Background Image
Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  686 / 846 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 686 / 846 Next Page
Page Background

4

AP

rn

END

1

X

Numb.

I.

of

true Minifters?

S.

But what are

all these

Words

of

mine to

the Agreemçnt

á

Thofe

are

but mine own Thoughts, which none

are defired

to content to. You

fhoulds

have produced

fomewhat from

our

Articles of

Concord.,

and

not from

my

Words.

Except. to

Se??.

4,

Do

they take in your

acknowledged

Grounds

of

all parts, (Epifcopal and

all)

who would have

us

acknowledge them Presbyters ordained in

this

Church

with-

out

Bithops,

not

by

necelíity

as

in

the Churches wherein no Proteftant

Bifhop could

be had

?

unlefs

their Chrillian

Charity

can take Countenance to

lay that none

of

our

Bithops

were Proteftants, and

that then

they mutt

have had

no Ordination at

all

or Ordination

by Papifts

(requiring of them the

Acknowledging the Popes

Ecclefiallial Supremacy) which

was

the confeffedCafe

of

thofe Protestants beyond

Seas,

from whence

they would

fain

borrow a Cloak for their

Fad

:

hut the Co-

vering

is

too short,

though they

argue while

the

World endures, there

is

a vast dif-

ference betwixt neceffity and voluntary Engaging

by Covenant,

and relinquiíhing,

calling

off,

and laying

by

true Catholick, Proteltant

Bilhops.

Reply to

Seíl.

4.

Yes,

Sir;

I

am confident

I

take

in the Grounds

of

the Epifcopal Proteftants

(But

I

dare not

fay

yours,

for

I

do

not

know.

you) nor

are

you

able

to manifelt the

contrary

;

t.

Necefty may

jellify fome things,

that

elfe

were

unjuftilable, and

the

abfence

of

fuck Neceflìty mayprove them

finful

:

But

if

Presbyters may

juftly

or-

dain

in

cafe

of

necefiìty, then you

will

hardly prove

oar

Ordination

null,

.for want

of

that

Necefty,

though you

should prove

it irregular.

It

feems

you think that Lay

Men may baptize in

cafe

of

necefflty;

if

fo,

you

may prove it

fink

but hardly

nail,

where

Nees

/ty

is

not.

2.

It

is

an incredibleAffertion againit

the Sun,

that

all

thofe

Proteftants beyond

Sea,

had

fuch

a

Neceffìty, and could

not

have

Proteltant

Billy's.

Put

out

MensEyes, and

then

tell

them

this.

Were the Low Countries

fo

far from

England

that

they could

not

poffibly have

borrowed

a Bifhop

toOrdain?

Was

not

Bifhop

Carleton

at

the

Synod

of

.Dort

with them

?

why

did

not that Synod

defire this

Curtety

?

It

is

faid, he

protetled

for Bithops in

the

open Synod, and

that he took their

Silence for

Content,

and alfo,

that

force after told

him, that

they would have them

if

they could

;

as

if

Silence

were any Sign

of

Contnt

againft

their own ettablilhed

Difcipline

Who

knows

not that their

loathnefs

tö difpleafeKing fames,

of

whom they had

then fe much need, might well caufe them to keep Silence, about that which

was

not the

Bufinefs

of the

Assembly,

as

long

as

they

held their

prefent Government

?

and,

if

force

faid

they would have Bithops

if

they

could, it

is

plain it

was

but

few,

for

if

moil had been willing,

what hindered them

?

If

you

fay

the

Civil

Power,,

I

anfwer,

n.

The

Ecclefatticks

fo

taught them and defired the Presbyterian Govern

-

mentof

them.z.They

might

have

run the hazard of

a

Perfecution

as

well

as

we

and

the

civil

Rulers

of

this

Nation

are

as

much

at

leaft againft

it

as

theirs

:

So

force gather

from

Moulirs's

Word to

Bithop Andrews, and fome few

other

Mens,

that the French

Churches

would fain have

Bithops ;

as

alfo

they

are faid to have

offered

Obedience

to the Papift

Bithops,

if

they would turn Proteftants

:

when

as

it

is

known theyare

againft

Bithops, and

if

any particular Perfons are for

it,

it

is

againft the Eftablilh-

naent

of their

Churches.

Perhaps they might think their Form of Government

not

of

fuck

Moment

os

to

rejeFt

Epifcopacy,

if

it might come

in

with

filch an

Ad-

vantage

as

the

turning

of

the Papift

Bithops would have

brought:

But

what

is

that

to prove that they would

have

Bithops

and could

not?

Grotios

knew

France

as

well

as

you,

whoever you

are;

and

he

tells

us

another Story

of

thhem,

Difcaf, Apologet.

River.

That they

wilfully

call

out the Order

of

Bïlhops

as

far

as

their Authority

could reach

;

what impoffibility path their been

these

hundred Years for

France,

Belgia,

Helvetia,

Geneva,

with the

reft

of

the

Proteltant

Churches to have had

Bi-

ihaps

if

they had been willing

?

They

had

Hermannusof

Coles, Vergerius

of

Ju(tinop.

came among

them,Spalárenfss

would have ordained force in

hisPaffage

; ifno

Englith

Bithop could

have been

got thither,how

easy

had

it

been to havefent one to

receive

Epifopal

Confeeration here, and then

to

have

gone home and ordained more

?

It

may

be

you

would

make

us

believe

the

like

of

the Church

of

Scorland

too,that they

would fain

have Bithops

and could

not: If

you

alledge

any Inconvenience

that

ne-

çellitates

-all

these

Proteftant

Churches

to continue without

Bithops, even to this

Day

;

I

fay,

;. Our

Neceflty

is as

great

as

any

of

theirs for ought you can mani-

fell to the contrary

;

for

r. Our

Rulers are

as

much

againft

them.

2.

We

cannot

exereife publickly our Minifterial

Office,

unlefs

we

be

ordained according to tits

Laws

of

the prefent Rulers.

;.

There

is

a

heavy Penalty ordained

to

all

Orda

nets