WHAT the Divel hath at­tempted in vain by the effusion of Christian blood, with the Sword of Heathen Persecutors, that he hath too success­fully effected, by the infusion of a Spirit of Division, into the minds of professed Christi­ans, that the Church might perish, as Christ her Master, by the treachery of her own hous­hold. This Engine, Julian the Devils most skilful Agent, did chiefly employ for the ru­ine of the Church: He knew that as it was founded in the blood of Christ, so it was watered and made more fruitful by the blood of the Martyrs; he therefore, as the envious man, soweth tares, and suffers bryars and thorns to grow up in the field of God; he summons the Bishops that contended about the Arrian Heresie, and other destructive [Page 2] opinions,Ʋt civili­bus discor­diis conso­pitis suae quis{que} Re­ligioni ser­viret in­trepidus. Am. Mar­cell. and chargeth them to preserve the peace of the State, and gives them all liberty to profess what Religion they pleased, know­ing that by fomenting divisions among the Pastors, he should beget in the people a ha­tred to Christianity, and then easily win them to his own perswasion. In order to which, he did at the same time cause a greater solem­nity in the Worship of his gods;Nazianz. Orat. 3. contra Ju­lian. he gave or­der that the Priests should carefully observe an outward form of piety, that they should set up Seats in the Temples, and appoint cer­tain days and hours, and forms of prayer, which for pomp and shew should exceed the Christians. [...]. By these means (as S. Augustine observes) he thought to root out the very name of Christians from the earth, if he could destroy the unity of the Church from which he had fallen, and contrive a liberty for sacrilegious divisions. Can any of us take delight to persue such impious designs? or can we think that the like actions will not tend to the like end? Certainly if there be such a sin as Schism in the Church, some a­mong us are guilty of it, and when it hath spread it self so general, through the Nati­on, and hath been manifested in more dread­ful confusions in Church and State, than ever were acted in any Heathen Common-wealth, it is very strange, that no man thinks himself concerned, either to repent of what is past, or to prevent the like desolations for the future. The Wheels of Providence ar [...] still in motion, [Page 3] and the same pride and contention, idleness and wantonness, the same ingratitude to God and hatred to one another, will draw them on in the same tract, and revolutions as formerly.

How should not the like causes produce the like effects? Experience teacheth us, that no discord is so mischievous as that, which is carried on upon religious pretences, by which (as the sweetest Wines make the sharpest Vi­negar) the best affections have the keenest edge set on them: and persons, otherwise of a good meaning, supposing themselves to be ingaged with Christ, think it their duty to call for fire from Heaven on every one that follows not them: as if their love to his ser­vice, could not be sufficiently expressed, but by their hatred to their Brethren.

And yet alas! what is the ground of our implacable feuds? Are the Articles of our faith suppressed? and new Creeds imposed? Are we called forth to the Fire and Faggots, except we will renounce Christ, and turn Ido­laters? These evils God may justly bring up­on us, but as yet, blessed be God, there is no such thing. The vitals of Religion are sound, we may be as pious as we will, our Assem­blies are as solemn, our Prayers as devout, the Word and Sacraments as purely dispensed, and the Lords day as duly celebrated; in a word, the Doctrine, Government, and Wor­ship of our Church as truly Apostolical, as in any Church since the Apostles days. What is it [Page 4] then, that puts us into such fits of distraction? and like the evil spirit, makes us cut and wound our selves, and all that come near us? The appearances of superstition and pollution in the Garments and outward dress of Divine Worship are pretended, and things in their own nature indifferent, are against all rea­son made the cause of our irreligious differen­ces, yea less than this, meer noise and cla­mour, exotick phrases and empty tones, like the noise of Drums and Trumpets, or the shewing of red Clothes to the armed Ele­phants, have animated and inraged us to mu­tual destruction. And here we may take such a sad prospect as S. James presents us with, Behold how great a matter a little fire kindleth, when once it gets within the Sanctuary. When we think our flames kindled by a coal from the Altar, and our passions warranted from Heaven, we account it our duty to act them to the highest degree, to be deaf to all sober counsels, and (as Rebels in the State, having drawn the Sword cast away the Scabbard) are resolved against any terms of reconciliation. There is no Faction, how notoriously hereti­cal and schismatical soever, be it Socinian, or Anabaptistical, but they pretend, that Reli­gion and the Church of Christ must flourish or fall with them; and usually the weakness of the cause is supplied by violence in the prose­cution. And as the Turks propose a greater reward for him that shall kill one Persian, than seventy Christians, they perswade them­selves [Page 5] that it is more meritorious to destroy a dissenting Christian, than many Infidels. The more absurd their Tenets are, the more studious are they to set them off and hallow them, by glorious names. The Cause of God, the Kingdom and Scepter of Christ are pretended by them, that turn Christ's Scepter into a Reed, shall I say, or to an Iron Rod, or a Scorpion; which, as the fiery Serpents in the Wilderness, have stung a great part of the Nation, and put them into fits of madness and convulsions, and so weakned and wound­ed us, that Simeon and Levi may with the more ease make havock of us. May we not justly fear, that God hath numbred us out to destruction, when we are deaf to all Argu­ments and methods for safety and self preser­vation, when we will not be convinced that there is such a sin as Schism, or that there is any truth in that saying of our Saviour, That a Kingdom divided against it self cannot stand; but are earnest in our contentions, who shall be the chief (for indeed that is the ground of the controversie) when the Church, like her Saviour, was ready to be betrayed and cruci­fied. What hope is there, when all the con­descentions and conferences in the days of Queen Elizabeth, and King James, could not mollifie them, when that Oracle of solid, learned, and meek piety King Charles the First could not charm them, when the Indulgence of our present Soveraign is requited with ob­stinacy, and the men (instead of confuting the [Page 6] Arguments of their spiritual Guides, such as Whitgift, Bilson, Bancroft, Hooker, Moreton, &c.) have by their professions and practices when they were in the Chair baffled their own Arguments, and yet live in contradiction to themselves as well as others. What little hope is there yet left, that such men will be perswaded, though one should come to them from the dead? Let us therefore try this expe­riment also, and because among all them that are free among the dead, there is none whose person or works, were, and still are (next to the Holy Writ out of which we have argued already) of greater authority than Mr. Cal­vin; we shall readily join in an appeal to Mr. Calvin, and make his Writings the judge of our Controversies. When contentious men have exhausted their Treasures in vexatious Law-suits, and perceive greater charges and difficulties still growing upon them, they do usually submit to a friendly reference, especi­ally when they agree on a person that is be­yond all exception. Such a one I suppose (on your behalf at least) you will judge Mr. Cal­vin, and seeing we have laboured in the flames of contention, which have exhausted the spi­rits and wasted the vitals of Religion, let us to preserve the little that remains, submit to his determination. I know the mediation of many worthy men hath been rejected, Peter Martyr and Bucer have been thought too par­tial to the Church of England, Melancthon and Zanchy are objected against as timerous [Page 7] men, Chemnitius exploded as a Lutheran, and many other moderate persons,Reply to Bishop Moreton. as not being well informed of the state of our differences, but none of these exceptions lay against Mr. Calvin. We receive Mr. Calvin, saith T. Cart­wright, and value him as the notablest instru­ment that the Lord hath stirred up, for the purging of his Churches, and restoring the plain and sincere interpretation of the Scripture, that hath been since the Apostles times. He was of such repute among our English Presbyterians; that I have heard it credibly reported (saith Bishop Bancroft) that at disputations in a cer­tain Colledge in Cambridge,Holy Disci­pline p 63. when the autho­rity of S. Augustine, Ambrose, or Hierom was urged, it was slighted, but if the Respondent had denied Mr. Calvin's authority, he made himself ridiculous. The Story that Zanchy tells of a Frenchman, of his acquaintance, is very famous.Zanchy's Epistle to his Misce [...]. At Geneva (saith he) where Calvin preached at S. Peter's Church, and Vi­ret at S. Gervas's, this Frenchman was ob­served constantly to hear Calvin and neglect Vi­ret, and being asked a reason of his partiality, he answered, that if S. Paul should come and preach the same hour that Calvin did, he would leave S. Paul to hear Mr. Calvin. Besides, as Mr. Hooker observed in his time, so it is still, they are judged the best Divines that are most conversant in his Writings, his Books are made the very Canon to judge Doctrine and Discipline by. Indeed they had his person in too great admiration, witness that expression [Page 8] of Jacobus Bernardus, who thus congratu­lates his return to Geneva, This is the Lords doing and it is marvellous in our eyes, that the stone which the Builders refused is now become the head of the corner. —If any prejudice lay against Calvin, it is on the behalf of the Church of England, and to submit her right to his de­termination, will be thought no less than to betray it. First, because he was not through­ly informed with her condition and affairs. Secondly, because he was actually ingaged in erecting and maintaining a Discipline very different from hers. To the first objection, I answer, That Mr. Calvin flourishing, when our Reformation was first begun in the Reign of Edward the Sixth, and living until May 1564. which was the seventh year of Queen Elizabeth, during all which time he had corre­spondence with the greatest and most learned men of our Nation, both in Church and State, and having frequent conference with divers of our Exiles in the Marian days, he was with­out question well informed of our Affairs, and knew particularly what our Reformers had setled, as to Doctrine, Government, and Worship, he being of an inquisitive genius, and concerning himself particularly in our Church-Affairs. And we find him offering his personal assistance to Archbishop Cran­mer; Epist. 126. If you think there may be any use of me (saith Mr. Calvin) it will not trouble me to sail over ten Seas for such a good work. So that I shall not be injurious to his memory, to [Page 9] ingage him in that work which he was so willing to undertake. But for what reasons his service was not accepted, I shall not now enquire. I do believe by all that I have heard or seen, that he was very well satisfied with our Reformation, and that with great pru­dence and moderation he did perswade those that were unsatisfied to a conformity.Epist. 228. In An­glorum controversiâ moderationem tenui cujus me non poenitet; I ever observed moderation in the English Controversies, of which I do not repent. He was generally of a stout spirit, but tem­pered with moderation and discretion, as he describes himself, Si te delectat mansuetudo, Epist. 393. ne{que} ego ab eâ sum alienus; quod autem severus nimium tibi videor, hanc mihi crede, personam imposuit necessitas. It is well known with what rudeness and vile language Luther dealt with him; yet his return to him was,Epist. 57. Saepe dicere solitus sum, etiamsi me Diabolum voca­ret, me tamen hoc illi honoris habiturum, ut insignem Dei servum agnoscam. Though Luther call me a Devil, yet I honour him as an eminent servant of God.

Many learned men of our Church do great­ly esteem him for his moderation, as well as his learned Writings.Holy Dis­cipl. p. 63. Mr. Calvin (saith Bi­shop Bancroft) was surely an excellent man. A man of no small learning and judgment in the Church of God, saith Bishop Bilson. Pag. 109. Judici­ous Calvin,Pag. 635. saith the Bishop of Down and Connor. How constantly that reverend Di­vine carrieth himself against your Opinions, [Page 10] saith Doctor Burges to the Non-Confor­mists.

Two things (saith Mr. Hooker) of princi­pal moment deservedly procured him honour throughout the Christian world; the one his exceeding great pains, in composing the Insti­tution of Christian Religion; the other, his no less industrious Travels for exposition of holy Scripture; in which two things, whoever after him bestowed their labour, he gained the advantage against them if they gainsaid, and of glory above them if they consented. In a word, to my great admiration (and I believe it will be so to the impartial Reader also) I still observe that when our Contro­versies are handled by men of greatest note in our Church, against dissenters, the judg­ment of Mr. Calvin is more successfully urged, than of any modern Divines whatsoever.

As to the second objection, from his being ingaged in a Reformation far different from ours, I hope to give some satisfaction in a brief relation of it. By the preaching of Fa­rel, and others, the Citizens of Geneva being informed of the impurities of the Romish Church, declared against Popery, and drove away their Bishop, who was also their tem­poral Lord. Taking the power of the Church, as well as of the State, into their own hands, conforming themselves in both to the Go­vernment of Berne, another reformed City; th [...] Bishop, to recover his right, joins with the Duke of Savoy, and assaults the City, but by [Page 11] the assistance of Berne, and other reformed Cities is defeated.An. 1536. In this juncture of affairs Calvin comes thither, and is admitted as a Doctor to expound the Scriptures; by whose perswasion, with Farel, as Calvin acquaints Cardinal Sadolet, it was offered, that the Bi­shop might return to his jurisdiction and Go­vernment, if he would disclaim Popery: but upon his refusal to do so, the Citizens under­take the Government of the Church and State. But in a short time great disorders growing, for want of an established Discipline, the Re­formation being opposed by the Papists on one hand, and by the Anabaptists and Libertines (whom Calvin often calls phreneticos & fana­ticos homines, distempered and fanatick men) on the other hand, it was a very difficult work for him and his Brethren to establish any orderly form. He must not by any means come near the Popish Government, not only the furious Anabaptists, but the chief Citizens who had taken the Government Ecclesiastical and Civil into their hands, would oppose that; and to gratifie the Factions would bring all to confusion; he suits his model therefore to the exigence of the times, and perswades the Citizens, that the Church ought to be governed, as the City was, by a Senate, which was to consist of twelve Lay-men, to be chosen out of the chief of the City every year, and six of the Ministers, to be fixed in their office for term of life; whereby he gra­tified the Magistrates, and yet secured the au­thority [Page 12] of the Ministers sufficiently. For it was no difficult work for him, and five other chief Ministers, being men of learning and repute, to prevail against twice as many igno­rant persons, who being to turn out at the years end, would be careful not to displease their Ministers, during the short time of their office. This Discipline, it is evident, Calvin did not erect, as a thing of choice, but of ne­cessity.

However it being of his own contriving, and no other like to be admitted, he was ne­cessitated to defend it against all Opposers; and no wonder if in the heat of disputation, being urged also by necessity, he did maintain it to be agreeable to the Word of God, when nothing less would please that people than such a pretence. We know how many of the Fathers, disputing against Hereticks, have op­posed their Errours with such earnestness, that by an [...], they have cast themselves into an extream, almost as dange­rous: this was Calvin's infirmity, common to most men; as was also another, namely to be too fond of our own inventions, (especial­ly when we see them to thrive) and strenu­ously to endeavour the prosperity of them. But I think I should much wrong the memory of Calvin, to say, that those things which he did out of necessity, to prevent the ruine of a Church, and (when rebus sic stantibus) he could not do otherwise, may be a justificati­on of all those disorderly confusions, which [Page 13] some, that pretend to be his Followers, are still endeavouring, to the subversion of the best established Church in the Christian world. And I verily believe, if Calvin were now a­live, and consulted by any of us, concerning our Church, he would give the same appro­bation (if not more perswasive to Conformi­ty than this) which I shall now produce from his Works. It shall be my care, not to wrest his words to my own sense, as he complains of many, that enquire to other mens Wri­tings, non ut quod rectum sit teneant, De vitan­da super­stitione. sed ut responsionem eliciant, veto suo congruentem. He may, as other wise and good men, vary from himself in some expressions, and more pri­vate transactions with his friends, Opere in longo fas est obrepere somnum; but consider him in his most publick and serious consulta­tions, wherein he was assisted by the advice of other learned men, as in the Confession at Auspurge, to which he so willingly subscribed in the Treaty at Wormes and Ratisbone; in that elaborate Book of his Institutions, and consider how generally his other Writings a­gree in the most substantial matters of Do­ctrine, Government, and Worship with them, and you shall find it all one to be a moderate Calvinist and a sober Conformist. Which will appear by demonstrating from his Works the truth of this Argument.

This Caution I think fit to premise, that the Church of England needeth not the au­thority of Calvin, it neither stands nor falls at his Consistory. I know he differs in some things from us; but in many more from our Adversaries. This therefore is only an Argu­ment ad homines.

I Shall lay my Scene thus. I suppose a Non-Conformist unsatisfied as to his present mode of serving God, desirous to be resolved by Mr. Calvin, concerning the particular pra­ctices in the Church of England, to whom he thus addresseth himself.

Nonconf. Reverend Sir, I have heard very honoura­ble mention of your name, not only by my Pa­rents, [Page 15] and the Ministers under whom I have had my education, who are of the Presbyterian perswasion, but also from divers of the chief Conformists in the Church of England, within whose Pale I was born and baptized into the Faith of Christ, the sum of which I have heard to be comprehended in that which we call the Apostles Creed: but having never been well ca­techised in the Articles of that Faith, which are of special importance to my salvation; I de­sire to be instructed by you, first, concerning the Creed in general, and then of an Article or two, which, to my best remembrance, I never heard ex­pounded by any. Whence I pray you had the Creed its original?

I greatly commend your ingenuity,Mr. Calvin. in using all lawful means, that may assure you of the truth of that Doctrine which you profess, for I find it to be pernicious beyond measure,Epist. 303. that men do so presume of their own judgments, as to think all their opinions firm and true, before ever they weigh them, and are so con­fident as to refuse communication with learn­ed men. As to the Creed,Instit. l. 2. c. 16. S. 18. which I also call the Apostles, not troubling my self with the Author of it, I find by a great agreement a­mong the Ancients, it is certainly ascribed to the Apostles; whether they thought it to be written, and delivered by the Apostles in common, or because they thought to confirm by such an appellation, that summary of faith, which was sincerely collected out of the Do­ctrine by them delivered. For I do not in the [Page 16] least doubt, from whomsoever it first came, that from the very first infancy of the Church, and so in the very Age wherein the Apostles lived, it was received as the publick Confessi­on, approved by the consent of all; neither is it probable that it was written by any pri­vate man; for as much as it appears from the very first Records, that it was esteemed to be of sacred authority among all good men.

Nonconf. I did suppose it indeed to be both of good authority and great usefulness, because the Church of England not only so solemnly useth it, as the summary of that Faith, into which all Children are by that Church baptized, but doth rehearse it in their daily service, Morning and Evening, and expound it by those two other Creeds (viz.) the Nicene and Athanasian occa­sionally, as also in the Church Catechism. But I find some Articles of it very obscure, whereof I beseech you to give me the true sense (viz.) the holy Catholick Church and the Communion of Saints.

Calvin.I did omit to treat of them with the body of the Creed, because I intended to speak more at large concerning them, in my Chap­ter of the Church,Lib. 4. c. 1. S. 1. where I have given the full sense of them to this effect.

In the Creed, where we do profess to be­lieve the Church, it is not sufficient, that I believe the company of Gods Elect, unless I apprehend such an unity of the Church, into which I am verily perswaded, that I am in­grafted and made a member of the same. For [Page 17] this Article of the Creed belongs to the exter­nal or visible Church,Lib. 4. c. 1. S. 2. S. 3. that every one may contain himself in a Brotherly agreement with all the Children of God, giving to the Church its due authority, and behaving himself as a sheep of that Fold: and therefore is that Ar­ticle of the Communion of Saints adjoined, which intimates, that the Saints are gathered unto the Society of Christ, to this end, that whatever blessings God bestoweth on them, should be communicated to each other. Now this communion with the Church brings us into the Society of God;S. 4. and how profitable and necessary the knowledge of this is, the very name of Mother given to the Church vi­sible may teach us, seeing there is no other way of entring into life, unless she form us in her bowels, and nourish us with her own breasts, and unless we live under her tuition and government, until we lay aside mortali­ty. For out of the embraces of this Church, no remission of sins is to be hoped, nor salva­tion to be had.Isa. 37.32. Joel. 2.32. Ezek. 13.9. Ps. 106.4. S. 5. S. 9. In many places of Scripture the Fatherly love of God is restrained to his Flock, so that the departure from that is al­way destructive, for God hath obliged us to his ordinary manner of teaching, which while Fanatick men do refuse, they involve themselves in many deadly snares, and they are devilish spirits that study to destroy the unity of the Church.

You do infinitely oblige me, Reverend Sir, Non-conf. by this familiar exposition of these Articles, where­by [Page 18] you convince me, not only of the great benefit, but the indispensable necessity, of living in the Communion of the visible Church, and not ad­hering to schismatical Factions. I have read the like in a learned Book (viz.) That when we say we believe the Holy Catholick Church,Thorne­dike's Weights. p. 208. the meaning is, that there is a Corporation of true Christians (excluding Hereticks and Schisma­ticks) to which we join our selves, and hope for salvation in that Communion: I beseech you, Sir, what are the notes of a true Church?

Calvine De vera Ecclesiae Reform. p. 322.I approve of these marks of the visible Church. First, pure Doctrine. Secondly, the right use of the Sacraments. And thirdly, a holy unity depending thereupon.

Non-conf. What is your judgment of such Parochial Churches as are now constituted in the Church of England?

Calvine Inst l. 4 c. 1. S. 9.Those Congregations that are setled in Towns or Villages (as humane necessities do require) have justly both the name and au­thority of a Church, as being in communion with the Church Universal, and to despise the authority of such a Church, to scorn her ad­monitions, to be refractory to her counsels, and mock at her corrections,S. 10. is not without guilt; much less to separate from it, and break its unity; for God doth so value the communion of his Church, that he judgeth him an Apostate from Religion, that shall contumaciously withdraw himself from the Society of such a Church; and no crime can be conceived greater than such sacrilegious [Page 19] unfaithfulness, whereby we violate that Co­venant which the Son of God vouchsafed to make with us.Instit. l. 4. l. 4. c. 1. S. 1. Therefore those things which God hath joined no man may separate (viz.) that to whom he is a Father the Church also be a Mother.Calvine contra A­nabapt. Wherever there is a Minister rightly constituted, who faithfully discharg­eth his office, every one that will be account­ed a Christian, ought to adhere to him, and to enjoy his Ministry with the rest of the Flock: But what do they? because we follow not them in their Errours, although we pure­ly preach the Word of God,Honorius Reglus ob­serves, that our Sects make it. Partem li­bertatis Christia­nae, non audire proprium ministrum. they account us as ravenous Wolves, and they so abhor us, that they think they should commit a deadly sin, to be present at our Sermons; therefore they create inferior Ministers, and being made in a moment, are employed to rend the Church, divide the people, and gather Con­gregations contrary to one another, that the name of God may not be invocated with the joint consent of all, and with that concord which becomes it.

You know, Sir, Non-conf: that Papists boast theirs to be the true Church, and our Bishops are said to grant so much; I have heard that Bishop Hall, a man otherwise well deserving of the Church of God, hath published that opinion in Print.

And so have I also,Calvine ad Sadolet. I granted to Cardinal Sadolet, that the Churches under his jurisdi­ction were the Churches of Christ, and the reason of my judgment in this particular I have given at large in my Institutions,L. 4. c. 2. S. 9, 10, 11 12. the sum [Page 20] whereof is this. No man well in his wits ever held that Christianity was quite extin­guished, wheresoever the Romish tyranny did prevail, whence it follows, that in some re­spects there is a Church yet remaining. As in Israel when Idolatry prevailed under Jerobo­am and Rehoboam, good men had a tolera­ble estate of a Church; for Circumcision, and the Law, and Sacrifices, and invocation of God remained: So I willingly grant that in Rome God hath preserved some footsteps of a Church, as when a building is demolished, the foundation and ruines remain; besides how else should we prove the Pope to be Antichrist,Dan. 9.27. 2 Thes. 2.4. unless we grant him to sit in the Temple of God, as the Prophets foretold he should, for his Kingdom doth not abolish the name of Christ or of a Church; God hath there preserved some remnants of his people, and Symbols of his Church, which the subtil­ty of the Devil, nor the impiety of men could destroy; however, they are so miserab­ly profaned, corrupted, and poysoned, that they want the lawful form of a Church pro­perly so called.

Non-conf. But, Sir, the Creed calls the Church holy, and I have been taught, that we ought not to communicate in the Ordinances of God, with wicked men, whereof there are too many in eve­ry Parochial Congregation.

Calvine S. 7.The Church of God is called holy, but not perfect, Christ is and will be still purging of it, until he present it without spot and [Page 21] wrinckle; you hear the Parable of the Net,Matth. 13. Matth. 3.12. and of the Tares, and of the Chaff, by which our Saviour shews, that there will be a mix­ture of good and bad in the Church, to the end of the world.S. 14. For a full answer to this question, consider the Church of Corinth, a­mong whom there were not a few that er­red, but pollution had almost over-run the whole body: there was not one kind of sin,1 Cor. 11. C. 3.3. C. 5 1. C. 6.7. C. 9.1. C. 15.12. but many; nor were they light errours, but cer­tain horrid enormities: there was not only corruption of manners but of Doctrine: what doth the holy Apostle in this case, who was the instrument of the Holy Ghost, at whose testimony the Church stands or falls. Doth he endeavour separation from them? Doth he expel them from the Kingdom of Christ? or strike them with the fatal Thun­derbolt of an Anathema? He doth not only forbear these methods, but he both owns and declares them to be a Church of Christ and a Society of Saints; if there were a Church in Corinth, where contentions, Sects, and emu­lations were so hot, where strife and brawling with covetous desires did grow, where a wickedness abominable (even to the Heathen) was publickly approved, where the name of Paul was wantonly abused, whom they ought to have reverenced as a Father, where some laughed at the Resurrection of the dead, with the denial of which the whole Gospel fell; where they served ambition, not charity, where most things were acted indecently and inordi­nately [Page 22] (and yet it remains, the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments was not to be re­fused) who dares to take from them the title of a Church, where the tenth part of such Vices cannot be fastned. To separate from a Church for this reason, as it is a sin to which we are prone, so it is a subtle device of the Devil.S 13. There have ever been some who be­ing conceited of their own holiness, as so many aereal spirits, despise the communion of all, in whom they perceive any humane infirmities: such were the Catharists and Do­natists of old, and the Anabaptists now, whose morose humours proceed rather from pride and a false opinion of holiness, than from a true endeavour of sanctity; and lest it should appear, that they want the light of truth, they make use of the shadow of rigid severity, to whom I commend the advice of S. Augu­stine. That they charitably amend what they can, and patiently endure what they cannot, and in love sigh and lament until God amend all.Calvin ad­vers. Ana­bapt. But when under a pretence of zeal for per­fection, we cannot dispense with any imper­fection in the body, or members of the Church, then we are to be admonished, that the Devil swells us with pride, and seduceth us by hypo­crisie to desert the Flock of Christ.

Non-conf. This is to men of my education a hard Do­ctrine. But there is yet another objection a­gainst communion with such Churches, to which I desire your answer. What if the Word of God be not sincerely preached, but some errours [Page 23] are mixed with it, and the Ministers idle and negligent in doing their duties, is not this a ground for separation?

The Doctrine of the Church is either that which is absolutely necessary to be known,Calvin Instit. l. 4. c. 1. S. 12. as that there is a God, that Christ is God, &c. or that part which is less necessary, which may be controverted in the Church, and yet not destroy the unity of Faith. As for in­stance, suppose that some hold, that the souls of men do not go immediately to Heaven, yet do grant they live unto God, but deter­mine not of the place: the Apostle, Phil. 3.15. plainly sheweth, that such dissent in points of Doctrine not necessary, are no ground for division; some faults may be discovered both in Doctrine and administration of Sacra­ments, which yet ought not to alienate us, from the communion of the Church. It is indeed a great fault,S. 15. when either through carelesness or indulgence, or want of autho­rity, the Minister doth not do his office, in purging the Church; which the Apostle great­ly blames in the Corinthians, but though the Church be tardy in its office, it is not lawful for every private man presently to resolve on separation; you may avoid the familiar socie­ty of such wicked men, but not desert the communion of the Church. And though some men through an inconsiderate zeal may be faulty in this respect, yet we shall ordinarily find this great morosity to arise, rather from pride and disdain, or a false opinion of san­ctity, [Page 24] than from true holiness, or a sincere en­deavour to promote it;Epist. 11. Epist. 12. there ought to be so great an abhorrence of schism among Christi­ans, that they alway fly from it, as far as pos­sibly they; they ought to have so great a re­verence of the Ministry and Sacraments, that wherever they perceive these to be, they think the Church to be there; this I earnestly per­swade, that schisms do not divide any Church, which though it may be corrupt in manners, and infected with strange Doctrines, yet is not wholly departed from that Doctrine, on which S. Paul teacheth the Church of Christ to be founded.Epist. 126. to Cran­mer. This therefore I must still la­ment, as one of the greatest evils of our times, that one Church is so divided from a­nother, that scarce any humane society is maintained among us; much less doth the holy communion of the members of Christ appear among us, which though all profess with their mouths, very few do in truth sin­cerely practise.

Non conf. What is your opinion of the Doctrine of the Church of England, which they boast to be so Orthodox.

Calvin Epist. 87.I am so far from objecting any thing a­gainst the Doctrine there professed, that I rather give God thanks, who hath so illu­minated them with the knowledge of sound Doctrine, that the chief Magistrate takes care to have it publickly preached, and it was my advice that care should be taken of unsta­ble (or desultory) wits, and provision made [Page 25] to keep out curious Doctrines, (and I think their Articles have done both.The 39 Ar­ticles were printed two years be­fore Cal­vins death. In composing of which, I know the English Reformers had respect to the Augustine Confession, as by com­paring them may appear: and I, who did subscribe the one, cannot disswade you from subscribing the other.)

But where then is the liberty of prophecying, Non-conf. if the Minister be limited in the exercise of his gifts, and not permitted to handle some myste­rious Doctrines?

I think it a means to remedy many evils,Calvin Epist. ad Protect. if there be composed a summary of Doctrine to be received by all; which all Ministers should observe in their preaching, which all the Bishops and Parochial Ministers should be obliged by Oath to observe, so as none should be admitted to any Ecclesiastical Office, unless he subscribe to keep that harmony of Doctrine unviolated, and this is the practice of most reformed Churches.Epist. 167. In this Church of Gene­va it was provided, that if any one should spread opinions, contrary to the Doctrine re­ceived in the Church, let him first be admo­nished in a Brotherly manner, if he acquiesce, let him be forgiven without any note of in­famy, if he be contumacious and obstinately addicted to his errour, let him be solemnly admonished until the Consistory declares, that greater severity is to be used; and then let the Lords Supper be denyed him,Beza in vita Cal­vini. and let him be committed to the Senate: It was also or­dered, that the Papacy being publickly dis­claimed [Page 26] by Oath, the whole people should swear to the Christian Religion and Doctrine comprehended in a few Chapters.Epist. 370. I was con­sulted about this Question, whether they that desire admission into the Church, may be re­quired to give a publick testimony of their Faith? Which I thus answered, I see no rea­son why they who will be accounted of the communion of Christ, should think it grie­vous to give up their names to Christ their head, which cannot be done, unless they ex­presly subscribe to sincere Religion, and inge­nuously condemn those errours, by which the sincerity of Religion is corrupted; we know how much S. Paul commends unto us the uni­ty of the Spirit in the bond of peace. More­over to retain and cherish agreement among good men, a solemn confession of faith is more than necessary; and whoever wish that the Church of God may stand safe, will not take it amiss, to support it by such a means. And the wantonness of mens understandings,Ad Versi­pellem quendam. is to be restrained, that they be not too curi­ous in the desire of knowledge; a learned ig­norance is to be commended, while we seek wisdom only in the Word of God, and even there reverently admire those things which God would have to be kept secret.

Non conf. Although our Ministers refuse to subscribe to the Articles, yet I suppose the reason is not be­cause of any fault found in the Doctrine, but in the Government which is joined with it, which they say is Antichristian: and Mr. Cart­wright [Page 27] tells us, Lib. 1. p. 112. that Mr. Calvin would shake at the name of an Archbishop, and tremble at the Office of an English Bishop.

M. Cartwright may not be believed in a re­port so contradictory to my publick Writings,Calvin Confess fid. Gall. I would never have the authority of Church Governours denyed unto them, but do ac­knowledge that the Bishops which according to their Office do teach the Word of God, ought reverently to be heard.

I had always a great reverence for the Bi­shops of your Church,Epist. to Cran. to whom I gave in­ward reverence as well as outward respect, and would gladly have served them, in setling of the English Church; and my judgment is,De Refor­mandae Ec­clesiae ne­cess. that if we may have such an Hierarchy, in which the Bishops so excel others, that they refuse not subjection to Christ, but would de­pend on him as their only head, and refer them­selves to him, in which they so preserve Bro­therly communion among themselves, that they are united by nothing more than the truth in this case, I denounce him worthy of all Curses, who doth not observe such an Hie­rarchy with all reverence and obedience.Vera Ec­clesiae re­formatio. And I would to God such a succession had continu­ed to this day, it should easily have found from us the obedience that it deserves.Epist. ad Reg Polon. I do account the Government by Archbishops, a moderate honour, as being within the compass of a mans power to execute, which the Popes pre­tended authority is not; and the ancient Church did appoint Patriarchs and Primats [Page 28] in every Province, as a bond to unite the Bi­shops in concord.

Non conf. How many distinct orders of Ministers were there in the ancient Church?

Calvin Instit. l. 4. c. 4. S. 1.There is a threefold Ministry commended unto us in the Scripture, and whatever Mini­stry was in the Primitive Church, was di­stinguished into three Orders; for from the Order of Presbyters, there was chosen Pastors and Doctors, the rest were to inspect manners and censures. The care of the poor was com­mitted to the Deacons, St. Hierom names five Orders in the Church (viz.) Bishops, Presby­ters, Deacons; the Fideles, or Faithful, and the Catechumeni (three of these were of the Clergy, the other two of the Laity.)

Non-conf. Was there any such Order as a Bishop di­stinct from a Presbyter in the Primitive Church?

Calvin l. 4. c. 4. S. 2The Presbyters, to whom the office of preaching was enjoined, did in every City chuse one out of their number, to whom they solely gave the title of Bishop, lest dissensions should arise, where all were equal (as it usu­ally comes to pass.) Now every City had a Colledge of Presbyters, which were Pastors and Teachers, for they all had the office of teaching, exhorting, and reproving in the Congregation.

To every City a certain Region or Province belonged, which had Presbyters sent from the City, and they were accounted members of the body of that Church. This is the sum [Page 29] then of the Primitive Government: Presby­teries consisted of Pastors and Teachers; nor were they seated any where but in Cities, to which the Region (or Diocess) was adjoined; and to avoid confusion, over each Presbytery, and the adjoining Country, was a Bishop,L. 4. c. 3. S. 7. who in dignity and authority was above them; it was no humane invention, but a divine institution, that every one should have a Church assigned to him, yet so as he might by his presence and counsel assist other Churches; thus Archippus was Bishop of the Colossians: And the Assembly at Ausburge de­clared,Confess: Aug. per Chytraeam. p. 109. that the Bishops might still retain the obedience due to them, if they urged us not to keep those traditions which we could not keep with a good conscience; and we often protested, that we did greatly approve the Ecclesiastical Polity, and degrees in the Church, and as much as lyeth in us endeavoured to conserve the same; that we did not mislike the authority of Bishops, so that they would not compel us to do against Gods Command­ment, and we did there protest, and so re­corded it, that we would willingly preserve the Ecclesiastical and Canonical Polity, if the Bishops would not tyrannize over our Churches; which intention of ours we de­clared, to excuse us to all posterity, that it might not be imputed to us, that the autho­rity of Bishops was overthrown by us; and I remember what Melanchton said there par­ticularly;Pag. 305. I would to God it lay in me to re­store [Page 30] the Government of Bishops, for I see that hereafter there will grow up a greater Tyranny in the Church than ever there was before. I was also with Martin Bucer at the Conference at Wormes, where we also con­sented to Episcopal Government, and that the care of Ordination of Ministers should be committed to them, the Reformation being first made.

Non-conf. What think you of S. Hieroms opinion, whom I have heard to be an Enemy to Episcopacy. He is said to confound the names of Bishop and Presbyter, and yet tells us, that when the People grew factious, and cryed, I am of Paul, and I of Cephas, then to prevent divisions the Government was develved on one; (if so, this was in the Apostles days, and by them approved for the preservation of unity in the Churches of Christ?)

Calvin. l. 4. c. 4. S. 2. S. Hierom indeed counteth the Bishops to be of Ecclesiastical constitution, but of such antiquity, that they must be also Apostolical; for writing to Evagrius he confesseth, that at Alexandria from the time of S. Mark to that of Dionysius, the Presbyters did always chuse one from their number, whom they set in a higher degree, and called him Bishop. And you may see in Eusebius, the best preserver of Ecclesiastical Antiquities, a series of the suc­cession of Bishops, in the four principal Churches of the World, which I here present you with.

• [Page 31]James the Apostle.
• Simeon.
• Justus.
• Zacheus.
• Tobias.
• Benjamin.
• Johannes.
• Matthias.
• Philippus.
• Sennecas.
• Justus.
• Levi.
• Ephrem.
• Joseph.
• Judas.
• Marcus.
• Cassianus.
• Publius.
• Maximus.
• Julianus.
• Caius.
• Symmachus.
• Caius.
• Julianus.
• Capito.
  • Maximus.
  • Antoninus.
• Valens.
• Dolichianus.
• Narcissus.
  • Dius.
  • Germanion.
  • Gordius.
• Narcissus iterum.
• Alexander.
• Mazabanes.
• Hymeneus.
• Zambdas.
• Hermon.
• Macarius.
• Maximus.
• Cyrillas.
• Johannes.
• Juvenalis.

• Peter the Apostle.
• Euodius.
• Ignatius.
• Heros.
• Cornelius.
• Eros.
• Theophilus.
• Maximinus.
• Serapion.
• Asclepiades.
• [Page 32]Philetos.
• Zebinus.
• Babilas.
• Fabius.
• Demetrius.
• Paulus Samosatenus.
• Domnus.
• Timeus.
• Cyrillus.
• Tyrannus.
• Vitalius.
• Philagonius.
• Eustathius.
• Paulinus and Miletius.
• Flavianus.
• Porphyrius.
• Alexander.
• Johannes.

• Peter and Paul.
• Linus.
• Anacletus.
• Clemens.
• Evaristus.
• Alexander.
• Sixtus.
• Thelesphorus.
• Higinus.
• Pius.
• Anicetus.
• Soter.
• Eleutherius.
• Victor.
• Zepherinus.
• Calixtus.
• Urbanus.
• Pontianus.
• Anterus.
• Fabianus.
• Cornelius.
• Lucius.
• Stephanus.
• Xistus Dionysius.
• Felix.
• Eutichianus.
• Caius.
• Marcellinus.
• Marcellus.
• Eusebius.
• Meltiades.
• Sylvester.
• Marcus.
• Julius.
• Liberius.
• Damasus.
• Siricius.
• Anastasius.

• [Page 33]Mark the Evangelist.
• Anianus.
• Abilius.
• Cerdo.
• Primus.
• Justus.
• Eumenes.
• Marcus.
• Celadion.
• Agrippas.
• Julianus.
• Demetrius.
• Heraclas.
• Dionysius.
• Maximus.
• Theonas.
• Petrus.
• Achilles.
• Alexander.
• Athanasius.
• Petrus.
• Timothius.
• Theophilus.
• Cyrillus.

But, Sir, Non-conf. I hear not a word of Archbishops in all this Catalogue, were there any in the Pri­mitive Church superior to the Bishops.

For the conservation of Discipline,Calvin Instit. l. 4. c. 4. every Province had an Arch-bishop, over the Bi­shops, and in the Nicene Synod, we read of Patriarchs above the Archbishops; that if matters of moment were to be determined, they might first be discoursed of in the Provin­cial Synod, then by the Patriarch in the Sy­nod, beyond which was no appeal, but to a general Council.

But, Sir, I have heard, Non-conf. in the instance of Diotrephes, that some ambitious men did ad­vance themselves above their Brethren, and so assumed this honour to themselves, and within a short time after the Apostles, the Govern­ment [Page 34] which they left in the Church was al­tered.

Calvin l. 4. c. 4. S. 4.If we seriously consider the substance of this Government, omitting the name (Hierar­chy) we shall find that the ancient Bishops never intended to devise any other form of Government in the Church, differing from that which God had prescribed in his Word,S. 1. and although the Bishops of those times did set forth many Canons, wherein they seemed to express more than was declared in the Scrip­ture, yet they setled the Government with so great caution, according to that only rule, that you may perceive it to have nothing dif­fering from the Word of God, and if any thing seemed defective in that institution, yet seeing they sincerely endeavoured to preserve the Institution of God, and did not erre much from it, it behoves us to consider, what observation they had. This was the form of the ancient Church, which presents to our eyes a certain Image of Divine Institution.

Non-conf. And truly, Sir, you have excellently descri­bed the constitution of our English Bishops, which I could shew you to answer your relation in every particular: But do not those Bishops take too much upon them, that challenge the power of Ordination solely to themselves?

Calvin Protest. addit. to Articles.I have already told you, that Reformation being once made, our learned men consented that Bishops should take the power of Ordi­nation to themselves. And I suppose this a­greeable to the Apostolical practice; for there [Page 35] was at Ephesus a Colledge of Presbyters, when S. Paul Ordained Timothy; 1 Tim. 4.14. and though the Apostle tells us of the putting on of the hands of the Presbytery, yet in another place he mentions the imposition of no hands but his own.2 Tim. 1.6. I do not understand the first place to be meant of the Colledge of Presbyters, but of the Ordination it self; as if the Apostle had said, see that the grace of God given thee by the imposition of hands, when I made thee a Presbyter be not in vain: for though the word [...] may be understood col­lectively, yet all things considered, the other sense which interprets it, as denoting the Of­fice doth very well agree, for it appears not, whether all did impose hands, or one in the name of all, to which I most incline.

But may not the Presbyters also ordain others? Non-conf. what necessity is there of the Bishops hands? there may be a succession of Ministers continued, without them as I have been taught.

The question was proposed to me in these terms, by whom the Pastors must be Ordained,Calvin Epist. 190. to make the succession lawful? to this I an­swered. Because I perceive it to be of great consequence, that nothing be done disorder­ly in the Church, lest thereby the reins be let loose to the lust of every one, and because it is commanded us expresly by the Spirit of God, in the words of S. Paul, that all things be done decently and in order, I judge that the ordinary Ministry ought herein to be reve­rently obeyed, and it were greatly to be de­sired, [Page 36] that a continued succession might be preserved,Ibidem. that the Office might be delivered from hand to hand.De verâ Ecclesiae Reform. And it is certain, that in a Church rightly constituted, none are to be admitted to the publick Office of Teach­ing, but who are called to it by the ordina­ry Ministers, and wherever the State of the Church is sound, or but in an tolerable con­dition, the ordinary vocation is to be expect­ed.L. 4. c. 4. S. 15: In the Primitive times, the Bishop put on a certain ornament, to distinguish him from the Presbyters, and he alone is said to ordain; whence the Ancients often say, where­in doth the Bishop differ from the Presbyter, the power of Ordination only excepted? Now at the consecration of an Archbishop, all the Bishops of the Province were wont to assem­ble together in the chief City, and the Cere­mony of his Consecration, was also imposi­tion of hands.

Nonconf. I perceive then the Ordination of many of our Ministers, is questionable in your opinion, be­cause they contemned that ancient power of the Bishops their Ordinary, without any necessity. But, Sir, methinks those great Revenues and Dignities, which the Bishops enjoy, are not fit for men of their Coat.

Calvine in 1 Thes. 5.12.Let us consider the double Office of such persons. First, they are to labour, and then they are also to attend to Government; now such men are worthy of double honour, that is as S. Chrysostom interprets it, both of main­tenance and reverence. I do not oppose his [Page 37] sense, let every one that will be of the same mind. I could not but express my sense,Epist. 127: to Archbi­shop Cran. in an Epistle to Archbishop Cranmer, when I heard that the Revenues of the Church were to be made a prey; that it would be an evi­dent hinderance to good preaching, and an intolerable mischief.Beza in vitâ Calvi­ni, 1545. When the people of Geneva seized on the Church Treasures (where­of the Bishop anciently had the care) I open­ly professed, that I could by no means favour such sacriledge, which I knew would one day be severely punished by Heaven; but yet I ac­knowledged the just judgment of God, in permitting that sacriledge, that the goods so ill gotten by the Romish Sacrificers, would not be permitted by God to be added to the Treasury of his Church.De necessit. Reform. Ecclesiae. It was objected to us of Geneva, that we had taken away the Lands of the Church, and converted them to profane uses. To which I answered. That, if I should say we have not offended in this re­spect, I should lye, nor do I excuse what is done, for it is sacriledge, and a grievous judgment is denounced against those that rob the Church to enrich themselves; and I do here testifie, that I will not excuse all that is done among us (though many Ministers were maintained in those Churches, which were before oppressed with abundance of wealth, but destitute of Pastors. And the Schools and Hospitals did not only remain without diminution, but received augmentations, and new Hospitals and Schools were founded, [Page 38] where not only the Masters were provided for, but the Boys also were educated, in hope of being serviceable to the Church) for I pro­fess that it displeaseth me, that a greater care is not taken, that the Revenues of the Church be employed to those uses to which they were de­dicated, and all good men do lament the same with me. And I expressed my sense particularly in the case of your Church;Epist. 123. that among o­ther evils I account this to be an incurable one (until the King assume his right of Govern­ment) that the Revenues of the Church are devoured by the Nobles, who for a vile sti­pend hire men of no worth to perform the Office, or rather fill up the place, of a Pastor, but I will not leave sharply to reprove them. Mr. Ramsey in a Sermon of sacriledge, says that, Mr. Calvin told the Magistrates of Gene­va, that, They had taken the Purse from Judas, and given it to the Devil.

Non-conf. If neither S. Hierom, nor you Mr. Calvin, do condemn the Office of Bishops, yet doubtless there are many things practised by them, which make their Government very culpable; what think you of their imposing so many things up­on the consciences, both of the Ministers and of the People, contrary to their Christian liberty. As first, it is a great grievance to have the spi­rit of God stinted, and the gifts of his Mini­sters stifled, by the imposition of a Liturgy, which they are bound to use always in pub­lick Worship. I pray you therefore to inform me, first in general, whether the use of a Litur­gie be lawful or not?

When the Faithful meet,Calvine in Matth. 18, 19, 20. they are taught to join their desires, and to use Common-Pray­ers, not only to testifie the unity of their faith, but that God may hear what is the consent of all: And John Baptist, as it is probable, did out of certain places of Scripture, compose a Form of Prayer for his Disciples, suitable to that season,Matth. 6.9 and the spiritual Kingdom of Christ, shortly to be revealed. And our Sa­viour did twice prescribe that Form of Prayer, which he taught his Disciples; and I think it to be agreeable to the command of our Lord, that his Saints should daily repeat this Prayer, And I believe the use of Liturgies in the Church were very ancient,Inst. l. 4. c. 1. S. 23. because it was a custom among the Primitive Christians, to sing, not only Hymns, but Prayers also.Lib. 3. c. 20 S. 32. And that must necessarily be done by Form. And certainly, if singing be attempered to that gravity, which may become the presence of God, and his holy Angels, it both procures dignity and gratefulness to sacred actions, and also availeth very much to excite the minds of men to a true earnestness and zeal in Prayer, and I greatly commend it, if it be accompa­nied with the devotion of the mind.

I do therefore highly approve that a certain Form of Prayers and Ecclesiastical Rites,S. 31. Epist. ad Protect. be published, from which it may not be lawful for the Pastors to vary in their administrati­ons, whereby to provide against the simplici­ty and inability of some, and that the con­sent of all the Churches, with each other, may [Page 40] more certainly appear; and lastly, to put a bar to the desultory levity of others, who af­fect innovations.

Opus. p. 33.I did therefore compose certain forms of Prayer, to be used by the Ministers in Geneva, in the Publick Worship on Sun­days and other holy days,Calvin's Prayer before his Sermons—Det nobis Do­minus in coelestis suae sapientiae mysteriis, cum vero pietatis profectu versari, in gloriam suam & aedificationem nostram Amen. and at the administration of the Sacraments, and when the Ex­iles that resided at Geneva, in the Marian days, could not a­gree about the use of the En­glish Liturgy, they did by my advice and approbation, draw up a Liturgy for their publick Worship, which was print­ed in the English Tongue, Anno 1556. where­in was a Confession taken out of the ninth of Daniel, a Prayer for the whole estate of Christs Church, the Lords Prayer, the Creed, &c.

Non-conf. But, Sir, now that you mind me of the an­cient English Liturgie, I have heard you much condemned, for saying, that in the English Li­turgie, were many tolerable follies.

Calvin. Epist. 200.My words concerning that Liturgy, are to this effect, there are many unfit things in it, which yet are tolerable (if it be as you, that is Knox, Epist. 87. Whittingham, &c. present it to me) and I believe no English Bishop, could give a milder censure of it, if it were present­ed to him in the same dress. If I had be­lieved them to be real follies, I would not have judged them tolerable, in the Worship [Page 41] of God. But I gave the Protector three in­stances of such things, the first was, Prayers for the dead at the celebration of the holy Communion. 2. Chrism at Baptism. 3. Ex­treme Unction. But I was also informed by Mr. Knox, and others, that in that Liturgy were prescribed the use of Wax Candles, di­vers crossings in the Communion Service, where also the Priest was to put the Sacra­ment into the peoples mouths,Epist. 206. Women ad­mitted to Baptize, the Child was to be thrice dipped in the Water, first on the right side, then on the left side, and then the face towards the Font, and other trifles, which as for the time present I thought tolerable, so I could not do less than count them unfit for such a Reformation. And I explained my self in these words (viz.) That there was not that purity that might be wished,Epist. 200. but the imper­fections, which could not be amended so ear­ly, might be born with for a time, there be­ing no manifest impiety in it.

But it is worthy your consideration,Acts and Monuments p 1521. first Edi­tion. who were the Authors of your Liturgy, and what testimonies they gave to it. Dr. Taylor a fa­mous Martyr, when it was setled by Autho­rity after its Reformation, affirmed that it was so reformed and fully perfected, according to the rules of Christian Religion in every behalf, that no Christian conscience could be offend­ed with any thing therein contained. And Mr. Fox says it was generally esteemed as a work of God. Doubtless those prudent and [Page 42] pious Martyrs, that died in defence of it, were well satisfied of the legality and purity there­of, at least, that there was no manifest impie­ty in it.

Nonconf. Is not praying for the dead a manifest impie­ty? If any but your self should have given me such an interpretation of the tollerable follies, I should have thought it a great affront to you. I shall give you the form of Prayer, and then desire your sense of it.—We commend unto thy mercy, O Lord, all other thy servants which are departed hence from us, with the Sign of faith, and now do rest in the sleep of peace, grant unto them, we beseech thee, thy mercy and ever­lasting peace, and that at the day of the general resurrection, we and all they which be of the mystical body of thy Son, may altogether be set on his right hand, and hear that most joyful voice. Come unto me, O ye that be blessed, &c.

Calvine ad Protect.I know that this (Prayer for the dead) did not relate to any approbation of the Popish Purgatory, nor am I ignorant, that the an­cient custom of making mention of the dead, may be shewed, that thereby the communion of all the faithful joined in one body might be declared; but this unanswerable Argu­ment, of the sacredness of the Lords Supper, doth hinder the mixing of humane additions with it, and when we call on God we must not indulge our own affections. That form of Prayer that God would give a good resur­rection to the dead, I would have banished, because it agree not to the rule of good de­votion, [Page 43] yet I deny not but it may be lawful to conceive such a wish.

I could not think that form of Prayer could have admitted such a favourable interpretation, Non-conf. and I begin to admire you for your moderation, as much as for your Learning. I perceive you are for a Liturgie, and for the imposing of it, and that as you bear with some, so you do im­partially censure the other faults and imper­fections of it. Those above-mentioned were long since purged out of the English Liturgie, but there are other still retained, which keep many of us from the use of it. My first objection is the constant pronouncing of the absolution morning and evening.

The Keys were given to the Church,Calvine Instit. l. 4. c. 1. S. 22. for the applying of this blessing to us, for when Christ gave the Apostles a command and power to forgive sins, he did not intend, that they should absolve them only that were con­verted from impiety to the faith, but rather that they should administer this office to the faithful, therefore in the Communion of the Saints, by the Ministry of the Church our sins are daily absolved, when the Bishop or Pres­byter, to whom this office is committed, do confirm pious consciences in the hope of par­don, and remission, by Evangelical promises, and that as well publickly as privately, as ne­cessity requires. For although the Sons of God be eminent in holiness, yet as long as they live in mortal bodies, they cannot stand before God, without remission of sins; and[Page 44] this office is so proper to the Church, that we cannot otherwise enjoy this blessing, than by continuing in her communion, and it is di­spensed by the Pastors and Ministers of the Church, either in the preaching of the Word, or the administration of the Sacraments; eve­ry one therefore must know it to be his duty, not to seek for remission of sins, any other where than where the Lord hath appointed; for seeing remission of sins and salvation is no where else,Calvine ad Ana­bapt. though we pretend more than an Angelical life, yet if by such boldness we se­parate from the Church we are very Devils.

Non-conf. Indeed, I have heard some good men in the Church of England, speak much of the absolu­tion of sick persons, that are going out of the world, but now you have acquainted me with the benefit of it; my next objection is, that I suppose the frequent repetition of our Lords Prayer is a vain thing, seeing that many of our Ministers wholly neglect it, and some have preached and printed against the use of it.

Calvin in Matth. 26.44.I cannot doubt of the usefulness of this, seeing our Saviour in his agony prayed three times in the same words, which was no such battology as he had condemned in the Hea­then, but Christ taught us by his example, not to faint in Prayer, if we do not presently obtain our desires. I have said formerly, that by the command of Christ the Saints ought to say it daily, and I fear they that object against the frequent use of it, either already have, or are minded to lay it wholly aside. But they [Page 45] who despising the rule of their Master, are fond of their own Prayers,Instit. l. 3. c. 20. S. 28. do not only want the Word of God, but as much as in them ly­eth are enemies to it.

You do answer those objections which I thought unanswerable, Non-conf. with such facility and satisfa­ction, that I am even ashamed to produce those lesser exceptions against the Liturgie. Such as the frequent Responses, which I have heard from Mr. Hooker to be of great use and anti­quity; and I remember you also did commend the use of every mans voice in Publick Prayers, that we may all glorifie God with one mouth; and that every one may bear in publick from his Brother a confession of his faith. I shall only propose the most material objections to you, concern­ing the administration of the Sacraments; and the most considerable is, that declaration of the Church of England at the end of Publick Bap­tism, which though it be only in the Rubrick, yet all Ministers are required to subscribe to it, before their admission. The words are these. —It is certain by the Word of God, that Children which are baptized, dying before they commit actual sin, are undoubtedly saved.

I openly affirm,Calvin. Opus: that in Baptism we have to do with God, who doth ratifie by his grace, that which the Ministers hand doth signifie;Instit. l. 4. c. 16. S. 5. and if (as you grant) Baptism doth belong to Infants, it is a madness to understand it only of the outward sign, and not of the spi­ritual mystery, for, as by Circumcision God made Infants partakers of all such things as [Page 46] were thereby sealed unto them (for God did not delude his people by an insignificant Sym­bol) so doth Christ by Baptism,De verâ Ecclesiae Reform. wherein both remission of sins, and regeneration of the Spi­rit are offered unto us. Christ commands Children to be brought to him; why? because he is the life,Instit. l. 4. [...]. 17. that therefore he may enliven them, he maketh them partakers of himself. But how are Infants regenerate, that are not capable of knowing good or evil? I answer, The work of God is not therefore null, be­cause we cannot give a reason of it. More­over those Infants which you grant are to be saved (as without doubt some of that age are saved) it is evident, they must be first re­generate by our Lord, for being unclean by nature, they must be first regenerate before they can enter into the Kingdom of God. And by sanctifying John Baptist in the Womb, that is before he was born, God shewed what he can do on other Infants. Nor can it be any way proved,S. 17. that Children may not be rege­nerated by the powerful operation of God, which thing is as easie to be done by him, as the manner of doing it is difficult and in­comprehensible to us.Epist. 179. to Melanch. I therefore agree to this, that this Sacrament is not an empty fi­gure,Calvine Opusc. de Sacram. but whatever is figured in Baptism, is indeed performed (viz.) the efficacy of the Spirit to cleanse and regenerate us; for the instruments of the Holy Ghost are not dead things, but God by Baptism truly effects and performs what he signifieth; it is therefore a [Page 47] sacrilegious divorce, to separate the sign from the promise which God maketh.Opus. p. 30. In the Ca­techism taught at Geneva this question is pro­posed, Do you therefore ascribe no other virtue to the water, but that it is only a figure of washing. The Answer is, I so believe it to be a figure, that the truth is really annexed to it, for God doth not delude us in his pro­mises, therefore it is undoubtedly certain, that both forgiveness of sins and newness of life are offered to us, and received by us in Bap­tism.

What, I pray you, Non-conf. is the meaning of Confir­mation by the Bishop? which is enjoined to all Children that come to years of discretion.

It was an ancient custom of Christians,Calvine Instit l. 4: c. 19. S. 1. when their Children were grown up, to bring them to the Bishop, who, because they could not make confession of their faith at their Baptism, were to be then examined by the Bishop, according to that certain and com­mon form of Catechism, which was then in use; and for the greater solemnity of this action, imposition of hands was used; and so the Child having made confession of his Faith, was dismissed with a solemn benedi­ction.Opus. de verâ Ec­clesiae Re­form. And I do deservedly wish that this Rite were every where restored, whereby Children are offered to God, after the confessi­on of their faith, which would be a decent approbation of the use of Catechising.

Is not the custom of having Godfathers, Non-conf. &c. a useless and superstitious practice?

Calvine Epist. 285. to Knox.I confess that a stipulation in Baptism is necessary, for nothing is more preposterous, than that those should be ingrafted to Christs body, whom we may not hope to be his Dis­ciples; wherefore if none of the Kindred ap­pear, that may give his Faith to the Church, and take charge of teaching the Child, it is but a Lusorious action, and the Baptism is defiled.Epist. 302. It was therefore my advice, that the Fathers should be present, together with the Sureties, to answer to the interrogatories, un­less any business did hinder them; and this was our practice at Geneva; and being the office of Godfather was honourable, it was required that they should be of the same Re­ligion. And when things are thus ordered, as Beza told your Archbishop Grindall, Beza Epist. 8. Quis damnare ausit, who dares to condemn this practice.

Non-conf. I have nothing more to object, against the ad­ministration of this Sacrament, until I come to speak of the Sign of the Cross: I desire, if it be possible, to remove some scandals which are taken at the administration of the Lords Supper: For first, it is a cause of great grief to us, to see so many profane persons admitted to the same priviledges with our selves, especially at that distinguishing Ordinance of the Lords Supper.

Because Pastors cannot alway watch so di­ligently as they ought,Calvine Instit. l. 4. c. 1. S. 15. and are sometimes more indulgent than they should, or are hindred from exercising that severity which they would, it happens that men openly [Page 49] wicked are not removed from the society of the Saints: This is a fault which S. Paul re­proves in the Corinthians; but though the Church fail in her duty, it is not lawful for every private man to resolve presently upon separation; I deny not but it is the duty of a good man to withdraw from the private fa­miliarity of the wicked; but it is one thing to avoid the company of wicked men, and another thing through hatred of them to re­nounce the communion of the Church. Where­as therefore they think it a sacrilegious thing, to participate of the Br [...]ad of our Lord with wicked men, they are herein more severe than S. Paul was, for when he exhorts to a holy and pure participation, he requires not that every one should examine his neighbour, or the whole Congregation, but that every one examine himself. If it were a sin to cmmu­nicate with an unworthy person, he would have required us to beware, lest there were any in the company by whose uncleanness we might be defiled, but seeing he requires eve­ry man to examine himself only, he intimates that it cannot hurt us, if any unworthy Com­municants thrust themselves among us; and to this intent is that which the Apostle adds. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself; he says not to others, but to himself, and this is justly said, for it ought not to be in the power of every one, to determine who are to be ad­mitted or rejected: the cognizance of this be­longs [Page 50] to the Church, which cannot be exer­cised, but in due order, it would therefore be very unreasonable, if a private Christian should be polluted by the unworthiness of another, to whom he neither can nor ought deny ad­mission.Epist. 127. Sive Pau­lus sive Judas Bap­tizat Chri­stus pec­cata lavat. Epist. 367. Yet farther, though there may be some unworthiness in the Minister, nothing of the efficacy of the Sacrament is lost to such as are duly qualified for the reception of it, for the truth of God is not altered by the impro­bity of man; the Sacraments do not depend on the worthiness of the Minister, much less of the Communicants.

Contra A­nabapt.If all things be accurately considered, it will appear, that they who have so much leisure to enquire after others, are too often most negligent of themselves. I knew a man pos­sessed with this errour, who was afraid to re­ceive the Lords Supper with us, because of the vices of some among us; in the mean time he had in his Family two Servants of a very vicious and debauched life; which when I understood I caused him to be admonished of it (because at that time he would not hearken to me) That it was worth his labour to think of purging his own house, which was committed to his charge, seeing he thought himself to be defiled with the Vices of them, that no way belonged to his inspe­ction. Hereupon he began to think of his indiscretion, and to acknowledge it as a cha­stisement sent from God, whereby he rebuked him for his pride, and so he reconciled him­self both to the Church and me.

If this Discipline (of restraining wicked men) be wanting, I confess the Church is im­perfect and hath its spots, but yet we may not unchurch it, or withdraw from her commu­nion, nor is it lawful for any man to separate from it. Let them that slander us as Authors of this Doctrine of separation, preach it to the Anabaptists, we owne it not,Calvin ad­vers. Ana­bapt: but profess that they do wickedly, who are so displeased with the faults of men, as to forsake the communion of the Church of God. Those that are good (as S. Augustine says) are to be loved, the openly evil to be avoided, and the rest to be tolerated. If the Papists had a pure form of Prayer,Epist. 265. I would not scruple to enter into the Temple with them, as the Dis­ciples did with the Jews at the hour of Prayer. If it be objected, that we may not join our selves with them that do crucifie Christ. I an­swer, an action which is in it self pious and holy, cannot be corrupted by the faults of other men, as I am wont to say. That if all the Angels were present at the Mass, they cannot cleanse it of its pollution by their ho­liness; nor can all the Devils cause by their presence, that the holy Supper being cele­brated according to Christs Institution, should lose any thing of its purity.

What I pray you is your judgment concern­ing the private administration of the Sacra­ments, Non-conf. which hath been generally decryed by our Ministers, but is approved of by the Church of England?

Calvin Epist. 321.Why the Lords Supper should not be de­nyed to the sick, many and great reasons pre­vail with me, let there be some company of the Kindred, Friends, and Neighbours, that distribution may be made, according to the command of Christ, and then let the action be performed, with an explication of the my­stery,Epist. 363. but in nothing different from the com­mon practice of the Church, for from the nature, use, and end of this mystery, I do right­ly conclude, That they ought not to be depri­ved of so great a benefit, who either labour under daily diseases, or are in danger of their lives, to deny that to them whereby they may be strengthened for the great conflict and temptations that are at hand, and whereby they may testifie their pious agreement with the Church, is a hard thing and of an evil example, whether a person be confined to his Bed, or nigh to death, and though this be not practised in our Church, yet I acquiesce, because it is not profitable to contend: My judgment for the administration of private Baptism,Epist. 185. Ad Mons­bel. and giving the Lords Supper to Ma­lefactors, that desire it, and appear qualified for it, is the same.

Non-conf. Sir, I perceive that our Teachers have per­plexed our consciences with many needless scru­ples and jealousies, from which I hope by your sober counsel, maturely considered; and by the grace of God teaching me true humility and Christian charity, to extricate my self, and to be fortified against the like suggestions; I shall [Page 53] trouble you but with one general question more (viz.) what power the Churches of God have, to ordain and impose Rites and Ceremonies in his Publick Worship.

Government is necessary in every Society,Galvin Instit. l. 4. c. 10. S. 27. for the preservation of peace and concord; but especially in the Church of God, and be­cause men are so different in their manners, various in their opinions, and of such oppo­sition in their judgments. And no Politie can be firm unless ratified by certain Laws, I am so far from condemning such Laws, that I peremptorily assert, that if these be taken away,Epist. 318. the very Nerves of the Church (for so I am wont to call Ecclesiastical Constitutions) are dissolved, and the whole frame deformed and dissipated. I confess therefore,Confess. fi­dei Gel. that eve­ry Church hath power to constitute Laws, for the establishing of common Polity and Government.Opus. p. 322 Instit. l. 4. c. 10. S. 30. And this liberty of making Laws was left to the Church by Christ, who would not particularly prescribe what we ought to follow in outward Discipline and Ceremonies, which he foresaw would depend on the condition of several Ages, and that one form would not agree with them all. In this case therefore we must have recourse to the general rules which he gave for decency and order, and the commands of the Church are to be referred to them, and those godly Laws of the Church,1 Cor. 14.40. wherein Discipline and good Order are contained, are not to be ac­counted humane Traditions, seeing they are [Page 54] founded in that general Precept, and have an evident approbation, as if they were spo­ken by Christ himself.Tit. 1.5. So St. Paul gave Ti­tus authority to do the same that he had done (i.) to set Church Affairs in order, and to supply what was wanting.

Non-conf. We have been taught a contrary Doctrine, namely, that nothing is to be admitted or im­posed as to the Worship of God, for which we have not an express command in his Word, yet I remember Mr. Cartwright did say, that things profitable to the Church, and not repugnant to the Word are to be received, as commanded by the Word, God commanding them by his Church; and I am not satisfied how the impo­sition of things in themselves lawful, doth make them become unlawful, which yet is the opini­on of many of our Divines, as it was of some old Non-Conformists: we cannot tell, say they, whether we might by the Laws and Order of this Realm subscribe, although the things were otherwise lawful by the Word of God, this in my judgment leaves the Magistrate no power at all, as to the outward acts of Gods Worship, for the Law of God commands what is good, and forbids what is evil, the Magistrates power is only in things of a middle nature, which this opinion denieth to him.

Calvin Ad Versi­pellem quendam.I have said enough to confute these fancies, shewing that particular Rites, which have respect to the general rules of decency and or­der, or peace and charity, are of more than humane constitution (as Mr. Cartwright doth [Page 55] truly affirm) I do not say,Decret. 1. S. 4. as the Council of Trent, that Traditions in general are to be received with like affection of piety, as the Books of the Old and New Testament; but I say, there are many things not expressed in the Word of God, which are never the less certain.Contra Anabapt▪ Unwary Christians cannot be sedu­ced by a more specious pretence, than this of Scripture, which the Anabaptists so much urge, but they that insist on this argument a­gainst their Adversaries, should consider whe­ther they can plead it for their own practices, for so Tertullian requires,De Coronā militis. See Bishop Sandersons Preface. Expostulantes Scrip­turae patrocinium in parte adversâ, praejudi­cant, suae quo{que} parti, patrocinium Scripturae, adesse debere; To men of this opinion, there can be neither peace of conscience nor end of superstition.Instit. l. 3. c. 19. S. 7. We are thought to be imperti­nent in making disputes about the free eating of flesh, use of Holy-days, of Garments, and such other things, which seem to be frivo­lous to some men, but are of greater mo­ment than is commonly believed; for when mens consciences are once got into a snare, they wander in a tedious and perplexed La­byrinth, from whence it is very difficult to find an out-let. If a man begin to scruple, whether he may use Linen Sheets, Handker­chiefs, and Napkins, shortly he will question whether he may use such as are made of Hemp, or coarser materials, afterward he is perswaded he may live without the use of any. If dainty meats seem at first unlawful, at [Page 56] length he shall not with satisfaction, before the Lord, eat ordinary bread and common meats, while he considers he may preserve his body with cheaper food; if he scruple first to drink pleasant Wine, anon he cannot with peace of conscience drink of that which is decayed, and at last to taste of any Water that is cleaner than other; and in the end to account it a sin to tread on a straw that lyeth cross in his way. Now here is no light que­stion begun, for the controversie is, whether God would have us use the one or the other, whose will ought to guide us in all our coun­sels and actions, and whoever are insnared in such doubtings, let them turn which way they will, there are stumbling Blocks for their consciences in that way. Now in all such things as are not determined by the Word of God, I am of S. Augustines opinion, that the custom of the people of God and the consti­tutions of our Ancestors are to be observed as a Law. And thus I would resolve these scru­ples, that things which are left indifferent (as to civil matters) are left to our own discre­tion,Ad Versi­pellem. until the Edicts of Princes do deter­mine them, and though the things which they enjoin are sharp, and such as seem un­equal, their commands ought not to be de­spised.Instit. l. 4. c. 17. S. 43. So likewise the external Rites in the Worship of God, are in the power of the Church; and as the edification of the Church requires, they may be changed or abrogated and new ones instituted. As in the Lords [Page 57] Supper, whether the people take the bread in their hands or not,L. 4. c. 10. S 30. Epist. 259. whether they divide it a­mong themselves, or every one eat what is given him, whether the Bread be leavened or unleavened, whether the Wine be mixed with Water or not (if it fall short, and to supply the Communicants; so there be not an opini­on of the necessity of mixture) is indifferent, and may be observed on the Churches com­mand.

But though the Church have power to make Laws, Nonconf. for Rites and Ceremonies not expressed in the Scriptures, yet I hope you will not say, that it may impose them on our Consciences, and so abridge us of our Christian liberty.

Humane Laws,Calvin Instit. l. 4. c. 10. S. 5. & 6. whether made by the Ma­gistrate or the Church, although they are ne­cessary to be observed, yet do they not bind the conscience by their immediate authority, but by virtue of a general precept, commend­ing to us the Magistrates power: and the ne­cessity of observing them, respects the general end, (viz.) obedience, charity, and unity, and is not grounded on the nature of the things commanded, nor can that be done which St. Paul requires,S. 27. 1 Cor. 14.40. unless the de­cency and order be established, by the additi­on of certain (Canons or) Observations as so many bonds: this only is always to be except­ed. First, that the Observations be not believ­ed to be necessary to salvation, and so be thought religiously to bind the Conscience. Or, secondly, that they be not so added to the [Page 58] Worship of God, as if any holiness did con­sist in them. And thirdly, that they be not held to be perpetual and unalterable, but on­ly as outward rudiments of humane infirmi­ty, which though we do not all want, yet we may all use, for the preservation of unity, and yet our liberty is not lost:L. 4. c. 4. S. 1. & 4. Suppose a man be commanded to abstain from certain meats, as 1 Cor. 10.28. the command being concern­ing things indifferent,Lex exter­num opus ligans, conscien­tiam libe­ram relin­quit. l. 3. c. 19. ult. with respect to scan­dal, he loseth not his liberty of conscience in obeying, for his conscience is free in respect of God, and of the things commanded, which he judgeth still to be indifferent. In such things therefore it hath been thought fit that a general rule should be given for esta­blishing of Church Polity, both to the Mini­sters and People, from which it should not be lawful for them to recede.Instit. l. 4. c. 10. S. 32. Nor is our liberty hereby infringed, which we may preserve, though we willingly submit to a certain ne­cessity, either as that decorum (of which we have spoken) or the respect to Charity doth require.Epist. ad Parellum. So I advised Farel, that he would not suffer pertinacious Controversies among Neighbours about Ceremonies, seeing all things are ours, we being free from all, are the Servants of peace and concord.Calvine Instit. l 4. c. 10. S. 28. When for the sake of publick decency a Law is made and published, then is superstition taken a­way: into which they only fall, that mea­sure the Worship of God by mens inventions. Again, when such a Law is known to belong [Page 59] to common use, that false opinion of obliga­tion and necessity is overthrown, which is wont to strike great terrour into the consci­ences, when men think them necessary to sal­vation; but here nothing is sought for, but the increase of charity, by joining in such common practices. And S. Paul's rule for decency tends to this, that, while Ceremonies are used, to beget a reverence towards things sacred, we may by those helps be stirred up to piety. And also that modesty and gravity, which ought to be regarded in all honest acti­ons, may most appear in those that are sacred; of this kind are kneeling, and uncovering the head, when we pray; and that in the buri­al of the dead we use a certain honour and decency. Which I thus expressed,Epist. ad Monsbel­gard. Comment in Zach. that the Corps be carried to the Church-yard, and that an exhortation be made, so as they which attend the Funeral, may understand what is spoken: That Ministers be distinguished from others by their Garments.Calvin. confutatio Hollandi. And in such things as are of a middle nature (i.) neither good nor evil, we may use them or refrain from them, as the Laws of our Superiours for de­cency and charity do require.Instit. l 4. c. 10. S. 31. It is the duty of Christian people to observe such Constitu­tions, with a free conscience, without any superstition, but with a pious and facile reso­lution to obey; and not by any contempt or supine negligence to omit them; so far must they be from an open violation of them, through pride and contempt, for even in those [Page 60] things (that are indifferent) the Customs and Institutions of Religion, and the rule of hu­manity and modesty do dictate what is to be done or forborn; in which if we erre by im­prudence or oblivion, the fault is not consi­derable, but if by contempt, it is a contuma­cy fit to be condemned; if therefore any shall clamour against this, and seem more wise than he ought, let him take heed upon what account he may approve this his morosity to the Lord; that of S. Paul shall satisfie us. We have no such custom (of contending) nor the Churches of God. 1 Cor. 11.16. Epist. col. 313. in fol. Contention is a dangerous thing, and therefore ought to be banished out of the Churches, and perverse contentious persons are rather to be suppressed by authori­ty than by long disputations; for there will never be an end of contentions, if you think to overcome a disputatious man by argument; for though he be overcome an hundred times, yet will he not be wearied. Let us therefore diligently observe this, that we suffer not our selves to be carried away with needless dispu­tations.

Non-conf▪ If you should preach this Doctrine in the Church of England, you would be accounted a Persecuter, as the Bishops are.

Calvin contra A­nabapt.As to the charge of Persecution, I affirm, that when any wicked and pernicious Sect be­gins to arise, especially when it increaseth, it is the duty of such as God hath appointed for the edification of his Church, to countermine them and withstand them stoutly, before they [Page 61] get strength to bring all to confusion; for see­ing they are made the Pastors of the Church,Nulla obli­gatio sine coercione. they ought not only to feed the Flock of God with wholsom food, but also diligently to watch against Wolves and Thieves, that when such come nigh the Flock they may remove them, as far as they can by great clamours, for they are worse than Wolves or Thieves. And when once the concord of the Church is violated, there is no end nor measure in con­tention. And how strict our Discipline at Geneva is in this respect, is well known to all the reformed Churches.

It is a most just thing to submit to the yoke of Christ (so he calls Church Discipline) and to acknowledge this,Epist. fol. col. 322. that the lawful use of our Christian liberty is to be far from un­bridled license.

But what if the Ceremonies be significant of the Mysteries and Doctrines of Faith, Non-conf. do they not then become a part of the Worship, and so unlawful to be observed?

I say,Calvin Epist. 85. that Ceremonies ought to be accom­modated to the use and capacity of the peo­ple; for the end of decency is, that when such Rites are used, which may procure vene­ration to holy things, we may by such helps be stirred up to piety, as also, that modesty and gravity, which ought to appear in all ho­nest actions, may shine especially in sacred things. That therefore is decency which adds an ornament agreeable to the action, and this is not without profit, for by it the [Page 62] faithful are admonished, with how great mo­desty, religion, and observation holy things ought to be handled;De verâ Ecclesiae Reform. and lest any should slan­der me as being too morose and rigid, as if I did precisely take away all liberty, I do here­by testifie to all pious men, that I contend not about Ceremonies, which serve only for de­cency and order,Lib. 4. c. 10 S. 14. or which are (Symbols) sig­nifications, and incitements of that reverence which we offer to God; let no man say therefore, that I allow no Ceremony, to assist the ignorance of the ruder sort, for I think such helps to be very profitable; I only would have such a moderation, that Christ may be illustrated and not obscured.Thes. Ec­clesiae Belg. And these re­strictions are necessary to be observed, that the Ceremonies be few in number, facile in observation, and that there be a suitableness of dignity in the signification, otherwise things indifferent may change their nature. Nor may we,L. 4. c. 10. S... as the Papists do, teach for Do­ctrines the Commandments of men, who make their Religion a barbarous Empire, teaching that their Ceremonies are a part of Gods Worship, imposing them on the con­sciences of the people, as things of necessity, accounting them meritorious services.Opus. 125. We have in the Papacy more than enough, and such as are unapt for signification; whereas Ceremonies ought to be squared to the edifi­cation and unity of the Church. I do in­deed condemn such Ceremonies as are added to the Sacraments,Calvin. in Levit. 4.22. to be mystical significati­ons [Page 63] of them, but not as they are significant of moral duties; but in those sacramental duties, to which God hath annexed a promise of grace, I allow them not; our Ceremo­nies then may not be like those of the Papists,L. 4. c. 10. S. 15. unintelligible like magical incantations; for all Ceremonies are corrupt which do not lead men unto Christ.

I do not see any great guilt in the Church Ceremonies, Non-conf. if you count them laudable quali­fications, which we account crimes; for I con­fess their number is not great, and it is de­clared concerning them, thus, Preface to Common Prayer of Ceremo­nies, &c. Those persons that peradventure will be offended for that some of the old Ceremonies are retained still, if they con­sider, that without some Ceremonies it is not pos­sible to keep any order or peace in the Church, they shall easily perceive just cause to reform their judgments; and if they think it much, that any of the old do remain, and would rather have all devised anew, then such men, granting some Ceremonies convenient to be had, surely, where the old may be well used, they cannot reasonab­ly reprove the old, only for their age; for in such a case they ought rather to have reverence to them for their antiquity, if they will declare them­selves to be more studious of unity and concord, than of innovation and new fangleness, which (as much as may be with setting forth of Christs Religion) is always to be eschewed; furthermore, such shall have no cause with the Ceremonies reserved to be offended, for as those are taken away which were most abused, and [Page 64] did burden mens consciences without any cause, so the other that remain, are retained for a discipline and order, which (upon just causes may be altered and changed, and therefore are not to be esteemed equal to Gods Law; and more­over they be neither dark nor dumb Ceremonies, but are to set forth that every man may understand what they do mean, and to what use they do serve. This (Mr. Calvin) is the very substance of what you have said, but I do not remember any thing in your discourse, which condemns such Ceremonies, as have been abused to Idola­try in the Church of Rome; ought not all such to be abominated, and cast out of the Church of Christ?

Calvin de vitand. superst. re­tinenda pura insti­tutio super­stitio corri­genda. Cal. in Heb. 6.1 Calvin. ad quendam VersipellemLet not any think me so austere, or straight-laced, as to forbid a Christian without any exemption to accommode himself to the Pa­pists in any Ceremony or observance; for it is not my purpose to condemn any thing, but what is clearly evil and openly vitious. The ancient Rites whose footsteps and lineaments do yet appear, although they decline in some respect from their end and use, yet for the sake of peace and publick utility, may be ob­served, until by publick authority they may be restored to their proper end, or be quite taken away;Ibidem. and therefore I do not contend for the casting out any thing but what is filthi­ly corrupted with the manifest spot of impie­ty.Cal. on the second com­mand. I know that the Jews during the time of their Pedagogy were commanded to destroy the Groves and Altars of Idolaters, not by [Page 65] virtue of the Moral Law, but by an appen­dage in the Judicial or Politick Law, which obliged that people only for a time, but it binds not Christians;Quale hoc est, ut quia novatianus hoc facere audet nos putamus non esse fa­ciendum. S. Cyprian Epist 37. and therefore we do not scruple at all, whether we may lawfully use those Temples, Fonts, and other materi­als, which have been formerly abused to Ido­latrous and Superstitious uses. I confess in­deed, we ought to remove such things as seem to nourish Idolatry, provided, that we our selves in opposing too violently things which are in their own nature indifferent, be not too superstitious. It is equally superstitious to condemn things indifferent as unholy; and to command them as if they were holy.Aug. contr. Donat. Quod rectum haberent Gentiles non improbarunt San­cti Patres.

It seems then that Superstition doth consist in charging upon our consciences the forbearance and disuse of things indifferent, Non-conf. as well as the use of them?

Men are too rigorously superstitious in op­posing things indifferent,Calvin in Exod. & 206. Epist. S. Paul condemns such as did intangle the consciences of the people with their prohibitions: Eat not, taste not, touch not, Calv. in Col. 2.20. (for so I suppose the word [...] is to be rendred, the Verb [...] signifying to eat as well as to touch) for those false Teachers begun to forbid first what seemed most offensive, that is to eat and feast upon idolatrous meats, then, having obtained this, they forbad them to taste, though they eat nothing; then they make it a sin to touch [Page 66] with their fingers any thing that they had prohibited, and so there is no end when this Tyranny is once begun; new prohibitions are still making, as I have given instance in the Church of Rome. Of this humour I found Mr. Knox and some others to be guilty,Epist. 105. see also Epist. 206. for­bidding their party to join with their English Brethren, because of some Ceremonies which as he informed me had occasioned new trou­bles. I knew the cause of those troubles, and applied this cure, I hope Mr. Knox your ri­gour in (opposing not imposing) Ceremo­nies, though it have provoked many, will yet be moderate. We must indeed labour to purge the Church of Errour and Superstition, yet with this limitation, which you well know, that some things though they be not well ap­proved,Epist. 303. may yet be born with. And when some complained to me of the troubles they met with, for refusing of Ceremonies, I told them it was my judgment that but a few Ceremonies should be used in the Church, but it altered the case, where they had no power to admit or reject what they pleased; and therefore they ought not because of them to interdict themselves from the Lords Supper; if we may not obtain what we desire, let us bear with those defects which we approve not of; so long as there is no impiety or re­pugnancy to the Word of God.Epist. 51. The same was my advice to the Church at Monsbelgard, who complained that their Prince did im­pose certain Rites, not formerly used in their [Page 67] Church. I charged them not to be too mo­rose, in what they might lawfully dispense with, and though some might be offended at those Rites, the fear of that should not hinder from admitting them, when the Prince en­joined them.Cal. de il­lititis sa­cris. Opus. 664. I also gave this advice to one that lived among the Papists, touching Cere­monies not branded with any impiety, to use them sparingly and soberly, but when occasion served, freely and securely, so as it may easi­ly appear that he was not superstitious, either in affecting or refusing them. In a word,Calvin. ad quen­dam Ver­sipellem. There may be need of correcting some Cere­monies, but there is as great danger from sharp Remedies as from the Disease; that se­verity which prosecutes every fault to the ut­most, and doth not moderate the method of healing, is very destructive. Peccat qui dam­nat quasi peccata quae nulla sunt S. August. de Libero Arbitrio.

This argument of negative Superstition, Non-conf. I confess I did not well understand, which now I perceive was not without cause urged by the Conformists against our Ministers, who do bind us for conscience sake, not to use the Ceremonies of the Church, which they say are heathenish and Antichristian; and so they make many things sinful to us, which I now perceive that the Law of God doth not make so, which you inform me to be a part of Superstition; and whereas at first they forbad us only the use of Ceremonies, they will not now permit us to come near their As­semblies. I pray you, Sir, that I may convince [Page 68] my Brethren, that the Ceremonies enjoined are not Antichristian nor Superstitious, shew me wherein the viciousness of the Romish Ceremo­nies doth consist, and how they differ from such as may be lawfully used?

Calvin Instit. l. 4. c. 10. S. 1.The difference appears in many considera­ble circumstances; for first, that barbarous Empire hath so increased the number of them, that the condition of the Jews was more to­lerable, and they teach for Doctrines the com­mandments of men, that is, they make their Ceremonies a considerable part of Gods Wor­ship, imposing them on the consciences of the people as necessary to salvation,Per crucis hoe signum depellitur omne ma­lignum. and teach­ing that they are meritorious services, and such Sacrifices as do expiate sin: they make it as great a sin to eat Flesh on a Friday as to commit Fornication; and condemn the mar­riage of a Priest as much as Adultery; and many such abominations which you may read in that Chapter.

Non-conf. I begin now to fear, that our separation from the Church of England, on occasion of such impositions as I have described is not very justifiable, pray give me your opinion, whether by our new Meetings and modes of Worship we make our selves guilty of Schism or no?

Calvine Confess. fidei.I judge them to be Schismaticks that raise tumults and divisions, to dissipate the unity of the Church, which cannot otherwise be maintained, but by submission to their Pastors; and whoever wilfully divide themselves from the Congregation of the Faithful, the same [Page 69] cast themselves out of the Kingdom of God. And S. Paul condemns them for contentious men,Calvine in 1 Cor. 11.40. that pluck up good and profitable Rites without any necessity, and move Controver­sies about things not doubtful, who will not be satisfied by reason, nor keep themselves in good order;Epist. ad Protect. there are still in England two sorts of seditious persons, the one under pre­tence of the Gospel, would bring in disor­der; the other are hardened in Antichristian Superstitions; both these deserve to be re­strained by the vindictive Sword.

They therefore are wicked Children (as St. Augustine also saith) who not so much through hatred of other mens iniquities,Calvine Inst. l. 4 c. 1. S. 16. as in affecta­tion to their own contentions, having insnared the weaker people by the greatness of their names, do affect to draw them all after them­selves; or at least to divide them, being swoln with pride, and mad through perversness, treacherous in their Calumnies, troublesom by Seditions, who lest it should be manifested that they want the light of truth, pretend the shadow of rigid severity, to countenance the sacriledge of their Schism, and the occasion of separation. And those things which are commanded in the Holy Scriptures to be used with great moderation and circumspection, for the correcting of the faults of their Bre­thren, they do employ as the occasions of a sacrilegious Schism and Separation. But they who are more audacious than others, and the Ring-leaders to separation from the Church, [Page 70] have no other reason for it, but that by a con­tempt of all, they may proclaim themselves to be better than others. (This in the Margent is called the Picture of a Schismatick.)

Non-conf. You do a little trouble me in discovering the nature and danger of Schism, which I hear seldom mentioned in our Congregations. I shall acquaint my Brethren, of your judgment, that our present Meetings are schismatical, and that they deserve not only to be punished by the Sword, but to be excluded from the Kingdom of God. For my part I shall for the future enquire more seriously into the grounds of this separation, and if I cannot find better reasons for it than I have yet received (which I perceive are easily confuted by men of great moderation) I shall return to the Communion of the Church, wherein I was baptized, and made the first profession of my Faith. And now my Baptism puts me in mind of what I had almost forgotten, to crave your opinion concerning the sign of the Cross, and those other few Ceremonies retained in the Church, which I cannot find that you have any where in your Writings condemned, as they are now used in the Church of England.

CalvineI am so well satisfied in the reason and manner of imposing those Ceremonies, from what you have told me out of the Preface to the Common-Prayer Book, that my judg­ment in this case is the same, which I gave concerning the Church at Frankefort (viz.) that in middle things (as those Rites are)Epist. 200. I yield my self easie and flexible, and I was [Page 71] displeased with them, who as being in the midst of ease and delights, were busie only in raising Controversies concerning the form of Prayer and Ceremonies, which hindred them from uniting into one body; whom I desi­red not to be so rigid, because where there is sound and wholsom Doctrine, and Ceremo­nies are used only for decency, such things are to be past by in silence, rather than by oc­casion of them to run into dissention and tu­mults. First therefore, as to the Surplice,Epist. 120. I did commend the constancy of Bishop Hooper, in refusing Unction, but I would not that he should have contended so far, about the Cap and Surplice, as to suffer imprisonment for them: and this advice I gave him. I heard of Bishop Latimer's speech, who said he would rather preach in a Fools Coat, than be deprived of his Ministry: but when the Church commands such things only as serve for decen­cy, and declares that she doth not attribute any holiness or special worthiness to them,Canon 75. she ought to be obeyed: and that we should be esteemed such refractory and tumultuary men,Epist. 117. as had rather set the world on fire than condescend to moderation, is a bitter and hard imputation.An. 1603. Thuanus speaking of the cauti­ons and restrictions laid on the Cross by the Church of England, says, that it did rather a­bolish than confirm it.

The Church hath in truth with great cauti­on set down the use and ends of the Ceremonies now in practice, particularly,Non conf.as to the Cross in [Page 72] Baptism, for in the administration of private Baptism it appoints it not, yet declares that the Child so baptized, that is, with the words of Christs Institution only, is lawfully and suf­ficiently baptized. And in the Rubrick for publick Baptism, to take away all scruples con­cerning the sign of the Cross, directeth us for the true explication thereof, and the just reasons for retaining it, to the 30. Canon, published Anno 1604. where among other weighty rea­sons, the Church referreth to the Conference at Hampton Court,Pa. 68.69. in which Dr. Reynolds con­fessed that it was used ever since the Apostles times, and that, as it was then proved from Tertullian, and Cyprian, in immortali lavacro, that is in Baptism, that it was used also in Con­stantine's time, and therefore not invented by the Papists, Opus. p. 326. And by the way, you would have this yielded to Antiquity, that some things non on­ly superfluous but unprofitable may be tolerated, to which the Fathers in the Council of Nice con­sented, [...]. Secondly, It is there declared, that the Church did ever hold and teach, Since the Refor­mation this sign hath traditio­nem au­ctricem & consuetu­dinem confirma­tricem. Tertull. and so doth hold and teach still, that the Sign of the Cross in Baptism is no part of the substance of that Sacrament; for when the Minister hath pronounced the words of Insti­tution, the Infant is fully baptized, and there­upon received into the Congregation of Christs flock, and it is evident that the sign of the Cross afterwards used doth not refer back to the Sacrament, but is a token that hereafter, &c. so that the Church following the Primitive [Page 73] and Apostolical Churches, accounts it only an outward lawful Ceremony, and honourable Badge, whereby the Infant is dedicated to the service of him that dyed upon the Cross: and lastly, Such as cu­ring Disea­ses and driving out Devils. that it is purged from all Popish super­stition and errour, and reduced to its primary Institution, upon those rules of Doctrine concern­ing things indifferent, which are consonant to the Word of God, and the judgment of all the ancient Fathers. Now this declaration (Mr. Calvin) seems to agree exactly with those rules that you have given me.

I should contradict my self if I should de­ny it,Calvin and I believe there is enough said to satisfie all sober men, as to the use of that Ceremony. If they say as much for that o­ther Ceremony of Kneeling at the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, I see no reason to for­bear it.

To secure every Communicant of the Churches intention in enjoining that Ceremony, it is de­clared, Non-conf. Rubrick at the end of the Com­munion. that it was meant only for a significa­tion of our humble and grateful acknowledg­ment of the benefits of Christ, therein given to all worthy Receivers, and for avoiding of such profanation and disorder in the holy Communion, as might otherwise ensue; and lest the same kneeling should by any persons, either out of ig­norance and infirmity, or out of malice and ob­stinacy, be misconstrued and depraved, it is de­clared, that thereby no adoration is intended or ought to be done, either unto the sacramental Bread and Wine, there bodily received, or to [Page 74] any corporal presence of Christs natural flesh and blood: for the sacramental Bread and Wine re­main still in their natural substances, and there­fore may not be adored (for that were Idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful Christians) and the natural Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ are in heaven and not here, it being against the truth of Christs natural Body, to be at one time in more places than one.

Calvin.This discreet and moderate declaration of the Church is very satisfactory, and I wish you to advise your Ministers and Brethren, in my name, to read and consider them, which I fear they have not done as they ought. If any man compare these with my Writings, they will find no difference between them: for I have shewed that (that is,Instit. l. 4. c. 10. S. 28, 29. Decency) which is agreeable to the reverence of holy Mysteries, and is also apt to exercise us towards piety, or is at least an ornament agreeable to the action, and is not without fruit, but may mind the faithful with how much modesty, religion, and observance they ought to handle divine things (and such is that we pray on our Knees, bareheaded, that we administer the Sa­craments of our Lord not sordidly, but with a dignity.) And kneeling and uncovering the head in Prayer, are exercises whereby we en­deavour to arise to a greater veneration of God,Instit. l. 4. c. 10. S. 30 and I proved that kneeling in the time of solemn Prayer (and such is that of the Mi­nister when he delivers the Sacrament saying, The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was [Page 75] given for thee, Adoramus in Eucha­ristiâ non Eucharisti­am: nos crucem ne­que adora­mus ne{que} optamus. Min. Felix. preserve thy Body and Soul to everlasting life) is of Divine as well as Hu­mane constitution: it is Divine as it is a part of that decency, the care whereof is commend­ed to us by the Apostle; and Humane as it is especially directed to that end to which it was more generally intended. And how can any man doubt, that when I consented to the use of Wafer-Cakes, instead of the common Bread, which was formerly used, I should oppose this Ceremony of kneeling, that is not half so subject to exception or scandal; for as some may be offended at them who kneel, so others are offended at them that kneel not; as the Reformed Churches in Po­land, who look on them as Enemies to the Deity of Christ, who will not give him this reverence.Instit l. 4. c. 17. S. 37. And I pray observe what I ad­judged concerning the Papists worshipping the Host in the Mass: That if this were done in the Lords Supper, I should approve that a­doration to be lawful, which terminates not nor resides in the Sign, but is directed to Christ sitting in Heaven.

The Sacrament is the Lords testimony of his grace confirmed to us by the outward Sign,Calvine Instit. l. 4. c. 14 S. 1. with a mutual testification of our piety towards him,—Therefore it may be lawful to testifie that piety by the Ceremony of kneel­ing. There were two Ceremonies used in the Church at Prayer (viz.) standing, which was long practised by the Primitive Church, [Page 76] and kneeling. Sitting at the Sacrament was not used in any of the Reformed Churches, save in Scotland and some parts of Holland; the Gallo-Belgicks used standing, and the re­formed Churches of Poland were deservedly scandalized at some among them that con­tended for it; against whom they thus de­clare,Synodus Generalis Petrocovi­ensis. Art. 4. We permit that the godly do receive the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, standing or kneeling, but for as much as they among us were the first Authors of sit­ting at the Table of our Lord (contrary to the accustomed Rites in all the Evangelical Churches throughout Europe) who unadvi­sedly changing all things in the Church, and seeming to imitate Christ, but without know­ledge, were perfidious Apostates from us un­to Arrianism. We therefore leave this disho­nourable and irreligious Ceremony (which is also highly scandalous to the meaner sort) as proper to them. And another Synod thus de­clares,Synodus Vlodista­viensis. Can. 6. This Ceremony (of sitting) although it be free with the rest is not used in Chri­stian Churches, and Evangelical Congregati­ons, and peculiar only to the unbelieving Ar­rians, who place themselves in an equal rank with Christ. And they who make it (as many do) a Sacramental Sign, and so to be neces­sary to the due celebration of that Ordinance, (that it better expresseth the Mystery of Christs Supper than any other; that by it our rest from Legal Ceremonies is denoted, and that [Page 77] we are admitted as Co-heirs with Christ) are guilty of more gross Superstition, in impo­sing this one, than the Church of England is, in enjoined all those other Ceremonies which have been mentioned. And this I observe,Calvin. ad Hollandum p. 570. that they who in the first place deny, that God may be worshipped by external Rites, say in the next place, that he cannot be offend­ed, and so bring in all manner of confusion; whereas S. Cyprian says we must please God both in the Habit of the body, and the mea­sure of the voice. De oratione Domini.

Although there were no superstition in those Ceremonies, yet I heartily wish, Non-conf. that the late C [...]nvocation had condescended to the alteration of some few words and phrases in their Litur­gie, which were excepted against.

I would have you for your satisfaction,Calvin. to consider first, what the Church pleads in her own justification.

The Preface to the Common-Prayer speaks thus. In our review of the Common-Prayer, Non-conf. we have endeavoured to observe the like moderation as we find to have been used in the like case in former times; and therefore of the sundry al­terations proposed unto us, we have rejected all such as were either of dangerous consequence (as secretly striking at some established Doctrine, or laudable practice of the Church of England, or indeed of the whole Catholick Church of Christ) or else of no consequence at all, but utterly fri­volous and vain. But such alterations as were [Page 78] tendered to us (by what persons, under what pre­tences, or to what purpose soever so tendered) as seemed to us in any degree requisite or expe­dient, we have willingly and of our own ac­cord assented unto, not inforced so to do by any strength of argument, convincing us of the ne­cessity of making the said alterations, for we are fully perswaded in our judgments (and we here profess it to the world) that the Book as it stood before established by the Law, doth not contain in it any thing contrary to the Word of God, or to sound Doctrine, or which a godly man may not with a good conscience use and sub­mit unto, or which is not fairly defensible a­gainst any that shall oppose the same, if it shall be allowed such just and favourable construction as in common equity ought to be allowed to all humane Writings, especially such as are set forth by Authority, and even to the best Tran­slations of the Holy Scripture it self. Our ge­neral aim therefore in the undertaking, was not to [...]atifie this or that party in any their un­reasonable demands, but to do that which to our best understandings, we conceived might most tend to the preservation of peace and unity in the Church, the procuring of reverence, and exciting of piety and devotion in the Publick Worship of God, and the cutting off occasion from them that seek occasion of cavil or quarrel against the Liturgie of the Church. Calvin. Resp. ad Westpha­lum.

Now you shall see how well I agree with this Remonstrance, in an Historical passage [Page 79] concerning my own practice. In the Pub­lick Prayers of the French Church, were these words occasionally inserted (viz.) That the New Testament is far better than the Old; this expression a Friend of mine did not like, and supposed that the Scripture was on his side, because the Fathers under the Law and we are all saved by Christ, but he first pub­lished that the word (better) ought to be al­tered, for the word (same) or the whole sentence rendred thus, The Old and New Covenant were the same; but because he un­advisedly spread this his opinion, not acquaint­ing me with it, he was sharply censured and convicted of levity and inconstancy, and would have been more severely handled, but that upon his submission, I entreated the Se­nate in his behalf.

If your Friend was brought to such a submis­sion, Non conf. for publishing such a desire against that Common-Prayer Book, without first acquainting you with it, and having so plausible a pret [...]ce for his opinion, then surely such as contrary to the known Laws of the Land (and especially those who act therein contrary to their former Oaths and Subscriptions) do not only secretly defame the established Liturgie of the Church, as if it a­bounded with nonsense, contradictions, profane­ness, and magical charms (as I my self have been often told) but publish Libels and mali­cious Pamphlets, to beget and cherish a perfect hatred in the hearts of the people against it, [Page 80] do deserve, Gladium ultorem, ut supra. not only the Churches Anathema, which they have executed on themselves, but the Magistrates high displeasure, for a professed op­position to his Laws. And though I was of the Presbyterian perswasion, yet did I greatly won­der at the confidence of my Brethren, who in­stead of intreating the alteration of some few things in the Liturgie (which was all they pre­tended to desire) did print and publish, together with their Petition for peace (which they might have rather called a Conquest and Triumph, not only over the present Church, but against the whole English Reformation; and doubtless the acclamations of Rome would have been as loud as theirs, if it had succeeded) a new Liturgie to be, by the joint consent of the Bishops, present­ed to his Majesty for approbation. They pre­tended it only a reformation of the Liturgie, but would have their long Prayers inserted into it (though they had often complained that it was too long before) and then desired that it might be left to the Ministers choice, to use the one or the other, that is in plain English, to lay aside the Liturgie, and to admit of their new Directory in its place. And the many strict Laws that were still in for [...]e against any attempt upon the Common-Prayer Book, besides the scandal that by the admission of such a de­sign would have reflected on the whole Church and State, that had from time to time establish­ed it by Law, might have taught them more moderation and prudence, and I believe the [Page 81] less was granted them, because they demanded so much. Many suffered imprisonment for les­ser offences in that kind, by order of Parliament in Queen Elizabeth's days, and King James by Proclamation admonished all persons not to at­tempt any alteration in the pubick Form of Gods Service, for that (saith he) we will not give way for any to presume, that our own judgment having determined in a matter of this weight, shall be swayed to alteration by the frivolous suggestions of any light spirit; neither are we ignorant of the inconveniences that do arise in Government by admitting innovation in things once setled by mature deliberation. So that I know not what to say in excuse of my Brethren. But pardon me, Sir, if I trespass on your pati­ence, in the proposal of one question more; Whe­ther the observation of Holy-days, in memory of the Saints, do not give just cause of of­fence?

I would not have disputes raised about e­very Festival,Calvine Epist. 51. but such only as do not pro­mote edification (as those in the Papacy of the Conception and Assumption of the Vir­gin Mary, the one being grounded on a false Doctrine (viz.) that she was conceived with­out original sin, the other on a fabulous opi­nion) and do at the first appearance tend to superstition.Epist. 118. He calls Sundays Feriae. Upon my return to Geneva I found there were no Holy-days, but the Sun­days: those which were observed by you were taken away by the same popular Decree, [Page 82] wherewith I and Farel were banished, which was rather extorted tumultuously by the vio­lence [...] wicked men, than decreed by any lawf [...] [...], many of your City were much offended at it, and many reports were raised by malicious and ignorant persons, as if I had been the Author of their abrogation, but I can sacredly testifie of my felf, that this was done without my knowledge or desire, and I found out this expedient, that the Nativity of Christ should be observed after your man­ner, and on other Holy-days, extraordinary Supplications should be used, the Shops being shut in the Forenoon, and after Dinner every one should depart to his Calling and other Af­fairs; but there were refractory persons, who by a preposterous malice would differ from the received custom, and for as much as vari­ety in an established Church is not tolerable, and it was apt to breed a suspicion in Stran­gers, that the Citizens were not well agreed among themselves, I intreated the Senate to prevent this evil by some convenient reme­die. I gave them particular commendation for their moderation in their actings, yet in a short time I heard the unexpected News of the abroga [...]ion of those days (and I wish that N. had not behaved himself so ambiti­ously) which were not more to be observed in this whole Province. The restoring of these four days observed by you (the Nativi­ty, Circumcision, Ascention, and sending of [Page 83] the Holy Ghost) he contended against with so much wilfulness, against all the Ministers of the French Church, as if the dispute had been for the safety of the whole Church. You would have thought Pope Victor had been disputing against the Eastern Church about the observa­tion of Easter, yet when one asked him by what right the Circumcision should have more honour than the Passion of Christ, he had no­thing to reply. This I desire [...]ay be testified on my behalf, that if I could have had my desire I should never have determined that, which is now constituted, and so I declared elsewhere that many defects may be tolerated,Epist. 379. which we have not power to amend; and therefore I think it not fit, that any of my Brethren do so urge against these things as to forsake the Communion of the Church in which he lives, especially when the greater part of the Flock incline to the contrary opi­nion; for though that which is imposed up­on us may bring scandal, and draw on (ma­lam caudam) ill consequences, yet because of it self, it is not contrary to the Word of God, it may be yielded to,Read Epist. 128. if there be a fault in what was done at Geneva, it is very unjust to impute it to me, seeing others did it without my approbation. I shall tell you a Story for the conclusion of this Answer,Epist. 119. I had preach­ed once upon Christmas-day, and being wea­ried with that, and visiting some Souldiers, I returned home, and found there a Pedomon­tane [Page 84] who had fancied a great opinion of him­self, pretending that the Lord had appeared to him, and told him, that he must be Moses and I Aaron, he was so busie with me that I could not be permitted to eat one morsel of Bread, for he was commanded (he said) that being fasting he should relate his revelation to me fasting; at last I got time to eat a lit­tle, but he assaulted me again, until his Bre­thren (being told of his phrensie) repudia­ted him. This man was prompted by Satan to obscure the power of God, manifested in the redemption of that people, with frivolous Allegories to make a meer Fable of it.Epist. ad Hallerum. But there is no reason why men should be so exa­sperated at our use of liberty, more than we are offended with them in the use of theirs.

Non-conf. Some men do under strange Phrases and new Notions much delude the ordinary people, but I am perswaded, if the most sober Nonconfor­mists would behave themselves with that mo­deration and peaceableness, as I perceive by your discourse they ought to do, they might be great instruments of edifying the Church of God, for they have extraordinary gifts of Gods Spirit in preaching and praying.

Calvine Ad Pseu­do-Nicode­initas.What you mean by edifying I know not, but there were a sort of Preachers in my days, that had the word of edification perpetually in their mouths, and they did so please them­selves, that they thought the art of edifying was known to none beside themselves, but [Page 85] they did rather edifie their own Houses than the Church of God, and made Christ a Caterer to furnish their Kitchin:Calvin ad­vers. Ana­bapt: many such were among the Anabaptists, who used a strange and obscure speech, prating so about spiritual things that they could not be understood; all their talk was of the Spirit, but in such a language as would amaze some men at their first hearing.

And as for their pretences to the inspi­rations and impulses of the Spirit of God, which the people so believe, that they of­ten leave the plain truths and precepts of the Word to follow such pretenders, my judgment is, that

They who forsaking the Scriptures do imagine,Calvine Instit. l. 1. c. 9. per to­tum. I know not what way of com­munion with God, may be thought pos­sessed, not so much with errour as with madness. There are risen up a sort of brain-sick persons, that proudly pretend­ing the teaching of the Spirit, neglect to read them, and esteem them as a dead Letter; which neglect is very ridiculous, for they will all grant, that the ApostleS and Primitive Christians had the Spirit of Christ, and yet neglected not the Word. St. Paul that was rapt into the third Hea­vens did not cease to make proficiency in the Law and Prophets; and enjoineth Ti­mothy to attend to reading; if the Spirit which they boast of be the same, that [Page 86] Spirit was promised not to produce new and unheard of Revelations, or to coin new Doctrines, to seduce us from the Go­spel, but to imprint on our minds the Do­ctrine of the Gospel. But they say it is unworthy of the Holy Spirit, to whom all things are subject, to be in subjection to the Word. As if it were an ignominious thing, to be unchangeable, always constant to it self. Should the Spirit of God be reduced to any Humane or Angelical rule, this were to debase it, and bring it into servitude, but while it is compared and considered on­ly by it self, no injury is offered to it. And lest the Spirit of Satan should deceive us under this pretence, he hath given us his image in the Scriptures, by which we may know him; such as he did once disco­ver himself to be there, such he will ever remain. The Apostle makes the despising of the Word to be a means of quenching the Spirit. What say the Euthusiasts to this? who cannot but perceive, that the Word is the instrument by which the Spirit dispenseth his illumination to the faithful, who know no other Spirit than that which spake by the Apostles, by whose Oracles we are required constantly to attend to the hearing of the Word.

The same may be applyed to those that neglect the Lords Prayer, and other wholsom Forms consonant to the Word, [Page 87] to advance their own conceptions, under pretence of immediate inspirations of the Spirit. Now as to the abilities of your Ministers.

I shall not enquire into them,Epist. 397. they are best known to their Superiors, but I would have them to know, that this hath been the constant practice of the Church, which was decreed in the ancient Synods, that he that would not submit himself to the Laws of the Common Discipline, should be depri­ved of his Office: and let them not ask by what authority, seeing the holy Ghost hath pronounced concerning such, that the Church hath no custom of contending; they may therefore give them a farewel, that despise the Laws of common Society. Tell them that God is not the Author of Sedition but of Peace,Contra Do­nat. l. 2. c. 6. 1 Cor. 14.33. And remember me to them in this sentence of S. Augustine, When Schism is wilful, and maintained with obstinacy, neither Mur­ther nor Adultery is more hateful.

This sentence of yours will be more dread­ful to them than all the Bishops Excommuni­cations, Non-conf. which even in your opinion they may deserve. But I pray you to let me know on what Scripture this practice is grounded, and of what efficacy it is?

You may see both in these two Scriptures,Calvin [...] the one in the Old the other in the New Testament. Deut. 17.12. The man that [Page 88] will do presumptiously, and will not hear­ken unto the Priest that standeth to minister before the Lord thy God, or unto the Judge, even that man shall dye. And our Saviour hath put his Seal to the Churches censures, when he says, Matth. 18.18. Verily I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven. I advise you therefore to confider those dreadful Curses which your Mother the Church denoun­ceth to be the desert of rebellious Chil­dren, which you may find among her Ca­nons.Printed 1603.

The Canons say, that, Whosoever shall af­firm that the Church of England by Law established under the Kings Majesty, is not a true and Apostolical Church, teaching the Doctrine of the Apostles, let him be ex­communicated, ipso facto. Canon 3.

Canon 4.Whosoever shall affirm that the Form of Gods Worship in the Church of England, established by Law, and contained in the Book of Common-Prayer and Administra­tion of Sacraments, is a corrupt, supersti­tious, or unlawful Worship of God, or con­taineth any thing in it that is repugnant to the Scriptures, let him be excommunicate, ipso facto.

Canon 5.Whosoever shall affirm, that any of the Nine and Thirty Articles, agreed upon by the Archbishops of both Provinces, and the whole Clergy in the Convocation, An. 1562. [Page 89] for the avoiding of diversities of opinions, and for the establishing of consent touch­ing true Religion are in any part superstiti­ous or erroneous, or such as with a good conscience he may not subscribe unto, let him be excommunicated, ipso facto.

Whoever shall affirm that the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England, Canon 6. by Law established, are wicked, Antichristian, or superstitious, or such as being command­ed by lawful Authority, men who are zea­lously and godly affected may not with a good conscience approve them, use them, or as occasion requireth subscribe unto them, let him be excommunicated, ipso facto.

Whosoever shall separate themselves from the Communion of Saints,Canon 9. as it is approv­ed by the Apostles rules in the Church of England, and combine themselves in a new Brotherhood, accounting the Christians who are conformable to the Doctrine, Govern­ment, Rites, and Ceremonies of the Church of England to be profane, and unmeet for them to join with in Christian profession, let them be excommunicated, ipso facto. And the Law of God says, Deut. 27.16. Cursed be he that setteth light by his Father or Mo­ther.

And so say I.—Now that the Keys were given only to the Apostles,Calvin. so that none but their successors did use them, may appear by the Primitive practice.Calvin Instit. l. 4. c. 11. S. 6. S. Cyprian re­cording [Page 90] by whom this Discipline was ex­ercised, mentioneth the Bishop and his Clergy, that is, the Presbytery his Assessors. And S. Ambrose says that in his Age only the Clergy had cognizance of Ecclesiastical cau­ses.Plebs est testis & custos. And the effect of it was not for the perpetual ruine and despair of the Offen­der, but to condemn his wicked life and manners, and to admonish him, that un­less he repented he should perish. And lest any should contemn the judgment of the Church, God himself testifieth, that that sentence is nothing else but the declaration of his own Law, and that he will confirm in Heaven what they decree on Earth, and they cannot erre nor dissent from the Word of God, because they judge by no other rule but his Word.Epist. Gas­paro Lyse­ro. However I never thought it profitable to commit this power to single Pastors, for it is a thing that begets hatred, and there is no probable example of it,Epist. 370. and there is an easie lapse into tyran­ny. But the Church cannot be safe with­out it, he therefore that being admonished despiseth the moderate use of it, betrayeth himself to be none of Christs Flock.

And this Discipline was severely practi­sed in the Jewish Church under the Law, by Gods own command, Deut. 17.12. The man that will do presumptuously and will not hearken unto the Priest that standeth there to minister unto the Lord thy God, or unto the [Page 91] Judge, even that man shall dye. (Ainsworth says it is to be understood especially of the rebellious Elder, that doth this presump­tuous act, or teacheth others to do it.)

I am convinced by your Arguments, Non-conf. Reve­rend Sir, how great a hazard I do run, if I should dye before my reconciliation to the Church of England, and therefore I do in the first place, heartily bless God for this seasona­ble information, and I resolve speedily by his grace, to unite my self unto her Communion, begging pardon from God and his Church, for all my inordinate behaviour, and shall con­stantly pray God to assist me for the future, with the spirit of humiliation and obedience, of peace and moderation, of charity and Chri­stian resolution. I learned long since not to deliberate in that which appears to be my du­ty. Tully de Officiis. l. 3. Qui deliberant utrum id sequantur quod honestum esse videant, aut se scientes, scelere contaminant, in illorum dubitatione inest facinus.Dr. Rai­nolds desi­red absolu­tion on his death-bed, and had it from Dr. Holland. I have before my eyes the example of pious Bishop Hooper, who did not only de­spise the shame of being a Conformist (which he had long refused) but the torture also of a glorious Martyrdom. Non aliter cineres mando jacere meos. If my Brethren have intangled themselves in Nets of their own making, let them look to that, I hope many will conform by my example; however, libe­ravi animam meam.

Calvin Epist. ad N.N.If these Arguments do not satisfie my Brethren, who being carried on with zeal, are too much addicted to their own opi­nions, I beseech them, for the Lords sake, that they would consider again and again, into what danger they bring the Church, (you have a toleration for the present) and when it shall be noted, how refra­ctory you are in many things, will not your rigidness beget in those good and pious Senators, who have granted you this Indulgence, a certain disdain and alie [...]a­tion of affection.Epist. 121. I beseech them also to consider my advice to the Duke of Somer­set, that it cannot be otherwise, but the Papists will grow more insolently proud, unless the differences about Ceremonies be speedily composed. And as I have often commended the judgment of S. Augustine, concerning the observing of the Rites and Ceremonies of divers Churches, so I shall now commend it again, and con­clude with it.

Epist. ad Januar.Those things which we observe be­ing not written, but delivered by Tra­dition, which are observed in the whole World, may be understood to be com­mended and appointed to be retained either by the Apostles themselves, or by frequent Council, whose authority in the Church is most safe, as that the Passion, the Resurrection, the Ascention of our Lord, and [Page 93] the descent of the Holy Ghost from Hea­ven are celebrated by yearly commemo­ration, and whatever of the like nature occurreth, which is observed wherever the Church hath enlarged her self. But other things which are varied through­out the parts and regions of the World, as that some fast on the Sabbath, and others do not. Some receive the body and blood of Christ daily, others only upon certain days, &c. All things of this kind have free observation. Nor is there any Discipline in these things more commendable to a grave and pru­dent Christian, than that he behave him­self conformably to the Church unto which he shall come; for whatever is enjoin­ed neither contrary to the Faith nor good Manners is to be accounted indif­ferent, and for the sake of Communion with them among whom we live, ought to be observed. I believe you have some­time heard me relate what I now repeat, That my Mother following me to Mil­lain, found a Church which observed not the Sabbath-Fast; she began to doubt and be troubled what she should do; I valued not such things, but for her sake I consulted in this matter with that man of blessed memory, Ambrose, who answered, that he could instruct me in [Page 94] nothing but his own practice: for if he had known any thing better, he would have practised that: And when as I thought he would only have admo­nished us by his Authority, without giving reason that we should not fast on the Sabbath, he thus informs me: When I am at Rome I fast on the Sabbath; when I am here I fast not: do you so. To what­ever Church you shall chance to come, observe the Customs of it, if you will not give an occasion of scandal to any, nor that any scandalize you. When I de­clared this advice to my Mother, she readily embraced it. And often ponder­ing this saying, I still esteemed it as if it had been received by an Oracle from Heaven; for I often observed with grief and sorrow, that many perturbations were created to the infirm, by the con­tentious obstinacy and superstitious fear of some Brethren, who in matters of this kind, which cannot certainly be deter­mined either by the authority of Holy Scripture, or by the Tradition of the Universal Church, nor are conducing to the amendment of life, only having en­tertained some Opinions of their own, or having so accustomed to do in their own Country, or because they suppose a Foreign Church more learned than their [Page 95] own, they become so litigious that no­thing will please them but what they do themselves.