The True Dissenter, Title page – Errata
THE TRUE DISSENTER, OR, THE CAUSE Of those that are for Gathered Churches.
BEING A Right State thereof, proposed and settled upon its proper foundations: in Opposition to all Compliance that is Sinful, but in Order to that Obedience which is Lawful, and Conducive to the Healing of the Nation.
Occasion'd by some late Writings, and especially by a Book entituled, The Cause of their Mix'd Churches against (or The Axe laid to the root of) Separation.
Nonnulli propter quaedam in se offendicula de quibus pie, religiose{que} monebantur, Episcopatus officium non solum sine culpa, sed cum laude posuerunt. Quid ista? Nisi quia sine Episcopatu vel Clericatu salvi esse possumus: sine Christiana vero Religione non possumus. August. contra Crescon. lib. 2. c. 11.
Printed in the Year MDCLXXXV.
THE PREFACE.
ALthough there have been almost ever since the Reformation great Contests between the Episcopal Divines and Protestant Dissenters, yet 'tis no easie matter to shew, where lies the main Diffeence. There hath been a great noise about Church-Government, and Ceremonies, but no very clear or distinct Knowledge of what is chiefly intended by these Termes.
If we consult the Great Doctors, who have written in Defence of the Church of England, we find them to differ greatly amongst themselves, Whitgift, Saravia, Hooker, Bancroft, Bilson, Downam, Hall, Andrews, Usher, Cousins, Bramhall and Hammond, have given us their sentiments about the Episcopal Government. Some assert that there is no Form of Church-Government de jure divino; whence no Difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter in Scripture account: And others are for the Divine Right of The Episcopal Government, who yet differ about the Offices of a Bishop and Presbyter. Some say that they are of the same Order, and Differ only in Degree. Others, that they are of Different Orders. Of those that hold them to be of Different Orders, there are some who make the Bishops the Apostles Successours, and others think otherwise. Dr. Hammond doth aver, that every place of Scripture which mentioneth Bishops, or Presbyters, meaneth only Diocesan Bishops. But then he leaves us in the dark about the Office of the Parish Presbyter, which according to his Notion can by no means be an Office of Divine Institution, and yet I must confess that Dr. Burnet hath offered very fair for the help of Dr. Hammond; for as Dr. Hammond makes the Scripture Presbyters to be Diocesan Bishops: so Dr. Burnet *Preface to his History of the Rights of Princes pag. 41.hath made the Deacons mentioned by St. Paul to the Philippians, and to Timothy, to signifie the office of Presbyters: and this is done to remove a vulgar prejudice, which is, that in the New Testament there is no mention made of more than Two Orders [Bishops and Deacons] and that therefore the raising a Third Order was at first but an Humane and Political Device; but this (saith the Dr.) must vanish into nothing, if we carefully examine what is the Importance of the Term Deacon, which (as he will have it) signifies a Presbyter.
But although Dr. Burnet hath shewn us where to find a Parish Presbyter in Scripture, notwithstanding Dr. Hammond had transformed the Scripture Presbyter into a Diocesan Bishop; its manifest that we have lost one of the Three Orders of the Church of England, and until some one or other doth find out under some other Scripture-Term an office to answer that of our Deacons, the Church of England will be very little owing either to Dr. H. or Dr. B.
Dr. Cousins and Dr. Zouch have indeed given us a very particular description of the Church of England, but whether it be a just one is questioned by divers, and denyed by some. So that notwithstanding the Severity of Paenal Laws against Nonconformists, it's a very great difficulty to know what the Church of England is, or what is the Episcopal Government unto which Conformity is so strictly enjoyned, and I am sure it s impossible for any to conform with a good Conscience whilst they continue Ignorant of the thing unto which their Conformity is exacted.
Besides there are among the Conformable Clergy different Opinions about the Ceremonies, which are made Termes of our Communion with the Church of England. Some make them all parts of External Worship: and others affirm them only to be Decent Circumstances. Bishop Taylour saith that we have retain'd but One Ʋninstituted Ceremony that is a part of External Worship, viz. the Sign of the Cross; and Dr. Sherlock endeavours to prove that the Sign of the Cross is no part of Worship.
And as it is so very hard to know what we must Conform unto, so it's not very easie to shew What the Dissenters would be at, or what parts of Conformity they like or dislike. Some can by no means be for Clergy Conformity who yet Conform as Laymen: and there are others among the Dissenters who think that Ecclesiastical and Statute Laws require as full Conformity from the People as from the Clergy, and that the Difference is only about the way of Discovering Assent and Consent. For what the Clergy do by Declarations and Subscriptions, that the People must do by their holding compleat Communion with the Church of England.
In a word, Some Dissenters think that the consideration of better Edification is sufficient to Justifie their partial Seperation from the Church, and others are of the Opinion that unless there lyeth some Sin in their way they are bound in Conscience to conform.
On an Observation of these things I thought it highly expedient to Consult the Ecclesiastical Constitutions, and our Statute Laws, and see what light they gave touching the Ministry, Discipline, and Worship of the Church of England, and also to search the Writings of the most Judicious Nonconformists to find out what 'twas they did stick at, that I might, if possible, know where the Difference lay, and what was the cheif cause of all our Maladies and hurtful Divisions. And this much I have according to the best of my skill attempted in the ensuing Treatise, and I think I have given a right state of the Controversie, which may be reduced to these three Heads. 1. The Matter of an Instituted Gospel-Church. 2. The Form of such a Church: and 3. The Imposed Terms of Communion.
I have shewn what the Church of England, and what the Nonconformists judge of these things, and without Fear or Flattery have declared how great the Difference is, and must ingenuously confess, that such is the Constitution of those Churches the Dissenters generally do believe to be of God, that the Divine Right of a National Church Government, whether Episcopal, or Presbyterian, makes Union a thing impossible.
The Controversie, which is about the Matter of Churches will soon be at an end, if the Church of England will but bring their practice to their avowed principles, which are published every time any are baptized by their Clergy.
It's true there are some Wise men amongst them who seeing this to be very clear, and finding that the Restraining their Practice to their Principles would destroy their Mix'd Churches, have made a search after wider Principles, and have formed such a Notion about the Matter of Instituted Churches, as may be of use to the larger size of Presbyterians, but not to the Church of England, whose mixed Congregations cannot be brought within so narrow a Compass as this new principle prescribes, so that though there is much weight and candour discover'd to be in the Notion, yet it doth not only look rare to the generality of Protestants, who take it to be the squaring principles to a Corrupt practice, but it fall's short of its main design: However for the weight that's in it I have fairly proposed it.
But the great Point in Controversie is about the Form of Instituted Churches. The True Dissenter doth think, that Dr. Cousins and Zouch have given the fairest account of the Form of the Episcopal Churches, and what mostly corresponds with the Ecclesiastical and Statute-Laws of this Land, as I have shewn, and if in this the Dissenter judge rightly the Episcopal species of Churches, the very species or kind of their Ministry and Discipline must be acknowledged to be destructive of those Churches the Dissenters do bold of Divine Institution, and they cannot without Laying a violence on their Consciences approve it.
The Dissenters not being able to find in Scripture any such Office as that of the Diocesan Bishop, do esteem the placing such an Office in the Church to be very like the erecting a New Office in the Civil Government, contrary to the Fundamental Laws thereof, or at least without the Consent of the Legislative Power. And as the Parish Minister is of an office of which the Sollicitudo Pastoralis, is no part, they find no such Office of Divine Appointment, nor can they see that such Ministers have any more Right to dispense the Holy Sacraments than either a Physitian, or Lawyer; for as they are Parish Ministers of Legal Establishment, they want what is Essential to the Office of a Gospel Presbyter, to whom alone the Authority and Obligation of Administring the Sacraments is by Jesus Christ committed, and therefore can have no more right to do it than either the Physitian, Lawyer, &c. have.
Here then lyes a chief Ground of the present Separation, and that which makes separation more Necessary now than in Q. Elizabeth's dayes, for then the Solicitudo Pastoralis was a part of the Parish Minister's Office, and although he was denyed the exercise of some Part of it, yet he remained vested with the Authority and Obligation, but now, as I have proved, the case is altered, and the Diocesan Bishop and the Parish Minister made quite another thing than before. Now the Bishop, as such, is not the King's Officer circa sacra, but Christs pastour of a Diocesan Church which is made a particular Church of the Lowest rank and the Parish Minister is not, as formerly, the Pastour of his Parish, But the Bishops Curate, a Sub-half-Presbyter.
If the Species of their Church Government be not as I have with Dr. Cousins and others represented it to be, 'twill be extremely necessary that the Reverend Bishops do give us a more exact description of it, and shew us, whether the Diocesan Churches now by Law established be single Churches infimae speciei, and, whether the Bishop be the sole pastour of this Church: or Whether the Diocesan Church be a compounded Church made up of many many single Parochial Churches, and Whether the Parish Minister be vested with the Pastoral Office and the Bishop is a Pastour of Pastours, or what else is the Church of England?
The Controversie about the Imposed Termes of Communion I have handled only in the general, and do therefore refer the Reader to such as have enumerated the many particulsrs in the Liturgy, which to consent to is in the Judgement of the True Dissenter sinful,See Mr. Baxters first plea for Nonconformists. and yet I have particularly shewn what it is the Law requires Conformity unto, whereby Some Dissenters, who flatter themselves with the Fancy that their going to Church to escape the penalty of the Law is not Approving what the Law requires, may be undeceived.
After I had given a just account of what I apprehended to be the Judgement of the Church of England, and of the TRUE DISSENTER, who is a thorough Nonconformist and cannot hold communion with the Parish-Churches in the Liturgick worship as by Law required, the Difference appeared to be so very great, that I could not but think it necessary to make some Enquiry after an Uniting Expedient but never could pitch on any thing at all agreeable, but that one dedicated some years ago to the Lord Marquess Halifax, which I have therefore very briefly and impartially Stated, and do humbly present the consideration thereof to our Superiours, as what may firmly Ʋnite the several Dissenting Protestants with the Church of England.
ERRATA.
PAge 1. l. 8, 9. for Nonconformist r. Conformist. p. 10. l. 18. d. all. p. 15. l. 1. for Patients r. Patents. p. 16. l. 25. for change r. challenge. l. 26. r. and after [again] p. 23. l. 33. for 26. r. 20. p. 29. l. 29. for 16. r. 6. p. 33. l. 20. after [in force] r. may clearly see the Truth of this. p. 36. l. 7. after [find] r. the. p. 47. l. 29. d. all. p. 59. l. 6. for [or live] r. and live. p. 61. l. 30. for [Diocesan] r. Diocess. p. 63. l. 25. after [must] r. so far. l. 33. after [themselves] add [to have any governing Power over the Parish, they own themselves.] p. 65. l. 2. after [they] r. will. l. 15. for Formed r. Framed. p. 66. l. 2. for the r. their. l. 15. for his r. this their. p. 93. l. 16. after [vita] r. et. p. 110. l. 25. for [the] r. He. p. 118. l. 10. for Counties r. Contries. p. 120. l. 10. after [much] d. as. p. 132. l. 27. for Face r. Free. p. 134. l. 32. for what r. that. p. 141. l. 4. for than r. that. l. 12. for taken r. taking.
THE TRUE DISSENTER.
The Introduction.
TIs too much known, that in this Kingdom, partly by a strict enjoyning, and partly by a stiff opposing Uniformity, a most unhappy Division hath ensued: which of late years is come to a greater heighth than formerly, not only between the Conformist and Nonconformist; but between Conformist and N… conformist on the one hand, and N…conformist and Nonconformist on the other. For, as some Conformists are for Severity against all Dissenters, others are for relaxing it as to some: and as some Nonconformists are against all Compliances, others are as much for some Conformity: so on all hands, there are strange Contentions, and Animosities, accompanied with too much Envy, Hatred, and every evil work.
To bewail, and lament the mischievous effects of our Divisions, and their Causes is the duty of all: To attempt the Healing of them is the intent of this present Discourse.
It's no part of my province to pass Censures on any, 'tis the grief of my Soul to observe on both sides, what I dare not publish, but desire secretly to bear on my heart before the Lord. My principal business is to enquire impartially after the true cause of the present Distempers, and to offer what I humbly apprehend to be the only effectual way of Cure. And this I will do in this Method.
1. I will give a just description of the Church of England, and shew what she declares her self by her Laws and Constitutions to be: and what she requires from all English men that hold Comunion with her.
2. I will give a short, but true account of the Principles of Protestant Dissenters, and the Constitution of their Churches. In doing which, I shall shew where lies the chief ground of our Divisions. And then in the Third place.
3. I will propose, what is (as I think) the only Necessary thing to be done for the ending our Divisions, and the knitting all the Protestants of the English Church into a firm, and lasting Establishment in our present Religion.