A Treatise of Episcopacy, Part 2 · Chapter 1 – Chapter 2
CHAP. I. The clearing of the ſtate of the Queſtion.
THE occaſion of our diſpute, or rather Apology, is known in England. 1. Every man that is ordained Deacon or Presbyter (or licenſed a Schoolmaſter) muſt ſubſcribe to the Books of Articles, Liturgy and Ordination, as Ex animo that there is nothing in them contrary to the Word of God. And by the late Act of Uniformity [that he doth aſſent and conſent to all things conteined in, and preſcribed by the ſaid books as ſince altered (we think for the worſe.)
2. In the year 1640 the Convocation formed, printed and impoſed a new Oath in theſe words (after others) [Nor will I ever give my conſent to alter the Government of this Church, by Arch-Biſhops, Biſhops, Deans, Arch-Deacons, &c. as it ſtands now eſtabliſhed, and as by right it ought to ſtand.]
3. After this the Parliament in the Wars impoſed a Vow and Covenant on the Miniſters and People contrary to this called the Et caetrea Oath; which Vow contained a clauſe to endeavour the ex…rpation of this Prelacy. In the Weſtminſter Aſſembly before it paſſed, many Learned Divines declared that they would not take it as againſt Prelacy unexplained, leſt it ſhould ſeem to be againſt all Epiſcopacy, which was not their judgment, they being for the primitive Epiſcopacy. To ſatisfie theſe men (that elſe had proteſted againſt it, and the Aſſembly been divided, the Scots and ſome others being againſt all) the additional Titles of Deans, Chapters, &c. were put in as a deſcription of the peculiar Engliſh frame of Prelacy which they all agreed againſt. Since His Majeſty's Reſtoration, there are many Acts made againſt the belief of an obligation by this Vow. One is made for a change in Corporations, requiring a Declaration by all in any place of Truſt, [that there is no obligation on me or any other perſon from the ſaid Oath, Vow or Covenant ] even abſolutely no obligation at all without exception of the clauſes that are for the Proteſtant Religion, for Repentance of our ſins, againſt Popery, Hereſie, Schiſm, Prophaneneſs, &c. The Act of Uniformity impoſeth it on all Miniſters, &c. to declare or ſubſcribe that there is no obligation from that Vow on me or any other perſon to endeavour at any time any alteration of Government in the Church.] The Veſtry Act impoſeth the like on all Veſtry men; and so of others.
4. All Miniſters ſwear to obey the Biſhops in li…tis & honeſtis, which is called the Oath of Canonical Obedience.
5. And laſt of all an Act paſt at Oxford by which we are to be baniſhed five miles from all Cities and Corporations, and all places where we have preached, and impriſoned ſix months in the Common Jail, if we come nearer any of them, except on the Road, till we have taken an Oath [that we will not at any time endeavour an alteration of the Government of the Church,] (which plainly importeth as much objectively as the Et caetera Oath of 1640; Though not endeavouring be ſomewhat leſs than not conſenting.) And ſo black a Character is put upon the Non-conformiſts, with a [ſome of them) in the beginning of the ſaid Act, that all Reaſon, Religion and Humanity obligeth us for the ſatisfaction of our Rulers, for the vindication of our ſelves, and for the juſt information of poſterity, plainly and truly to lay open our Caſe, even thoſe reaſons for which we forbear that Conformity; and by ſo doing, incurr all this, beſides the greater loſs of our Miniſterial Liberty, to labour for the ſaving of the peoples ſouls, and the edifying of the Church of God.
What is ſaid in the beginning may ſufficiently inform the Reader, 1. That it is not every man's Cauſe that is called a Non-conformiſt, no nor a Presbyterian, or Independant that I here maintain. 2. That I am not writing a Juſtification of the Covenant, 1. As to the Act of Impoſing. 2. Or of taking it. 3. Nor as to the obligation of it to any thing unlawful. Leaving ſuch matters as alien to my work, 3. And that I am not ſo raſh as to aſſert that it obligeth any man, to endeavour (in his place and calling) any change of our Church Government, no not of a Lay-Chancellor's uſe of the Keys, whatever I think, Becauſe it is made a matter of ſo grievous penalty by an Act. All that I have to do is, to enquire whether the Dioceſane Prelacy as now ſtated, be ſo lawful that we may take all theſe Oaths and Subſcriptions to it, and ſo neceſſary that the King and Parliament have no power to change it, or make an alteration if they pleaſe, and we endeavour it by obeying them if they ſhould command us.
And I go upon ſuch Principles as Doctor Burges, Maſter Gataker, and many others in the Aſſembly, that were ready to proteſt that they were not againſt the Primitive Epiſcopacy, no nor a moderate one that did not in all things reach it.
I will rather be guilty of Repetition than of leaving the raſh or heedleſs under a pretext for their miſtake or calumny.
My own judgment is as followeth. 1. That every particular Church, (conſiſting of as full a number as can aſſociate for true perſonal Communion in Worſhip and holy living) ſhould be guided by as many Paſtors or Elders (of the ſame Office) as the number of ſouls, and the work requireth.
2. That it is lawful, (if not uſually laudable and fit) if theſe Presbyters conſent that one among them who is wiſer and fitter than the reſt, be ſtatedly their Guide, Director, or Moderator, in the matters of Doctrine, Worſhip and Diſcipline in that Church, for order and concord, and for the peoples ſakes and their own: And eſpecially that in Ordinations they do nothing without him.
3. That theſe particular Churches with their Biſhop and Presbytery are Independant, ſo far that no other Biſhop or Church hath a Divine Right to Govern them, ſaving what is anon to be ſaid of General Paſtors or Viſiiters, and the power of each Miniſter in the Univerſal Church, as he is called.
4. That as to the Communion of ſeveral Churches among themſelves, theſe particular Churches are not Independent, but muſt hold Concord and Correſpondency by Letters, Meſſengers or Synods as there ſhall be cauſe.
5. That in theſe Synods it is lawful and orderly oftentimes to make ſome one the Moderator or Guide of their debates. And that either pro tempore, or quamdiu ſit maxime idoneus, or durante vita, as true Prudence ſhall diſcern it to be moſt conducible to the end.
6. That where the Churches Good and the calling of the Infidel World requireth it, there ſhould be itinerant Miniſters, like the old Evangeliſts, Silas, Apollo, Timothy, Titus, &c. to preach the Goſpel, and gather Churches, and help their Paſtors. And if ſuch be not neceſſary in any place, yet the fixed Paſtors ſhould when there is cauſe be itinerant, and help to convert the Infidels and Hereticks, and do both the general and particular work.
7. That the judgment of Antiquity moving me much, but more the Argument from the neceſſity, [that the ſame form of Government be continued in its ordinary parts, which Chriſt at firſt ſetled in the Apoſtles, and is not proved repealed] do move me to incline to think that the Apoſtles muſt have ſuch Succeſſors, as general Planters and Overſeers of many Churches. And who ſhould (before all particular Biſhops) have a chief hand in the ordaining of particular Biſhops and Paſtors, and removing them as the Churches good requireth (As the Seniors have in the Bohemian Waldenſes Government.) And though I am yet in doubt my ſelf, whether ſuch general Miniſters, or Arch-biſhops be jure divino, of Chriſts inſtitution, I do not deny it, or contend againſt it: And though I would not aſſert or ſwear to their right, I would obey them.
8. That all this Church-power is to be exerciſed only by Gods word, managed by convincing Reaſon, Love and good Example, and that no Biſhops or Arch-biſhops have any power of Corporal Coaction; Nor ſhould give Church Communion to any but Voluntary Conſenters; nor ſhould mix and corrupt the exerciſe of the Keys, with unſeaſonable interpoſitions of the Sword even in the Magiſtrates own hand.
9. But yet that the King and Magiſtrates are the Rulers by the Sword over all Paſtors and their Flocks, to ſee that all men do their duties, and to regulate them by Laws about holy things, ſubſerviently to the Kingdom and Laws of Chriſt, and in conſiſtence with the preſervation of the Office of the Miniſtry and real liberties of the Flocks.
10. And therefore, though we think Churchmen uſually very unfit for any Magiſtratical Power, yet we ſhall obey as his Miniſters any whomſoever the King ſhall commit any part of his power about Church matters to; and promiſe them due obedience as ſuch.
And ſo you ſee what is not the Queſtion now to be debated.
But the Queſtion is [Whether the preſent Church Government in England (as diſtinct from the Kings and Magiſtrates part) be ſo good or lawful, that we ſhould ſwear or ſubſcribe our approbation of it, our obedience to it, or that we will never (in our place and calling) endeavour an alteration of it (no though the King command us) and that every man in the three Kingdoms that vowed to endeavour ſuch alteration, is ſo clearly and utterly diſobliged, as that all ſtrangers that never knew him may ſubſcribe or declare that he is diſobliged, or not obliged to it by that Vow.
CHAP. II. The firſt Argument againſt the Engliſh Dioceſans; That their form (quantum in ſe) deſtroyeth the particular Church Form of God's Inſtitution, and ſetteth up a Humane Form in its ſtead.
ARGUMENT I.
WE cannot ſubſcribe or ſwear to that form of Church Government as good or lawful, which in its nature excludeth or deſtroyeth the very ſpecifical nature of the particular Churches which were inſtituted by the Holy Ghoſt, and ſetled in the primitive times, and is it ſelf a humane from ſet up in their ſtead.
But ſuch we take the preſent Dioceſane form to be: Ergo,
The Major will be denied by very few that we have now to do with. And thoſe few that will deny it, muſt do it on this ſuppoſition, 1. That the Holy Ghoſt did inſtitute that particular Church Form which is deſtroyed but pro tempore. And Secondly, That he allowed men ſince to ſet up one or more of their own in its ſtead. But the diſproof of this ſuppoſition will fall in more fitly, when I have ſhewed what Church Form was firſt ſetled.
The Minor I thus prove.
The Species of a particular Church which the Holy Ghoſt did inſtitute, was [one Society of Chriſtians united under one or more Biſhops, for perſonal Communion in publick worſhip and holy living▪ ]
The Dioceſane Engliſh frame is (deſtructive of or) inconſiſtent with this ſpecies of a particular Church.
Ergo, The Dioceſane Engliſh frame is inconſiſtent with (or deſtructive of) the Species of the Holy Ghoſts inſtitution.
In the Major, 1. By [Biſhops] I mean, Sacred Miniſters authorized by Divine appointment, to be the ſtated Guides of the Church, by Doctrine, Worſhip and Diſcipline, under Chriſt the Teacher, Prieſt and Ruler of the Church. Whether he have a ſuperior Arch-Biſhop I determine not; Nor now whether he may ordain Paſtors for other Churches.
What I mean by [Perſonal Communion] and whether it be conſiſtent with divers Aſſemblies, I have fully ſhewed before. I mean, that the ſaid Churches were no more numerous than our Engliſh Pariſhes, nor had more Aſſemblies; Or no more than could have the ſame perſonal Communion, and that there were never any Churches infimae…vel prime ſpeciei, which conſiſted of many ſuch ſtated Aſſemblies.
I ſhall therefore now prove, 1. That the Churches of the Holy Ghoſts inſtitution were no more numerous, or were ſuch ſingle Congregations. And that they had each ſuch Biſhops and Paſtors will be proved partly herewith, and partly afterward.
2. And that ſuch Churches do tota ſpecie differ from the Dioceſane Churches, and from our preſent Pariſh Churches as they define them, and are inconſiſtent with them. And the firſt I ſhall prove, 1. From the Holy Scriptures. 2. From the Confeſſions of the Dioceſanes. 3. From the teſtimony of Antiquity. All proving fully that the ancient Epiſcopal Churches were but ſuch ſingle Societies or Congregations as I have deſcribed, and ſuch as our Dioceſſes of many hundred Churches are different from, and inconſiſtent with.