A fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's vvorship. Or a triplication unto. D. Burgesse his rejoinder for D. Morton The first part

SECT. XIIII.

A Fift instance, or rather an inlargement of the former is, in respect of the Ministers who have for∣merly refused the ceremonies, for whereas the Minister is bound to lead his people forward unto perfection, and to pro∣vide by all good meanes, that his ministery be not despised: by this meanes he shall draw them back againe unto the li∣king of superstition: or at least not to dislike it so much as they have done, and give them evident occasion to b••ame his Mi∣nistery, and to call in quaestion the truth of all his doctrine.

Here the Defen. commeth upon them with open mouth, avouching peremptorily, that this is a false, pre∣sumptuous, irreligious, partiall, and pernicious pretense: and all this he will prove. If he can, we shall the easilyer beare these great words. But why is it false? forsooth, because most of the Non-conformists have once subscribed: the contradicting of which subscription is no lesse a matter of discredit then returning unto conformitie. What kind of

proofe is this? because they were subject to another dis∣credite, therefore this is no discredit. Beside it doth not appeare, nor is likely that most of these Ministers did ever absolutely subscribe: neither is it likely; because it is well knowne how easie and how ordinary it was in Queene Elizabeths dayes, to enter into the Ministry without passing under that gallowes. If the most had, yet how would this prove it a false pretence in the rest? If all had done so, yet this was no act of their Ministerie, nor known it may be to their people, and therfore the crossing of it did not so directly tend to the discrediting of their Ministery, as the crossing of their publick doc∣trine. Lastly, that which is done before a man be setled in the Ministery at one time, without any great delibe∣ration, is not of such note as that which a man hath long professed and perswaded by reasons taken from the word of God. By all this it appeareth, that this first accusation of Ialshood was rather an adventure as the Def. himselfe calleth it, then a grounded assertion.

He did but adventure neither to call the same plea pr••sumptuous. For he can finde no other reason to beare up this charge withall then, that they seeme to arrogate to themselves a pre••ogative proper to the Apostles. How can this be I wonder, seeing they follow herein the direc∣tion of the Apostle himselfe, Tit. 2.15. Let no man despise thee. What this prerogative is, he doth not plainly tell us: but compriseth it in two places of Scripture, 1. Cor. 15. Gal. 2.18. the first whereof is nothing at all to the pur∣pose. For the Apostle doth not say as the Def. maketh him, If we be found false witnesses, then is your faith in vaine:

but if Christ be not risen; then are we false witnesses, and your fai••h is vaine: Which also any preacher of the Gospell may say without falshood or presumption to his people. The second place, If I bui••d againe that which I have de∣stroyed, I make my selfe a prevaricator, is applyable to any Minister that hath taught the truth against Popish super∣stition. This very doctrine M. Perkins gathereth out of the words. Proculcavimus sup••rstitionem Papisticam &c. I hope the Def. doth not thinke he may build up any superstition, and not be accounted therefore a prevari∣cator: if he doe; or though he doe not, let him consider where the presumption lyeth.

But why irreligious? because it is persisting in an er∣rour, for the preservation of their owne credit. But 1. who taught the Def. to make that which is in quaestion the ground of an accusation in dispute. First, let him prove that it is an errour, before he take it so for granted, that upon that ground he will challenge mens reasons as irreligious. 2. It is not their credit, but the credit of their Ministery which they speake of. 3. Is it such an irreligious thing, to desire that certaine ceremonies may not bee imposed upon them, lest their Ministery be by that meanes prejudiced?

Why partiall? because men should rather yeeld to con∣fo••mitie for the credit of the Church: i. e. for the credit of the Convocation house. Alas, the credit which a great part of that generation doth seeke for, is that they may rejoyce in our flesh. But suppose they meant sincerely: would the Def, have men discredit and prejudice their Ministery, to bring some credit unto other mens decrees?

Or doth the forbearing of some ceremonies bring such discredit to the Authorizers of them? surely then they are more for the honour of mortall men, then for the honour of God. For Gods honour and worship is no wayes prejud••ced by their absence.

The last charge is pernitious. And here many words are used to give countenance unto that one. The maine ground is, Woe to me if I preach not the Gospell; and Simon lovest thou mee? then feed my sheep. Whereupon he ga∣thereth, that it is a pernicious thing for a Minister to putt himselfe unto silence. But 1. what is this to the quaestion of di••crediting ones Ministry? 2. Although we were most worthy to have these remembrances out of Scripture rubbed upon us yet the Prelates are altogether unwor∣thy and unfitt to doe it. Let any man conceive with himselfe B. Bancroft, or any other in the end of the Con∣vocation, after all the Canons were concluded, com∣ming forth as Prolocutor, and speaking thus to the Mi∣nisters assembled together before him. Men and bre∣theren, the reverend fathers of this Convocation, as th••y al∣wayes meditate on the law of God, and every part of it, both day and night: so especially doe they lay to heart those passages of holy Writ which properly concerne their office: as woe unto me if I preach not the Gospell: and Simon lovest thou mee? feed my sheep. Out of th••se considerations, being carryed with a fervent zeale both of preaching themselves in their se∣verall places, & also of procuring more faithfull Preachers, & more fruitfull preaching throughout the land, they have ••ver and above the institutions of Christ, appointed certaine

ceremonies strictly to be observed of every Minister: so that whosoever shall hereafter upon any pretense refuse to observe the same, they shall be esteemed factious, sc••ismaticall, disor∣derly, exo••bitant men, and for that cause by their or••inary suspended and deprived. Now for the prevent••ng of such a mischief•• your tender mother would have you to understand by my mouth, that if any man bee thrust out of the Ministery for not yeeld••ng to these c••nstitutions, howsoev••r they may seeme un••o him such as the Church cannot lawfully appo••nt, nor hee observe, yet is he author of his owne silencing: and therefore you must all be exhorted to consider w••ll of those par∣cels of Scripture which have so much prevailed with your carefull mother. Woe is me if I preach not the Gospell: Simon lovest thou mee? feed my sheepe.

Would not he that heard such a speech as this from a Prelate be forced to call for a bason? and after he had recovered himselfe he might well give answer in these words. I heare the word of a deceitfull tongue. Behold thou art called a Bishop and gl••riest in that title: thou perswadest t••y selfe, thou art a chiefe guide and father of the Church, thou therefore that teachest another, teachest thou not thy selfe? Thou that sayest it is a woefull thing not to preach the Gospell, doest thou neither preach Christ faithfully, nor suffer those that would? Darest thou by thine owne authori••y, and for t••ine owne pleasure, hinder so many able men from preaching? thou that professest the flocke must bee fed, doest thou thrust o••t fee∣ders, and keep in starvers? Therefore thou art inexcusable, O Prelat, whosoever thou art, that condemnest another for that whereof thou art both beginning and ending.

Thirdly, the Apostles woe, 1. Cor. 9. belongeth to

negligent, slothfull, and carelesse ministers properly, such as our Prelats know where to find enough, who y••t neither feele nor feare that woe from the Bishops which m••ny faithfull preachers are wrapped-in from time to time.

Fourthly, the Apostle doth not pronounce any woe for not preaching, where imprisonment do••h hinder. Now hee whose conscience is against the ceremonies, or doubteth of them, is spiritually imprisoned, so that he cannot by using of them, make his way to the pulpit.

Fiftly, it is a meere jest, though a bitter one, to say, that we leave our ministeries: when we doe all that our consciences will suffer us to doe, for the holding of our places: and when we have done all that, depart against our wills with sorrow. Non discedit a statione, qui cedit in∣vitus. See M. Parker, p. 1. c. 4. s. 14.

But the Defendant undertaketh to prove, that the cause of silencing is not in the Bishops that suspend and deprive us, but in our selves. He is as it seemeth, a great adventurer: For he commeth forth upon this peece of service with flying colours: Know you well what you s••y (sayth hee) when you lay the cause of your silencing upon the Bishops? Yes surely, very well. For a cause is that which bringeth force or vertue to the being of another thing.

Now the first vertue (or rather vice) which tendeth to silencing of Ministers in this case, is in the Bishops canons: they therefore are the first cause. The second vertue is in the Bishops and their officers, which are exe∣cutioners of those unconscionable canons: they there∣fore are the secondarie cause. Non-conformity hath no

vertue in it of it owne nature, nor by Gods ordinance, to bring forth such an effect as the silencing of Gods Ministers is: though it be made an occasion by the per∣versenesse of our Prelats. I know well what I say: and will make it good against the Defendants vaine pre∣tences. The case standeth thus (sayth he) Titus (it had been more proper to say Diotrephes) the Bishop doth deprive Titius a factious and schismaticall minister, that he may place Sempronius a peaceable and discreet man, in his stead. In this proceeding, the intendement of Titus is not absolutely to de∣prive Titius, as he is a Minister, but as he was factious: yet so onely respectively, that Titius being deprived, he may consti∣tute Sempronius: for the charge of a Bishop is not determinate to appoynt precisely this min••ster: but indefinite, to ordaine a minister, so that the course of Gods plow is still preserved and continued. But as for Titius, who will rather be silenced then conforme, it is evident, that the cause of his silencing being his owne refractarinesse, which is onely personall & proper to him∣selfe, and yet hath no faculty in himselfe to appoynt or admit of a successor: he may be sayd to have properly caused his own suspension and deprivation.

This case needeth no long demurring on: for there is not one sentence in all the length of it, which doth not smell, without any uncasing, 1. are all those factious and schismaticall men, that refuse to conforme? was Hooper such a kynd of man? was Peter Martyr, and M. Perkins such, when one at Oxford, and the other at Cambridge, refused to weare the Surplice? was M^r. Goodman, M^r. Deering, M^r. More, M^r. Rogers, and such like heavenly men, the lights & glory of our churches,

were all these factious and schismaticall? In the pre∣sence of God it is well knowne they were not. But our Prelats have this prerogative, they may dubb whom they please factious and schismaticall, & after that, there is no redemption, they must be such, be they otherwise never so full of all grace.

2. Are all peaceable discreet men, which are placed in the deprived ministers stead? For the best of them, they are still as great eye-sores to our Bishops almost as the other: because they reprove a great deale of Epis∣copall darknesse, by their practises. For the rest, the con∣gregations over whom they are sett, cannot finde it, the voyce of all the countrey is otherwise for many of them; yet according to the Prelats measure, who meat (as it seemeth) the vertues and vices of a minister by certaine ceremonies of their owne imposing, it cannot be denied, but the most of them are very peaceable and discreet: Even so as many of the Bishops themselves were knowne to be afore they were Bishops, and shew themselves to be still: for, Episcopatus plures accepit, quam fecit bonos.

3. What sence can this have, The Bishop depriveth Ti∣tius respectively, that he may constitute Sempronius? Doth he know before-hand whom he shall constitute? then there is grosse legerdemaine, betwixt him, and that Sempronius. For with what conscience can one seek and the other assigne the place of him that is in posses∣sion? This is but some time in those benefices which are fatter, and whose patrons are more foolish. Ordinarily. the vilest minister that is to be found, may succeed

in the place of him that is deprived, for ought the Bishop knoweth, or for ought he can doe, except he will endure a quare impedit, which in case of morall un∣worthinesse, hath scarce beene ever heard of.

4. The charge which he sayth our Bishops have of appointing Ministers, I wonder from whence they have it, or by what conveyance. They say that they them∣selves are the proper pastors of all the parishes in their Diocesse. It is well, if they have an ubiquitary faculty, and will, to performe the office of pastors to so great a people: but who made them such? Christ & his Apostles never knew of ordinary pastors, having charge of so many Churches. But suppose they did, by whom doth Christ call one of our Bishops? By the Kings conge∣delier, the Chapiters nominall election, or by the Arch∣bishops consecration? There is none of these that can beare the triall of Scripture, nor of the Primitive Chur∣ches example?

5. Is the Bishops power of appointing a minister no wayes determinate to this or that minister? then it see∣meth his meere will determineth of the particular per∣son, without any just reason. For if there be certaine causes or reasons which the Bishop is bound to follow in designing of this or that minister, rather then an∣other, then is the Bishop determinate. The Councell of Nice it selfe determined the authority even of Patri∣arches in this case: viz. that the Elders should first no∣minate fitt men 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: secondly, that the people should elect or choose out of that num∣ber, per 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: & thirdly, that the Bishop should con∣firme

the elected 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Socrat. l. x. p. 177. What exorbitant power is this then which our Bishops doe now-a-dayes chalenge unto themselves? All Classicall Divines do consent to that which Iunius setteth downe, Conc. 5. l. 2. c. 6. n. 73. that no Bishop can send or appoint a Minister, sine cer∣ta ac justa ecclesiae postulatione, without the certaine fore∣choyce of the Church: Id enim esset obtrudere, non mittere, for that were to obtrude him, not to send him.

6. How is the course of Gods plow preserved, when for the most part the succeeding Minister is thrust upon the people against their wills, and so pernitious conten∣tions arise, of which the Bishop is cause procreant and conservant, by depriving the people of their minister, and obtruding his owne minister upon them, and up∣holding him in all those courses whereby he grieveth the poore people.

7. As the Minister hath no faculty in himselfe to ap∣point a successor, so hath not the Bishop neither of him∣selfe, and by himselfe.

Thus much for the Defendant his case. Whereas he addeth, that Beza and M^r. Cartwright determined with him in case of the Surplice. I answer 1. they did not so for the crosse. 2. they did not so for subscription to either. 3. they did not so but by way of toleration, re∣quiring also that men did speake against the imposing of the Surplice. 4. Beza was not throughly acquainted with the state of our Church. M^r. Cartwright (as I have

beene certainly informed by his owne sonne) recalled that passage of his booke, and desired that his revoking of it might be made knowne.

I thought good, overseeing the Presse, to confirme the Authors report, by a more particular relation which I have received from a person of good credit, set downe in writt as followeth.

MR. Cartwright being beyond the seas, in prin∣ting the rest of his 2. Reply, werein that indul∣gence is, sent to the Ministers of England who sought reformation with him, for their opinion of the use of the Surplice in case of deprivation: 22. of whom met therabout: of whom 19 joyntly agreed that it was simply unlawfull in any case, but the other three sayd other∣wise; wherefore it was agreed by all, that each part should write their opinion, and their reasons to him, which they did: but the letter of the nineteene miscarried, and that of the other three was delivered, which he ta∣king as the letter of the whole, supposed their joynt con∣sent had beene, that the losse of the ministery altered the case of the unlawfulnesse, & so that they were all against him; whereupon be mistrusting his owne judgement, and being much perplexed thereabout, suffered himselfe to be

swayed unto what is there written: but afterward un∣derstanding the right, hee was much more perplexed; yea (as he sayd) more then ever he was, in that to the great prejudice of the truth, he had suffered his conscience to be so defiled▪ which was forbidden, 1. Cor. 8.7. which hee bartily sorrowed to many, professing that if he againe put penn to paper about that subject, he would cleare the cause, and blame himselfe, praying them to signify the same freely in the meane tyme, the which they did, so that it ever since hath been currant among all his friends, and constantly affirmed by them to all on due occasions, and particularly affirmed to M. Sprint by a Gentleman in the presence of one Nobleman, two Gentlemen, 27. Ministers, and many professors, in his course, in the scanning his booke then about to be printed divers yeares before it was printed, sundry also of those ministers a∣vouched the same, some on their owne knowledge, others vpon vndoubted testimony, which yet is ready to be avouched in due case of need, and should now be ex∣pressed, were not the naming of the avouchers dangerous vnto them, and so not to be done without their know∣ledge, which now cannot be.

For the point it selfe, when a man doth but stand in

doubt betwixt using the ceremonies, and suffering of d••privation, it must needs be more safe, patiently to suffer himselfe to bee thrust from his minist••ry, then to reteine it and offend his conscience by using the Cere∣monies. For to bee restrained by authori••y from his lawfull function, because hee will not yeeld to the doing of that which to him is sinne, is no more sinne in the sufferer, then to surcease his publicke preaching whilest he is held in prison, where he wanteth occasion. Thus the use of that is avoyded, which he disalloweth, and the blame of leaving his standing, is theirs who cast him from thence, and not his. So no sinn is committed ei••her in the use of that hee disalloweth, or in susteining deprivation. But to hold his place, and to practise against conscience, is to commit one great sinn at the least.

Thus having examined the Defend. his adventurous charges of false, presumptuous, irreligious, partiall, and per∣nitious, I finde them all to bee but rash words of distem∣per.