Against the Revolt to a Foreign Jurisdiction, Chapter 15
Chap. XV. The first Letter to Bishop Peter Guning, upon his sending me Dr. Saywell's Book.
My Lord,
I Thankfully received from you by Dr. Crowther Dr. Saywell's Book, and a motion for Conference with him, which I yet more thankfully accept; I read over the Book presently, and think it meet to give you this account of the Success:
I. 1. I perceive that it doth not concern me, nor many, if any, that I converse with; For it is Presbyterians, Separatists, Quakers and Fanaticks that he accuseth, and I am conversant with few such.
2. And yet the strein of his Book is such, as will make Readers undoubtedly think, that by Presbyterians and Nonconformists, or Conventiclers, he meaneth the same Persons, and speaketh of the common Case of the present ejected silenced Ministers: Of whom I must again and again say, 1. That I have had opportunity by Acquaintance and Report of knowing a great part of the silenced Ministers of England, and I know but of few of them that are Presbyterians; and Judge most of them to be Episcopal; Lawyers and Gentlemen indeed incline to place all the Government in the King and Magistrates. 2. That in 1661. when we were Commissioned to endeavour Concord with you, not only those named in the Commission, but all the Ministers of London were invited by Mr. Calamy ▪ and Dr. Reinolds, and Mr. … and Dr. Wallis, &c. to come to us in Consultation, and let us know their Sence: and many came. And I remember not one Man that dissented from what we offered you first, which was Archbishop Vsher's Primitive Form, which took not down Archbishops, Bishops, or a farthing of their Estates, or any of their Lordships or Parliamentary Power or Honour, (unless the Advice of their Presbyters, and the taking the Church Keys out of the hands of Lay Chancellors cast you down.) 3. That when the King's Declaration about Ecclesiastical Affairs 1660. granted yet much less Power to Presbyters, and left it almost alone in the Bishops, we did not only acquiesce in this, but all the London Ministers were invited to meet to give the King our joyful Thanks for it: And of all that met, I remember but two (now both dead) who refused to subscribe the Common Thanksgiving (which with many Hands is yet to be seen in Print). And those two exprest their Thankfulness; but only said [That because some things agreed not to their Judgments, they durs… not so subscribe, lest it signified Approbation; but they should thankfully accept that Frame, and peaceably submit to it.]
All this being so, I appeal (with some sense of the Case of England) to your self and common reason, whether it be just and beseeming a Pastor or Christian, or a Man to make the Nation believe, 1. That we are Presbyterians, 2. And against Bishops) 3. And therefore that we are Schismaticks. 4. And therefore that we must be Imprisoned or Banished, as those that would destroy the Church and Land. Would a Turk own such dealing with his Neighbour? Is this the way of Peace? Will this bring us to Conformity? Was it Anti-Episcopal Presbytery which the King's Declaration 1660 determined of? Nothing will Serve God, and the Churches Peace, but Truth and Honesty, or at least that which hath some appearance of it.
II. I find that almost all the Strength of his Book as against Presbyterians (who are his Fanaticks) is his bare word, saying that they are Schismaticks, and that they forsake the Judgment and Practice of the Universal Church by forsaking Episcopacy. And will this convince me, who am certain, that I am for that Episcopacy which Ignatius, Tertullian, Cyprian, &c. were for, and am past doubt that the Episcopacy which I am against is contrary to the Practice of the whole Church for 200 Years, and of all save two Cities (Alexandria and Rome) for a much longer time; If I prove this true (which I undertake) must I then take his turn, and desire the Banishment of the Contrary-minded Bishops, as dangerous Schismaticks for forsaking the Practice of the Church?
III. I understand not in his Platform of the Rule which denominateth Dissenters Schismaticks, Pag. 353. what he meaneth by the very highest Power, most necessary to be understood in these words [The Laws and Orders of the Church Vniversal] to which every Provincial Church must submit.] What the Scots mean by [a General Assembly] I know, and what the old Emperors and Councils meant by [an Vniversal Council] Viz. Universal as to that one Empire. But I know no Vniversal Law-givers to the whole Church on Earth, but Jesus Christ; neither Pope nor Council. If I am mistaken in this, I should be glad to be convinced: for it is of great moment: And is the hinge of our Controversie with Rome.
IV. He doth (to me) after all give up the whole Cause, and absolve me and all that I plead from the guilt of Schism, and lay it on your Lordship, and such as you, if I can understand him when he saith, Pag. 363. [It is clear that in the Church of England, there is no sinful Condition of Communion required, nor nothing imposed but what is according to the Order and Practice of the Catholick Church, there can be no pretence for any Toleration, &c.]
And Pag. 360. [There is no Question to be made but where there is an interruption in the Churches Communion, there is caused a Schism: and it must be charged on them that make the breach which will lye at their Doors, who by making their Communion unlawful, do unjustly drive away good Christians from it; neither doth such a Person that is driven away at present from the external Communion, cease to be a Member of that Church, but is a much truer Member thereof than that Pastor that doth unjustly drive him from his Communion. This fully satisfieth me; and if you will read my late small Book, called, The Nonconformists Plea for Peace, you will see what it is that I think unlawful in the Impositions; And if you will read a new small Book of your old troubled Neighbour Mr. Jo. Corbet, called, The Kingdom of God among Men, I have so great an Opinion, that by it you will better understand us, and become more moderate and charitable towards us, that I will take your reading it for a very obliging Kindness to
Your Servant Ri. Baxter. December 11. 1679.
Add. V. His terms of Communion are not right, as I have proved.
VI. He speaketh against Toleration so generally without distinction, as if no one that dissented but in a word were tolerable, which is intolerable Doctrine in a pretended Peace-maker.
VII. He inferreth Toleration while he denieth it, in that he is against putting us to Death: How then will he hinder Toleration? Mulcts will not do it, as you see by the Law that imposeth 40 l. a Sermon: For when Men devoted to the Sacred Ministry have no Money, they will Preach and Beg: Imprisonment must be perpetual or uneffectual: for when they come out they will Preach again. And it contradicteth himself; for it will kill many Students being mostly weak) as it kill'd (by bringing mortal Sickness on them) those Learned, Holy Peaceable and Excellent Men, Mr. Jos. Allen of Taunton, Mr. Hughes of Plimouth, and some have died in Prison: And he that killeth them by Imprisonment, killeth them, as well as he that burneth them or hangeth them. And the Prisons will be so full, as will render the Causers of it odious to many, and make such as St. Martin was separate from the Bishops; the same I say of Banishment.
Dr. Saywell's Principles infer as followeth;
I. Schismaticks are not to be Tolerated. They that are for the sort of Diocesane Prelacy, which we disown are Schismaticks: Ergo—not to be Tolerated.
The Major is Dr. S's. The Minor is proved thus.
They that are against that Episcopacy which the Primitive Universal Church was for and used, are Schismaticks: The foresaid Diocesane Party are against that Episcopacy which the Primitive Universal Church was for and used—Ergo they are Schismaticks.
The Major is Dr. S's. The Minor is thus proved, I. They that are for the deposing of the Bishops that were over every single Church that had one Altar, and those that were over every City Church, and instead of them setting up only one Bishop over a Diocess which hath a Thousand, or many Hundred Altars, and many Cities, are against the Episcopacy which the Primitive Universal Church was for: But such are the Diocesane Party now mentioned— Ergo—The Major is proved, not only from Ignatius who maketh one Altar and one Bishop with his Presbyters and Deacons, the no…e of Individuation to every Church, but a multitude of other proofs which I undertake to give: And from the Councils that determined that every City of Christians have a Church (till afterward they began to except small Cities) The Minor is notorious Matter of Fact, every Parish with us hath an Altar, and many hundred have but one Bishop: Ergo they are no Churches according to the Saying, Vbi Episcopus, ibi Ecclesia, & Ecclesia est plebs Episcopo adunata. And foreign then signified every great Town, like our Corporations and Market-Towns: And Titus was to set Elders in every such City.
II. They that render Bishops Odious, endeavour to Extirpate Episcopacy. But so do (I need not name them)—Ergo—The Major is granted. The Minor is proved. 1. They that use Episcopacy to the Silencing of faithful Ministers of Christ, (near Two thousand at once, than whom no Nation under Heaven out of Britain hath so many better) and to render them and all that adhere to them odious and ruined, do that which will render Bishops odious—But—Ergo—
2. From Experience, when we treated with you 1661. the People would have gladly received Episcopacy as we offered it to you, and as the King granted it in his Declaration: But when they saw near Two thousand Silenced, and that Bishops thought all such as I, and the many better Ministers of the Countrey where I lived, to be intolerable, it hath done an hundred times more to alienate the People, from Episcopacy, than all the Books and Sermons of the Opposers of Episcopacy ever did: e. g. The People that I was over would reverently have received Pious Bishops: But though I never saw them, nor wrote to them one Letter against Episcopacy these 19 years, but have largely written, to draw them to Communion in the Parish Church, and much prevailed, yet they will now rather forsake me as a complier with Persecuters (as Martin did the Bishops) than they would own our Diocesane Prelacy, since they saw me, and so many better Men of their Countrey Silenced, and cast out, and many of themselves laid in Jails with Rogues, and ruined for repeating a Sermon together, as they were always wont to do. He that will teach Men to love Prelacy by Prisons, Undoing them, and Silencing and ruining the Teachers whom they have found to be most edifying and faithful to them, will do more to extirpate Prelacy by making it odious, than all its Enemies could do; The reason of the thing seconded by full experience are undeniable proofs: No Men that I know of have done more against Episcopacy than Bishops: and (Pardon my free inviting you to Repentance) none that I know alive, either Sectaries or Bishops, more than you two, who I unfeignedly wish may have the honour before you die, of righting the Church and repairing the honour of true Episcopacy. It is a dreadful thing to us Nonconformists to think of appearing before God, under the Guilt of Silencing Two Thousand of our selves, if it prove our doing; If not, let them think of it that believe they shall be judged, Prov. 26.27. Whoso diggeth a Pit shall fall therein, and he that rolleth a Stone it shall return upon him.