv, that this is the fitteji ^ejiure for f^etjlterits : and now hc delcribes the Lord's Supper, as tho' it ferT'J^for iiorhrtig clfebut to promote repentance. But w^ lay, that poduve does not well fuit an cuchariftical, or th:ink(giving fca4t'; and we pay more deference to the approbation of God' under the Old Tertament, and the example of Chrift uiidcr the New, than we do to the judgment of the wifcft of mqn; But our Author would confirm, or at leaft illuftrate the point by a comparilon : Snj^^'ofe a tYaitor h.ts ohta'tn^A a ^arJxm from h'tsfr'ince 5 and that ivhen he receives it^ he jlould be Jo far from falling doun on his kj?ees to give tharkj^ that re iiQU'd not fo much as rijev.f^^ pretending a great many idle fcrff^e^y ^^J^^y ^^'^ expreffion ofrefpeB^ he fioKldjeem to idolite hh prince : zvh(i -would Kot y of a'thortfand deafhs^'^^^^ut" irould ar.y impartial per [on cenjure-this dificffkB to a'm€^^a{-^]riti:c'e\'''j4 apiece of pride ^nQt t9 be endm^dy and\not hf ticf J '-ikhre' T^e Pent ihe' affronts offered to the majejty and authority of ahni^hty God ?• * ' ^ But this coinparifon is not made fairly. He /fiotfld ra- ther have fuppos'd, that the prince had beenMccuftomM to deliver his pardons to rebels fittings and ha^ long befbre deciar'd his approbation of th^t pofture iTr.r^c^^i>inP tHtm^ and that it was as yer doiibrful^ whether he'lri^'d" of 'dny* other* When the cafe is thus put/ as it 6ti^?%' 'B^. fio\:^ only would no body judge Him worthy of a fingledeathj^ but all men .would acknowledge-. 'he be'hav'dTiimielf very' well . And Jis^ foon as it In all be pfb^^M, that herein AJf-onts ' are offer d to the inaiejiy and aitthority of ahriijhtyGody \vc Will leave this practice. For notwithft'anding wh^tt ht? may fay to the contrary, we do nothing in this matter out: ct pride' and difrefpecf ; and if it be but made appear' to be more pleafing to God, We will thankfully receive thefe pledges of our redemption^ not only kneeling, but piroftrate and rolling in the dutt. But he goe« Oh : \ \' ' BefideSy that feftlxai gefiure^ whtch our Advcrfdries fo much ronttnd for^ li: as never fo much as heard (f i'^'thejiiftayes, Jo>' ti:e prnntti've ChfiiftianSj in veneration of Chrifty alvsays received Kneeling or ftandim, : /Is for jittmgy i't'vuasnevertlou-^htof:-^ But w-hat need have we of examples, when thofe of Chrifl N n ■ and 'P^g- .0:. t^^^- 304, 498 ^A V I N D I CAT I o N of Part III. and his Apoftles are fo clearly and plainly fet before us in the Scripture ? If the pradice of the primitive Chriftians fliould be of any authority with us, certainly that of the Apoitlcs may well claim the chief authority, if it were only becaufe they were the firft Chriftians. Wherefore while they boaft of fome later examples, we glory in the piuftice of the moft antient of all Chriftians. Nor will it be ^mifs here to take notice, how very dangerous 'tis to allow any authority in thefe matters, to uninfpir'd men, However famous and wife they may have been ^ fince we fpe, our Advcrfarics are fo prone from thence to rejeft the authority of Chrift and his Apoftles. If any Htretic had been jo audacious as to attempt the Intro- diicin^of.it wfothis fart^ of divine v:orJJnp^ the moji dexout ^'eyjons ha4 cert^njyjlarted hack^from ity as from a monjlrous and ahoynliiahk im^uty. I neither know what Heretic he means (for I fuppofe the Apoftles were not Heretics in his account) nor whence he has taken this. And fince he alledges no witnefs of what he lays, le^' him anfwer for the truth .Qt^^lf^reMr^:^ery prohahk reafons and grounds to imagine^ that our f^ojture' of Kneeling ii-as the {}raEtice of all antiquity. Many great- fr^^hiiT^ thought Kneeling at the Sacrament was ne- ver .fiff4 in-.the Church before the time of Hononn/s III. or Gngij/yyiX. Popes of the L3th Century. I will not now inqMire whether it might not be a little older , but our Author & aflertion is not grounded upon the authority of any one antient writer, nor can it ever be prov'd. If our Ad verfaries can pretend antiquity here, there is no- thing which they may not with as good reafon defend by it. Jiut 'tis no new thing for them to attempt to wind that with craft to ferve their own purpofes, which they fee to be moft diredly contrary to them. 'Tis well known from jiijiln Martyr's Joolo^iy^ which I have had fo frequent occafion to mention, that Chriftians ufed to meet and re- ceive the Lord's Supper every Lord's day 5 but it is cer- tain in the third and following Centuries, they never wor- fhip'd Kneeling upon thofe days. Hence 'tis undoubted, that another pofturc was then us'dat the Sacrament. Nay, the antienrs reckon 'd that unlawful, which the Churchmen praflife, as often as they adminiftcr the Sacrament on a Lord's day. And yet liere too he appeals to antiquity. For thus he argues : lor -Chap. X. the DissenIters^ 49^ For ii^^nt cizn he the rcafon of th.it antknt i>jjti>ifJ o r^ ivJ'vH they had daily Sdcraynehts^ that they ftjoiildjland m the coK^nz^a^ tto>is all Siojdiys and weel^days between Ealter and Whitfuntidci if Knei'lin'^ had not been the j?raflice at other tnna ? By the fame argument it might be prov'd that the primitive (^hriftians knecFd at the reading of the Scriptures, and the Sermon^ as U'ell as the receiving the Sacrament. As to the thing itfelf, they always prayM at other times Kneeling3 but on Lord's D.iys,and all the while between Eajier and JVhnJtm- tide^ they counted it unlawful to do fo. A notable place in the ^'iojioHcal Conftitntions will make this plain : " What •' apology will he make to God, who does not aflemble on *' the Lord's Day, to hear the faving word concerning the " refurreftion ? on which alfo we pray rhrice, ftandingj •^ in memory of him who arofe in three days , on which ** is the reading the Prophets, the preaching the Gofpel^ " the offering of the facrifice, and the gift of the holy •* food. " * So that when they pray'd to God on the Lord's Days, they, contrary to their cuftom on other days, flood 3 but nothing of this nature is faid of the Lord's Supper. Thus alfo the Canon of the Council of Nicf^ alledg'd by cur Author, is to be underftood ; *' Becaufe ** there are fom.e who kneel on the Lord's Day, and the ** time between £7ttde -^ to the end, that ** all things may be alike obferv'd in all places, it feem'd ** good to the holy Council that men fhould pray ftand- «ing.'>t But the Doftor farther asks : Why does Gregory Nazian* 2en tell «f, hisjjirer Govgonia fell on her Knees before the Altar ^ tf Kneeling at the Sac ramcyit h^id not been the ctijiom of thoje days ? The reafon is plain enough : For Gorgonin therefore fell on her knees, becaufe fhe offer'd her prayers to God 3 and that pcfture has always been thought the moft fit for prayer, And Naxiamen's words fliew this was the caufe of her Kneeling : '* And with a loud voice fhe call'd upon *' him, who is worfhiip'd upon the^ltar. " II From thefe words the Papifls endeavour to eftablifh the adoration of fhe elements. And to fay the truth, if the holinefsof the Altar is fo great upon the account of the elements blefs'd theA-e, that we ought to worfnip towards it 3 I dont fee, N n 2 why * Lib ii- c- s»' t ^^n. i© [. 0;at-. ii, 5CO >? Vindication of Part IIL why we fliould not alfo worftiip towards the elements themfdves, which mult have a greater holinefs. But there is not a word concerning the Sacrament, and fo neither argument is of any force. But if any one ask, why Ihe kneerd in the Church, and at the altar rather than any other place ? 1 anfwer : She might perhaps think, her mind would be more excited to prayer in fo holy a place, or that her fupplications would there be more prevailing with God. \Vhcther that fancy of hers has any good foundation, or does not rather favour of fuperftition, I leave to the judgment of others. Neither is Kneehnj^ at the Sacrament derived (^as they pretend) to us from the Papijis^ * If it be not deriv'd to them from the Papifts, whence then have they receiv'd it ? But mind now our Author's pleafant realon for this : Sitting is tn^reat- eji reputation with them^ as i^ell as u^ith our Dijjenters. What then ? becaufe both are us'd by the Papifts, is it neceffiry that neither, or both of them, muft have rifen from the^r cuftom ? If he fays, that for thisreafon neither of them rife thence, how will he make good his confcquence? If he fays both of them are deriv'd from the Papilis, we will be- lieve him, when he can prove that fitting had its rife among the Papifts, as well as Kneeling. But what is this to our Author's purpofe, who undertook to prove Kneeling was not a Popifh rite ? Perhaps what comes next may feem more pertinent: When the Pope himfelf communicates^ ^^J^i^^^ fy his equality ^ivith GoJ^ he Jits on a throne in great fiate^ as a ^j;orthy gueft at God's table. Can the reader forbear laughing ? Kneeling at the Sacrament is no Popi/h rite; becaufe one Perfon, the Pope y Jus y when he communicates, *Tis not indeed a rite us'd by the Pope himfelf j yet *tisPopifli, /, e. Pa- piftical, prefcrib'd by the Pope, and us'd by that whole communion, the Pope alone excepted. But what Popifti writer ever gave this account of tne matter, that tojignify his equality liith Cody he fits on a throne ? His own fins are heavy enough upon him, and there is no need to add more to his load by fuch filfe calumnies. And if this bufinefs be throughly examin'd, it makes for our caufe. For the* the Papifts are oblig'd to defend Kneeling at the Sacra- ment, and the adoration of it, for the fake of their tranr fubftantiation 5 yet they are not able to deny the Apoftles receiv'd * i'-'g^ 305. Chap. X. fk D I s s E N T E R s. 501 rcceiv'd it in .1 different pofture. And for this rcafon the Pope communicates fitting, to fipiify >7ot Us efjiuiliry iL-'tth God^ but his imitation of the Apoflles.* Further, if the reafon alledg'd by our Author were true, what could it fignify to us ? When Chrift and his Apoftles have taught us any thing by their example, we dontprefcntly think it becomes unlawful, if the Po} e of Rome praftifes perhaps the fame, for quite another reafon, and thit a very bad one. We have herein no regard to the Pope. If he has polluted Chrift's inttitutions, let him look to it 5 we endea- vour, as much as we can, to reftore them to their antient purity, by removing all the corruptions, which have been mix'd with tb.em. Nor are we fo foolifli as to think every thing, which he has retained in his Church, the Synagogue of Satan, muft needs prefently be unlawful, and fit to be rejefted 5 for then we muft not retain the Sacrament it felf, nor even the worfhiping a Deity. CHAP. XI. Of the obfervaUo?i of Holidays.' Concerning this matter, I have written fomewhat large- ly, in my Letters in anfwer to Dr. Wells. I fliall here therefore borrow fome things from them, for the explain- ing our opinion. 1. We think God has appointed one certain day in the week, for the thankful remembrance of thofe mercies, which he has in common beitow'd upon us. Upon that therefore, as often as it returns, allChriftians are bound to imploy themfelves in meditating upon God's works of creation and redemption, in praifing God, and in other religious exercifes. Hence we judge itneedlefs for men^ by their authority, to appoint other days of the fame nature ; and deiire them, who ufurp fuch a power, to produce the commiffion they have for it. 2. It feems probable to us, that God would not have us obferve thefe yearly Holidays 3 becaufe we meet with nothing in his word, whereby we can fix the times of the year, when thofe things happen'd, which our N n 5 Adverfaries * FiJ. Alex. Ilcles dc MiiTa Fa^. :i- 502 A Vindication oj PartllL Adverfirics pretend are the occafion of them. There are but four oftheni which we can affigii to their proper feafon ; and they are Eajltr^ U^hirfiwude^ Goodf^-iday^ and Afcctifwyt day. But the Scriptures tell us the exact timesof all thefe : not that we fhould yearly obferve them, but for other reafons, eafy enough to be perceived, but too long to be related* Concerning two of thefe, we have no great difpute 3 for they always fall on Lord's D;ivs which are holy by God's appointment. And it feems ridiculous and fuperilitious, that men fliould endeavour by their orders to make thefe more holy than the rell, fince all Lord's Pays are by divine inftitution equal in that refpeft. As to the other Holidays, they cannot by any arguments be prov'd to beplac'd on thofedays, whereon the pretended cccafions of them really happen 'd. Nay, the great 6"^^- Uger^ and many other learned men, have demonltrated the weaknefs and falfiry of thofe reafons by which five of them are fix'd, '^h. The Anymyiclation of the B. V. Miry 'y the Natrcity of St. ^ohn Baptift 3 the Nativity, and the Or- (iimcifion of Chrift 3 and the Purification of the B. V, Mary. For they who fettled the Calendar as it now is, went upon a -«yTnnr->-r-w— ; a * Luke i. a. Chap. XI. f/j^ Dis-sENTERs. 503 Teftament, any days appointed to be kept in coinmemo- ration of the Saints. And therefore our Adverfaries have here neither Scripture precept, nor example, for what they do. I have before taken notice, there wis anticntly a very niifchievous delign to adapt the Chriflian religion to the rites and cuftoms of the Heathens. This was the begin- ning of many fetHvals, while the Chriftians endeavoured by this means to draw off the Pagans from their fuperllition. Hence thcyfixVi their principal I{olidays in thofe times of the year, which were before obferv'd among the Gentile.^;, with the greateft folemnity. This has been lately obferv*d by Mr. JVhiJiorjy * and long before by Mr. If. Cafauhon. f But no one has more fully prov'd it from the writings of the antients, than Mr. "^ofeph Jvlede^ in his excellent Treatife of The j4^oJiacy of the latter times, \\ Where he /hews at large, in what manner the doBrine of Devils^ I Tim. iii. r. that is, as he explains it, the worfliiping of Demons^ or Saints^ \v:is brought into the Church , and cites, among many other teftimonies, thefe remarkable words of Theodor'it : '' Our *' Lord God hath brought his dead [yit. the Martyrs'] into ^' the room and place [the temples] of your Gods, whom he ** hath fent packing, and hath given their honor to his *' Martyrs. For inftead of the fealls of Jupiter and Bacchmy " are now celebrated the feftivals of Peter and P^/r/, and " Thomas and Ser^iaSj &c. and other holy Martyrs. ** t We have therefore good reafon not to keep thefe feafts, which had a bad beginning, and were afterwards fo perni- cious to religion. Nor is there the leaft lign of any teitival obferv'd in the three firft Centuries, in memory of the Apoftles, of Chrift's birth, or fliewing to the Gentiles, Nay, Jnft'in Martyr mentions no other Holiday, but the Lord's Day. * And when Trypho the Jen- objected, that the Chriftians did not keep iabbaths, or feafts, he dees notanfwer him, according to the fentiments of our Church- men 5 that they rejected indeed the Jeii-iJIj fabbaths and feftivals, v;hile they kept others in memory of the Apoftles , but he argues only, that they had good reafon to obferve the firft day of the week, f N n 4 4. We * Hamon.of the Gofpel, p- 16 2 | Excrcit. i. in B.'.ran. f'^fJ'. 25. r Tr.ur O^fra, p. £42. 4: Dc cur. Gr. Affeft. Wj. Tiii. * Ajol. a. .i;-iU 2' ■ 38, 47, : V. 5^4 'A ViisvDic ATioK oj Part III. 4. We own, there may happen new occafions of folemn and public fafting, or rejoicing 5 for which, becaufe they concern the civil ilate,'tis the bufinefs of themagiitrateto appoint proper days and times. And he only can command all his fubjefts to obferve fuch faft.s, or thankfgivings,when , there i.^ occafion for them. But if he neglefts his duty, and does not appoint fuch days, when 'tis manifeft to all that he ought , or if abufing his power, he orders days to be kept to a bad purpofe 3 we think every Church has a right to fct apart days themfelves, or to forbear to ob- ferve them that are not well injoin'd. We are to judge, when thefe njore folemn occafions are proper to be kept j not by thofe things which concern all Chriftians in com- mon, and :it all times, for which a fufficient provjfion is niade by God himielf in theinftitution of the Lord's Day j but by a careful obfervation of the providence of God to- w:irds the Church, or ftate. I will make the thing plain by mentioning fome inftances. The Churchmen are com- iijanucd to keep the yearly faft of Lent, If you ask the reafon, they tell you 'tis, that all may repent of their fins, as they have all fin'd. But now, tho' we deny not, that we have all fin'd, and that fin is a juft caufe of fallmg; yet fir.ce our Saviour knew this as perfedlly as they can do, uhy iliould not this continue,as it was by him left to mens liberty ? Our Adverlaries alledgc nothing new, that has happened iince he declar'd his mind about fafting, that /lio'vild give any occafion to this alteration. But if the fins of a people are at any time become very heinous, if God by his providence teitifies his difpleafure, or if any thing ex- traordinary is to be fought with more fervent prayers, thefe are new and fpecial occafions, wherein God calls us to public failing ; and 'tis manifeft to all, that a day fhould be appointed for it : whereas nothing of this nature can be faid of thp Lent U^- Thus on the other hand, fince God has commanded every firft day of the week to be kept holy, that w^ may apply ourfelyes to the praifing him as our creator, and efpecially as our redeemer ^ the blefling God for the incarnation, death, refurreflior, an,d afcen- ^ion of Chrift, and what ever elfe he has done to bring about pur redemption, i;> the chief bufinefs of the Lord's Pay, By what autiK)riry then do officious men fet apart mher days yearly for the lame end '< Whenever God vouch- f.itco to bcAo^- any ulv^ and eminent bleiiing upon us, we pV'/n this call:? for more folemn ch^nkfgivingS; but thofe Chap. XI. the Dissi-^ riKS. 505 that equally belong to all Chriftians, in every age, nceil no ft.ited loleir.n fcflival, bcfide ihar weekly one which God has appointed. I would therefore fain h ivc our AdverLi- ries fliew us, what new occafions of inlliruting the fefti- vals of our Siviour, his ApolUe^, and the Virgin VKvy^ have happened fince the appointment of the religious ob- fervatjon of the Lord's D ly. Hence 'tis evident, what our Author fays of the fafis prefcrib'd by 5^/ o a^hat^ Z^ofiah^ Ex.ra^ and Ffiher^ are nothing to the purp ofe. * For we hold that fiifts fhould at all times be appointed by the Magiftrate, as there is occa- fion. Let us therefore proceed to his other exam- ples : The feajf o/Turim ii*^P( eflahlijh^dforn f?erpetual ayTnivcrfaryoj thankjgivm^ to God^ for delivering the Jews from the h!oody niaf- Caere ^ iihtch Haman hud projeHed azainft them. That this inftance fignifies nothing in our controverfy, is prov'd by two confiderations : Firft, God feems to have appointed, or at leaft by fome certain tokens to have approv'd of this feaft. For if the Book of EJiher be canonical, as the Church- men agree with us it is, f infpiration was not ceas'd among the JsvjSy when that feaft was inftituted. Secondly, If that feaft took its rife not from any fpecial divine precept, but from the appointment of the 5^11*5 5 yet it no way agrees with our cafe, becaufe there was a new and fpecial occa- fion for it. But if our Adverfaries would not lofe their labour, let them /hew us, that the 'Je'u:s ever inftituted anniverfary foiemnities, in remembrance of thofe blefiincr^, for the thankful acknowledgment of which a particular day had been before fet apart by God's commandment ; nay, or of thofe blelTings, which tho' they were before the fetting apart that particular d-\y, yet were not ordered to be commemorated therein, or in any other feftival. Let them fur inftance tell us, if they can, when the jeiis appointed an anniverfary day in memory of the creation, for which God had fandify'd the feventh cir-y of the week ; or when they inftituted a yearly feftival to hiefs God for preferving Koah and his fons in the flood, or for calling Abraham ^S>Lc, The feaft ofPurim was very like our Fifth of Kovemhtr^ on which we, as well as the Churchmen, blefs God for our deliverance from the Gunpowder Plot , and for Art. o 50^ A Vindication of Part 111. for the happy arrival of our Great Deliverer, fC/w^ fTi/Z/^yw, of bleffed memory. The feaji of Dedicatm:^ tf;«« t)' Judas Maccabcus, u^as re- ligionjly obfcrv'd for inany ayss^ and, honored ivitl) our Lord's oivn pre fence. My fecond obfervation, with reference to the feaft oi Punm^ might not amifs perhaps be apply d to this of Dedication. But to fay nothing of that, how docs it appear, that our Lord had any regard to this feftival ? Our Author had his eye upon thofe words of the Evange- Lft : And It was at Jerufalem the f aft of Dedication^ and it 'WJ^ winter . And Jefus waW^ed in the Tenifle in Solomon'^ Porch. * But how could our Author tell he had any more regard to the feaft of Dedication, than he had to the winter ? I walk'd it may be in PauPs Church at London on a Chriftmas day^ muft I therefore be needs faid to have done it upon the account of the feftival ? I am forry, I profefs, learned men fhould defend a caufe, that has no better ar- guments to fupport it. Let us hear what the learned Y^c. Lfgh/oor fays of this matter. He cites then this paftage out of the Hierofol. Megillahyfol. 70.4. *' There were eighty ** five Elders, above thirty of which were Prophets too, ** that made their exceptions againft the feaft of Punmy ^^ ordain'd by Ejiher ana Mordecaiy as fome kind of inno- *' vation againft the law. " | Upon which, the Doftor fubjoins his own obfervation : '' And yet that feaft was but ** of two days continuance. *Tis a wonder then, how " this feaft of Dedication, the folemnity of which was to ** be kept up for eight days together, that had no other «' foundation of authority, but that of the Scribes, ftiould ^ be fo eafily fwallow'd by them." And a little after, upon thofe words of the Evangelift : It was winter^ and Je^\is walked in Solomon's Porch y he gives us this note: ** He " walk'd there, becaufe it was winter, that he might get «* and keep himfelf warm : perhaps he chofe Solomon's Porch " to walk in, either that he might have fomething to do *' with the Fathers of the Sanhedr'in who fat there j or elfe, *' that he might correal and chattife the buyers and fel- ** lers, who had their fliops in that place. " It would be tedious to mention all thefftivals^ which the pri- mitive Chrftians jet apart in honor of Chrifty his Aj^oftleSy and '^lartyrs . Befide * Jola X. 2Z;, ii. \ yjLi Walks, woL ii j[j. 5ji. chap. XI. the Dissenters. 507 Beiule the Lord's Day, there was r\o ffff real fet .i(>an in honor ofChrij}^ or his u-J^oJiU's^ i» the three jiji aj^ts of the Church 5 as I have obferv'd alreidy. The words of CUnunt oW/ilex- andrta are very remarkable concerning this matter : " We *' are commanded to worfiiip and honor this Tame perfon, ♦' who we are perfuaded is the Word, :he Saviour, and ** Ruler, and thro' him the Father, not upon lele^S days, *' as iome others do , but we do it always, and by all " manner of ways, thro' the whole courfe of our lives.'* * But tho' the antients kept no days in honor of the Apoftles, yet we deny not that the tealls of other Martyrs are very antient. But thefe can do our Adverfarics little fervice. For the primitive Chrittians thought the martyrdoms, which happen'd among them after the Lord's Dav was inft-tuted, gave them new occafions of keeping feftivals j bur our Adverlariesobferve no fuch for their own Martyrs, as RidUyy Hooper ^ Farrer^ Latimer^ Cranmer^ Qpc. nor do they pretend any fuch reafon for their Holidays. Nay, thofe antient feitivalsof the Martyrs, if they were at firft void of fuperftition, yet foon degenerated into it j as is certain from Tertiilliarjy who mentions the oblations they ufed in his time to^ make for the dead^ and for their nmrtyrdom on a Jlated day yearly. We have therefore the more reafon to take warning by their example, and to watch againft the firft beginnings of fuperftition. Nor will any one thir.k I fay this without caufe,who conliders with himfelf what Bifiicp MountagUy and fome other famous authors of his time, have written concerning the invocation of the Saints. But our Author brings an argument againft us from our own prailice. jVill ar.y man fay that iie have >:ot as 7Kuch poller to fet apart times^ .t^ perfons andpiaces^for religions ujes ? So xht Latin ftiould be render 'd. As to/^f?; o«5,they are fet apart by a divine command ^ and we think any tiym may be fo too, if God pleafes^ as is evident by our opinion of the Lord's Day. Let therefore our Advcrfaries fhew, their feftivals are thus prefcrib'd, and they will put an end to ihe contro- verfy about them. As 10 places^ we think there is now no holinets in them, as I have eliewhere faid. The reft of this paragraph is eafily anfwer'd, from what I have now faid j and therefore fince there is no need to infift upon it, I ^aften to other matters. fSttjrA^t. lib. yii. £. 1^9. joS // ViKDic AT ION of Part III. As to the number of our fejlivahy which our yfdverfaries mal^^ fticb ado about y .ps if hy this meayis liork^n^ peoj^le ivere Jiarv*A 5 // they he reckon d «^, they ivill not he fonyid more than tiventy eight : and they are fo divided amon^ the fever al months^ that they come no oftner^ than ivhat may zi'ell conjiji "with the hitjjnefs ej labouring men^ even tho^ they Jhould ftriBly ohferve them."*^ This is no fair reprefentation of the cafe. For firft, our Author is out in his reckoning, fince they are twenty nine in number. And if we ihould only confider the matter thus, the Holidays of human inftitution, will be above half as many> as thofe of divine appointment : But to thefe we mutt add two other feftivals, viz, the xxixth of yiay^ and the vth o( November, And fince there is as much rea- son to forbear working on Fatt days, as on thofe of Thankf- giving, their number ought likewife here to beconfider'd. Now the days of fatting or abftmcncein the Church oiEng- land:\tQ all the Fridays in the year, except Chrijhnas day , all the days in Lent y which, befide theFr/W^jy;, are thirty three; fix more in the Emhcr wecks^ three Rotation days^ and the xxxth of ""January, The fum is xxxi Feaft days, and xcv Fatting days 5 to which if we add the lii fettivals of di- vine appointment, all the Holidays, Feafts and Fafts taken together, make clxxviii. Let now any reafonable per- fons ludge, whether we have not good reafon to pity the cafe of poor working people ? and whether the Fourth Commandment is not defervedly urg'd by us in the prefent cafe ^ when not the feventh part, but almoft half our time is to be devoted to the duties of religion ? We may w-ell here take up the words, which King David with great wifdom utter 'd upon another occafion : Let 71^ no^j: fall into the hand of the Lordyfor his mercies are^reat 5 and let me not fall Into the hand of man. f If the Apottle Peter call'd the Jeivifi ceremonies a yokfy ivhich neither they^ nor their fathers could hear 5 It what would he have faid of this, which is much heavier ? Our Author feems to hint, that their fettivals are not finally obferv'd 3 which is indeed very true now, God having in his tender mercies rclax'd that part of their difcipline 5 yet formerly when they had more power, a man would have been put into the Spiritual Courts, if he went to hi.s work upon a Holiday, after he had been at the Sermon. + But our Author goes on : Ten * i^'^. 30^:. \ I S;;m.xxiv. 14. II Act. xv I'j. 4- .icY pari of a Chap. XI. r/jd' D I s s E N T E R s. 509 Tc« of them fall u^vn the great joUmulties of Chriftnias, Earter, afid WhirluntiJe^ at iihuh times >;o hojy uoulj iiO)\y tho^ they were not boioici to a>iy relliious ohjtrv.iuce of thofe fea- fons. And why fo ? Truly 1 can't perceive, what Ihould make any fcruple it. ^ome of the reji fall on Sundays, om ivkich our u'ldxerjaries do not hold it laufiil for any man to uorl^^ and for the remainder^ they come Jo jeldomy that there ts fcarce ever above one in a month. Sometimes more, and fometinies fewer, fall on a Lord's Day. If we make a computation thro' the whole cycle of the fun, we lliall find there are but cviii of the fellivals, that fall upon the Lord's Day in all that time 3 that is not quite four in a year, take one with another j and as many will fall on the Friday. If we fubftraft thefe, there will remain clxx days in a year (ct apart for religious exercifes, befides the Vigils, which I have not regarded in the computation. Let our Brethren then judge, how good the temper of the Church is. Our Author next proceeds to treat of the particular feftivals of the Church of England^ and their antiquity. The feaft of the yinnunciation iias ejlabltf^d in the Church l>t^ the days of Athanafius, A,D. 240. iiho calls it one of the Dominical feafis, * Athanafiti^ was not born in the year 240; fo that I fuppofe 'tisfalfe printed for 340. I fhail lay no- thing of the teftimony, becaufe he has not refer'd us to the place, where 'tis to be found. But I am much out ia my guefs, or he cites fome fuppoiititious writing for the true Athanajitis, The feaft of the Nativity feems to have been obferv^d from the very Jirji beginning of Chrijiianity, Tb^ moji antient Fathers mention it as fuch, 'Tis moft certain no fuch feaft was obferv*d by the Catholics in the three firft ages of Chriftianity: nor can one witnefs be produc'd of any fuch feaft before the fourth Century, and that well ad vane 'd too. The firft we read of» who obferv'd any feftivals in honor of Chrift, are, if I am not very much miftaken, the heretical followers of BafiUdes. I will here tranfcribe a notable paflage oi Clement of Alexandria 'j by which it will appear, that thofe Heretics celebrated the feaft of Chrift's Baptifm, if not alfo of his Nativity, at the right time of the year, as they perfuaded themfelvcs 3 and that the Catholics were uncertain of the true * i'^^ i^^ yio A Vindication of Part III true time of his birth, and kept no Holiday in memory of it. *' There are fome, fays he^ who with greater curiofity •* fix not only the year, but the day our Saviour was born ^ ** which they fay was the 28 year of yht^ufins^ on the •* 25 d^y of the month Pachon. The followers of Baji- ** likes celebrate alfo the day of his Baptifin^ fpending *' the whole night before in reading. Ihey fay it was ^' in the 15 year of TiheriM ^ on the 15 day of the *' month Tuh'i. Some fay it was the if of that month. . 3^0. t £nicnd. Temp ^ iid.Qr Can. Cbion.]?. 99* Chap. XL the Dissenters- 5ir But what a fine witncfs docs he give us of this ? A for- ry trifling writer of the 14 Century, of no credit. '* This *• Nicef>hon(s^ fays Cajuuboftj is a moll fabulous writer, and *• of no judgment 5 as is well known to the learned, and '^ I have before obferv'd. Wherefore, whatever he fays, ** I value it not a rufh, except there be fome other autho- **^ rity for it. How often does Baroniu^ himfelf defpife, *^ rejeft, and confute him ? " * Now Nicephomsy as far as appears, is the only author of this fine llory. Dr. Cave thinks h^e might perhaps have it from Sancoyt l/ieta^hrajies. If that be true, he will not deferve much more credit upon his account, fince Simeon^ tho' an antienter writer, is not lefs filly and fabulous than himfelf 5 of which Mr. AW^ has given us proof enough. t Kay, there are fufficient evidences, that this (lory of Nice^horus is falfe. For who can believe, that twenty thoufand Chriftians could at that time meet toge- ther in one temple ? It does not yet appear, the temples of Chriftians, during the ten firft perfecutions, were large enough to contain fo great a number. And when our Ad- verfaries find it will be to their purpofe, they eafily em- brace a contrary opinion 3 as when from the great number of Chriftians in a city they argue, the whole Church could not be included in the narrow compafs of a fingle congre- gation. Befides, as this (laughter vaftly exceeds all that are mentioned by Eufehius and LaHantius^ 'tis incredible that neither of them ihould fay a word of it, where they par- ticularly treat of the perfecution at Nlcomedla^ which was alfo the place of LaHantlus's abode. Nay, Eufihius^ after he had given an account of this perfecution at Nicome- dia^ prefenrly adds : ** That the numbers could hardly be *' reckoned up of thofe Martyrs, who afterwards fufFer*d ia *^ each Province ; and efpecially in Jfrlca^ 'Manrkanla^ The- *' t^;V,and £e/?pr. "il But if twenty thoufand were flain toge- ther at one time in NicomeMa^ how could the number of Martyrs be the greateft in thofe provinces? For Eufelim fpeaks of it as a m.onftrous thing at Thebais^ one of thofe provinces : " That fometimes ten, fometimes above twen- ^^ ty, fometimes near theefcore, and fometimes an hun- *' dred perfons, men with their wives and children, were *' llain in one day .''4^ Let the reader compare the learned •'* Exercit. i./(?^. i-T. ] The Aporrary of tb<^ litter limfi \ H E lib. xii'i. c. bs ± c'h.fp- o ' ■ 512 -/? V I N D I c A T I o N of Part III. Mr. Doduell difcourfing in like manner of the feunefs of the Martyrs 3* who t.tkes no notice of this fable, as un- worthy to be nicntion'd, tho' as contrary to his argument a$ to mine. In the eailern Churches, this feltival of the i5 of December came firtt into ufe, in Chryfojiom's time, as he exprefly tcftifies : '^ 'Tis nor, fnys he^ quite ten years •' ago, fince we were informed of this day."t I'hey re- ceiv'd it from thofc of the well, as he afterwards tells us. Sca/iger writes thusconcernmg it : '' Cbr^yo/Zo^w himfclf tells *' us in that Oration, the cullom of keeping that day was *' brought to Conjiantino^le by the Komarjs, but ten years be- ** fore J and that it had indeed been us'd to be kept for *' fome years by the Romans^ of whom thofe of Conjtanti- *« no^k learnt it. All thefe things flaew the novelty of the ** religious obfervation of that day. Among the iiomans ** who began it, I find none more antient than A^nhroje^ ** that aflign the nativity of our Lord to the 25 of Decern- ** her 5 if you except that pretended Clement^ who in the *' xiii chci^, of i^'Ooli^Vy fp^aks of this, as inftituted by «* the Apoftles, which was not in ufe till a little before *' Chryfojrom's time. 'Ml But 1 fear a fuppofititious ^/>^i?>'Oji? imposed upon the great Scaiir^er, lie feems to refer to the Sermons De Natali Domini^ which are unjuftly fathered up- on him. Ambrofe himielf, when he is treating of the na- tivity of our Lord, fliys not a word of it 5+ but whether he does in any other of his genuine works, 1 cannoc cer- tainly fay. The fuift of Circumrijlon is not very antie>n. The jirji that mentions It is Maximus Taurinenfis, ivho fljurtjl) d A. D. 450, if the injcr lotion of his Homdy^ In circumcilione Domi- ni, inay he alloiv'd to be genuine • for there is nothing uUon the JuhjeB in this Homily. The true title is: Dc Kalendts Januarii Increpatio : J Riproof for them that keep the frft of "January. For fo far is Maxnnns from efteeming it a Chriftian feflivai, that he blames men for oblcrving the day, w^hich many others do befidc him. Hence 'tis plain thofe words, In circumc'ijione Domini^ arc not ALiximus^s,"^ But at length our- Author has found out a true date to this Holiday, namely^ the twelfth moll fuperlHtious and barbarous Century. For * Inter Dlifcrt. Cyjr. fd.^t. o \ Horn, in N..t. Dom. |! Dc Emend. Temp. h'h. vi. p. 541. -"j: Coinm. ir> Luk. cb.ip. ii. i?^ irtit. * J idc S:rni. 17. ijjtcr Amhroiii opera, c^ Cbrylort Horn. cont. eos qui nov. obreiv, ctijtm CitZL i6- Cone Turon. ii. A. ^67. i^- Confil. Antiiiod. A. 5i«. 1 Chap. XL the D rss^ n t e r si 513 For fo he adds : Sr, Bernard has Samom upon ity about A. D. 1 140. In the next Centmy we jind tt tn the Councils cata!q^{H€5 of fcjiivals. Wirh good reafonnow, we congra- tulate our Churchmen upon the difcovery of their ancejiors^ rJ:oje cujloms they follow.^ Cafanbon agrees with our Author, and tells us : *' They, who five hundred years ago, gave *' an account of the feltivals of the whole year, have *' not mcntion'd this of circumcifion. '' f And there .are few of the Popilli Holidays that may not be defended by as great antiquity as this. Indeed, if cur AJverfaries would imitate the antient Church, they fliould keep this as a faft. li But he pretends to have better antiquity for the next feaft, of Purification <^ other^ife call d the Prefentatton of Chriji In the temple , which, he fays, "v^as tnfiituted by the Empero)* Juftinian, about the year 54.2, f "we maybelie-jc modern Greeks writers , tho\ Chryfo&otn J eems to.hai:e anHomVy «^o?nt. Every body knows, thofe modern Gr^f-(^ writers ufe to place the beginning of the cuftoms of their own time In the moll: diftant ages, to procure them the greater veneration. And I queftion very much, whether any author can be produc'd^ who mentions this feftival before the ninth Century. As to Chryfojlom's Homily, here refer'd to, befides that Sir H^nry Savi! fufpected it to be none of his, there is not a w^ord in the whole Homily concerning this feaft, which is contrary to Chry'^ojlom's cuftom, when he has any Sermon upon fuch occafions. And if becaufe he has an Homily upon the m.eeting of our Lord Jefus Chrift, and the Bl. Virgin, and Simeon^ we may conclude that in his time they kept an Holiday upon this occafion 5 we may by the fame reafoning infer, they kept others fox Abraham^ for the man that had the palfy mention'd in Mattheiv^ and for ano- ther mention'd in john, . For concerning thefealfo, he had Homilies. The ftaft of the RefurreHlon ii-as plainly of Jpojlolical tnfii^ tut ion. There were great dtfputes between the eaflern and wejiern Churches about the day where on it fiouldbe kept. That it was very antient, I grant 5 but yethardly believe it to have had fuch an inftitution. 'Tis not probable, the Apoftles, who in dehvering the Chriftian religion to the O o world Jl ^y-'P 30T. edit. Lat. \ Exerdt. ii. fs^- 9. y Ind, Hifp. De Off. Lui. /i^. i. c.^9' J * i! 514 ^ Vi-NDiCATioN of Part III. world fo perPefHy agreed with one another, fliould in this particular fo exceedingly differ. Further, that moft an- tient, bitter, and idle conteft between the eaftern and wellern Churches, concerning the time of keeping this feaft, fhews that Apoflolical tradition is not much to be regarded j Uncc both fides pretended to have that for their warrant, tho' the Scripture faid not a word about it. But fince the Churchmen always keep this fellival on a Lord's day, we will not quarrel about it, who think all fuch days are holy. We go on therefore to fomewhat elfe. The fiiiji of the Afccnjxon is not farticulurly mention d in the oldeji ^ariterSy being comprehended in the Jifty days after Eafter,''ufe/^ *ivere all Holidays. One may well wonder, how the Churchmen in this matter imitate the antients. The latter kept Holiday for fifty days together 3 the former only obferve three befide the Lord's days, namely the fecond, third, and fortieth. The latter had no particular regard to Afcenfion day 5 and, for ought appears, no more thought of the Afcenfion on that day, than on any of the reft '-, but the former celebrate one peculiar day, as a feaft in memory of the Afcenfion. Every me muft fee how little agreement there is between thefe things. We agree with our Author, that it wasobferv'd in ^/i<^i«'s time, that is, about the year 400. Concerning Pentecoji^ or Whitfunday^ we will not contend any more than about Eaficy^ fince th it alfo, always falls on a Lord's day, and we grant a regard was paid to it ever fince Terti'JUan^s time $ fo that it is needlefs to fay any thing of our Author's teftimonies. BeccUift the Abojlles u-ere conjiant attendants on our Lord^ and advanced hy him to that hivh Order j every one of them hath his fiay afji^nd him^ to the end ue may meditate on his ho- ly exayn'^ky and endeavour to folloiv the jamejieps of piety and virtue. * Thus, for inftance, the xxviii of O^oher is affign'd to the holy Apottles Snnon and Jude. Now this is all that is done on that day more than any other. Firft the Collet is read : '' O Almighty God, who haft built thy Church *« upon the foundation of the Apoftles and Prophets, Jefus *' Chnft himftlf being the head corner ftone, grant us to *' be join'd together in unity of fpirit, by their dodrine, that " we ' Ta^e 3X1. j Cliiip. XL the Dissenters. 515 *' wc may be made an holy temple, acceptable unto thee^ •' through Jelus Chiiil our Lord, yfrnen^ Then are read the eight firft Verfes of the EftjUe of !?i^^ and the eleven laft Verfes of the xv chaj;. of John, And fo.the example of Simon is proposed to be meditated on by the people, when he is nor fo much as nam'd, or any thing faid with a peculiar relation to him. But what is faid on this feftival may as well on any other. 1 could mention other things in thefe feafts as little to the purpofe 5 but I had rather our Brethren abroad fhould learn them from the Liturgy it felf. And in my mind it looks very childifh, to pretend to pro- pofe feverally the examples of thofe ApoiHes, concerning whom we know nothing at all in particular. But I pro- ceed to our Author's Margin, where he treats furtiier of this matter. In the jirji times there ivere only feftivals in honor of our Lord. Let our Advcrfaries then own, that we come near- eft to the pattern of the firft^ that is the pureft Churchy fince we have no other feftivals but the Lord's days, which are in honor of him : nor let them go on to give us any difturKince, for our imitating the moft antient and perfeft Church, and rejefting the inventions of the latter and more corrupt times. Afterv:ard$ the Martyrs ivere pioujly commemorated, Tbofe pious men, who began this cuftom, did not apprehend what the confequence would be. Our Author places the beginning of it in the year 170, at the martrydom of Polycarf?, Now this in 40 years after was degenerated into grofs fuperftition, as appears by what I have before cited from TertuUian : We make oblations for the dead^ and for their martyrdom on a fated day yearly. This fuperfljtion greatly increas'd in the following ages. And there is no reafon, why we fliould judge thofe cuftoms fit to be retain'd, which fo foon became, if they were not in their very be- ginning, fuperftitious. Our Author after tells us, this was done for thefe rea- fons : That u-e might he inched to the imitation of their godly •Lealy and confinncy urito death^ as ]^di{\\ ffeaks^ Afc. r. 4c. This I own was the true and only reafon of their firft in- ftitution. However I let the reader know, thatJB^yF/is not there fpeaking of the anniverfary feftivals of the Mar- tyrs, but of their fepuichres, which us'd often to be vifi- t^d by Chriftians. But our Author fuggefts another rea- fon of theffe feafts J Md likeii'lfe^ that ^eo^le by fuch tneans G o 2 might 5i5 ^ Vindication 6)f Part UL fnight he hroujlit off from the prof we revels of the Heathen. If their fir(t original be confiJcrM, 1 dont think, any man- ner of regard was had to this dcfign. But when the R«- vtin Emperors embrac'd (vhriflianity, and many of their fubjeits in all parrs began to profefs it, as a national re- ligion, rather in complaiiance to them, than from a con- vidion of the truth of i^ who yet were fond of> or at leid not fuliiciently averfe to their old fupcrftition ^ then 'tis probable the ecclcfiallical governors made ufe of this inftitution to bring them off by little and little : which is confirm'd by the teftimony of TheoJorit^ before mentioned. There might perhaps be yet another reafon for this practice 5 namely, that in the third Century, they might think thele oblations were profitable to the Martyrs, for whom they offered them. And why might they not think fo of them, as they certainly did of all the relt of the faiihiul who weredcparred ? That this was Tt/7w///j«*s opi- nion is plain, not only by his words mentioned before, but by fcveral other places. * In the next Century indeed they thought otherwife of the Martyrs, upon whom they beflow'd many new honors, making them the guar- dians of places, as I fhall fhew afterwards. Hence yiiiftht rejecis praying for tl^e Martyrs, as a great abfurdity. f This conjecture will be the more probable, if Mr. Chil- Ihigziorth's words are true : '' I fee plainly, and with my ^ own eyes, that there are Popes againll: Popes, Councils '*^ againii Councils, fome Fathers againrt others, the fame '* Fathers againft themfelvcs , the confent of one age <* againft the confent of another age, the Church of one *' age againft the Church of another age. "II John the BaptiH, ^Wi^ Stephen, have the fame hoior do^ie them ; one hecaufe he iL\is ChrtB's forer tinner y and the other his firB Martyr. Concerning both he Ipeaks in the Margin. And of the feaft of 5o'^>^ the Baptift he fays: That 'tis ^ery antlent : for Maximus Taurinenfis h.ts a hlomily upo>2 ir, about A. D. 400. Without doubt this is faife printed, both in the Latin edition, and tne Tranflition; for in the fore- going Page the Doctor fays he flour;f)i'd in the year 450. And indeed he is reckoned to have dred in 455, or 4.^6. Now 1 think it unreafunable to call a thing very antient, becaufe * TzieDe Monog..f: lo- 1 Dc Verb. A^oll. Serm. xvii. { Rclig. of Pfot. a fafc uay. c. vi. jecl. 56. '^ap. XI. tic DissFNTFRs. 517 hecaufe nientionM by an author of his time. And by the i'lmc right may many of the Popifh feflivals be f lid ro be very antient. And truly I can't underlKand, how he can expert to de!^end his cauil* by tliefe middle ages of the (vhurch, in the things about which he owns they were often mi (la ken. But he goes on to Stepherr^ and fiys : If ]:is ftjlival was rot orne of the Ji^'Jty there are Homii:es uf?on kirn very atitunt. See Chryfo^J-. ^>7r/ Greg. Naz. Bu Pin and Dr. C^^f both fiiy, *tis doubtful, whether thofe Homilies are Chryfofiom\, But if they were, what do they fignify ro our controverfy ? He is often fpoken of, and highly commended in fermons both by us, and all thofe Chriilians every where, v/ho keep no fcftivai upon his account. 'Maximus 'Taur'mcnfis\:i?A another Homily upon him, which is alio put, but more at large, among Jujiins works. But that our Author may fee how little deference we pay to fuch antiquity, I wiil tell him of Gregory Nyjfenus^ who not only has a Homily upon him, but expreily mentions his feftival in it. Our Author acknowledges : The feafis of the Converjion of St. Paul, of St. Mark, and St. Luke, were mt k^ft before the xii or xiii Centuries : which antiquity we defpife. But the fcafl of the Martyrdom of St. Paul he makfS much ant'iemer. And that notwithftanding their regard to anti- quity, they never obferve. I pafs over feveral things in the Latin edition, which the Tranilitor did not think worth inferring^ and fo I fhall the feafl: of the //o/^' iw«or->;n, for which our Author has produc'd no teftimony at all ; and the feaft o{ All Saints^ which firft fprang from the faperfti- tion of the Heathens 5 and fo I come to that of 6h MichaeL And that the ^eo^le may kjiozv -n^hat benefit Chr'Jiians receive by the yninftry of Jngels^ the fe aft of St, Michael and all Angels ts folemnly ck/ervd in the Church.''^ Now in order hereto, is read on that day this Collefl : ^'* O everlalling God, who halt '' ordain'd and conftituted the fervices of Angels and men '* in a wonderful order 5 mercifully grant, that as thy *' holy Angels alway do thee fervice in heiven, I'o by thy *' appointment they may fuccor and defend us on earthy *' thro' Jefus Chrift our Lord." And for the Epiftle is read T^ev. vii. from Verfe 7 to the 13 : and for the Gofpel, are read the ten firft Verfcs of the xviii of Adatthr^-, What par- O o 3 ticular * JPagi^ 212, 5i8 A Vindication^/ Part III. ticular advantage there is in reading thofe places of Scrip- ture on that day of the year, rather than any other, I cart't imagine. Further, fince many learned and pious men have thought Michael to be no other than Chrift, the Angel of the Covenant • let our Adverfaries confider with what prudence they join him with ordinary Angels, and fo give him no xnoxe honor than they do them. Our Author does not trace the antiquity of this feafl, but contents himfelf with re- jecting the fabulous account the Papifts give of the matter, which he makes our Reformers to have defpis'd. The reafon he alledges, why they, notwithftanding, retain'dit, is not rightly tranflated, but /hould be thus ; In reforming the Church they would not be too fcrnpulous^ and therefore retain d all thofe indifferent things^ which might he any way uftfuL Now this is very falfe. How many feafts of the Martyrs have they rejcftcd, which are not lefs indifferent, than thofe re- tain'd ? Anointing is reckoned by Dr. Hammond indifferent. The vulgar ufe of the fign of the Crofs muft be reckoned by our Adverfaries of the fame nature ^ or they do very ill to alledge Tirtullian's teftimony, which fpeaks only of that ufe of it : The mixture of wine and water in the Lord's Supper, mentioned by 5'r/?i« Martyr^ is as much indiffe- rent 5 and by Cyprian is pretended to be of Angular ufe : and yet all thefe, and many more of the like nature, have they laid afide. Thus far of the feftivals of the Church. It remains that we now treat of her fafls. And here we are told : The fame mean is the rule of their fafis. And what that mean is, (the considerate reader will ealily perceive from what has been faid already. Our li^^ils are only the eves of the feajis of the Jpoflles accord- ing to {primitive difcipline. This is not true: neither all the feafts of the Apottles, nor they only have vigils annex'd to them. For St. Philips and St.'^ames^ tho' they have but one Holiday allow'd betwixt them, have no vigil to go be- We it. The Converfion of St, Paul is likewife without a ijie;//^ and fo he has lefs honor done him, according to our Author's notion of the matter, * than "^john the Baptift, whofefeaft is preceeded with a vigih^ notwithftanding that our S iviour himfelf has affur'd us, that the haft in the king- dom of heaven is greater than he, \ The primitive dfcipline • • he * ^'«^- 305. Lat. edit \ Matth.xJ xi. I Ghap. XL fZ^^ Dissenters. 519 he here talks of, is not the diTciplinc of the three firf}, but of fome later ages of the Church 3 as he /l:icws in the Margin. There he affcrts the vigils of the primitive Chrif- tians were held in the nature of feflivals, whereas the Church oi^ EnglduA s are falls: they held it unltwful to fail between Eaji^r and Whitfunday j /lie appoints thefe vigils as fafts, the eves before Afccnjionddy^ and IVhitjunday : they kept their vigils together in their Churches 3 flie has no fuch nodurnal aflemblies. If the firft original of thefe vigils be inquired after, I am of our Author's mind, they are owing to the primitive perfecutions. yigils^, fays he, iiere antieutly ajjtmhlies of ChrijUans hy ni^ht^ in times of f^erjecution^ lihtn they durji 7!0t meet in the day time. This is confirm 'd by what Pliny and Tertullian fay ot thofe aflemblies. Now if this was the firft reafon of them 3 I can't fee why they Jhould not have been laid afide, when the reafon of them ceas'd. But our Author obferves they praftis'd otherwife : u4)7d they were l{ept «/?, eien in the peaceful times of the Churchy on the exes of great fesiivals. Our Author was miftaken in thinking thefe vigils were at firfl obferv'd in a feftival man- ner, whereas they were kept asfafts. And I wonder he fliould not have perceiv'd this, fince it was moft for his pur- pofe. But he is not lefs out of the way, when he preiends they preceeded not only the Eajler feaft, but the great fefti- vals in general. For I dont find that in the moft antient times they religioufly obferv'd any vigils, but at Eajier, And it appears from Tertullian^ thefe were kept, not as feafts, but fafts. * The Chriftians of that time thought, they were bound by the command of Chrift, Matth, ix, 15. to fail all the while, between the time of his Paffion and his Refurreftion. For they underftood his words, as tho* he would have the time, wherein he was taken away from his Difciples by death, kept as an anniverfary fair. And with I know not what vain fuperftition, they expe^cd the return of the Bridegroom, upon the feaft of the Refur- reclion. This fail: therefore began on Geodfriday^ the day of his Paflion, when they held a general religious full, as the fame author teftifies 3 which was not ended till Eajier day. | The fame thing further appears from Efpiphamus^ who op- pofes the vigils (which were become more numerous in his time) and the faits, to the feafts 3 and gives the fame rea- O o 4 fon f Llb.de Jejun. c. r, t Dc Qrat. in fin. ^, 155. 520 ^A Vindication of Part 111. fon for this faft, which he fhews was ended at the Cock crowing on EaBer day^ when the people us'd alfo to be dif- mifs'd.* This is further confirm 'd by a tradition, which anticntly gain'd a great deal of credit 5 that the fccond coming of our Saviour fliould happen on this very night j for which reafon they kept it with the greater folemnity. I will here alledge two notable teftimonies, one of LaHan- tim^ the other of ^erom^ to fhcw they were of this opinion : " Then, fiiys La^antitt^^ (liall the heavens open, that the *'' light of the defcending God may be feen like lightning ** thro' the whole world. - — This is the night which is *' kept by us with watching, becaufe of the coming of our *' King and God 3 for which there is a double reafon, be- *' caufe then he receiv'd a new life af er his PalTion, and *' becaufe then he is to receive the kingdom of the whole ** world."! He defcribes it indeed in a rhetorical man- ner, as tho' it had been kept as a feaft 5 but that it was otherwife obferv*d, at leaft the former part of it, appears by what has been already cited from TcrtnUuxn and E^ifpha- rtius^ and will yet further appear by this paffage cfj.rom : ** Let me fay fomewhat, that may perhaps be profitable ♦« to the reader. 'Tis a tradition of the jeiiSy that Chrift " will come at midnight, in conformity to what was done *' in E?:yfty rii. when the pafsover is kept, and the de- *' flroyer comes, and the Lord paffes over our tabernacles, ♦' and our foreheads, like their door pofis, are mark'd ** with the blood of the Lamb. Hence, I fuppofe came <' that Apoftolical tradition, that on the EafUr vigils 'tis ** not lawful, before midnight, todi'^rnifs the people, who *< are expefting the coming of Chrift 5 but after that time ** is once paft, we prcfume he will not yet come, and fo " all keep a feftival." II Now then, fince neither perfecu- tion, nor TertuUinn^s interpretation of our Lord's words, JAcitt. ix. I 5. nor this tradition, mention'd by LaRantim and ^erorriy oblige us to keep thefe vigils 3 why fhould we re- tain them? From what has betn faid, the paffage, refer'd to in Eiifehifi^y may be eafily underftood 3 it refers to the vigil before Eajier, 1 dont here regard the pretended Jmbrofe^ who is, in fpite of th^ judgment of the learned Critics, trump'd upon us for the true. But let us hear the reft of what he fays on this Subject. But * Exyof. f^J- Cathol. feH. 22. \ Inftit. lib. vii. Jc vit. beat, c 19. u Commcat. in Abtt. xxv. 6. Chap. XL fk DissEN TE RS. 521 But di!orctn's ^ron-i}?^ in fuch ajjanhl'trs^ they were changed into f^lfis preparatory to jtich fej}i''y:a!s ^ the old nawe of vigils bei>7g Jiill retain^d,^ Thcfe difordcrs were not owing to the '^igUs^ but to perfons going to the tombs of the Martyrs to pray. This was done luperftitioufly, at any time, and gave an opportunity for wanton people to praclife great wickcdncfs; but there could be no danger of this from the t.\^^/-s which were kept in full aflcmblies in the Church. Our Author was here guilty of another grievous miftake, which the Tranflator gives me no occafion to take notice of. I therefore go on to the other fafts of the Church. hi cotiformhy to iihich [primitive difciplinej ive liktii'ife keep Lent, and the four Emher iveekj 5 that hy the one vse 7nay he the letter qualijitd to relifi the joy of the reJttrreBion 5 and may he dijpos^d hy the other to more importunate prayers for the grace of the Ho!y Spirit^ upon all thofe ivho fJoall he admitted into facred orders. I fhall confider thefe falls diftinftly. And as to Lent^ we grant that in the fecond Century a fafl ufed to go before Eajier ^ but utterly deny it was a fafl: like that of our Churchmen, of forty days. The reafon why we dont herein follow their example, is, becaufe we either are ut- terly ignorant of the true motives, upon which they appoin- ted fuch a fafl: 5 or thofe we are acquainted with, feem not to us fufficiently weighty. Nor dare w^e in the mean while offer to God any w-orfliip or fervlce, for which we are not able to render a good reafon. Our firft Reformers judg'd fafting days were prefcrib'd among us, not upon a religious account, but for the advantage of the civil ftate. They knew the people were commanded to eat fifli on certain days, that fo other meats might be fpar'd, that fifliing might be encourag'd, and the number of our mariners in- creased 5 and therefore they earneflly exhorted the people to obey thefe laws. Thus did Latimer^ f Hooper^ II and the Homilies in Q^ Elizaheth's time 3 ± and the Lords of her Council declare the fame thing. * If for fuch reafons alone we were required to forbear fiefh, we Jhould not contend : but when Leyit is required upon a religious account, 'tis quite another matter. Nor can our Adverfaries agree about the reafon of this fafl 3 for fome alledge the example of Chritt, and faft forty days in a ludicrous fort of imita- tion * ^'^g- 3^3. t Serni. Iv. uyon tne Lord's }-rayer, jf>. 143. (I Serm. vii. uyon Jonah. i Homil- oii&i^..part ii. j? 89. * See Griudal's Life, t. 226, Zii. 522 ^A Vindication of Partlll. tion of him 5 but others give quite another reafon for it. So our Author informs us: Onr learned Bijhoj^ Hooper has made it probable^ that our Lent is derrcdfrom a, lil^e cujiom of the Jews, x:^o irent thro' a foUmn courfe of forty Days fenanct before their expiation, 'Tis, I think, a denionftration, this account of the learned Bifliop Hooper cannot be true. For if we fhould luppofe the 'Jeiis icpt a forty days faft before the d^y of expiation, yet the Lent fait cannot be thought to he brought intoufe in imitation of them 3 becaufe then it fhould have been a fall of forty days from its firft original 5 which it moll certainly was not, nor for feverai Ages after it began to be kept. And if thi^ were the ifirft reafon of appoin- ting Lenr, 'tis ftrange no mention, no hintfhould be given of it by any author, who liv'd near the time when it firit began to be obferv'd. But befides, if the je-ss kept fuch a fail 5 yet the primitive Chriftians, who firft fet up thi^ cuttom, would have been fo far from imitating them 3 that they would the rather, if we may believe TertulUan^ have abftain'd from fuch a praftice, becaufe they had us'd it. For thus he explains and carps at the opinion of the Ca- tholics ; " Truly they think thofe days are in the Gofpel *' appointed for fifting, in which the Bridegroom was taken *' away, and that thefe are the only lawful Days forChrif- *' tian falls, the old cuftoms under the Law and the Pro- *' phets being aboli/li'd 3 for where they have a mind, *' they under ftand what that means, The Laiv and the Pro- *' phets uere till John." * Tertullian fpeaks of the faft be- fore Eajier^ which was then in ufe 3 but which was not a faft of forty days continuance, as I will fhew afterwards more fully. I only take notice, the Catholics were fo far from an mcli nation to conform themfelves to the j^^ui/i fatts, that they rather counted them old abolilh'd cuftoms of the Law. I fhall now proceed to confider the teftimonies our Au- thor refers to 3 wherein I ftiall chufe rather to follow the order wherein the Doctor himfelf fet them down^ than that of the Tranflator. The thing he aflerts, and would prove, is : That thi$ Quadra^ffmal [that is forty days] faft has heen obfer^vd ever ftncethl' yltoftles times, i\.nd for this" the firft authority al- ^' ledo'd ' Dc Jejun. c. 2. Chap. XL the Dissenters* 523 'cdg'il IS Eiifehius^ E. H. lib. v. r. 25. Since the Tranlla- ror has not let Jown his words, 1 ihall only give this brief I'ccount ot them : EujehiM^ who wrote in the former part of the fourth Century, there gives his own judgment, concern- ing the controverly there had been between the eaflern and weftern Churches, about the time of keeping Eafter^ and fo of putting an end to the faft before it 3 and fhews he thought the cuftom of thofe in the n^eft was from Apoftolical tradition. But 'tis certain, thofe of the eaft were not lefs confident, that Apoftolical tradition was on their fide. By which it appears, what a vain thing that is, which both parties equally pretended to, and by which they wTre not able to determine this trifling controverfy. Who that confiders this, will ever much believe them^ when they boaft of Apoftolical tradition ^ fince they could not believe one another. Further what are thefe things to his purpofe ? they fhew they had a faft, but not that it was of forty days 3 for there is not a word of any fuch thing in the place. The next pafGige is the next Cha^^ter in the fame Author^, and is taken out cf a Fragment of a noble Letter of Iren^eu'S. I ftiall tranflate this teftimony, becaufe 'tis full againft the practice of tne Church of England. Thus then the Fragment begins : ** There is a controverfy not only ^mid T'^ "/>t^/f^x^ ** about the day, [Dr. IVirb/5 thinks he means £^f^r ^^^ ^ Dr. Grahe fays hc intends the time ofthefajr^ and his following w^ords carry it clearly for the latter] *'but alfo the very man- *' ner of the fitt. For fome think they ought to faft one " day, fome tw^o, fome more, fome forty hours, night and ** day, fivy.u(\['^Ti rh Y\iA>^cfV dv\^r^ making the time of their V* Faji to anfwcr in lenith. " Dr. N. put a period after forty 5 and fo would have made this a clear evidence of their practice. But he had no warrant for it, nor was the thing iair. Some bold Men have taken that liberty with Irencems w^ords 3 but Vahfim and Dr. Grahc give up that pretence. It muft be own'd there is fome difficulty in rhe latt expref- fion. Whence P'aUfius would have chang'd riui^siu into rwrsiav. But Dr. Grahe di (approves his conjedure, an4 makes ^jAc^. in both places to fignify time in general, whom I have therefore follow'd in tranflating it. But I am apt to think, Jrencen^y in the word 7wau<0,o^ti^ would hint to us the reafon why they made their ftft juft- forty hours long. Tertullian informs us, they kept that faft, becaufe of the Bridegroom's being taken away. For the antient Chriftians, " •' ' as 524 !^ Vindication 6*/ Part III. as I fald, thought Chrift commanded his Difciples to faft every year, during the time he was taken away from them, that is, all the while between the time of his Paffion and Refurrcflion. Hence fome, computing the time of his be- ing taken away to be forty hours, made their faft juft of the fame length. If Ircn.fns's Epiftle were perfcft, this conjefture might perhaps be confirm'd by it, as if in the former part of it, he had faid any thing concerning the fpace of time, in which Chrift remain'd under the Vower of death ^ or had hinted the fame reafon, Ttrtullian does^ for their keeping the fift^ one or t'other of which it feems probable he had there taken notice of. But fince the whole Epiftle has not been prefcrv'd, we cannot be certain hereof We leave therefore the conjcflure to the judgment cf the learned. However from Terttdlians account wemay perceive, what was the occadon of their different cuftonivS in obferving this fift. For they who fifted one day, may be thought to undcrftand Chrift, as requiring them only in genera! to faft 3 they that would have it continu'd to forty hours, reckon'd the whole fpace of time between his death and refurreftion for the abfenceof the Bridegroom 3 others judging the Bridegroom was taken away as foonashe was betrayed or condenin'd, made their faft ftili longer. And that there was a vaft diff»rrence all along in the manner of obferving this faft, may appear by what Socrates and Sotlo- men have related in their Hiftories. *But that a Quadragefvmal faji of forty days iv^ obfcrvd^ as our Author affertSyever fince the A^ojilcs days^ is fo fir from being true, that there was no fuch thing for the iirft fix hundred years. This is evident from the Teftimony of Pope Greii^ory^ who died, J. D. 604. In a Sermon of his, upon the firft day of Lent ^ he thus dif- courfes: '^ From this day to Eajier is juft fix weeks, ** which contain xlii days. Of thefe, when the fix Sun - ^* ddys 'dve fiibtrafted, there remain no more than xxxvi as '* days of abftinence. But as the year confifts of 565 days, ** and we aifti£t our felves for xxxvi days, we give as it '' were the tithe of the year to God, S^r."! And I fup- pcfc the reader will cafily think, that at Kon?e they were as forward in thele improvements as any where elfe 3 and that * /.:'/. V. c. 22. Lib. vii. c. iQ. ri^. etian: Epiph. cxp. fidci. i Horn 16 dc div- Lea. EvangcL^- 42 jowp. Ifid. Hiip. de Off. L:cl. lii>. I. c. iib. Chap. XI. f/j^ D IS s E N T E R s. 525 that if they had got no further than xxxvi days there, in DC ye^rs, there had been no fall of xl days obilrv'd in the Church in any more antient times. And as there wis fo great a difference In their manner of obfcrving this fall antiently ^ fo tl;cre were fome who ieem to have been of our mind alfo, who thought there was no ncceffity for any fuch fift j as Dtonyfitt^ AUxcwdrinm in- forms us : " For neither, fays hey do all ahke keep thefe *' fix days of the fart ^ for fome fart all the fix, fome two, " fome three, fome four, and fome none." * And I cannot but think, upon an attentive review of the latter part of the Fragment, which Eiifehiu< has prefer v'd us oflrenceu^^ Epirtle, that this fart had, when he wrote it, but very lately been brought into the Roman Church. Let me fet down the place : *' The Presbyters that governed your Church ** before Sotery I mean, AnlcttuSy PiuSy Hyzinus^ TtleJpko^'uSy '' and Xyfti'Jy neither themfelves obferv'd this fart, [Dr. Grahe here adds in his Tranflation, on the fame dcxy with the Aftatic BijJjoj^Sy for which we thank him 3 fince it iliews, he thought there was need of it for his hypothefis, tho' Iren^HS fays no fuch thing] '' nor fuffer'd thofe who be- ** long'd to them to obferve it. Neverthelefs, they who " did not obferve it, were at peace with thofe who came " to them from other Churches, which did obferve it , al- '* tho' the keeping of it was much more contrary [aiAAi;^ '' hd^liov'] to thofe who obferv'd it not at all " [This is a clear evidence. They who go upon the other fuppoli- tion can make no fenfe of the {/.a/;o« tx impeno no^cae *' dlfc'ifitnae , fjot by virtue of any command of our rellporJ^ *' but according to our own free choice, as every one fees *' caufe from times and circumftances. Which agrees *' with the practice of the ApoiHes, who inipos'd no other *' yoke of any i\{\ to be obferv'd generally by Chriilians." *- We gladly embrace this opinion of the anrient Catholics, that all fafts, which are not commanded by our holy re- ligion, are free, and left to every ones pleafure. And I would fiin have our Churchmen produce that command of our religion, that obliges us to obferve this faft of Lent^ or the Ember weeks. 1 am fenfible there are fome, who, by the nova difcit^Hna^ mentioned by Tertullian^ underftand the difcifline of the Montan'tjis 5 and think he oppofes this not to the old difcipline of the "jews^ but to that of our Saviour and his Apoftles. But which ever fenfe his words are taken in, my argument, with a little variation, will have the fame force. From what has been faid, it may eafily appear, not only that the faft of the antients was of a dif- ferent length from that of the Churchmen, but that it was kept upon quite another account. They kept it becaufe of the Bridegroom's being taken away 3 but the reafon of the Church's keeping it, may be learnt from the Colled: for the firft Sunday in Lent : " O Lord, who for our fakes *' didft faft forty days and forty nights, give us grace to *' ufe fuch abftinence, that our flefti being fubdu'd to " the Spirit, we may ever obey thy godly motions in " righteoufnefs and true holinefs, to thy honor and *' glory, S^r. As for what our Author refers to in Orlgeny we can't tell whether it be Origin Sy or Rujfinu^\ teftimony 3 befides that, it does not help us to determine, what fort of a Quadra- gefvna it was. I /hall, with the Tranflator, pafs over many other tef- timonies, which the reader may, if he pleafe, find confi- der'd in the Latin edition. I come therefore to the laft he mentions 3 which is that of Socrates^ who treats of this matter with great judgment 3 and fhews that nei- ther the feaft of Eafler^ nor the faft that precceded it, was owing to Apoftolical tradition 3 nor does he mention ♦ Dc Je-ua c. a. Chap- XL the D i s^ e kt e r s^ 529 mention a forty days (dH. He fhews on the contrary, tha^ in different places they us*d very different cufloms^ that at Rome they fafted three weeks before Eajier^ except- ing only Saturdays and Sundays , that in lllyncum^ y^ch at a ydnd ^ilexandria^ they fafted fix weeks before Eajur 3 that in other places, they began their faft feven weeks before Eajier^ but fafted only three of them, and but five days in each 5 and that they all agreed in calling thefe their fafts ^adragejjma. Now thefe cuftoms did not more differ from one another, than they all manifeftly do from that of the Church of England. I have faid enough, if not too much, of Lent : it re- mains now, that I confider the Ember weeks. Thefe, he tells us, were appointed, that we may be difj?cs'd by them to more importunate prayers^ for the grace of the Holy Spirit upon all thofe iL'hoJhail be admitted into facred Orders. Thefe Ember ueekf are the Wednefday^ Friday^ and Saturday^ after the firfl: Sunday in Lenty afier the feaft of PentecoB^ after September 14, and after D^rc7?;kr 13. Thefe things were not praflis'd in the primitive Church. For the Lent faft in thofe antient tithes was much fhorter 5 nor did it begin fo long before Eafter^ as to be able to take in thefe fafts. Nor were any Saturdays in the whole year, one only excepted, then kept as fafts, as I have fhewn already $ altho' the Church of Rome had, indeed, a more peculiar fafhion, in Socrates's time 5 when they fafted all the Saturdays in the year, except thofe in Lent. Concerning the rife of thefe fafts, our Author fays : That thefe Ember weeks, or Jejunia qua- tuor temporum, u^ere of antient obfefcation^ appears from Leo the GreatV Sermons upon them^ about the middle of tit jfth Cen- tury,' Since there are no footfteps of thefe fafts in any antient author before Lco^ I believe they were inftituted a little before his time. Leo makes the faft of the tenth month to be inftituted before his time. *' Our holy ** Fathers, fays he^ being divinely infpir'd, appointed the " faft of the tenth month, that when they made an " end of gathering in the fruits of the earth, a reafona- ** ble abftinence might be fet apart for God."* And he was much in the right, in thinking a faft ought to be ob- ferv'd, which was appointed by Fathers divinely in pired. But fince thofe Fathers feem to us neither very antient, nor di- P p vinely • Sciai.v, De Jcjun. decimi xacnfis.^ , 530 ^A Vindication of Part III. vinely inft;iy'Jy we dont much regard their authority. Nay we rejeci that antiquity, which cannot be commended, but to the great detriment of the Reformation. Leo is taken notice of by Proteftant writers, as a great promoter, if not the firll beginner, of the papal tyranny. And I would fain have our Adverlaries firft defend themfelves againlt the Papifts, who argue from his authority, before they attempt to run us down with it. Thefe words of his are indeed remarkable, and he has many the like in his Sermons on the faft of the tenth month : *' On Saturday we will keep *' our -^ytgils in the Church of .the bleffed Apoftle Peter^ *' who will vouchfafe, by his interceffion, to help our " prayers, fafts,and alms. " * The Ordinations of the Clergy were perform'd in the antient Church at any time of the year, as there was occafion. If Gelafius order'd they /hould ordain four times in a year, his order was new, and had not been known even to his predeceffor, L^o the Great. Our Author has omitted the three Rotation days^ being the Monday^ Tuejdayy and TVednefday^ before Holy Thurfduy, They were firfl appointed upon the account of continual earthquakes and lempefts at Viennay and the great Church taking fire in that city, which St. Mamertus put a flop to by his prayers, f Whereupon he eftabhfh'd thefe days to thank God for his mercy, and to prevent the like calamities for the time to come. I dont fee how other nations fhould be obliged to obferve them, efpecially after fo many ages. They are contrary to the practice of the primitive Church, which reckon 'd all fafting between Eafter and JVhitfuntide finful. But our Author, at length brings in fome body thus obje<^^ing, againfl what he has hitherto faid in this Chap- ter concerning both their feafts and fafts : But God Jays^ Six days fhalt thou labour : Therefore the Lord's DayjVfhicb fucceeded in the room of the Sabbath^ is the only day to be k^^t holy ; all the rtfi are for our iiorldly affairs S\ Now this feems to him fuch an abfurdity (as he afterwards calls it) as is moft J eafily confuted. He therefore anfwers : What man in his f vits e'\:er took^ this claufe for any thing hut a j^'ermilJion ? But he may take notice, there have been thofe, who have under- Hood thofe words, as carrying in them not only afermif fwn. ♦ Sam. i. t ^ V.t Du Pia Noirv'. Bibl tom^ v. j), 9.' W^^S' 3^4- Chap. XII. the Dissenters. ,531 /iOHy but 3, precepty and yet have been thought to be i>i thdr wits. Neverthel^fs, that we may not feem ill-nitur^, let us fuppofe they are only expreffive of a permijjion. By what right then do our Adverfaries take away from us that liberty, which God himfelf has granted us ? God lays : Six d^iys fialt thou lahonr. The Churchmen fay oh the contrary : Six days thou fialt t:ot Uhonr. Strange bold- nefs ! By their own inftitutions they would deprive all men of that very liberty, which they allow God has by exprefs commaqd univerfally granted. CHAP. XII. 0/ Bowing at the Name of Jefih\ OUR Author treats of two things in this Chapter 2 Firtt, What the Title exprefle^ : Secondly, Bowmg towards the Altar. Concerning the former our opinion is. That all the worfhip we offer to God ought to be rational. But we can fee no reafon, why we fhould rather bow at the name of 3efuSy than at the name Gody ^ehovah^ Chrifty or Saviour^ which is the fame with ^efus. But our Advferfaries have not, as yet, gratify 'd our moft juft requeft : That they would either from theHolyScriptures, or the nature of the thing, give us a reafon for this worfhip. And therefore it cannot feem ftrange, we do not obey their commands. But let us hear our Author : Tl^e re^refentationivhich thefe men niakf of our exiraxa?cint beha'viour in this part icuhdry as tho* 'We were fraf! tic and turbulent in this gejiure^ is" ajhrahr of rude rhetoric^ very familiar to them on fuch orcajions, iVe' d6 reve- rence to our Lordy at the mentioning of his name^ hy a very fedate inclination of the body ^ not making the leaji nolfe^ or giving the leafi difiurhance to any one, * But who knows not, that the cuftom^ of thofe times, wherein this objeflion was made, are nor to be learnt from the prefent prartice ? Oar Adverfarfes have had the advantage to learn by our admonitions; to fhew their reverence in this refpeft more decently, than in former times. Hence all the late P p 2 w^riters * ^ag. 316. 532 'y4 V I ^* D T c A T I o N of Part III. writers on our fide,never mention any thing of the fcraping of the feet, which is, what the Dodor here particularly refers to. But 'tis plain from Archbifhop Wbitgift^ that there was fufficient ground for this objection in former times. For when he is anfwering that paflHige of the j^d- ^nonluoyiy which our Author iets down in his Margin, he is fo far from denying the truth of the objcflion, that he defends the cullom. He fays : ** Kneeling at the name of ** Jcfus is indifferent." * And certainly a whole affem- bly can't kneel down in the niiddleof the fervice without fome conliderable noifc. He fiyslikewife : " Thishinder- *' eth no more the word being read, then hawking and *' fpitting hindereth the fame being preach'd."t By which he in effe(^T: owns fome noife was made* And truly if every perfon made as much noife in his bowing, as a perfon does with haw^king and fpitting, the difturbance muft have been confidcrable. I dare fay, any one would think fo, if he w^re to fee a whole congregation hawk and fpit together by confent. II Our r e viler s thinks theynfe I xes dejicient in good breedings if they do not mal^ hoivs to one another in their Meeting-houfes^ uj^on fnee-Lbig.^ Juft thus the Papifts argue from the refpeftfhewn to the King's pifl-ure, that honor is to be paid to the image ofChrift. But Bifliop vSri///w2;j?ffr anfwers, that the dif- pute is about a religious, and not a civil refpeS. * We might liere ufe the fame anfwer, if his aflfertion were true. But 'cis mdeed falfe. And tho', I thank God, 1 have been brought up among the Difienters from my infancy, yet ne- ver before did I hear this aflerted to be their cuftom in their aflemblies. Hence our Brethren may Judge, what credit this Author deferves, when he talks of our prayers, f7. 259. fince he is fo egregioully millaken in a thing that is certain. For 'tis well known, that fome of our writers have condemn'd this practice, even out of worfhip,asfool- ifh, fuperftitious, and heatheni/h. Nay, the JVeflminJler y/Jfemhly have declar'd againft all fuch kind of falutations^ as our Author charges us with, in the time of religious wor/hip 5 nor have we yet departed from their judgment. If Chriji is to he worfLip^d in our public prayers^ 'u;hy not at the mention of his name^ uherehyy as by a common token ^ the -ii'hole * Dcf. of the Anfw />. 741. \ p- 742. )! Co)Kb. the 52. I^junft. of C^Elizab, ^. J55?. ii'-3i7 * idolatry of the Church of R9«rf, ^. 21. Chap. ). XIL fk D I s s E N T E R s; 533 ii/:o/f congregation may be at oyjce alarnt^J^ and excited to offer ujf thetr itK'itt'd demotions to (jod their S.ivtour ? Our Author does not here refleft fo much upon us, as upon his own party. For the fame reafon holds, concerning the other names of our Saviour and of God. Kay the name Jeffi^^ whenever 'tis pronounc'd, ought to Oir them up to pay the fame reverence , whereas they only bow their heads (as he prefently tells us) when they recite hisname in the Creed. For thus he goes on : But 'tis aga'mji all rea- fon that ive are charged in being over officioU'S and troublejom in this iray of honoring our Lord, For u-hen the name of Jefus occur Sy either tn reading Holy Scripture ^ or in the prayers of the Li- turgy^ wefeldom take that exprefs and joUmn notice of it^ as we doy when we pronounce the ylrticles of our faith in the Creed, Who does not fee, how difagreeable this is to the argu- ment he juft before alledges ? Yet, I believe what he fays is true, concerning moft places. For tho' this cuftom is more frequently us'd in Cathedral Churches 5 yet in parifh Churches, 'tis, tho' contrary to the command of the Con- vocation, almoft laid afide, except only in faying the Creed. And our Author's excufe feems not, to me, very civil to the Synod, which has otherwife determin'd 3 as will appear by their own wTords : *' And likewife when in time of di- " vine fervice the Lord Jefus fhall be mentioned, due and *' lowly reverence fhall be done by all perfons prefcnt, as *' it hath been accuftom'd. " * But our Jdverfaries would perhaps be hfs free with their tongueSy if they well confider'dy that together with us^ they involve almoji all Protejiants in the fame crime of ido- latry, f But who of us ever charg'd them with idolatry upon this account ? Let the reader look back upon thep:iffages which in his Margin he has tranfcrib'd from the writers of our fide. There is not the leafl: mention of the ido- latry of this rite. Bowing, indeed, to the Altar is charg'd therewith ^ but that is a very different cafe, as we fhall fee prefently. In the mean while let us go on with our Author: For all who receive the Auguftan conflfony and many other Churches in Germany, do agree with us to mahe a low reverence at the naming of Jefus. II I am wholly ignorant what thofe P p 3 other ♦On. xviii. t^^g- 3i8. 'j'^^-3i9- 5 34 ^Vindication o/ Part III. Ofher Chtirch.'5 of Germa>:y (hould he. Bat as to the Lu- tl era)?ry I think thofe words of Mr. ^ohn Brentlm^ a Lu- thtrayi Divine, deferve to be taken notice of : '' When *' Paitl fays : In the name of Jefus e':ery knee fhall how ^ &C. " 'tis ncc to be underftood, as tho' men ought alv/ays to *' bow their bodily knees, when ever his name is mentioned. *' This is a childifli ceremony, and to be us'd fometimes " for the fjke of children. " * Ntiy the more modcjl Calvinifls, tho^ they dont approve this cereaiOKy^ ^-y their o'u;n j^rntlice^yet ar: far from condtranin^ others li'ho life It, And to this purpcfc Pxrem is cited in the Mar- gin. Bit who can help wonderiTig that P^r£/*5, fo often condenin'd by the Churchmen, and vvhofe Works were publicly burnt by a decree of the Univerfity of Oxford^ iliould now be reckon'd among x\\q more modfi of the Calvi- nifls ? But thus uncertain anJ inconftanc men ufe to be, when they weigh things in a f-ilfe balance, and judge of other mens manners, according as they feem to agree or difagree with their own methods. I am very well pleased, the Doflor acknowledges, the Apollle's words, Ph'tl. ii. lo. which occafion'd this cuftom, dont at all relate to it. For if it be owing to mens raiftaking that phce, fince the miftake is now dif- covered, 1 can't think why we fliould not lay it afide. But our Author is deceived, when he fiys prefently : But neither ive^ nor they [the Foreign Divines] are fo dull as to think^y that thefe 'u:ords can he ri7oroiifl\ apply^dto this j^urj^ofe»\ For Dr. Hammond feems to follow Grotlnsy and not to diflike that interpretation. Thus Mr. john Browyiin^^ a man of confiderabie learning and reputation, contends we muft keep clofe to the letter of this text. 'I Nor does Dr. Hey- /)'^ otherwife explain it, alledging ^/wtre/f, and others of the antient Fathers, as maintainers of that interpretation.^ BiHiop 'Montaz^HS words alfo, concerning this place, ought not to be pafs'd by : '' The Church commends this place *^ to the people, underftood in no other than a literal *' fenfe. So that as often as that moll glorious *' name, and efpecially in a holy place, and in divine *' fervice, is pronounc'd by the reader, and heard by the ^* people, they prefently, in token of humility, fubjeftion^ ''and h^ * Ci'.el by Af)-. Hu-i.nian Arol. t- 10 >• t ^'?«- Sy^off Crit. in loc (I Six rm. concern, the Prr.ycri*nd FAUsot liiC Church- ^.21. :t Cypr. Angl.^. ay. Chap. XIL f /je^ D I s s E N T E R s.' 535 ** and obedience, bow their bodies to an adoring pofture, ** and bend their knees, and own him as their L,ord. ** Which anticnt cullom the Church of I^n'/Jayid alio ufes ** in her feveral parillics, and carefully defends it by an *' ecclefiaftical law, the Scftariesin the mean while /hew- ** ing their teeih and fpeaking againft it. '* * To thefe I may add Mr. 7ofc>^ Suayiy who affcrts that the Apoftle in that place in[oins this ceremony, and endeavours to anfwer our Author's reafon for the contrary : '' For, fays ke^ *' why may not the Aportle as well fpeak here, after the " manner of men, and afcribe knees to Angels, as he does, *' elfewhere, tongues ? f We are now come to the other controverfy of this Chap- ter : Of ivorJJj'i^'wg towards the Altar. \\ And here the Doftor obferves, That no rule of their Church injoins it. So far then I think file is to be commended : for I would not have the leaft fliew of idolatry among Proteftants. And truly if it were injoin'd, I /liould think it a futficient reafon to forfake the Churchmen, tho' there were no other. But if this be not (as it really is not) injoin'd by any rule of the Churchy how can Laud^ the famous Archbi/hop, and (as fome rec- kon) Martyr of the Church, be vindicated from the charge of afFefting a tyrannical power ^ fince he not only commanded the ceremony, but feverely punifli'd thofewho refus'd to ufe it ? But we may fee there are Churchmen, who are ready to follow his example. For what elie can be the meaning of thefe words of our Author ? But what f authority had commanded peof?le to ohferve it ? What mighty offence had been ijt all this ? 'Tis no more than a rule to them^that at their coming into the Houje of God^they fhall fhevj \ome bodily reverence^ in regard of the fanBity of the place^ and this towards the Altar 5 that is looking firaight forward (for in moft places where this ceremony is us'dy the doors are wefi^ 'ward, and bring men in ivith their faces to the eafty that if, to- ward the Altar, ^ But becaufe the Church hath not diretled • them to turn to the right hand^ or to the Itfty or quite backc^^ards^ with worfe manners fiill 3 thertfore fb^y muji needs be thought to worJJjif? tables and carbetSy andto comtnit grojfer idolatry than the very Papi/is, But how /hall we be certain of this pretended fanBity of their temples ? We know of no inherent hohnefs P p 4 in * Oiig. Eccl. ^art i. ^. 123. \ Piofanomafl. Matt ^ 49. o |l ^xg- iilo. 53^ '^Vindication of Part IlL in wood and ftones 5 nor do we apprehend that one place is more holy than another, under the New Teftament. Our Advcrlaries would have every one, when he goes into a Church, tho' there be no body in it, fhew reverence, becaufe of the fan6i:ity of the place 3 which favours of fuperllition, to fay no worfe. Befides, if men only bow right forwards as they enter the Church, what need is there of the{e v/ords^towards the y4ltar^. Nay, when they happen to enter the Church, not having their faces towards the Altar, why do they then turn their backs to the aflembly, that fo they may bow towards the Altar ? I /hould think there is a greater holinefs in the Church of God, that is, his people, than in their Altars. And yet I havefeveral times feen this, however unmannerly^ praftis'd among them. Befides, if our Author had no defign of impofing upon his reader, why did he not tell us for what reafon, not only they who enter the Church, but they alfo, who come to, or go from the Altar, make their bows. And why may not thefe excufes, he makes for his party, as well de- fend the ?ntient Idolaters? Why might not the Ifraelltes in like manner have pleaded, they did not worfliip the Golden Calf, or thafe at Dan and Bethel^ but only God towards them ? And that the reafon why they bow'd to- wards them, was only becaufe that coming tow.irds them, they neither turned to the right hand, nor to the left^ or quite hackcdcirds^ 'ivith ivorfe minners JiiUy hut low^d their bodies Jirai^ht forward ^. There are two forts of idolatry ,as we learn "from the Scripture : one, which is forbidden in the firft Commandment, when a falfe God (as Baal) is worfliip'd ^ the other, when the true God is worlhip'd, but the worfhip is direfted towards any thing, (as the Golden Calf) that neither has any holinefs in itfelf, nor is any fymbol or token of the divine prefence. And this we find is forbid- den in the fecond Commandment. How therefore our Adverfaries will be able to clear themfelves from all blame in this matter,'tis their bufinefs to confider. I fliall conclude this Chapter with the words of the excellent Archbiihop VJher : ^' Altho' the grofs idolatry of Popery be taken ** away from amongft us, yet the corruption cleaveth ftill ** to the hearts of many , as may be feen in them that make «' courtefy to the Chancel, where the high Altar flood. * CHAP, ♦ Bo.ly of Divimry, ^. 23 i. Chap. XIII. f ^j^ D I s s E N T 1 R s. 537 CHAP. XIII. Of readhig Jpocryphal Books in the Church. T ^Here is a hot difpute between the PapifKs and Prote- ftants, about the Canon of the Scripture. The Pa- pifts have for feveral ages commended to the people the Apocryphal Books, as tho' they were of equal authority with thofe of the Old and New Teftament 5 whereas the Proteflants with one confent agree, they are not to be reckoned Canonical, and have every where, except in Eng- Und and Ireland^ laid afide the public reading them in the Church. The queftion is, whether this is not prudently done by our Brethren abroad, and whether the public reading thefe books, is without any danger prefcrib'd here among us? Few of the common people ever look into the Articles of the Church of England^ to learn what her dortrine is j but what they know of it, is from daily ufe and cuftom. So that when the Jpocry^ha is read at certain times, inftead of the Holy Scriptures, and the Book of Common Prayer, which is in every ones hands, after fetting down the order how the Pfalter is appointed to be read, prefcribes the courfe of both the Canonical and Apocryphal Leflbns, under this one general title : The order how the reft of the Holy Scripture is appointed to he read: they give a handle to the crafty Papift of impofing upon the ignorant fort 5 nay, and the churchmen themfelves fomtimes lead them into a great miftake. But our Author tells us : The Church exprejly affirms^ that the Canonical Books are the only rule of faith. ^ And for this he appeals to her VI Article. Now it muft be own'd that Article is very exprefs in the matter. But the Church is hardly confiftent herein with her felf $ for in her Homi- lies fhe feems to fpeak very differently of the Apocrypha. I might mention the frequent quoting the Book of Wtfdom^ juft as they wou'd do the Book o( Proverbs^ as tho' it were written indeed by the Wifeman, that is, Solomon. This is done nine or ten times in the three parts of the Homily for Rotation iveekj. Thus Buruch is cited as the Prophet Ba- riich y ■ i^g' 122^ 53^ 'A Vindication 0/ Partlll. Tuch } and his writing is call'd, The uord of the Lord to the Jeivs."^ And the book of Tohit is attributed to the Holy Ghoft in thefe exprefs words : " The fame leflbn doth the *' Holy Ghoft alio teach in fundry places of the Scripture, *' faying : Mercifttlnefs and alms^ivinz^ ^tirgeth from allfins^ and' ** deiivereth fom death^ and ftijfereth not the foul to come into *' darknefsj Scc/'f Now if the Jfocry^ha is the word of God, and ditlated by the Holy Ghoft, I niuft confefs I can't ima- gine why it ihould not be counted Canonical Scripture, and as much a rule of faith as any part of the Sacred Book. This is doftrine, which I am not Latitudinarian enough to fubfcribe, as '^odly and wholefom^ and necefjary for thefe times 3 and which I fhould never care to read in the Church. And I cannot here upon this occafion but take notice, how very tender the Biftiops were in the Hampton Court Conference of the honor of thofe Books 5 which fliews they had themfelvcs got no good by the Church's order for the public reading them. For when Dr. Rainolds ob- jefted againft them, Biftiop Barlow tells us : " The Bi- " fliop of Lo Wo« fhew'd: Firft, for the antiquity of them, " that moft of the objections made againft thofe Books, *' were the oldcavils of the JeivSj rcnew'd by St. jf^row, in <* his time, who was the firft that gave them the name ** of y^pocrypha 3 which opinion, upon V.ujpnus\ challenge, he ^' after a fort dilclaim'd, the rather, becaufe a general ^* offence was taken at his fpeeches in that kind." Firft, f rather Secondly^ *' for the continuance of thcni in the ** Church, out of Klmedoncim and Chemnitim two modern *' Divines. The Bifhop of Wtmon remember 'd the diftinc- *' tion of St. Jerom^ that thefe Books ^te Canonical , for in- *' formation of manners, but not for confirming any matter *' of faith ^ which difiinftion, he fiid, muft be held for *' the juftifying fundry Councils."!! So that the Biftiop of London knew of no objections againft them, bat fome old Jeu^iflf cavils 3 and the Biihop of J Vinton allow'd them to be half Canonical. But how they could be canonical for manners, and not for faith, is too myfterious for my un- derftanding. I ftiould be glad to know, whether the An- gel's teaching young Tohij4 how he might funk away the Devil Jfmodeiii , relates not rather to manners than to faith 3 * Tart, i of the Horn againfl: wilful RebeL j? 28 r. \ Tart ii. of Horn, of Alms Deeds. U f- ^^' Chap. XIII. fi^ Dissents Rf;. 539 faith 5 and whether the Book of Tohit be Canonical to di- refl: our manners in fuch things? Our Author likcwife adds, from the Article : The ylpocry- ffhal [^Books] are read for example of life y and inJlruHion of man- ners 3 hut not to ejiahhfj any JoHrine. We grant many excel- lent things are contain'd in thofe Books ^ but there are fe- ver:il wretched lies told m them too 3 which many think are more likely to make people laugh, and to corrupt mens manners, when they are read to them, than to promote piety 5 altho' the Church affirms : " Nothing is *' ordain'd to be read, but the pufe word of God, the *' Holy Scriptures, or that which is agreeable to the *' fame."* Tho^ flje ejleems the iiord of God the heft meanSy ivhenhy to infill ptety and virtne into mens hearts ^ y^^ fi^ can never he per-* fuadcd that ^tis a fin to read other fort of uritingSy compos d hy the heji of men^ and well fu'ited to the edification of the hearers. For if foy then to what purpofe Jhould there he any preaching of fermons ? How would the people ne^leU the hefi performances of this kjndy if they were once perfuaded^ that it was unlawful for them to hear any thin^^ hut purc^ literal Scripture ? Sermons ferve to explain the Holy Scriptures, and to inculcate the prefcrib'd duties of religion 5 and therefore Minifiers are bound to preach them, altho' no one takes them to bein- fpir'd. But 'tis quite another thing, when foolifh, ab- furd, falfe and wicked things are read inftead of the Holy Scripture. The fenfe of the antient Church was the fame in this^ with that of ours at this day,-\ Dionyfius of Corinth, who livd in the fecond Century^ acquaints uSy that Clement'^ Epiflle was ready according to antient cufiom^ in the Church of Corinth : II and Eufebius fays it was read in his time^ in many Churches. ± But "Jujlin gives a very different account of the cuftom of his time : That the writings of the Apoftles or Prophets were read, as the time would allow.* But what a weak way of reafoning is this? The antients read an excellent and pious Epiftle of Clement to the people : therefore the conjurations of Tohit^ and the forg'd lies of Judith^ Sufan- nah^ Bell and the Dragon^ are to be read to the people inftead of Holy Scripture. But take the reafon of this from * Preface to the Comra. Prayer, cone, the Se v. of the Church, \ Iagil2i» 11 Eufeb. lib. is, ^ Id. lib. Hi, * Apoiii. 54^ A Vindication oj Part III. from the learned Bi/hop BeveriA^^e : " Both thefe Epif- ** ties, fays hey of Cement, are written at the end of that *' moft antient Copy of the Old and new Teftament, " kept in the King's Library (from whence alfo, they were *' iirft publiiTi'd) in the fame hand, and with the fame ** great letters. 4>o that we may probably conjeflure thefe " Epiftles, at the time and place of writing the faid copy, " were reckon 'd among the Canonical Books, according to *' the order of this Canon; otherwife, 'tis hard to give an " account, why they fhould be thus bound up together.''* Now if this conjefture be true, what wonder was it, an Epiftle, which they judg'd to be Canonical, fhould be read in the Church? But what we blame the Churchmen for, is very different. For thofe Books which they acknow- ledge themfelves to be Apocryphal, they not only bind up with the Bible, but read them inftead thereof. St. Auftin relates hoiv the hijiories of the Martyrs ivere read in the African Churchy with certain narratives of miracles obtained hy the Chrijiians Prayers.] j4uftin in that Chapter fpeaks not a word of the reading the hiftories of the Martyrs, altho' the thing is certain enough from other teftimonies. The narratlxes of miracles were indeed read to the people. But the cuftom began in Auftin's time, who firft introduc'd it. But thefe things fignify little in our cafe. For they read them not inflead of Canonical Scripture, nor did they read any thing but what they believ'd to be certainly true , whereas our Adverfiries read that to the people, which they know is certainly falfe. Tfcf Boo/;/o/\Vifdom, Ecclefiaflicus, Tobit, Judith, ctnd the Maccabees, are recommended hy the Coioicil of Carthage, to he publicly read in the ChwrchM To the Council of Carthage^ I oppofe the more ancient Council of Laodicea. which for- bids the reading any Books in the Church, which are not Canonical ;+ and reckons up the Canonical Books exaflly as we do, faving that it leaves cut the Revelation.'^ And when the Council of Carthage recommends thofe Books of iVtf- domy &c. to be read, under what notion does it recom- mend them, as Canonical or apocryphal ? Truly as Ca- nonical. Hear the words of the Canon : *' It feems ** good to us that nothing be read in the Church under *' the * Ir App. Can.lxxxv. Vid. Cod. Can. Eccl.Primit. Vindic. lib. ii. c.9./^.?.I2. t Df Civit, Dei. lib. xxii. w. 8. H Cone. Carthag. Can.xlvii. « ± Can. lix ♦Can.ix. Chap.XIIL the Dissenters.' 541 *' the name of Holy Scripture, befides the Canonical *' Writings. Now the Canonical Writings are, B'r. ** and among them thofe Books are mentioned. Nay, even the Council of Nice reckoned JuMth Canonical, as Jerom tellifies. * Cyprian took the Maccabees for fuch. f The Books of Wifdom^ Ecclejiafiictt^y and Maccabees^ contain abundance of profitable things , and Tobit has fome that are not contemptible 5 but in each of thefe there are fome millakes. And unlefs our Adverfariesdefign to teach peo- ple magic, they would aft more prudently, if they omit- ted the VI chapter of Tobit. But as to the ill conrriv'd Fables of Judith, Sufannah, Bell and the Dragon^ they dont deferve to be read in private. y^y?d Ruffinus tells H6 they "jjere alfo read in his ti^ne^ tho* ne'\:er ynade of equal authority u-ith Canonical Scripture. \\ 1 own, Rujftnu6 fays fo, and feems to have been of that opinion j but I much doubt whether this were the common fenti- ment of that Age. Jerom, as I obferv'd, makes the Nicene Fathers to have had a different not ion of Judith. Nor could 5^ron2 and Ruffmi^s agree about the Canon of the Scriptures. For Jerem rejefts the ftories of Sufannah^ Bell and the Dra- gon, which he feveral times calls Fables. + But Rujfinm reckon'd thefe, or at leaft Sufannah^ and the Hymn of the Three Children Canonical. And yet when Ruffintps ob- jeftedagainft 5^ro/«, that he rejefted thofe additions to the Prophecy of Daniel 3 * he was afraid to defend his opinion, tho' he had plainly enough profefs'd it before, and there- fore moft craftily evades what his adverfary had urg'd againft him : f whence one may well guefs, he departed from the received opinion of his own time. And C^ri/ of Jerufalem fays, no Jpocryjphal Books WTreread in the Church, and forbids the private reading of them. I regard the au- thority of later writers as little in this controverfy, as in many others. And therefore I pafs by what he fays of IJtdoru^^ and Rabanm Maurm, altho' he is grofly mifiaken in the opinion of the former, as will presently appear to any one who looks into his writings. II From what has been faid, I fuppofe, 'tis fufficiently evi* dent the Doftor has in vain attempted to defend his caufe from the praftice of the antient Church. But fince the opinions ^ * Tr£f. in Judith. t Epift ad Cornel. |i RufF. in Symbol. + TrJif, ^"'i^f^'r?' ''*, f ""'"• '" ''''^'°- * ^^^^^- "• ^''^ Hieron. t Vid-. Hi«. Apol. is. (1 r^ci^ Urig. lib. vi. c, i. lUm Lib. Proocmior, 5i4^' 'A Vindication of Part IIL opinions of the ancient writers differ fo much about the Cunon of the Scripture, I will difpatch this matter in a few words. Either therefore thefe Books, which are cali'd u4^ocry'.)haly were at firft reckonM Canonical, and therefore publicly read in the Church , or elfe while they were read, tho* not reckoned at firft Canonical, their authority by degrees and infenlibly increas'd, till at lafl they came to be efteem'd as a part of the Canon of Scripture. Our Author may chufe which he pleafes. If the former ^ the antients are to be commended, whoinjoin'd the reading all thofe books which they counted Canonical , but our Ad- verfaries are to be blam'd, who will not fuffer Solomon s Son^y and other parts of the Holy Scripture, which they 6wn to be Canonical, to be read to the congregation. But what can it fignify to us, who unanimoufly declare thofe Books are not Canonical? If on the other hand hechufes the latter 5 we hence fee thofe book^cannot without great danger be long read in the Church : and the Council of Carthage^ which the Dodor appeals to, gives this reafon for their account of the Canon of the Scripture : That they had received it from the Fathers, that thofe books ought to be read in the Church : and therefore being warn'd by their example, we fliould take great care not to fall into the fame evil with them. * For what has been formerly the effeft of any courfe, may be fo again. But let us return to the Doftor. But there is not one Sunday in all the year^ on ivhich any of our Lejjons are taken out of an Apocryphal Bool{. That dijTmgHiJh^ ing honor is paid to the Sacred Scripture alo>Uy to he read on thefe folemn occafions. And hecaufe then are the greateji affemhlies of • ChrifiianSy both of learned ayid unlearneJy ^tis ivifely order d^ that they fjould he all infiruBed out of the genuine word of Gody and that ignorant people fiould have nothing to take ojfence at, I I can't fee how this will confift with what he fays himfelf. For if the Apocryphal Books are therefore read, as he tells us himfelf in his Latin edition, that people may^ hy the excel- lent examples J and ufcful counfels of piom men^ ivhich are con- tained therein^ he the more earnejily excited to lead a good Ife 3 II why fhould not lelTons taken out of them be ufeful on Sundays^ when they ought to be asearneftly excited to this, as at any time whatever ? And ^hdit offence^ I pray, can be taken ^ Can. 47. \ ^age yx^. jl j.^^e ^xq. Chap.XIII. the Dissenters* 543 taken »it the excellent exam[?!es and ufeful counfels of pious men ? But fee now how little countenance they have herein from the primitive Chriitians. They us'd to read fuch kind of writings, as particularly C/^w^wr 's Epiftle, on the Lord's Day, not lufpeding any danger therein :* our Ad- verfaries, on the contrary, think they fufficicntly guard ^gainil what they acknowledge to be a real danger, by reading thefe books at a time when ignorant people cannot be prefent. And thus at length we have got their confef- fion, who formerly maintained, there was no danger at all in thefe Apocryphal leflbns. Seeing therefore the congrega- tions of our adverfaries are never made up entirely of learn- ed men, but ignorant people are always more or lefs mix'd with them, thofe leflbns cannot be prudently injoin'd. But let us hear the reft : The Jpocryphal Books are ajftgn'd either to thefejircals of Saints^ or the common iveek^daysy and to the autumn quart er ^ ivhen harveji ijcork^makjs country congrega,^ i'lons thin. And even thefecond lejfon is always Canonical Serif-- ture. Which one would thinks fhould filence the calumniating tongues of our Adverfaries on this head. Our Author was greatly deceiv'd in thinking this a fatisfaflory anfwer. For belide what is already faid, there is no neceflity for thefe leflbns. Why then fhould they give men any cccafion to take offence ? Further, this defence is weak. For in villages where men live, who employ themfelves in harvefl work^ there are very feldom any aflemblies on week days, but this is more ufual in cities and market towns ^ altho'in them alfo there are many ignorant people. Nay, in many fuch places men have in autumn little to do. And if our Author has aflign'd the true reafon of their practice, why is an apocryphal leflbn appointed for Innocents day^ December 28 5 a time when men have more leifure than all the year befide ? But the Doftor goes on, and ftarts an objection, which he fuw we might eafily make : But thefe fiories exclude a great part of the Canonical Scripture out of the Church. But being convinc'd of this truth, and wanting a reafon where- by to defend their praftice, he has recourfe to the fly arts of Rhetoricians. Firfl: therefore he fays : I wonder with what face the ohjeHors can fay rfc/; ? With a very modeft one fure, as we fhall fee prefently. Next he endeavours to elude * Eufcb. E. H. lib. iv. c. aj. 'j44 ^ Vindication of Part III. elude the force of the objedion, by making a comparifon between their cuftom and ours. I ivould undertake^ at the ha- xard of my I'lfcy to make it as clear as the fun y that there is more Canonical Scripture read in our Churches (eventho^ we fhould ex- cept the Pfalmsj Epifiles and Gofpels) in two months^ than there is in a whole year in the largefi Meetings of our Adverfaries. But even thus he does not untie, but cut the knot. For if thefe Apocryphal leflfons come in the room of the Sacred Scrip- tures, our argument remains good. How much of the Scripture fhall be read at a time in the affembly, is no where appointed in the word of God, but is wholly left to the prudence of every Church. Nor have we ever com- Elain'd that the Church's appointed leffons were too fhort. lut we blame our Ad verfaries for fpending frequently that time in thefe Apocryphal leffons, which might better be employed in reading Canonical Scripture. Befides, the comparifon is not fairly put : for their morning and eve- ning prayers are inftead of family prayer 5 and therefore, our Adverfaries think perfons need not ufe family prayer, when they can attend thofe in public. The comparifon therefore fhould have been made between what they read in the Church on the one lide, and what we read both in the Church and in our families on the other. And when *tis fo put, our Author's affertion will be found to be falfe. But now if any are not fatisfy'd with this anfwer, our Au- thor has another ready for them, which, as the fulleft of all, he has referv'd for the laft. But to rid our hands of this calumny y that we exclude the Scriptures y let it be remember' d, that almoft the whole Bible is read over in our Church once ayear^ ^vit. in thofe places where there are prayers morning and evening all the year round, which are comparatively very few] a few genealogical or ohfcurely prophetical Chapters being emitted, * TheTranflator fhould have added : Or fome others which fpeak^too broadly (according to the cuftom of thofe in Afia) of ohjcenematterSy and might caufe diforderly motions in unfettled minds. And here our Adverfaries imitate the antlents like- wife ^ thofe I mean, who [train d at agnaty andfwaltow^d a camel, f For, according to the judgment of thefe men, the Word of God muft not be read in a Chriftian congregation, while the notorious and magical lies of the Apocrypha are without fag^ 325* \ Alatth. zxiii. 14, Chap. XIII. th Dissenters^ 545 without any danger put in the room of it. I fuppofeiSb/o- ffjon's So»g is here particularly intended by our Author. This Book, which is fo often cited by the Fathers, and upon which they have written commentaries, is never read in the Church of England's aflTcmblies, lert the too hroad Jheecbes in it fioidd caufe difordtrly motions in imfettUd minds* Who now will wonder, that our Author /hould reproach us with an amorous divinity y*^ when lome of the oracles of the Holy Ghoil-, iiritten after the -manner of thofe in ylfa^ are reckoned by him unworthy to be publicly read? And herein perhaps he defign'd to gratify fome, who would fain have that Book excluded from the Canon of the Scrip- tures. But how could he tell, the minds of the ^ews were better fettled than ours ? How did he know, this book might with lefs danger be read to them, than to our country men? A wicked mind has wicked inclinations. I fhould not fcruple to affirm, that leflbns taken out of it might be much more ufeful, than many of their Apocryphal ones. But thofe parts of the Jpocryphal urithigs ^i'hich our j^dver Ca- ries mofl carp at^ are not irholly ixithont excufe. Take the -mojl exceptionable piece^ Bel and the Dragon, and let it pajs for fahtiloHS j yet fitll as a piou^ allegory^ in faJJjion iiitb the Jews, it may he retained. But yet it feems, the pious allegory of the Holy Spirit, heing "jjrit after the fafhioyi of thofe in ^fa^ ought not to be retain'd. But what our Author would have retained, we mufl reject, if we will hearken to the Apoille. For of the fame kind are thofe Jficifi^ and old ivives fublesy which he re- quires us to rcfufe.-\ And yet thefe, becaufe J^'U-//?^ for- looth, muft now be retain'd 3 by which argument the reading all the ridiculous fables of the Rabbins may upon occafion be defended. That Book is indeed not only a fable, but a very foolifh one, more adapted to provoke the hear- ers to laughter, than to If ir them up to a good converfation. And yet this was firft order'd to be a leflTon by the wife Synod of 1661, who would rather make thcmfelves ridicu- lous to all the world, than not offend the Diflfenters. I wifii our Advcrfaries would explain the hidden meaning of this pious allegory, that it might be made the more ufeful. Q^q Nay^ * Face 88. \ Tit. i. 14. 1 Tim. iv. ' 54^ A Vindication of Part 111. N^ry, fo'ne very learned and wife men^ viz. Irenseus, Tertul- lian, Cyprian, Nazianzcn, haxe ajprted the truth of the plain tnatttr offaH. * The three firft of thefe, did not only think the Book to be true, but alfo Canonical. Wherefore, cither their authority proves nothing in this cafe, or it proves too much. Now, that they all judged it Canonical, appears from their conftant citing of it as the genuine work of the Prophet Vanie! ; for they us'd only the Seventies Tranflation of the Old Tcftament, having no knowledge of the Hehreiv. But our Author was carekfs in joining Naziamen with them, who does not fpeak of Bell and the Drazon^ but of BW/and Vagon^ and alludes to Ifai. xlvi. i. and xxxiii. 9. Jnd tho' the Hijiory of Sufannah he the fubjeH of their fcojfs^ yet St, Jerom, and Origen, ivrit Commentaries upon it,^ Ori- gen^ I grant, writ upon it j but JfricanuSj who liv'd at the fame time, had a much meaner opinion of it.ll But 'tis not fairly faid, "jcrom writ Commentaries upon ft. He tranfla- ted indeed thofe of Origen^^ but did not write any himfelf. Hear what he fays himfelf : *' Having explained as well as *' 1 couldi what is contain'd in the Book of Daniel ^ accor- ** ding to the Hehrewj I will now fet down briefly what Ori- <^ gen fays, in the tenth Book of his Stromata^ concerning *' the fables of Sufannah and Bell^ and they are his words, *' which you will find in their proper places.":}: And whatever there is in that Commentary, that is not Origen Sj but ^erom'sy is wholly defign'd as a confutation of the Itory. So that 'twas not handfome in our Author to hale ^eromy fo much againft his inclination, over to his own fide. And that mofi antlent writer St, Clement quotes her as an admirable pattern of virtue."^ Through the whole Epiflle I find not the leafl mention made of her. There feems to be an omiffion here in the print. I am apt to fufpefl: the Doftor had faid fomewhat of Judith^ which was left out through the carelefnefs of the printer. And the name Firago^ w^hich he gives her, fuits better with jiidith than Sufannah. And Judith is indeed com- mended by Clement^ in his Epiftle. f Unlefs the conjefture of Mr. ) dtrick^ Youngy and another learned man, whofc Notes I * 71/';. ly. c IT. De Idol. L/''. i. ebijl.j^. %ilib.\\\. epiji. r. Adv. Jul Orat w, 1 Vidd Comm. Hiercn. JJ Kufc-b. H, !L. lilj.\'i,c. jx. 4^ In Dan. xiii. !• * i kui. Epiji. I, ad Cor, i. Ca^, 55. Chip. XIIL the Dissenters. 547 Notes are publifli'd by iMr. LfOm, in his edition of the Apoltolical Fathers, fliould be here allowVi, who think the whole pafTage is toiiled in from Clemtm of Alexandria, But let us fuppole that Sufannah was quoted by Clement, Will he hereby dntionflrate^ that in thofe days this EookJ-ad its an^ thority in the Chtirch ? That it had equal authority with other prophane hiftories, 1 will not deny. But he that would prove from Clement^ that 'twas read in the Church, may , by the ifame argument , prove they read in the Church theftories of t\iQDanaid€s:iV\6,o{Dtrce^ which he quotes in like manner 5 * and the writings of the SihyU^ which, \t appears by an antient author, | were quoted by him,tho'wcmeetnotnow with thecitation, the Epiitle being imperfeft. Nay, Clcynent in his fecond Epiftle (if it be his) quotes the Gof\>el according to the E^y^tians,\\ which many others of the Fathers have done. Nor does Terttdlian dif- dain to borrrow examples from the Gentiles, but propofcs Lucrctiay Mutiny Heraclituiy Dido^ &c. to Chriflians^ as patterns for their imitation.^ The Fathers did not perceive the fraud of that fable of ^udithy which no body is now ignorant of. And Mr. Limhorch very juftly fays of it ; '' It ** feems to be writ by fome "yeii'ijb trifler, who, without " any judgment, would needs write a Hiftory for the com- *' mendation of his own nation."* In this, as ivell ,ts other thi>:^^<:^ the great mode ratiok^ of our Church is feen^ ^ii-hich^ not billing to deprive the fiocl^of Chriji of ar>y Bcok^ ivhich might ferve to their edification^ hath retain d fe'veral Chapters of the ylfocry^ha to this f^urpofe. If that be your mind, why are not Cleynent^ Herm^vsy and feveral others, read in your Churches, as they were in antient times? But he adds a caution : But yn^ Lfi Jhe pould feem to dote on theyn^ as much as the Church of Rome nWfc, fje hath turnd out of her KaUndar all thofe parts which are grojly erroneous^ that the peo- ple may ViOt he mijled hy the reading of the77i. Who now can deny their great moderation is feen in this matter ? Would you have me go to particulars? Why, they leave out Toh'it V. becaufe it brings in the Angel telling a lie. But Chap, vi, and viii, which are magical, are read 5 and fo is Chap, xii, Verf. 12, 15. '^^^f^* viii. 19, 20. not to mention other places, taken notice of in all Syftems of Q^q 2 Divinity. * Cap. 6. \ Refp. ad qu«0. 74 inter JuO-in. Opera. H Cap. ult. Vide Cotel. not. iu Loc. :f Ad Al.utyr- :. a. * Thc^jl- Cluift. lih.i, c 3. /ice o:tr Souls are jo much accujioyndto "nor Id- ly matters^ xi to be xery cold andjlon' to the loxe of God^ iie have need of J itch helj^s as thefe^ to inarm our affe^ions^ arjd put them in 7not!0>;. By thefe ive are diffos'd to he importunate in 9Hr prayers for any divine fa^cour^ &c.* But now by I know not what alteration it happens, that all thefe helps are wholly fuperfluous, and there is no need to ufe any vehe- mence and earneftnefs in fpeaking, in order to work upon mens afFeftions. Their [the antient orators] great endeavour v:as to excite the attention ^ and i:; or k^ upon the pafjions of the judges^ that they might have a perfeH underjianding of the caufe^ 'which otherii'ife did not concern them. But the things of the Chrijiian religion^ ivhich are the fubjeBs of our Sermons^ are of fitch univerfal concern^ ayid ofjuch weight and moment in them- felves^ that if they are hut clearly and diftinHly propounded to mens underftandirigs^ they can hardly deny their affent to them, for what grace and heauty can he added to things divine^ or iiho can amplify that which is infinite and eternal ^. TheChri/tian religion fjines hrighteji in its own native drefs^ and to jjaint tt^ is hut to deform it, f This obfervation, which I have taken notice of before, is a moft true and ufeful one, if there be any in all the Book 5 and, indeed, it refutes the greater part of it. For^ all the meretrtclom paint (as he calls it) of civil honors confer'd upon the Bifhops, of Mufical in- flruments, of Garbs, Holidays, and all other ceremonies borrow'd from Pagans^ ^^^plft^^ or jews^ do but dtform the Chrifiian religion. But this by the way : for the Dofl:or goes on : Life eternal wants nothing to make it deferable j and the leafi ferious thought of everlajiing punifhment carries that horror in it^ that all the fptres and flowers of rhetoric are unne- ceffary to the defcription of it. And why fhould not this be own'd to be true in the bufinefs of prayer, w^herein we pray that w^ may obtain eternal Ufe^ and efcape everlajliyig punifbmtnt ? What need of fo much ado, to ttir mens Q^q 3 aflfe£iions, *^ 254; 255. t P^^^3 3I. 5 50 A Vindication oj Part 111. affe£lions,which aremov'd enough ofthemfelves by thefe im- portant things ? If our Author found his parifhoners fo very prone to thinkof cverlattingconccrns,hehadan unufualhap- pincfsjwhich very few,if any faithful Miniiters ever met with beiide. Nay, according to his way of reafoning, Mini- Iter's fermon.s would become ulclefs, fince men may think at home of things Atvine^ injintte^ and eternal . 1 here i$ a twofold deiign of fermons, to inform mens minds, and to move their affedions 5 and an earneftnefs in preaching ferves to promote both, as it tends to make the hearers the more attentive to what is faid. They are therefore in the wrong, who would have thefe ornaments of fpeech laid afide. But let them hear what Bifhop Burnet fays, who is more to be regarded : *' Man is alow fort of crea- " ture 5 he does not, nay, nor the greateft part cannot ♦' confider things in themfelves, without thofe feafonings *' that muft recommend them to their affeftions. That a ♦' difcourfe be heard with any life^ it muft befpoken with *' fome 5 and the looks and motions of the eye do carry in *' them fuch additions to what is faid, that where thefe do ♦' not at all concur, it has not all the force upon them, that " otherwife it might have. " * He therefor^ fends preachers to Tz;, Bnxtzi'^ Bates ^ Hozv^ Charnock,^ \UujtoYiy Gil^un^ and many others, w hem it would be tedious to reckon up, as fome of the moft excellent Divines of the laft Cetitury. We own * TkH, iliuc, J. 204. Oup. XIV. the Dissenters. 55} own there were many famous Divines alfo among the Churchmen , but doubt whether we agree with our Au- thor in naming the perfons. But how did our Author know , we tak^ our way of reafoning from the clear method of their Sharps and Ttllotfo>is ? I fay nothing of Archbifliop Sharps few of whofe writings I have ever feen. Archbi/hop Tillotfon is remarkable for an admirable ftile, a folid confutation of the Papijh^ a clear and ufeful handling of the duties of natural religion , and» wherein I wifh his example were more follow'd, an excel- lent moderate temper, which he very feldom fails to dif- cover in his writings. But if a man would have an intire fchemeof Chriflianity, hemuftnot, in my judgment, con- tent himfelf with his writings alone. Dr. Edv:ards has fuf- ficiently evidenced this, by what he has lately faid upon that fubjeft. His works are in every EngliJJj reader's hands, and therefore I ihall forbear tranfcribing much from him. I fhall only take notice of one place, where he fays, unlefs the Clergy mend their preaching, *' Some are apt to think, •' that there will be a necefiity of repairing fometimes to *' other affemblies, befides thofe of their Church 5 that *' perfons may have the whole of religion taught them. '' * And neither he, nor the Diffenters, blame Minifters for preffing mora! Virtues in their fermons, provided the other parts of the Chriftian religion are not omitted. But 'tis no wonder many fermons favour fo little of Chriftianity, when a fyflem of Divinity is very feldom, if ever, read to Stu- dents in our Univerfities : but after four years, fpent in the ftudy of Philology and Philofophy, they are fent abroad to undertake the care of pariflies, when they have hardly enter'd upon the ftudy of Divinity ^ or if they con- tinue longer in the Univerfities, they muft ftudy Divinity by themfelves, without the affiftance of a Tutor. And lience 'tis fo common for our Adverfaries to contemn and undervalue the Profeffors of the Univerfities abroad, f c CHAP. • Pteachci, i» tf» Fief. ^ jr. \ Hi. p. a-, Edil. Lot. 5J4 ^ Vindication of PartllL CHAP. XV. Of the Faults found with the Englilh Liturgy, IHave had occafion already, in feveral places, to fpeak of the faults of the Liturgy : I fliall therefore treat of them but briefly in this place, fince my work has already run to too great a length. Our Author mentions three feveral faults we find with it, which he afterwards di- flinftly endeavours to excufe. How well he performs the taft he undertakes, we fhall confider in fpeaking to each. The firft fault then he fpeaks of in the Liturgy is : Becaiife the Lord^s Prayer is, rej^eated three or four times m the Service 3 this^ ^^-^y f^y^ ^^ ^^h ^^^ Popifi Opus operatum 5 ^tis ujtng vain repetitions in our prayer^ and dejiling the facred u-orjhip of God ivith impure juperftit ion. * And to this accufation he thus anfwers : But the reafon ivhy the Lord's Prayer is fo often repeated in the fame ajpmbly isy hecaufe feveral diJiinB Offices are fut together y viz. Morning Prayer ^ the Litany ^ and the Communion Service^ which are fometimes us^d feparately 3 and for that reafon the Church hj4 provided ^ that we never fjould breaks our Savi- cur^s rule in our prayers^ hut ufe the form which he hath given us.-\ But this is a forry excufe. For when two Offices are put together, why may not thofe things, which are com- mon to both, be left out in one or t'other of them ? Let now any indifferent perfons judge, whether when that Prayer is repeated, as 'tis upon fome occafions, fix times in one aflembly, they dont fin againft that command of our Saviour : But ivhen ye pray, ufe not vain repetitions^ as the Hea- then do 'y for they think, that they JJjall he heard for their much fpeaking. II And if our Adverfaries had a mind to put twenty Offices together, the Lord's Prayer might by the fame reafon be repeated twenty times. But neither is this excufe altof];ether true. For they always repeat it twice in the fingle Office of Morning Prayer, as likewife in that of the Communion $ nor is the Litany an office that is ever, as far as I know, faid by itfelf. The *Fi^geiiii. ti''*^^3 3 9. II Matth. vi. ,7. Chap. XV. the Dissenters. 555 The fecond fiult the Dodor mentions, is : Becaufe ^wt pray to be deircer'dfrom fornication, and all other deadly fin j this^ they fay, //, ir'ith the Tapirts, to Jtif^pofe^ that there art fome lenial Jws. * His anfwer here is : Formcation Is calPd a mortal Jtn^ both to J^jezv the heinous nature of it^ that it is peculiarly Aifpleajin^ to God^ and ptmicious to our ozin fouls 5 and itl^ii'ife to corretJ the Papifts , zvho reckon this among venial Protejiant Divines have long ago exploded thisdiftinftion, the Papifts have coin'd between mortal and venial fins. And fince death is the u-a^es of every Jin, unlefs God's pardoning Grace prevent it, there is no reafon, why that diftinftion fliould be again admitted. Hence the Presbyterian Mini- fiers, in the Conference appointed by King C7:^r/f5 H. de- fir'd thofe words might be altered, and fornication might be rather call'd a heinous , than a deadly Sin. But the Epif- copal Commiffioners made confcience of not gratifying their Brethren in fo fmall a requeit, altho' UJher, Williams^ Pri- deaux^ Hard^ Bron-nri^ge^ Featly^ and Hacket, who were moft of them Bifhops, had before given their advice for fuch an alteration 3 fuch a hatred had they, at that time, of peace. And however Dr. Nichols here pretends to juftify the Church in this particular, yet 'tis plain he did not think we found fault without a caufe. For fpeaking of that conference, upon another occafion, he very honeftly tells us : " The Bifliops were not very forward to make any *' alterations, which were propofed by the Presbyterians^ *' even in fome things as might have deferv'd confideration 5 *' refufing them fo much as the change of deadly fin^ into '* heinous fin, " II Now we are the rather defirous of this alteration, becaufe we obferve feveral of the Church Mini- fters do, in their writings, openly abet and defend that diflinftion. But I proceed to the third fault. Becaufe^ fays he, In the Office of burial, 'u.e pray^ That when we depart this life, we may refl in Chrifl, as our hope is, this our brother doth. Thisy fay they, is co-mmonly to lie to the Spirit of God, andtopro^ mife the l^n^dom of Heaven to the children of the Devil, :[: But this objection he hopes eafily to get over, thus : According to the rules of Chriftian charity ^ we hope for the falvation of every deceajed * Tage 338. t Fjjge 339. ',1 Comment on the Common Prayer. 55^ A Vindication of Part III. Jkceafed perfoyi^ who dies mthin the pale of the Church 5 a^ thinkjng^ ive cannot^ without the greatejt arrogance^ exclude any^ in our private judgment ^ from the common reward of Chrijiians^ whom the Church hath not thought Jit to exclude by her public cen- fure, * I am utterly ignorant what thofc rules of Chrijli unity are, which require us to hope thus concerning men, who were, it may be, notorious for all manner of wickedncfs. The Spirit of God teftifies, that the unriiihteom fjall not inherit the l{ingdom ofGoi. f How then can we hope, that fuch are made partakers of the eternal inheritance, provided only they died not under the Church's cenfure ? How many wicked wretches are daily buried, who, as they gave no figns of fo much as a death bed repentance, have left us no room for fuch a hope in their cafe ? To require Mini- fters to exprefs fuch a hope, is as wicked, as 'tis abfurd. Nay, if we fuppofe the cafe to be doubtful, what occa- fion is there to fay any thing about it ? But profligate wretches meet with that charity among our Adverfaries, which feveral of the furious High blades refufe to fhew to any Diffenters. Nor can it be exprefs'd how great mif- chief has been done to religion, by the promifcuous ufe of this form in burying the dead. Men are eafily hardened in their impieties, when they hear fuch hope is entertain'd of thofe that liv'd and died like themfelves. If it was left to a Minifler's difcretion, to exprefs this charitable hope of the dead he buries, or not to exprefs it, according as he faw there was reafon, it would be quite another cafe. But fince they are required always to fay the fame, of all thofe that have been baptiz'd, and did not die excommu- nicate, or by laying violent hands on themfelves, we can- not oblige ourfelves to conform to fuch a cuftom. But let this matter be judg'd by the words of the Liturgy ; ** For as much as it hath pleafed Almighty God , of his ^' great mercy, to take unto himfelf the foul of our dear V brother here departed, we therefore commit his body to ** the ground j earth to earth, afhes to afhes, duft to duft, ** in fure and certain hope of the refurreiliion to eternal *' life, through our Lord Jefus Chrift, who fliall chapge *^ our vile body, &c. Almighty God, with whqm live '* the fpirits of them that depart hence in the Lord, and *' with P^^c :,9. t ' ^^r. vi. 9. Chap. XV. /k D I s s E N T I R s ■ 5 57 " with whom the fouls of the faithful, after they arede- ** liver'd from the burden of the flefli, are in joy and fell- ** city 5 we give thee hearty thanks, for that it hath pleafed *' thee to deliver this our brother, out of the miferics of *' this finful world, &c, - We meekly befecch thee, O *' Father, to raife us from the death of lin, unto the life " of righteoufnefs ^ that when we fliall depart this life, " we may reft in him [_Chriji'] as our hope is, this our bro- ** ther doth." Thefe are the words to be faid of every one that's buried, and which our author has undertaken to defend ^ but which to us appear to be fuch as would juftify our Separation, if we diflik'd nothing elfe. Nor can our Adveriaries agree with one another in this matter. For in the Saxoy Conference^ they refus'd to make any defir'd alte- rations m the Office, and gave this reafon for it : " We fee ^* not why thefe words may not be faid of any perfon, *' whom we dare not fay is damn'd 3 and it were a breach " of charity to fay fo, even of thofe, whofe repentance ** we do not fee : for whether they do not inw^ardly and *' heartily repent, even atthelafl aft, who knows? And " that God will not, even then, pardon them upon fuch *' repentance, who dares fay?"* And yet Dr. Pair?^ and many other of their Divines, fliffly deny that any fuch late repentance can be true, and faving. So much for the faults of the Liturgy, here mentioned by our Author. From what has been faid, the whole Re- ■forynd iiorUy to whofe judgment he fubmits the matter in the end of the Chapter, may now decide between us, whe- ther we have notjuftly found fault with thefe things, not- withftanding what Dr. N/r/ 0/5 has alledg'd to the contrary. The reft of this Chapter is fpent in running over the feveral parts of the Liturgy 3 that fo it may appear, forfooth, hou- much their Liturgy excels all others^ either in the arttiefit^ or the pref en t Church, j" But if a man were inclin'd thorough- ly to examine all the parts and members of this exquifite body of prayers (as our Adverfaries efteem it) 'twere eafy to fliew that each of them has its defeds and blemifhes. But for the reafon I gave before, I fhall content my felt with only a few brief remarks. The Co77fe//2on^ which our Author fo highly extols, 1$ too ftiort and general, and feems not well adapted to an- i fwer * Hil^. cf Nunconformity. p j2i \ Fage ji^zt. 55^ A Vindication of Part III. fwer the end of confeffion, that is, to promote the contri- tion of the heart. And tho' very heinous ^articuUr fins, of which the affembly has not been guilty, are not to be brought into a public confeffion j yet there are many of- fences, which all are chargeable with, and ought therefore to be more particularly infilled on in that part of the Ser- vice. The Church of Eyj^^land holds the doclrine of origi- nal fin 5 nay more, that yldarns ftn is tmffnted to all his pojii-^ rtty^ as our Author informs us. * Why then fliould not original fin be taken into their confeffion ; efpecially, fince it ferves to fhew the neceflity of the mercy of God obtain'd for us by the blood of Chrilt ? The alternate r eating oj the Pfalms f is no where com- manded by the Church, but has crept in by an evil cuftom* The Minirter's part may be eafily underftood, but the con- fus'd noife of the people is hardly intelligible. Further, the Pfalms they read are not thofe of the laft tranflation^ made from the Hebrew 5 but an old one, agreeable to that of the Seventy, in which fome things are improperly, nay, and very badly rendcr'd. But they expedl allowances herein, to be made them upon the account of their defe- rence and love to antiquity. The repeating the Creed always at the Communion began not before the middle of the fifth Century, and was the Contrivance of I^eter Fulloy an Heretic, as TI:eodortis LeBor tells us. II This I take notice of for the fake of thofe who are Lovers of antiquity ^ becaufe Dr. Nichols has faid no- thing of the antiquity, or Author of this praflice. The Litany is made up of a great many little /hort prayers, heap'd up together, without any great matter of order. + Thefe petitions are pronounc'd, partly by the Minifter, and partly by the people, who fometimes divide one lliort fentence between them. But I will prefent our Arbitrators with a part of the Litany, that they may the better judge, whether our Adveriaries are guilty of thofe vain rejjetitions condemned by our Saviour, or not. " Min. ** Son of God, we befeech thee to hear us. ^nfu\ Son *' of God, we befeech thee to hear us. Min. O Lamb of " God , that takeft away the fins of the world 5 ^nfw. Grant tis thy peace. Mn. O Lamb of God, that takeft away the fins of the world 5 Jnfw. Have mercy upon us. " Mln. Vide^^2C9. t ^^g^ i^' II H. E./zi'.ii.^. 566. , :j; P^^5 -'4^/ (C Chap. XVI. the Dissenters: 559 ** M/w. O Chrift, hear us. Anfiv. O Chrift, hear us. •* M«. Lord, have mercy upon us. yl>2fu\ Lord, have ** mercy upon us. Mm. Chriit, have mercy upon us* *< j^nfw. Chrift, have mercy upon us. Min, Lord, have •' mercy upon us. yinfn-. Lord, have mercy upon us. Min. *' Our Father which art in heaven, fe'r." In fo few words as thcfe, have mercy upon us is feven times repeated $ and hear us four timeS) tho' it had been repeated above twenty times before, in the former part of the fame Office. And who can now help opening his eyes^ and feeing hoiv much this Liturgy excels all others^ either in the antienty or the frefent Church^. We dont at all blame the reiterated petitions of a devout foul, that arife from a more vehement and extraordinary afFeftion. But, to fpeak the truth, I hardly think this depends upon cur own pleafuce, but proceeds from that Spirit of fuppli- cation, who afts of his own good pleafure. Altho' we are to endeavour to ftir up our fouls to the moft fervent defires, as often as we pray 5 yet good men experience themfelves fometimes favoured with a more than ordinary aid of the Spirit in their private devotions : and hence they do well to redouble their petitions. But I dont yet underftand, how our advocates for the Liturgy can be certain the affem- bly fhall be favour'd with fuch extraordinary defires at the precife time, when thefe repetitions are prefcrib'd, rather than any other , wherein the fame or fuch like things are pray'dforby them. CHAP. XVL Of the Difcipline of the Church of England. OU R Adverfaries are very angry at our complaints of their want of ecclefiaftical Difcipline ^ altho' fome of the moft confiderable men among themfelves, acknowledge there is too much reafon for them. Our Author boldly appeals to all impartial judges^ li'hether they ever l^teiv any v:ifer government in the vjhole Chrijiian iiorld : * notwithftanding,he here in the beginning of this Chapter, grants 'tis defeftive. They may^ fays he, he pleased to underjiand^ that our Difcipline^ tho^ Jhort of what good men wijh for^ yet is the heft we can have in thefe mijerable divifions of the Church, f Dx. J^ide ^age 347. f p-g^ 344- 5(5o 'A Vindication of Partlll. Dr. JVhitly takes notice by the by, that the Church of England obferves no Church DifcipHne.* And the Liturgy it felf teaches them, once a year, to wifh the godly dis- cipline of the primitive Church reftor'd. I have alfo taken notice already, from Bi/hop Burnet^ how very corrupt their prefent Difciplinc is. And 1 fuppofe, 'twill pleafe the reader to hear what the fame excellent perfon's judgment was con- cerning that matter, in one of thelail works he publi/h'd. •* Theprovifoyfuys he^ that had pafs'd mK, Henry the Eighth's *' time, that continued all the Canon law then received *' in England^ till a Code of Eccleliaftical laws was pre- *' par'd (which, tho' attempted, and well preparM, was ** never fettled) has Jix'd awong m many grojs abufes^ befide *' the dllatoyyforym of thofe Courts, which make all pro- *' ceedings m them both flow and charge^^ble. This has '* in a great meafure enervated all Church Difcipline. A *' faint wifh, that is read on Jfi-W'ednefday^ intimates a de- *' fire of reviving the antient Difcipline , yet no progrefs *' has been made to render that more eiFeClual. The ex- *' emptions fettled by the Papal authority do put many *' parts of this Church in a very disjointed ilate ; while *' in fome places the Laity, and in many others Presbyters *' exercife epifcopal jurifdiflion, independant on their Bi- *' /hops, in contradiiliion to their principles : while* they *' aflert a divine right for fettling the government of the ^* Church in Bifliops, and yet pradife Epifcopal authority *' in the virtue of an afl: of Parliament, that provifionally *' confirm'd thofe Papal invafions of the Epifcopal power 5 *' which is plainly that, which by a modern name is cal- *' led Erajliamfniy and is fo feverely cenfur'd by fome who " yet praftife it , fince whatever is done under the pre- *« tence of law, againll the divine appointment, can go « under no better name, than the higheft and woril de- " gree of Erajiianijm, ] But to return to Dr. Nichols : What are thok miferahle drcijioijs of the Churchy which hinder the reftoring Difci- pline ? Certainly, they are not fo much thofe between th^ii and us, as thofe among themfelves. If all theEpif- coparians were agreed, why might they not be able to recover the antient form of Difcipline? the pious part of the Clergy, among whom the Doctor doubtlefs made one, earneftly * UjrnRcm, xiv ft \ Hift K€£or. ^arii'u. }. iiO. I Chap. XVI. tU Dissenters. 5^1 earnclHy dcfire it, anJ perhaps carefully endeavour it 3 but fuch dciigns are hinder 'J by others, who, not without caufe, are afraid of them. If the true ecclefiaftical Difci- pline were once let up, I make no doubj, our controvcrfy would foon be ended. For whcnfoever our merciful Father ihall pleafe, by his Holy Spirit, ro ftir up the Churchmen to mend their Discipline j he will, without quelHon, ini'ufd into them, at the lame time, fuch a Spirit of love and peace, as will efteftually put an end ro their childiili fond- nefs for trifles. Which it once it happens 3 what fhall be able to prevent our being united ? As to the DifTenters, they neither are, nor can be a hindrance to th^ reftaura- tion of the antlent Difcipline. 'Tis not long of us, that they can't govern their own Members, hold Synods, lay afide their bad Canons, and make new ones. We greatly long to fee that happy day : God grantit may be haflen'd. I confefs, they labour under this one inconvenience, that they can make no ecclefiadical laws without the confent of the government 3 but that is not owing to us, but to the conftitution of their Church. And yet, who can imagine the government would be againft fo good a thing as the re- floring Difcipline, if they did but fee it, were heartily defir'd by the greater part of the Clergy ? But there is too much reafon to fear the Clergy will never move at all in this work, unlefs the Parliament firfl: take it in hand or" their own accord. But our Author goes on : If all things were cowpos'd ayid quiet amongH ^5, theniveceuld eajily apply new laws to the rcjiraining ofgrovji>7^ evils. But in our prejent trouhltjome circi.mJxanceSy it is thougJt hy mojl intelligent perjons too rajlj an attempt to Jlir the old foundations. But what if thefe troublefomecircumjtances are the puni/h- n:ent of your fin, in neglefling and dcftroying Church Difcipline, and God is hereby calling you to refioreit ? If that conjediure is not improbable, how vainly are thefc troublefomecircumftancesallecig'd as anexcufe? Certainly, no man /liould ever do evil, that good may come of it. And if our Adverfaries acknowledge the neceiTity of that Difcipline, the want of which they lament, why have they not as yet attempted to fet it up ? Why dont they ufe as much Difcipline, as they fee we do, notwithftanding thefe troublefome circumftances ? Why dont they, as well as we, keep Heretics and profligate finners from theif Com- munion ? They are afraid, it may be, they fhould come t)Ter ib Uojt\'hrn they rejeft them. But if u fhould prove R r ii^f $6i ^^ V I K f) I c A T I o N of Part III fo, what hurt would it do the Church ? The happinefs of the Church depends more upon the hohnefs, than the number of her members. And why may not we as well fear the fame thing ? Bur, indeed, that fear is caufelefs^ for we fliould admit no fuch to our Communion, unlefs they mend their manners. Our Author hitherto has been owning the defe£ts of their Difcipline $ which any one would guefs, by his words, was in a very wretched and deplorable condition. But now, as tho' he repented of his conceflTion, he pretends their Dilcipline, with all its faults, is equal to that of any other Church whatever. For thus he dilcourfes in the words that immediately follow : However^ our prefent Jlate of Difcij^ltne At'ferves fo little to he tle'pis^d or charged ivith any flagrant d'ljorder^ that "^tis not a jot inferior to the compleateji rules of other Churches^ as exery impartial jud^^e mufl needs grant. He is a great ftranger to the foreign Churches, who is not acquainted with the exaft order of their Confiftories, Claffes, and Synods. By thefe a remedy is prefently apply'd to any growing evils, and the good of the Church taken care of 3 and as foon as any fcandal is given, either by mens manners, or opinions, it prefently meetswith a juft cenfure. But every creature likes its own offspring beU. And we have had occafion more than cnce, to take notice of this vain hu- mour of our Adverlaries, who take all opportunities of ex- tolling every thing that belongs to themfelves, and never vouchfafe in any thing to come behind other men. We ihall prefently fee what ground our Author had to givchis own Church's Difcipline the preference, when we go over the feveral parts of it. But firft let us hear what he lays : All England /r divided into ahoiit ten thoufand parifJjes 5 over every one of ii'hichy there prefides a ReHor or Vicar ^ ivho ha^ au- thority to preach the word of God^ and adminifter the Sacraments. We are hereefpecially to obferve, how theCe KeHors or Ft- cars come by their parochial Cures, according to the Difci- pline of the Church of England. I'he parifliioners in a very few places have that power, which, Cyprian fays, belongs chiefly to the people, ofchufjng vjorthy Priejis^ or refuftn<^^ thoft that arc unixorthy. If a new Rcdor is to be placed in a pariHi, the Patron of the living writes a letter to the Bifhopi and recommends what Clergyman he pleafes to be put into it. The BiJhop cannot refufe the perfon thus recommended 5 and fo the parifliioners, whether they will or Chap. XVI. the Dissenters.' 5(^3 or no, arc committed to the care of that Presbyter, chofen by a ftranger, and it may be, a notorioufly wicked perfon. It might pcrh.ips fccm incredible abroad, if 1 /liould afftrti that in the Church o^ England ^ the beft reformed ('hurch, as they themfelvcs boaft, in the world, v^hofefpreftntjiatedf D'tjcij^line is not a jot hjferior to the compleatej} rules of other Cburchesj the right of patronage is bought and fold 3 and that 'tis not reckon'd Simony, nor any crime at all, for a perfon to buy that right, or the next prefcntation of a living, provided it be not void at the time. Hence ignorant fellows, if they are but rich, often get thefatteft Benefices. And when they have got the livings, they are not bound to tajce care of the flock themfelves 5 'tis enough if they leave fo troublefomea work to any forry Curate, who will do it cheapeft. Nay, fometimes the Minifterfhall have the income of two, three, or more parifhes, who will not vouchfafe to take the paftoral care of one. Hence out Author us'd a caution in his own expreflion 5 making the number of Reftors and Vicars almoji as great as that of Parifhes. We have already heard Bilhop Burnet's grievous complaint of this matter 3 out of whom I fliall now add a little more. ** But what can we fay, when we find ** often the pooreft Clerks in the richeit livings ? whofe " Incumbents, not content to devour the patrimony of the ** Church, while they feed themfelves ^ and not the fiocl^ out of '* it, are fo fcandaloufly hard in their allowance to their ** Curates, as if they intended equally to ftarve both Curate •* and people. * We ought to reflefl: on thofe words ^' of the Prophet, and fee how far they are applicable to " us: The Prieji's lips fiould keep l^iouled^e^ and they fiould *' fe6l(^ the law at his mouthy for he is the mejfenger of the Lord ** of hojis. But ye are departed oiconflderably alter 'd in this refpe£t. They are likewife, Ta preach a Sermon on Sunday s^ if they are licenced tlcreto^ (for fo our Author truly expreffes it) as tho' all iVesbyters, who adminifter the Sacraments, had not a power to preach. So much is the method alter'd fince the Apoltles days. St. Paul would have only fuch, as are aft to teach ^ ordain'd Presbyters^ but now, if a man can read iVivers and Homilies, he may be admitted to the office of Jer. X. 3r. \ P;i{lor«l care, Ir^f. ^- 29. Chap. XVI. the Dissenters. 565 of a PrcsbytLT, tlio' he is not capable of preaching. The laws of the Church are certainly too luole in this matter j iince a Bifliop is allowed to ordain any perfon, if he has a prcfcntation to a living, underllands Lutni^ and is not ican- dalous. * The Redlors are not oblig'd to preach more than once on the Lord's Day, and in many pari/hcs they have no afternoon Sermons, f Lallly, they are oblig'd to .obey the orders of the Ecclcfiaflical Courts, and to publiHi in their congregrations the Lay Chanctllors's lentences of Excommunication, which are often pafs'd upon vory frivo- lous occalions. For they are unworthy, with all their pafloral ixiulorityj to be judges of the offences committed 3 nor are they in any thing allow'd to ufe their own judg- ment ^ but are bound, with an implicit faith, to take the fentences of Excommunication, which mercenary m.en pro- nounce to be good, and as fuch to publifh them to the congregation. The ]3r. next treats of the Parlfjioners.W Thefe within cur remembrance were bound by a very fevere difcipline, to frequent their own parifh Churches5altho'they chanc'dto live at a diftance from them, and in the neighbourhood of other Churches. All likewife above lixteen years eld, be their faith or morals what they will, were required to re- ceive the Lord's Supper. No one could then hiy or felly or almoftlive, if he dillik'd the A'«^/i/i Service, according to that laudable example, as it was then reckoned, Kev. xiii. I 7. But this Difcipline is happily fallen to the ground, tho' to the great regret of our High Churchmen. Kor are the Holidays, here mention'd by our Author, much Valu'd, there being very few of the people who keep them. ; I flialladd nothing concerning x\iQBiJljoj>s^ having large- ly treated of them already. Tne Archdeacons^ who are meer Presbyters, ought not, according to our Adverfaries opinion concerning Bifhops, to have any jurifdiclion. ^- And indeed I believe 'twas un- heard of in the antient Church, that any Presbyter /l"iouldbe call'd 2in Archdeacon. They had not then learnt to fpeak fo improperly. I dont deny that name to-have been Ais'd' in the fourth Century, ^^ro/?? mentions an Archdeacon, who belong'd to jo]m the Bijfhop of^erufalem. * But fuch then R r ^ w ere fCa^. 34. \ Caa 45. jl^^^e 345. :j:J/^^e 346. * Ep.lUi. ad Pamach. ^66 ^A Vindication of Part III* were Deacons, and not Presbyters 5 as appears by another letter of 7f^*<>^w. " If, fays he^ the Deacons chufe one of " their own number, whom they know to be induftrious, ** and call him an Archdeacon. * The Bijhops have their Archhijhops over them^ not only againft Cy^ri^w's judgment, who exprefly denies any one to be the Btfioj? of Brjho^s 5 but againft the opinion of many Epifco- parians. But we need not wonder, that fuch a number of contrivances fhould be needful to patch up a Dilcipline, that varij^s fo much from its firft and moft perfeft infti- tution. Of the King and his power I have faid enough in the Firft Part, in anfwer to the IntroduWion, f Now our Author appeals to all impartial jud'^eSy ^whether they ever kneiv any ivifer government in the ivhole Chrijiian n-orld ? And in like manner I appeal to them, whether they know a worfe in the Reformed world ? I wifh thefe vain glorious defenders of the Hierarchy would mind the excellent admonition given them by Bifhop Burnet. *' *Tis ** not our boafting that the Church o{ England is the beft ** Reform 'd, and the beft conftituted Church in the whole *' world, that will fignify much to convince others : we *' are too much parties to be believed in our own caufe. •** There was a generation of men that cry'd : The Temple of *' the Lardy the Temple of the Lordj as loud as we can cry, ** The Church of Enghndj the Chw^ch of Engl^Lud ^ when by ** their fins they were pulling it down, and kindling that ** fire which confurri'd it. It will have a better grace *' to fee others boaft of our Church, from what they ob- *^ ferve in us, than for us to be crying it up in our words, ** when our deeds do decry it. Our enemies will make ** fevere inferences from them , and our pretenfions will be *' thought vain and impudent things, as long as our lives ^^ contradift them, 'Ml Nor will it be foreign to my pur- pofe, to prefent my reader with the complaint of a high Churchman, concerning this matter, " Difcipline, fays ^* he, is loft, and will not be permitted by the ftate ; ** which by virtue of Conge d* Ejlire'sy Quare TmpeditSy Prohi- " hittons^ &c. have made themfelves the fofe and ultimate *' judges, not only of all BiJhops and Churches 3 but of • '• . • - ^ " theif * Fpift. ad Evagt. ^^s^e 3i^7. I) Pa^. Caic Iref. J). 32. Chap. XVI. f k D I s s E N T E R s. 5 67 " their Excommunications, and every excrcifcof ilicir Tpi- " ritual juri (diction. * An action lies againd the *' Miniilcr, who Ihall refule it [the Sacrament] to them 5 *' tho* he knows, lees, and hears them, in their conver- " fation and principles, to be never fo much unqualiFy'd ? f This is the J)ifcipline of the Church of En^liwci^Co highly commended by fome ; which yet many of the Epikopa- rians themfelves blufli at, as the diigrace of the Refor- mation. But our Author goes on in the praifc of their Dlfcipline : Our Church is not ivithout her good laivs for the ad''canccment of pitty^ iVtd the fuj)prejJion of ill r$2dnners, fory accordifi^ to our Ca>io>/Sy all Iprcaders ofhtretica!^ corruft doHnnes^ are to he ex* communicated, ll It would bc tedious to give an account of all the feveral things, for which men are ordered by the Ca- nons to be ipfofjkRo excommunicated 5 1 will however, foj? the fake of the reader, mer^tion fome of them. " Whofoever fhall hereafter afiirm, tiiat the form of " God's worfhip in the Church of Eu^-lund, eflablifh'd by *' law, and contain'd in the Book of Common Prayer and '' adminillration of Sacraments, is a corrupt, fuperfti- " tious, or unlawful worftiip of God, or containerh any *' thing in it that is repugnant to the Scriptures : let him ** be excommunicated ipfofaHoy and not reftor'd but by ^* the Bilhop of the place, or Archbifliop, after his repen- ^^ tance, and public revocation of fuch his wicked errors, t *^ Whofoever iliall hereafter affirm, that any of the nine " and thirty Articles agreed upon by the Archbifliops and " Bifhops of both Provinces, and the whole Clergy in the " Convocation holden at Lo^no;?, in the year of our Lord " God ij6zy for avoiding diverfuies of opinions, and^for *S the eftablifhing of confent touching true religion, are *'' in any part fuperftitious or erroneous, or fuch as he may ** not with a good confcience fubfcribe unto : let him be ** excommunicated ip 0 fuclo^ &c. ^• *' Whofoever Aiall hereafter affirm, that the rites and " ceremonies of the Church of En^Jayidhy law eftablifh'd, ^^ are wicked, Antichriilian, or fuperftitious , orfuch as be- *' ing commanded by lawlul authority, men who are ze'a- '' loully and godly aifecled, may nor with any good con- H r 4 '' icience ♦ Cafe of tKc Rcg.'l, & Pontlf ^. i66. * Ibid ^. 179. || i j.ge 343. i Can IV icOj. * Can. v. 568 A Vindication oj PartllL *' fcicncc approve them, ufe them, or as occafion requireth *' fublcrjbe unto them : * Whofocvcr /hall hereafter affirm, ^' that the Government of the Church of England under ** his Majetty, by Archbifhops, Bifhops, Deans, Archdea- *' cons, and the reft that bear office in the fame, is Anti- *' chriftian, and repugnant to the word of God : t Who- *' foever fliall hereafter affirm, that fuch Minifters as *^ refule to fubfcribe to the form and manner of God's *' worfliip in the Church of England^ prefcrib'd in the *' Communion Book, and their adherents, may truly *' take upon them the name of another Church not *' eftablifti'd by law, and dare prefume to publi/h it, *' that this their pretended Church hath of a long time «' groaned under the burthen of certain grievances impos'd ** upon it, and upon the members thereof before mentioned, ^' by the Church o^ England ^ and the orders and conftitu- ^^ tions therein by law eftablifh'd :ll Whofoever fhall bere- ft after affirm or maintain, that there are within this *^ realm other meetings, alTemblies, or congregations, of *' the King's born fubjefts, than fuch as by the laws of *' this land are held and allowed, which may rightly chal- *' lengetothemfclvesthenameoftrueandlawfulChurches.t *^ . Whofoever /hall hereafter affirm, that 'tis lawful for any *f;fort of Minifters and Lay perfons, or of either of them, " to join together, and make rules, orders or conftitutions ^' in caufeseccle/iaftical, without the King's authority, and *^ fhall fubmit themfelves to be rul'd and governed by *^ them. " * All thefe are by thofe Canons i^jo faBo ex- communicated. 'Tis therefore certain all the DifTenters in England are ipfofaHo excommunicated. But we do not much fear their excommunication, now the law has taken off the edge of it 3 however, we cannot but wonder they /hould make fuch heavy complaints of our leaving them, when they have with To many bitter curfes caft us out. Further, fince Dr. Hicho's gives many of our Minifters fo good a cha- raioy v^'oulci ftrffer hy a fuhlic Penance j are allowed to ranfom them [elves from the reproach of it^ hy a good round fum of money ^ to he htjiovj'd cither ut?on the poor ^ or upon the buildings of the Church, * If the cafe be as he fays, our Adverfaries are defervedly tax'd, as guilty of that refpeFf of perfons^ which the ApoftIecondemns,37otigh in defence of our Churchy t ho' far fbort of ivhat it de- fer ves, yh I am afraid I have not fatisfy'd many^ both of our €^j:n^ and the contrary f>art^ ivho are too much under the infiieneif of prejudice, -[ Whether he l^a^s fiid enoiigh in defence of his 0:Hrch^ or lefsthan it dferves^ is refer'd to the judgment of all men of candour, who (hall penifc this our Anfwer, What the judgment of his owmi fide will prove concerning it, is not my bufinefs to inquire. But 'tis worth while to take Pief;'. 19. \r,^g jfT. Part. IIL the Dissenters^ 575 take notice of the reafon he givCA, why he thought we jhould not much approve his performance. / exfftH^ fiys he, liar fro?n the heated Nor? con jarrHijts^ heciUijt I haxe exf^os'JL the 'u:iUfrtal{} of their predcctjjors^ and taktn ojf the foul reproachei zvhich they have cajl tifon our Church, There is no great rea- fon to wonder, if, in the management of this controverfy, hard words have been dropt on both iides. I could eaiily produce, from the writings of the Epifcopal fide, much more fevere expreffions, th:m what have been ufed by any of our Authors. But to what purpoie /liould I do it l We defire to difputc about the things themielves, and not about mens charaflers. Hence I have generally pafs'd by whatever our Author has cited in his margin from our writers ^ not becaufe I was afliam'd of them, for I have defended the greatcflpart of their aflertions, tho' without taking notice of their words ^ but becaufe it feem'dtome to fignify little in the conrroverfy. Eut I deiire our Bre- thren would guefs from Dr.Nicholsy u^hat kind of writings thofe are, which the High Church have publiAa'd againit us. How is his own book fill'd with calumnies and reproaches, leveird not only againft u^, but againit our Brethren abroad, whom he has chofen Judges in our controverfy ? What then may be expected from thofe, whofe cenfure the Docior ex- peds upon the account of his moderation and gentlenefs ? he has indeed fet out their temper to the life in what he fays next : y^nd 1 fore fee at the fame t'lrae^ that 1 fhall he at- tached in my quarters hy fomt ofmyoixn Brethren^ becauje Iha'ce vot been jexere enough u^on the Lookj and ftrmons of the prejent Nonconjormif}$-^ hut^ like a coiiardly chamj?ion^ have trampled upon the afljes of the dead, Thty will he ready to fay^ IfjouUi have mufter^d up all the invidiom oj- unwary Jayings of the prefent Dijfenters^ with all the ^^gravat ions imaginable^ incrder totuVfi the indignation of the Queen and Parluiyn:nt upon them, Norfiall I eajj/y be forgiven by jome, for allowing that there are h^neflmtn a,mong Koncoyifortmjis^ and tru^ lovers of piety -^^ that ynany cf their Preachers are men of great learning ; that I applaud and ex- tol fome of their fermons ^ that if there be no mher way for theif adtnittance int9 the Churchy rather than lafe their joint labours with ours in the vineyard of Ckrifl^ I would willingly confent^ that jome indijfcrent things^ fto' venerable for their great anti- ffuity^ fjould be either laid afide^ or If: to the choice of the Mini- fter^ whether he will ufe them or not. You fee now, Reverend Brethren, the worthy Arbitrators and Judges of our con- troverfy, what fpirits we have iq deal with. For- thus we - find t 574 ^ Vindication of Part III. find the far greater part of the Clergy (the more is the pity) are affedteci toward us. That Dr. Niihols is pleas'd to fpeak fo honorably of our prefent fet of Minifters, we eiteem a favour , but we take it ill he Ihould load the me- mory of our prcdeccflors with fo many reproaches. We have always an high efteem and veneration for their piety^ moderation, and learning. Them we imitate, their exam- le we follow, tho' we are far from coming up to it. That e profeffes an inclination to peace, is likewife moft plea- fing to us j for we are all very defirous of peace ^ nor is any thing fo dear to us, that we will not be willing to fa- crifice it, provided it be with a fafe confcience, for the fake of fo vakable a blefling. But I wi/h a perfon, who pre- tends to be fuch a friend to peace, had not fo widely mifs'd his aim. He has offer 'd no new terms to procure that agreement, which he declares himfelf earneftly to long foi** I wifh the pains he has taken to mifreprefent theNoncon- formifts, and to expofe them to the contempt of our Bre- thren abroad, had been rather employ'd in perfuading the Sjovernment ferioufly to think of fome way to heal our breaches , and in advifing his own Brethren to come at length to a temper, and to be defirous of an accommoda- tion. As things go now, we think it very happy, that the learned Mr. Calderuood^s Altare Damafcenum has been lately reprinted abroad, at the inttigation of fome of our Bre- thren there, who have greatly oblig'd us by that favour. That one writer, whom, as King "James forefaw, no man has yet ventured to anfwer, is abundantly fufficient to con* fute all the arguments of our Adverfaries. Wherefore fince that book, which was formerly very fcarce, is now in every bodies hands, our Brethren may from thence more fully inform themfelves concerning our caufe ^ altho' I w^ould hope, that neither this fmaller work of mine, wherein I have ufed fuch a ilile as I Wvis able, but arguments which, unlefs I am miftaken, want not for ftrength, will prove wholly ulelefs, either to overthrow the reafons, or confute the ca- lumnies, wherewith Dr. Nichols has lately attacked us. All that remains, is, that you, our worthy Judges, would row determine between us. As for our part, we do not decline the having our caufe heard before any impartial judges, and confequently before you. For tho' by o^r Ad- verfaries we are defpis'd, and loaded with abundance of ca- lumnies and reproaches ^i yet we make no doubt, that you will have the great and aweful judgment before your eyes, and Part III. the Dissenters; 575 and judge without refpcft of pcrfons, even as you fliall alfo then be judg'd 3, and will never condemn thofe Churches, which endeavour to fervc God with pure and fife confcien- ces, according to the dircs^lion of his Word. Nay, my Bre- thren, you ought diligently to lay hold of this opportunity the Epilcoparians have given you. Which of you does not bewail the corrupt ftate of the Church here in our coun- try ? They have now chofen you Arbitrators, and we rea- dily join iflfue with them. I wifli they may at length hear- ken to you, who have always been deaf both to our intrea* ties and arguments. Nor ought you to decline to under- take this office, who well underftand how great the blef- fednefs of4>eacemakers is. And now my prayer is to thee, mofl merciful Father z Do thou regard this my weak endeavour, and dire£l it to the profit of thy Church 5 confider her moft afflifted ftate, by reafon of external enemies, and internal difcords 5 and pour out at length thy Spirit, who alone is the moft rich and plentiful fountain of all truth, purity, peace and con- cord. Thee, who only canft do it, even thee I earneftly intreat, to calm the paffions of our Adverfaries, and turn their hearts to the love of peace , that fo we may, as one, worfhip thee our one common Father, thro' thy Son the one Mediator, by the help of one Holy Spirit, and endca^ xour to ksej^ the unity oftbej^irit in the bond of^eace. FINIS, «iC^'^^^St^^--iK ^ubltfh'd by the fame Author. I. "11 Em.irks on Dr. ^f^Z/j's Letters, S^r. Wherein the Boc- •*^ tor''^ Writings againft theDiflenters are fully confi- der'd : In Eight Letters. 8rb. IL Some Confidcrations on the fixth Chapter of the Abridgment of the London Cafes, containing a Vindicatioit of the Office for Baptifm, and particularly of the Sign of the Crofs. 8i;a. in. An Ufeful Miniftry a Valid one : Being a Sermori preach'd dit Exori^ May 5. 1714. at a Meeting of the United Minifters oiDexon and ComixaL The Fourth Edition. 8to. Price 6d. IV. Presbyterian Ordination proV'd regular : A Sermori ?reach'd at an Ordination. The Second Edition. 8ro. •rice 6 d. V. A Letter to Dr. Bennett occafion'd by his late Trea- tife concerning the Nonjurors Separation. The Second Edi- tion. 8t(7. Price 6 d, VI. The Curfe caufelefs : A Sermon preach'd at £xo;;, Jayi. 30. 1717. The Fifth Edition. 8to. Price 4^ VII. A Defence of the Diflenting Miniftry, and Presby- terian Ordination ^ being an Anfwer to two Pamphlets t The one intituled, The Invalidity of the Diffcntin^ Miniftry j the other, The Rational and Moral Con duB 0/ Mr. Peirce, exa- mind^ &c. Part I. 8to. Price i 5. VIII. A Defence of the Diflenting Miniftry, and Presby- terian Ordination. Part II. Being an Anfwer to the two laft Chapters of the Pamphlet, intituled, The Rational and Moral ConduB of Mr. Peirce, examind^ &c. 810. Price I s. 6d> IX. The Dirtenters Reafons for not Writing in the Be- half of Perfecution 5 defign'd for the Sarisfidion of Dr. Sfiaf^Cy in a Letter to him. The Third Edition. 8io, Price 6 d. X. Some Refleftlons on Dr. SlerlocJCs indication of the Corporation andTefl ABs, 8ro. The Second Edition. Price 6 d. Sold ^)' J 0 H N C L A R Ki \ i i \ 1 it' 4k i ''M » 'M"'' «& t A .. -.. ^ I wfl} m >f: J^V. :k ■v>t.^ . 1^, I! #• ^/•^^•-