"Rigors in the Point of Predeftination, and the "reft depending thereupon, were received as or"thodox; that they maintain a Parity of Mini

fters DIRECTLY CONTRARY BOTH TO THE "DOCTRINE AND GOVERNMENT of the Church "of England; and that Parens a Profeffor of Di"vinity in the Univerfity of Heydelburg (who "was not to be thought to have delivered his "own Sense only in that Point) ascribes a Power to inferior Magiftrates to curb the Power, con"troul the Perfons, and refift the Authority of "Sovereign Princes, for which his Comment on "the Romans had been publickly burnt by the

Appointment of King James. Which as it "plainly proves that the Religion of thofe Churches "IS NOT ALTOGETHER THE SAME with that of "ours, fo he conceived it very unfafe that his

Majefty fhould declare under the Great Seal of "England, that both himself and all his Subjects "were bound in Confcience to maintain the Religion "of thofe Churches with their uttermoft Power. And "as unto the other Point, he look'd upon it as a "great Controverfy, not only between fome Pro"teftant Divines and the Church of Rome, but << between the Proteftant Divines themselves, "hitherto not determined in any Council, nor "pofitively defined by the Church of England; "and therefore he conceived it as unsafe as the "other, that fuch a doubtful Controverfy as the "Pope's being Antichrist, fhould be determined

pofitively by Letters Patent under the Great "Seal of England, of which there was great Dif"ference even among the Learned, and not re" folved on in the Schools. With these Obje&ions against that Passage he acquaints his Majefty, who thereupon gave Order that the faid "Letters Patents fhould be cancelled, and new C ones be drawn, in which that Claufe fhould

be corrected or expunged; and that being "done, the faid Letters Patents to be new fealed, and the faid Collection to proceed accord"ing to the Archbishop's firft Defires and Propofition made in that Behalf." But it may perhaps be faid, that notwithstanding all thefe Declarations made by the Calvinists in the Behalf of the Purity of Minifters, yet there is an Imparity amongst them, for they have their Superintendents, which is but another Name for Bishops, as appears from the French Confeffion, (b) where they fay, We believe that it is expedient that they who be chofen SUPERINTENDENTS in the Church, fhould wifely confult among themfelves by what means the whole Body may conveniently be ruled. By which it appears that thefe Superintendents are Perfons bearing a chief Rule in their pretended Churches, fo that one would be very ready to take them for fome-. thing more than their ordinary Paftors, and yet in Truth they mean no other, as they have themfelves taken care to inform us in their National Synod of Gap; (c) where they fay, the Word Superintendent in the Two and Thirtieth Article, is not to be understood of ANY SUPERIORITY OF ONE PASTOR ABOVE ANOTHER, but only in general of fuch as have Office and Charge in the Church, that is, either Paftor, Elder, or Deacon. So that the Word, in their Senfe of it, is fo far from fignifying fomething more than a common Paftor, that it is only used by them as a common Denomination for all that they call Church Officers. And fo tender are they of their beloved Parity, that they take it as an high Affront for any of our Divines to write against it. Thus because Dr. Sutcliffe Dean of Exeter, and Adrian Saravia then a Pre

(b) Art. 32.

(c) Quick's Synod. p. 227.

bendary

bendary of Canterbury, wrote fome learned Tracts in Defense of Epifcopacy, and took occafion to fhew that Parity of Minifters was no Inftitution of Christ, they thought proper not to order an Anfwer to be written against what they had advanced, which no Body would have blamed them for, if they could have done it, but to remonftrate against them to their Sovereign, and (d) in their National Synod at Montpelier 1598 they ordered, that Letters fhall be written to my Lord the Ambaffador of England, and to Monfieur de la Fountaine, Minifter of the French Church in London, to inform them of thofe injurious Writings published against our Churches by Sutcliffe and Saravia, and they be defired to apply themselves to the Queen, that fuch Writings may not be printed. Thus could they publifh Articles in their Confeffion of Faith directly oppofite to the Doctrine and Government of the Church of England, and confirm them in every National Synod; and fuppofe that the Church of England was obliged to take no Notice of it. And when our Divines faw it neceffary to vindicate our own Doctrine and Government against their novel Articles of Faith, which they could not well do without fome Reflections on thofe Articles which were fo contrary to it, they had the Modesty to think that our Sovereign, and the Defender of our Faith, was obliged to fupport theirs in Oppofition to it: And to fupprefs thofe Books which were written in Defense of our own Church, because they were not agreeable to the frange Conceits (as Bifhop Carleton calls them) which were put into their Confeffion. But it does not appear that our Queen took any Notice of their Remonftrance. However, they were fuffi

(d) Quick's Synod, p. 203.

ciently

ciently revenged of the Church of England, for all that Sutcliffe, or Saravia, or any elfe of that Communion, had written against them, by taking care to spread their Calvinistical Notions in this Land to fuch a degree as to raife a Party amongst our felves, which at once overturned both Church and State. And yet fome Men amongst us are ftill fo modeft as to think the Church of England ought to lay afide the Doarine of the Divine Right of Epifcopacy, and the Neceffity of an Epifcopal Commiffion for the valid Adminiftration of the Sacraments, purely to gratify this Party, and the Foreign Reformed, from whom this Party borrowed their Notions, and by whom they have been from time to time fupported and abetted. And those who refufe to part with thefe Divine Truths (as I truft I have proved them to be) are by thefe Men accounted uncharitable. But furely Charity can never oblige us to part with Divine Truths, and embrace the contrary Errors: And it is certainly much more charitable to fhew Men their Errors, when we see Men embrace fuch as are dangerous, as this certainly is, than to footh them in that Error, and make them believe that they are right, when we fo certainly know and fee that they are wrong. But it is faid, that at this rate we unchurch all the Foreign Reformed Churches. But we anfwer, that we neither do, nor can unchurch them? Yet if they have unchurched themselves, by fhutting themselves out of the Corporation erected by Christ, under the Government of his Apoftles, and the Bishops their Succeffors, and erecting a new Corporation according to their own Fancies under the Government of an upftart Set of Paftors or Minifters, who had no original Authority derived to them by a fucceffive Ordination from the Apostles, but affumed and ufurped this Authority

thority upon an inward enthusiastical Vocation, we cannot but think it the highest Charity to en→ deavour to make them fenfible of this fatal Ertor, which may be of fuch dangerous Confequence to them. And tho' according to the Example of Archbishop Laud before mentioned, we are and fhall always be ready to help and relieve them in any Diftrefs, yet we cannot think them of the fame Religion with our felves, nor hold a religi ous Communion, with them. Neither can we excufe their want of Bishops upon the Plea of Neceffity, when we fee that they make it an Article of Faith, that the Church ought to have no Bishops, that is, no Minifters or Paftors, of which one is fuperior to another. Tho' even the Plea of Neceffity would not excufe them in the pretended Miniftry of the Sacraments. For if they could have none with an Epifcopal Commiffion to minifter them, they ought to bear the want of the Sacraments with Patience, till God fhould vouchfafe to fend them Bishops or Epifcopal Priefts with Authority to minifter them. And God did vouchsafe to fend both the Lutherans and Calvinifts fuch Bishops and Epifcopal Presbyters, as I have already fhewed: But they neither of them had any Regard to the Epifcopal Commiffion, but the Lutheran Presbyters took upon them, in direc Oppofition to Scripture and Antiquity, to ordain others, whom they also called Paftors or Presbyters: And the Calvinifts, without any manner of Regard to a Succeffion either of Bihops or Presbyters, fet up a new Order of Men, whom they called Paftors or Minifters, not deriving their Authority from any that went before them, but taking it up of their own Heads by an inward enthufiaftical Motion, which they called an extraordinary Vocation. But fuch an extraordinary

Vocation