like nature. In the same Book of Discipline, cap. 1. art. 47. "among other crimes for which a minister may be deposed, rejecting of the counsels of the consistory is one, and schism another, and rebellion against the discipline of the Church a third." It seems, if after admonition and suspension, they do not conform to the order of the Church, then they are to be deposed.

The Synod of Alez. 1620. Cap. 10. Art. 22. speaking of rebels against the discipline of the Church, says, "classes, consistories, and Synods shall inflict upon them the heaviest censure of excommunication."

The Synod of Montauban, 1594. Cap. 4. Art. 19. says, "ministers shall have no alteration in the forms of public prayers, and administration of the Sacraments, the whole having been prudently and piously ordained, and for the most part in plain and express terms of holy Scripture."

amount to.

Now compare these Canons together, and see what they Ministers must make no alteration in the forms of public prayers, &c. If they do, they are liable to be suspended; if after that, they persist obstinate, they are to be deemed rebels against the discipline of the Church, and to be proceeded against as such by deposition or excommunication.

They have other Canons which suspend men for transgressing their rules about preaching, one or two of which it will not be amiss here to mention. The Book of Discipline, cap. 1. art 12. gives these directions to preachers: "They shall never preach without having for foundation of their discourse, a text of Holy Scripture.-They shall forbear all needless enlargements, all superfluous heaping up of Scripture quotations, and vain recitals of various and different expositions. They shall very rarely alledge the writings of the fathers, nor at any time profane histories and authors; that so they may reserve unto the Scripture entirely, its own authority. Moreover they thall not handle any doctrine in a scholastic way of disputation, nor with a mixture of languages.-And that this Canon may be more carefully observed, consistories, classes, and Synods shall put to their helping hand." And what they mean by their

helping hand, is explained in the Synod of Gap, 1603. Cap. 3. Art. 4. which orders them to suspend all that observe not the foresaid rules. "All provincial Synods, classes, and consistories, are enjoined, as they would avoid the greatest censures, to have a strict eye over such who act contrary to the eleventh Article of the first chapter of our Discipline, and to suspend them from the ministry. And they also shall be liable to the same censure, who leaving the true and genuine sense of Scripture expounded by itself, do rather pitch upon the glosses of fathers, and school men, and launch out into allegories: larding their sermons with philosophical discourses, quoting the fathers, and bringing their books with them into the pulpit; and they also, who in time of Lent, or on such noted seasons, do chuse the self same texts with the Popish preachers."

Here it is plain, that all who transgress these rules about preaching are to be suspended; and then if they rebel against the discipline of the Church, or reject the counsels of the consistory, by that rule of the Synod of Alez and Book of Discipline, Chap. 1. Art. 47. they are to be deposed and censured with excommunication. I know not what Mr. Baxter would have thought or said of these Canons, or how far he would have complied with them, either in his own preaching, or censuring transgressors: but I am sure, after all his tragical outcries against the Canon of the Church of England, there is nothing in it, but what is fully justified by these rules of discipline in the reformed Church of France.

CHAP. X.

Of the 49th Canon, which forbids Ministers, who are not licensed Preachers, to expound the Scripture, &c. That the same Thing in effect, is done in the Church of France.

The words of this Canon are," No person whatsoever not examined and approved by the bishop of the diocese, or not

licensed for a sufficient or convenient preacher, shall take upon him to expound in his own cure or elsewhere, any Scripture or matter of doctrine, but shall only study to read plainly and aptly, without glossing or adding, the homilies already set forth, or hereafter to be published by lawful authority, for the confirmation of the true faith, and for the good instruction and edification of the people.".

Mr. Baxter is very angry with this Canon, and after his usual manner, says, "It binds us to sacrilege, perfidiousness, and uncharitable inhumanity. 1. Men are at once made Christ's ministers and forbid to exercise that which they are ordained to. 2. We are laid under the heinous guilt of breaking our vow, when they have engaged us to make it; and of betraying men's souls, by omitting a vowed duty. 3. We are forbidden that which is the duty of every lay-christian that is able, as if they would suppress religion and charity itself.

prac

This is all the charity Mr. Baxter had for the religion of the English Churchmen! I will first shew what was the tice of the French Church in this matter, and then examine his reasons against the English Canon.

As to the case of the French Church, I observe that they lay under the same unfortunate necessity for many years after the reformation, that the English Church did; that is, that in many parts of the kingdom they could not have their churches supplied by fit and able preachers, who could compose sermons of their own for the use of the people; but for want of such, they were forced to appoint Calvin's homilies upon Job to be read publicly in the churches. And Beza says this was done with very great benefit to such churches as could not be better supplied. Beza Præf, in Calvin. Homil, in Job.

Ludovicus Capellus considers this matter particularly, and his resolution is this: "That postils, homilies, and such other set forms of preaching, are to be allowed as little in the use of the Church as may be; not because they are absolutely and simply unlawful, or wholly to be prohibited, but because they would be an occasion of sloth and idleness

and breed ignorance in pastors. Yet forasmuch as in all places, especially in country villages and hamlets, in so great a number and multitude of country churches, it would be no easy matter to procure so many learned and able ministers, that could of themselves continually make new sermons for the edification of the people, as their occasions and necessities should require, it is much better that they shonld read and preach to the people either dominical postils, or whole homilies composed by learned and pious men, by the public authority of the Church, rather than say nothing at all. To confirm this his opinion and judgment, he alledges the authority and dractice of the Church of England." This, says he, was heretofore done in England, when the reformation was first begun there; together with the Liturgy, a great volume of homilies was composed, which were read to the people on every Lord's day and holiday, by such pastors as could not make sermons of their own. And histories tell us, that the same thing was anciently done in France by Charles the Great, at whose command, his master Alcuin is said to have composed a set of homilies, which were read in order to the people on all Sundays and holidays, the year round. Andwho knows not, that in all the Eastern, Southern, and Northern parts of the world out of Europe, in Asia, and Africa, there are scarce any pastors among the Christians there at this day, that can preach to the people sermons of their own composing? And is it not better they should preach sermons of other men's composing than none at all? Thus far Capellus, in his disputation about Liturgies, part. 3. n. 9, 10. among the Theses Salmurienses, p. 659.

We see the case of the French and English Church was the same: it was not choice but necessity that led them both to take the best measures that they could; and the French writers are so far from condemning the English Church with Mr. Baxter, that they make use of her authority to justify their own Church's practice, in appointing homilies to be read to the people in such places, where the pastors had not sufficient ability and skill to preach sermons of their own com

posing. And I have shewn elsewhere,* that the Dutch Churches did the same, in appointing Bullinger's decads to be read instead of sermons, from the beginning of the reformation.

Let us now hear Mr. Baxter's arguments against our Church's Canon, and consider what they amount to. says, "Men are at once made Christ's ministers, and forbid1. He den to exercise that, which they are ordained to. But are any ordained to preach sermons of their own composing, whether they be able to compose them or no? Suppose ordination be a vow and dedication to the sacred office, as both he and we say it is: does the office consist altogether in preaching sermons of the minister's own making? What then becomes of all the Churches of the East, South, and North in Asia and Africa, where Capellus tells us the ministers are not able to preach sermons of their own, but only homilies, to the people? Are such ministers guilty of breach of Vow? Or is there no performance of the sacred office among them? Were all those French and Dutch Churches also without the sacred office of preaching, who had no other sermons but Calvin's homilies, or Bullinger's decads read to them? Why is not this preaching the word of God to the people, as well when these sermons are read out of a printed book, as when they were first spoken by Bullinger or Calvin, provided it be done by a public minister regularly appointed to perform Divine service? The contrary notion, which Mr. Baxter advances, is so absurd in itself, and so great a reproach to half the Christian world (Churches that Mr. Baxter upon other occasions expresses a great value for, and often appeals to them) that in compliment to them he might have dropped this argument, though he had no respect for the Church of England.

2. But he says, "This Canon lays us under the heinous guilt of breaking our vow, when the Church has engaged us to make it; and of betraying men's souls, by omitting a vowed duty." This will be best understood by considering

* See Book 2, chap. 11.

VOL VIII.

R