Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

reformation of the church. He is denominated from this letter a man of good intentions, but of little learning. M Coleman and his brethren, Messrs. Benson, Button, and Hallingham, are said to have been more ardently zealous in the cause of the reformation than any others; and it is observed, that they condemned the discipline of the church, the calling of the bishops, and the public liturgy, as savour ing too much of the church of Rome; that they would allow of nothing in the public worship of God, besides what was expressly laid down in the holy scriptures; and that though the queen had commanded them to be laid by the heels, it is incredible how the number of their followers increased in all parts of the kingdom.+

WILLIAM AXTON was a truly pious man, a steady nonconformist, and a learned divine. He was some years rector of Moreton Corbet in Shropshire; where Sir Robert Corbet, who was his great and worthy friend, protected him for some time from the severities of the prelates. Though under the wing of so excellent a patron, he found protec tion only for a season, and was brought into trouble for nonconformity. About the year 1570, he was cited before Dr. Bentham, bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, when he underwent several examinations for refusing the apparel, the cross in baptism, and kneeling at the sacrament. Upon his appearance, he debated these points with the bishop and his officers, with great freedom and courage. These examinations, now before me, though at considerable length, are here presented to the curious reader. Mr. Axton being brought before his ecclesiastical judges, the bishop thus addresed him:

Bishop. Though we allow you, Mr. Axton, to assign your reasons, you shall not be unanswered. Therefore set forth your reasons, and we will consider them.

Axton. If there be any odds in the disputation, it is on your side. For you are many, and I am but one, and have no equal judge or moderator; but I am content to set down my reasons, and leave them to God and your own con

* Strype's Annals, vol. i. p. 568-570.

+ Heylin's Hist. of Pres. p. 257, 258.

Mr. Neal, by mistake, says Leicestershire.-Hist. of Puritans, vol. i.

P. 228.

Sir Robert was a constant friend to the persecuted nonconformists, and often sheltered them from the tyrannical oppressions of the bishops.-MS. Chronology, vol. ii. p. 373. (14.)

sciences. As the priesthood of Christ or of Aaron, and even their very garments, were most honourable: so the priesthood of antichrist, and even the very garments, as the cope and surplice, is most detestable.

B. Then you will condemn as unlawful, whatsoever the papists used in their idolatrous service.

A. Some things have been abused by idolaters, and yet are necessary and profitable in the service of God. Other things they have abused, which are neither necessary nor profitable. The former are to be retained, and the latter to be refused. The surplice hath been used by the priests of antichrist, and hath no necessary nor profitable use in the service of God, any more than any other thing used in idolatrous worship; therefore the surplice ought not to be used. B. The surplice hath a necessary use.

A. If it have, you sin in omitting it at any time. In this you condemn the reformed churches abroad, for excluding a thing so necessary.

B. It is necessary, because the prince hath commanded it. A. Indeed, it is so necessarily commanded, that without the use of it, a minister must not preach, nor administer the sacraments, however great are his learning, his gifts, and his godliness. This is a most wicked necessity.

B. But it is comely in the church of God.

A. What comeliness is it for the minister of Christ, to wear the rags of antichrist? If this be comely, then the velvet and golden copes, for the same reason, are more comely. But this is not the comeliness of the gospel.

B. You are not a judge whether the surplice be comely. A. The apostle saith to all christians, Try the spirits, whether they be of God." Is it then unlawful for a christian, and a minister of Christ, to judge of a ceremony of man's invention? The reformed churches have judged the surplice to be uncomely for the ministers of Christ. Luther, Calvin, Beza, Peter Martyr, and many others, have disallowed the use of it. And most learned men now in England, who use the surplice, wish with all their hearts, it were taken away. Yea, I think this is your opinion also. Ridley said "it was more fit for a player on the stage, than for a minister of God in his church."

B. We will not allow that the surplice is the garment of antichrist.

A. That which was consecrated by antichrist, and constantly worn by the priests of antichrist, in their idolatrous service, was one of the garments of antichrist. But the

şurplice was consecrated by antichrist, and constantly worn by the priests of antichrist in their idolatrous service. Therefore, the surplice is a garment of antichrist.

B. But this surplice which we use, was never used by idolatrous priests.

A. Then you confess that their surplices may not be used by us. Yet in many churches in England, the massing surplices and copes have been used, and are still used; which, by your own confession, are accursed and abomin able. But when we speak of the surplice, we do not mean this or that surplice, but surplices in general.

Barker. How do you prove that?

A. When the king of Judah came to Damascus, and there saw a brazen altar, he sent the pattern of it to Jerusalem, commanding the high priest to make one like unto it, and set it up in the temple of God. This was as great a sin, as if he had set up the very same altar which he saw at Damascus; therefore, though we have not the very same surplice, we have one made like unto it, even as like that at Damascus as it can be made.

B. Then we will have it made shorter or longer than theirs, or wider or narrower.*

A. That is a poor shift. You know, that nearly all the surplices in England are like the papists' surplices.

B. I have a cup like the papists' calice, and is it unlawful for me to use it?

A. Your cup is not used in the service of God, nor is it convenient for that purpose. But supposing it were both .convenient and useful in the supper of the Lord, it cannot be compared with the surplice, which is neither convenient nor useful.

B. We have appointed the surplice for another end, than the papists did.

A. You cannot appoint it to any good end. According to what you now plead, you may bring into the church

The profound reasoning of the reverend prelate, reminds us of an anecdote we have met with concerning a pious minister, who, in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, was urged by his ordinary to wear the surplice; but who, in addition to other reasons, alleged, that the surplice offered him to put on, was the very same surplice as the mass-priest had used. The bishop admitted the excuse, and commanded another to be made; and when it was taken to the church, the minister took it up, and thus addressed the people present:-"Good people," said he, "the bishop himself confessed, that the former massing surplice was not to be worn by a minister of the gospel; but judge you if this be as like that, as one eye is like another? Let this, therefore, go after the other:" and so he cast it away.-Ames' Fresh Suit, part ii. p. 435,

of God, nearly all the trash of popery, their candles, their torches, their banners, their oil in baptism, and nearly all other things pertaining to antichrist.

B. Yes; and why not, if it please the prince, seeing they are things in their own nature indifferent.

A. I beseech you in the Lord, mind what you say. Shall we again bring tapers into the church of God, and oil into the sacrament of baptism?

B. Yes; and why not? Is not oil one of the sacraments in the church of God? Why do you speak so contemptuously of oil?

A. It is no contempt to exclude oil, milk, salt, or any such thing, from the sacrament. And why do you call oil a sacrament, secing it is neither a sacrament, nor any sign of a sacrament ?

B. Though it be no sacrament now, it was in the time of the apostles.

A. To speak properly, it never was a sacrament, the nature and use of which is to remember and seal unto us the mercies of God in Christ Jesus.

B. This is talk. You do not allege the scriptures.

A. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils; and ye cannot partake of the table of the Lord, and the table of devils. Meats, drinks, and apparel, are all of the same nature; therefore, being consecrated to idolatry, they are condemned. So it is said, "Ye shall also defile the covering of the graven images of silver, and the ornament of the molten image of gold: Thou shalt cast them away as a menstruous cloth; thou shalt say unto it, get thee hence. And whether ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God." But the surplice, and the wearing of it, is not for the glory of God, therefore not to

be worn.

B. The surplice is for the glory of God.

A. That which promotes the glory of the papists, does not promote the glory of God; but the wearing of the surplice promotes the glory and triumph of the papists, and, therefore, not to be worn.

B. I deny your argument.

A. It is a syllogism.

B. You are full of your syllogisms.

A. Our reason is the gift of God, and the right use of it is to find out the truth.

B. But a syllogism may be false. Let us proceed to your second argument.

A. I will allege one reason more. We ought to be without offence to the Jew, to the Gentile, and to the church of God. But our wearing the surplice is an offence to the Jew, and the Gentile, (meaning the papists) and the church of God. Therefore we ought not to wear the surplice.

B. How will you be an offence to the papists by wearing the surplice?

A. By offence, the apostle does not mean to grieve, but to be an occasion to another to sin. But if I wear the surplice, I shall be an occasion or encouragement to the papists to sin. Therefore I may not wear it.

B. How will you be an offence to the church of God? You perhaps may be to three or four; but you must regard the greater part.

A. I should be an offence to the greater part, and the lesser part, and all the church of God.

B. How do you prove that?

A. I should be an offence to the lesser part, being those who are effectually called, because their souls are exceedingly grieved with those who do wear it. And to the greater part, being such as are beginning to dislike popery, and follow true religion; who, by wearing it, would be ready to give up their zeal, and return to popery.

B. You must teach them to hate popery, though you wear the surplice.

A. If I teach them one thing, and I myself do the contrary, how will they believe me? You know most people look more at our doings, than our doctrine.-Hitherto I have given my reasons against wearing the surplice; if you have any reasons to shew why I should wear it, let me hear a few of the best.

Barker. That which doth not offend in its institution, matter, form, or use, is not to be refused. But the surplice doth not offend in its institution, matter, form, or use. Therefore it may not be refused.

A. Your reasoning is not good. You must first prove that the surplice has not been abused, and is not offensive, then will you conclude better.

Walton. If nothing may be used in the church, that has been abused to idolatry, then the pulpits, and even the churches, of the papists, may not be used.

A. This, in effect, hath been already answered. Prove that the surplice is as useful as the pulpit and the church, and you will do something.

« AnteriorContinuar »