A19142:1407
A19142:1407
A fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's worship. Or a triplication unto. D. Burgess his rejoinder for D. Morton The first partA fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's vvorship. Or a triplication unto. D. Burgesse his rejoinder for D. Morton The first part
Amsterdam: printed by the successors of Giles Thorp, 1633
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
5. The question was whether any such thing was in the Primitive Church? The Rejoinder his answer is affirmative; that it seems there was such a thing: because ••. It is said only of the Apostles, that they ordained Elders •o the Churches, Act. 14.23. and Titus, Tit. 1.5. appointed •he Ministers. 2. Sometime Ministers were chosen by prophecy; and sometime by lot. 3. The peoples consent was not held •f divine necessity. For the grave Council of Laodicea, Can. •3. restrained the people from choice of their Ministers. Beside, •he people of this Land have given their implicit consent in Parliament, to such as the Patrons and Bishops call: And if •hey do their parts, it is as well, and sometime better, then if •hey were chosen by the people. Finally, God hath not forbidden our manner of calling Ministers, nor commanded the other. Where 1. let it be marked, that the question was only of •he peoples consent; concerning which the Rejoinder •n all these words, answereth just nothing. 2. The first place he bringeth against the peoples election, Act. 14.23. is the chief place, which Protestants use to bring for it; as Bellarmine (de Clericis. lib. 1. cap. 7.) observeth of it.1 This argument is the chief foundation of Illyri•us, Calvin, Chemnitius, and •thers. Of Bellarmines answer, the Rejoinder maketh an Argument, against our Divines, who have confuted that answer, and so sufficiently answered his Argument, long before he framed ⟨p. 412⟩it: which yet he taketh no knowledge of, but nakedly propoundeth it, as if this were the first time of beating it off the stage. It is (saith he) only said of the Apostles, & not of the Churches, that they did ordain Elders. Act. 14.23. So (say I) it is only said of the Apostles, and not of the Churches, in the very same verse, that they did pray and f•st: doeth it follow from hence, that the Churches had no hand, part or consent, in prayer and fasting? If not, then neither doeth the only mentioning of the Apostles in creating Presbyters, exclude the peoples formal choice, much less their consent. If any man desires large and full clearing of the place, he may find it in I• nius his Notes on Bellarmine, Contr. 5. lib. 1. cap. 7. annot. 59.63.64.
5. The quaestion was whether any such tingh was in the Primitive Churche? The Rejoynder his answer is •ffirmative; that it seemes ther was such a thing: because ••. It is sayd onely of the Apostles, that they ordeyned Elders •o the Churches, Act. 14.23. and Titus, Tit. 1.5. appointed •he Ministers. 2. Sometime Ministers were chosen by prophesie; and sometime by lot. 3. The peoples consent was not held •f divine necessitie. For the grave Councel of Laodicea, Can. •3. restrained the people from choice of their Ministers. Beside, •he people of this Land have given their implicit consent in Parliament, to such as the Patrons and Bishops call: And if •hey doe their parts, it is as well, and sometime better, then if •hey were chosen by the people. Finally, God hath not forbidden our manner of calling Ministers, nor commanded the other. Wher 1. let it be marked, that the quaestion was onely of •he peoples consent; concerning which the Rejoynder •n all these wordes, answereth just nothing. 2. The first place he bringeth against the peoples election, Act. 14.23. is the cheif place, which Protestants use to bring for it; as Bellarmine (de Clericis. lib. 1. cap. 7.) observeth of it.1 This argument is the cheife foundation of Illyri•us, Calvin, Chemnitius, and •thers. Of Bellarmines answer, the Rejoynder mak•th an Argument, against our Divines, whoe have confuted that answer, and so sufficiently answered his Argument, long before he framed ⟨p. 412⟩it: which yet he taketh no knowledge of, but nakedly propoundeth it, as if this were the first time of beating it off the stage. It is (sayth he) onely sayd of the Apostles, & not of the Churches, that they did ordyn Elders.
where the Conclusion is, that Bellarmine doeth in this argument nugari, nothing but trifle, disjoining things that ought to be conjoined, as if there were a contradiction betwixt these two Propositions: The Apostles ordained; the Churches ordained. If the Rejoinder would have brought a fitting example, he should have showed us, that Paul, or Barnabas, being at Jerusalem, ordained a Minister, and sent him to Antioch, Iconium or Lystra, signifying by letters, that such a man was appointed their Pastor, though they never knew, or heard of him before. For that had been something like unto the practise of a Bishop, who upon the Patrons presentation, wheresoever he be, sendeth his Minister from the place, or Palace of his residence, unto a Congregation 20.30. or 40. miles of; which poor despised People, must be content, with tolling of a Bell, as sufficient notice given of their Ministers fitness, and their necessity to ⟨p. 413⟩•cknowledge the same. 3. In the second place Tit. 1.5. whereas our translation hath, that Titus was to ordain Ministers, the Rejoinder turneth ordaining into appointing, and I may better turn it into setting, or placing. Now (which soever translation be admitted) the Rejoy. •is argument is lighter then a feather, except it be supposed that Titus could not effect that Ministers should be in every Church of Crete, neither by, nor with the Churches consent: which is too absurd a proposition for •ny reasonable man to father. Take the Rej his translation in ordinary rigour; Our King doeth appoint Bishops; and yet they are not placed in their Seats, without some kind of consent and election of others. And yet I hope the Rej. himself will not say, that Titus took so much upon him, as this cometh to.
where the Conclusion is, that Bellarmine doeth in this argument nugari, nothing but trifle, disioyning thinges that ought to be conjoined, as if ther were a contradiction betwixt these two Propositions: The Apostles ordeyned; the Churches ordeyned. If the Rejoynder would have brought a fitting example, he should have shewed us, that Paul, or Barnabas, being at Ierusalem, ordeyned a Minister, and sent him to Antioche, Iconium or Lystra, signifying by letters, that such a man was appointed their Pastor, though they never knew, or heard of him before. For that had been something like unto the practise of a Bishop, whoe upon the Patrons praesentation, whersoever he be, sendeth his Minister from the place, or Palace of his residence, unto a Congregation 20.30. or 40. miles of; which poor despized People, must be content, with towling of a Bell, as sufficient notice given of their Ministers fitnesse, and their necessitie to
4. As for choosing Ministers by Prophecy, that was very extraordinary, and therefore hath no place in the question of ordinary calling. Yet 1. Prophecy did no less require the concurrence of the Churches consent, in an ordinary Minister, then it did the Presbyteries ordination in Timothy's person. 1. Tim. 4.14. It was only an extraordinary cause of that consent, which otherwise should have been grounded on the persons qualification. Prophecy also or Vision did sometime follow the Churches election, as in Celerinus, of whom Cyprian (Epist. 34. ed. Goulart.) recordeth:1 When he wavered about consenting to the Church, by a vision of the night he was forced to assent.
4. As for choosing Ministers by Prophesie, that was very extraordinary, and therefore hath no place in the question of ordinarie calling. Yet 1. Prophesie did no lesse require the concurrence of the Churches consent, in an ordinary Minister, then it did the Presbyteries ordination in Timothies person. 1. Tim. 4.14. It was onely an extraordinary cause of that consent, which otherwise should have beene grounded on the persons qualification. Prophesie also or Vision did sometime follow the Churches election, as in Celerinus, of whom Cyprian (Epist. 34. ed. Goulart.) recordeth:1 When hee wavered about consenting to the Church, by a vision of the night he was forced to assent.
5. As for election by lot, I do not think any example can be given of it, wherein the Churches election of ⟨p. 414⟩divers persons betwixt whom the lot should design, with their consent, did not concur.
5. As for election by lot, I do not thinke any example can be given of it, wherein the Churches election of ⟨p. 414⟩divers persons betwixt whom the lot should designe, with their consent, did not concurre.
6. As for the Primitive Churches tenet of Divine authority, nothing can be proved out of the Council of Laodicea, which was after Julians time. The Synod of Africa (Epist. 68. Cypr. ed. Goul.) doeth inform us thus: The people it self hath power both to choose worthy Priests, and to refuse unworthy ones. The which also we see to come from Divine authority. 1Yet Calvin answereth, that even that Laodicean Council did not restrain from election, but only from disorderly electing, by themselves. And is therein learnedly seconded against Bellarmines rejoinder, by Junius, in Bell. Cont. 5. lib. 1. cap. 7.
6. As for the Primitive Churches tenet of Divine authority, nothing can be prooved out of the Councell of Laodicea, which was after Iulians time. The Synod of Africa (Epist. 68. Cypr. ed. Goul.) doeth informe us thus: The people it selfe hath power both to chuse worthy Priests, and to refuse unworthy ones. The which also we see to come from Divine authority. 1Yet Calvin answereth, that even that Laodicean Councell did not restraine from election, but onely from disorderly electing, by themselves. And is therin learnedly seconded against Bellarmines rejoynder, by Iunius, in Bell. Cont. 5. lib. 1. cap. 7.
7. As for implicit consent in Parliament, it maketh nothing to the question. And yet it cannot be proved, that every thing decreed by Parliaments, have the Churches implicit consent. For then the Church did implicitly consent unto all the alterations of religion, in King Henrys, King Edwards, Q. Mary's, and Q. Elizabeths days, how opposite soever they were one to another, neither can it be showed lawful, for the Churches of Christ, to leave their privileges which Christ hath given them, to the pleasure of any Parliament.
7. As for implicit consent in Parliament, it maketh nothing to the question. And yet it cannot be prooved, that every thing decreed by Parliaments, have the Churches implicit consent. For then the Church did implicitly consent unto all the alterations of religion, in King Henries, King Edwards, Q. Maries, and Q. Elizabeths dayes, how opposite soever they were one to another, neither can it be shewed lawfull, for the Churches of Christ, to leave their priviledges which Christ hath given them, to the pleasure of any Parliament.
8. To say, that the Patrons and Bishops sending without the Churches consent, is as good, or better then the Churches free consent, well ordered, and directed; is all one as to say, it is as good, or better, that Women should be married without their consent, then with it.
9. As for the final answer, I refer the Reader partly to that already said, and partly to D. Ames his answer ⟨p. 415⟩unto Bellarmine, tom. 2. lib. 3. cap. 3.
9. As for the finall answer, I referre the Reader partly to that already sayd, and partly to D. Ames his answer ⟨p. 415⟩unto Bellarmine, tom. 2. lib. 3. cap. 3.
6. The question is, if this was known in the Primitive Church? It is rejoined 1. that Bishops were often in question at Synods, about their title to their places, which was as much. But 1. This was not in the Apostles time. 2. Questioning before Synods, about Ecclesiastical affairs, is of Ecclesiastical nature; going to law, not so. In Synods all things ought to be determined by Gods Word: at the Kings Bench, and Assizes, the Judges pronounce sentence by mans law. Yet the good ancient Bishops, were so far from seeking a title to their places, by Synodical judgement, that they withdrew themselves, as being afraid to have such a title put upon them, either by Churches or Synods: examples of which modesty, we have even in declining times, Basil, Gregory &c. A law we find also (Cod. de Epist. & Cler.) mentioning the same disposition:1 The Prelate ought to be so far from ambition, that nothing but compulsion should draw him, though he be desired, let him give back, and when invited, let him shift, &c. For certainly he is unworthy the office of Priesthood, unless he be ordained unwillingly. Certainly, these men would never have sought those places by course of law, which they hardly accepted, being obtruded upon them. 2. The Rejoinder saith, Lawing about places ariseth upon the title of Patronage, a civill inheritance. Whereas the question is not from whence it ariseth, but if it appeared in the face of the Primitive Mother-Church? ⟨p. 416⟩This answer is as much as to say, our Church hath a special wound, or sore in her face, which the Primitive Church had not; and therefore must have a plaster upon it now, in those times unknown: that is, our face doth not lively represent that face, which is the question. Beside, if the lawing be necessary, about the Patrons civill title, what hath the Minister to do with it, except ambition or covetousness, doth cause him to take other mens business upon him, for his own advantage?
6. The question is, if this was knowne in the Primitive Church? It is rejoyned 1. that Bishops were often inquestion at Synods, about their title to their places, which was as much. But 1. This was not in the Apostles time. 2. Questioning before Synods, about Ecclesiasticall affaires, is of Ecclesiasticall nature; going to law, not so. In Synods all things ought to be determined by Gods Word: at the Kings Bench, and Assizes, the Iudges pronounce sentence by mans law. Yet the good ancient Bishops, were so farre from seeking a title to their places, by Synodicall judgement, that they withdrew themselves, as being afraid to have such a title put vpon them, either by Churches or Synods: examples of which modesty, we have even in declining times, Basil, Gregorie &c. A law we finde also (Cod. de Epist. & Cler.) mentioning the same disposition:
7. About these, the Rejond. confesseth that they are the sore of our Church, but not allowed, or tolerated, further then Mr. Hooker showeth. Now 1. If they be sores, being also in the face, that is, our chief eminent, Convocation men, bearing them in their •ore-heads, surely they must needs dis figure the Primitive face. 2. Though I have no more leisure to seek and confute Mr. Hookers mitigations, then the Rejoynd. had to allege them; yet I dare say, if the Stews be tolerated, and allowed at Rome, th•se sores are tolerated, and allowed in England, they are as well known; more publicly professed; they are practised in the Bishops Palaces; and not only the Court of Faculties, but most Bishops do gain by them. But (saith the Rej.) If you can tell us the Certain and safe remedy of this sore, I am persuaded the Church will thank you. But I am neither so persuaded of the Convocation-Church, not yet that the Rejoinder himself is so persuaded Men ⟨p. 417⟩do not usually give thanks, for that which formerly they did not desire, and if this Church had desired a remedy, the Convocation-men would long since have begun (according to their skill and power) with themselves, their Chaplains, the Benefices in their gifts, &c. They would also have hearkened unto Parliament-remedies of wise and careful Physicians, which have been often prescribed, prepared, tendered, & almost applied, but by the Convocation-men, refused, and opposed, as the world knoweth, and the Rej. is not ignorant of it. In the close of this question, the Rej. insinuateth, and (as half ashamed) only insinuateth a secret distinction, betwixt carelesse-Non residents, and another kind, of them that are careful: the former of which he affirmeth to have been often condemned, though never removed. Of which distinction, as being left obscure, I cannot speak so much as I muse. Only this: Carefull Non-residents seeme to be such as have great care to get some pretence in Court, University, or some great mans house, for absenting themselves from their charges (which God hath laid upon them, if they be lawfully called) and some care to provide a tolerable Curate, for supplying their places. Now these the Rej. seemeth to excuse, for which they are more beholding to him, then the Churches are, upon whose spoils they live, and aspiring by them unto higher places.
7. About these, the Rejond. confesseth that they are the sore of our Church, but not allowed, or tolerated, furher then Mr. Hooker sheweth. Now 1. If they be sores, being also in the face, that is, our chiefe eminent, Convocation men, bearing them in their ore-heads, surely they must needs dis figure the Primitive face. 2. Though I have no more leisure to seeke and confute Mr. Hookrs mitigations, then the Rejoynd. had to allege them; yet I dare say, if the Stues be tolerated, and allowed at Rome, thse sores are tolerated, and allowed in England, they are as well knowne; more publikely professed; they are practised in the Bishops Palaces; and not onely the Court of Faculties, but most Bishops doe gaine by them. But (saith the Rej.) If you can tell us the Certaine and safe remedie of this sore, I am perswaded the Church will thanke you. But I am neither so perswaded of the Convocation-Church, not yet that the Rejoynder himselfe is so perswaded Men
And as for the carelesse Non-residents, how cometh it to pass, that non conformity can as easily be removed, as condemned; and such condemned felons as these, be so long reprieved, after their condemnation? Certainly, if they were as great ⟨p. 418⟩enemies to the Bishops kingdom, as they are to Christs, a quicker dispatch would have been made of them.
And as for the carelesse Non-residents, how commeth it to passe, that non conformity can as easily be remooved, as condemned; and such condemned fellons as these, be so long reprived, after their condemnation? Certainely, if they were as great ⟨p. 418⟩enemies to the Bishops kingdome, as they are to Christs, a quicker dispatch would have beene made of them.