1 of Caufes, with pitiful Sophifms, a Multitude of Words, and a Wilderness of Impertinencies, he must write much to no Purpose, because he can fay but little to the Purpose. Our Caufe (Thanks to God) needs no fuch bafe Methods, nor would I take it in Hand, tho' I were fure never to be discovered. I could find no greater Enemies than my own Friends, and thofe of my own Communion, if they found any fuch thing as this bafe Calumniator charges me with For the Truth of the Premifes I could declare upon my Sacrament, if I were stepping prefently into another World, as I know not how foon. I with Mr. Jameson and his Fellow Apologifts a more GofpelSpirit, which I am fure, God will never grant, fo long as they are Slaves to fuch a Party, and are violent for fuch a Caufe as would crucify Chrift again, if He protested against their Solemn League and Covenant, which is as contrary to a Gofpel-Spirit as Turcifm is to Chriftianity. I find Mr. Jamefon, in his Preface to Mr. Davidson's Catechifm, very preffing to renew their Covenants, but not a Word of bringing in the reading of the Scriptures, or the Ufe of ancient Creeds into the publick Worthip. Yea the Kirk will overlook the blafphemous Scribblers against the Lord's Prayer, calling it A Lifeleß, loathfome, faplef Worship, and an Engine from Hell to overturn the Gospel: As the Author of the Cafuiftical Effay does. But that Idol of a bloody Covenant mult be brought in: What! Muft we be for War at Home, fince the Peace is concluded Abroad? And can there be a more effectual Courfe fallen on to breed Wars in Britain, than that curfed and bloody Covenant, which, in former Times, overturned the Apoftolical Succeffion, and the Royal Family? Ought not fuch Incendiaries and Fire-Brands be taken notice of? For can any Government be in Peace, when fuch bloody Projects are set on Foot? I foresee, that, among many Cenfures I may meet with, this will be one, that I fhew more Favour for Papifts than for Proteftants. It is indeed the Method of pitiful Scribblers and falfe Teachers, to call every Thing Popery, that is not Presbyterian; tho' indeed they have the worft Things that fome Papifts have, but nothing of their beft. It is by fuch Means,they have banished Sense and Reafon out of the Church. I wish when any writes against Papifts or any other Party,they may do it with Truth and Senfe, by ftating the Controverfy fairly, and in plain Language, not with bombaft Vocables, as Mr. Jamefon ufes; fuch as Syncretizing and Papaturients; or by taking the Opinion of a private Doctor for the Doctrine of the Council of Trent, as Mr. Jamefon does, taking Catharinus his Notion of Original Sin for the Doctrine of the Church of Rome, for which the learn'd Foreigners have expofed his Roma Raccoviana. Such Methods as these are very far from doing Service to the Proteftant Intereft. THE Edinburgh, December 17. 1712. Num. XXX. THE Nail truck to the Head : OR An Indictment drawn up against Mr. John Anderfon, the Presbyterian Incumbent at Dumbarton, before all the Colleges in Britain, and Ireland, or any other Inferior Library-Courts, in City, or Country, and that before PerJons of Knowledge, Confcience, and Candour, of what foever Principle or Party they are, by Mr. Robert Calder Minifter of the Gospel; who is acting and fuffering for the Book of Common Prayer in Scotland. I Fa Man err through Weakness or Mifinformation, it is pardonable; but if he err through Wilfulnefs and Design, it is a Wickedness before God and Man. Men are ordinarly very warrie, that they be not deceived in their Coyns, Corn, or Cattle, in Matters of Traffique. The Deceived is to be pitied, but the wilful Deceiver is punishable in the Courts of Heaven and Earth. And this Crime I lay to Mr. John Anderson's Charge; and if I do not make it good, let the Laws of the Nation, and the Universities chaftife me as they think fit. But if I do, I think, befides leaving off further Scolding and Scribling, his Credit fhould die in Infamy, for impofing notorious Untruths upon Men under the broad Eye of the World; as afferting, That the Church of England maintains any part of the TrentCreed; That it damns all Children dying without Baptifm; That it makes Marriage a Sacrament; That the Book of Common Prayer is Popery. I pafs over his confident Affirmations, as, That the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, was more frequently given the Twelve laft Years bypaft, in woft Paroches in the Kingdom, than in all the Twenty eight Years during the time of Epifcopacy. I know not what the Weft may fay; but I am fure, moft Paroches in East, South, and North, will give him the Lye. I pafs by the uncivil Reflexions he uses against the Bishops, and Doctors of the Church of England; as calling Bishop Sanderfon, Half-mad; Dr. Sacheverel, Monftrum nulla virtute redemptum; Dr. South, A Man more fit for a Bedlam than for a Pulpit. I omit the Character he gives the Scots Clergy; as, That they never fo much as peep'd into the Fathers, nor Councils, nor know the Age wherein they liv'd, nor the Language they wrote in ; or that fecond hand Shreds from the Rag-Market, is all the Furniture we are to expect from Scots Liturgick Curates; and his confident boafting of Learning, and defpifing the Epifcopal Clergy as if he had the Vatican in his Head; or as if he were a living Library himself. I pafs over the general Scandals and Slanders upon our Clergy, and particularly upon my felf, as being more proper to come before a Commiffary or Criminal Court than before an Univerfity. I pafs over his Libelling the Church of England for Omitting the Reading of many Dark and Mysterious Places in Scriptures, fome Chapters confifting of Hebrew Names, Genealogies, and Chronologies, not fo edifying for a vulgar Auditory, as the plain Ecclefiaftical Books of the Old Teftament, called the Apocrypha. I refer to the Phyficians of Soul and Body, whether or not the Author of Ecclefiafticus contradicts himself Chap. 28 15. when he faith, He that finneth against his Maker, let him fall into the Hand of the Phyfician. He extolling the Phyfician in the preceeding 14 ver. and in the 5 ver. defcribes him, as M. A-- faith, as a plague of God: And examine whether the Son of Sirach means the Patient, whofe lewd Life brings him into the Hand of the Phyfician, and not the Phyfician himfelf who is an Inftrument in God's Hand for his Recovery. I refer to my former Numbers, Whether or not M. A-- has vindicated himself from the Scandal of Impudence, in objecting the Omiffions of fome Chapters in the Bible; whereas they read no Scripture at all, except an immediate Expofition follow thereupon, which was the Errour that Mr. Robert Bailie objected against the Independents, in the former Days of Presbytry. I refer it also to the Readers of both our Answers, Whether or not those that cry out against the Liturgifts, prefer their own Words to the Word of God; as I told in my Answer to the Dialogue Pag. 17. preferring their own Preachings, to the Reading of the Scriptures; witness the Anfwer to that Question in both Catechisms. How is the Word made effectual to Salvation? The Answer is, The Spirit of God maketh the Reading,but especially the Preaching of the Word,an effectual mean of Convincing and Converting Sinners, and building them up in Holiness and Comfort through Faith unto Salvation. Obferve these Words, especially the Preaching. I refer it alfo to the Judicatories to which I Appeal, whether or not in Mr. A--'s Examination of Mr. C--'s Anfwer to the Dialogue betwixt the Curate & the Country man, this be a found and folid Opinion of Mr. Anderson's, That 17 Chap. of the 2 Chron. is alone more edifying than the half of the Apocrypha, but Horace more edifying than the whole. For fo the Words will bear when he oppofes it to the half, fo that Horace muft be better or twice as good as the 17 Chap. of the 2 Chronicles. I pitch upon, and fhall prove three wilful notorious Untruths in Mr. A--'s Examination of my Answer to his Dialogue. First, p. 23. he fays, That I am guilty of a palpable Misrepresentation of the Author of the Cafuiftical Effay on the Lord's Prayer, but leaves me to be chaftifed by the Author. Let the Judges determine, whether or not I have mifreprefented that Author, when I repeated his very Words in my Anfwerp. 11. where I told, That the Author in his Cafuiftical Effay fays, p. 318. That the frequent faying of the Lord's Prayer is a lifeless, fapless, and loathsome Worship. And p. 321. That the concluding with thefe Words, rather than at any other time, is an Engine of Hell, not only far contrary to the Divine Prefcript, but likewife fubverfive of the Gospel of Chrift, Yea he tells, That he doubts not of the Concurrence of thofe that are exercifed in Godliness to fay with him. Wherein then have I mifreprefented the Author, when I repeated his very Word? Again Mr. A-- in his Examination of the Answer p. 34. fays, When he in his Dalogue objected a Contradiction in the Old and New Verfion of the Pfalms; particularly the 105 Pfal. 28. v. And they were not Obedient to his Word; In the Bible (2) Bible it runs thus, And they rebelled not against his word. And he tells the Reader, that all the Anfwer I gave was, I told that by Reading of Capellus, or Pool's Synopfis, which he has out of Mr. Fuller's Mifcellanies, he fhould find that that is preferable to the New Tranflation. For there the Pfalmift fpeaks of God's wonderful Works, against the Egyptians, and fuch (according to the new Verfion) rebelled nor against his Word, that is, Mofes, Aaron, and the Ifraelites: Or as Junius and Tremellius have it, his Signs rebelled not against hrs Word. And that in the Liturgy is agreeable to the greatest Number of Latin Copies in S. Auguftin's time, and to the Septuagint, expreffing it thus, And they were not Word, (meaning the Egyptians) continuing rebellious against the Miracles, and Signs of God: and that is reconcilable to the obedient to his Hebrew Text, if the Word (NOT) be admitted to include an interrogation, as the fame word doth. Exod. 8. 26. And did they not rebel against his Word? This and Fourteen Lines more I gave in Anfwer to that common Objection; and yet he fays. That all 1 Anfwer, is, That the Old Tranflation is preferable to the New. I fhall only add another Inftance, which I have partly done already, when in my Anfwer p. 30. Feite fo many Authorities from the Ancients, and ingenuously cite my fecond Hand Authors, to wit, Dr. Resbury in the Collection of the Cafes, &c. and Dr. Ellis Du Pin, What is Mr. A--'s reply to this, p. 43? Why all this waste of your Learning in Antiquity, especially when like the poor Man's Ax, alace! it was Borrowed; which Reflection Mr. -- has out of Thomas Fuller B. D. in his Triple Reconciler, Second Reconciler. p. 94. Mr. A-- adds, and I can tell you Page and Leaf where. Here I offer good Security to Mr. 4- for Twenty Guineas if he can give any other Author, but what I have cited; and then that Author he produces muft cite the Authors which I named, or elfe he fays nothing: He is oblig'd to take other Twenty, as furely he may Fourty (if he be fure that he has Printed nothing but Truth;) which if he refufe to do, I leave it to all ingenuous. Men to Determine what Credit may be given to his Word, or Write in any thing he has hitherto Printed. Mr. A-- in his Dialogue having charged the Church of England with Popery; Mr. Calder asked what was Popery in it? Did it own the Pope's Supremacy, which is truly and properly Popery? Or had it any Tincture of the TrentCreed in it? Mr. Anderson replied, Ifit had nothing of the Trent-Creed in it, it was a very ill Book, for the TrentCreed begins thus, I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of Heaven and Earth, and of all things Visible and Invifible. Now let the World judge, how this came to be a part of the Trent-Creed, which is truly the Nicen-Creed, as it was inlarged by the Council of Conftantinople, particularly in that Article of the Holy Ghoft, whom the Heretick Macedonius, afferted to be but a meer Creature and Servant of God; as the Arians affirm'd of the Second Perfon of the Trinity: And the Book of Common Prayer has that Creed as it came from these two Councils, but not at all as it came from the Council of Trent, which added Twelve Articles of their Unwritten Traditions to it, for which the Papifts call the Twenty four Articles the Trent-Creed. But when the firft Twelve Articles ftand by them felves, they can in no Propriety of Speech be called the Trent-Creed ;fince it wants the Twelve Articles, which Pope Pius the IV. added to the Nicen-Creed. The Church of England protests against that which is called the Trent-Creed. And Learned Men think the Twenty four Articles improperly called the Trent-Creed, and good Reafon for it; because they are not both of a piece. For the firft Twelve Articles are Compofed from written Traditions; the other Tridentine Articles are compofed of unwritten Traditions. If a Man had a Table, whereof the one half is Gold, and the other half Brafs, it were improper to call that a Golden ora Brafen Table: But feparate them and make two Tables of them, then properly the one is called a Golden; and the other, a Brazen-Table. M. A-- adds, That even in thofe Articles of the Tridentine Creed, the 15. is, I do alfo receive and admit the received and approved Rites of the faid Catholick Church in the Solemn Adminiftration of Sacraments; whereof he tells, the Cross in Baptifm, Kneeling at the Communion, and the Ring in Marriage, are three. See here what a Trick is put upon the Credulity of Men, efpecially fuch as are not acquainted with the Book of Common Prayer, If this be an Article of the Church of England's Faith; or if it be in any of the three Creeds, which the profeffes; or from the one End of the Common-prayer to the other; or in any of the XXXIX Articles of that Church: Mr. Anderson, by a refponfible Gentleman of my Acquaintance, fhall be holden for Fifty Guineas, for Ten of his Staking. And if he do not hold, I leave it to the ingenuous] World to judge, whether or not Mr. 4- be a good Man, who thus wilfully and defignedly imposes upon the Readers of his Book. Mr. A-- is pofitive, that this is the Third Article of the TrentCreed, properly fo called, and the Fifteenth, as it is in the Addition to the Twelve Nicen Articles; and makes a great Noife about it, as if it were worth the while; but feeing he contends fo hotly for it, I fay it is but the Fourth in the one, and the Sxteenth in the other; and fhall make it out before the Court I have appealed to. I Mr. A-- p. 8. will have the Church of England hold Marriage for a Sacrament, whether it will or not, and one reafon he gives is, Because the Church of England in her Catechism defines Marriage to be a visible Sign of an invisible Grace; And that there are only two Sacraments generally neceffary to Salvation. Now what fays the Church of England, but what all found Proteftants do in the like Cafe? For if men contend for the Word, Sacrament, which is not in Scripture ftile, and take it in a large Senfe, they'll not only acknowledge to the Papifts feven Sacraments, but if they will, Seventy Seven. See Mr. Menzies's Papifmus Lucifugus, paft in Letters betwixt him and Jefuit Dempfter, alias Rhind or Logan, his Tenth and last Letter. Mr. A in his Letter p. 6. affirms with a great deal of Confidence, That the Nicen-Creed is not in all the Book of Common Prayer, from the one end to the other. I do not understand his meaning by this: For if he means, that is but the Conftantinopolitan-Creed; then he nor any Man cannot deny, but that it is the Nicen-Creed. For wherever the Conftantinopolitan-Creed is, furely there is the Nicen; but it will not follow, wherever the Nicen is, that there is the Conftantinopolitan. The Creed, which we call the Apofiles, goes ftill under that Name, tho' AfterTimes added these Articles, or further Enlargments, The Defcent into Hell, the Communion of Saints, and the Life everlafting. If Mr. A-means, (as furely he does) That it is not called the Nicen-Creed, from the one end of the Book of Common Prayer to the other. I Anfwer, Firft, It is never there called the Conftantinopolitan-Creed. 2dly, The Doctors of the Church call it the Nicen, 3dly, The Eighth of the Articles of the Church of England calls it the Nicen. 4thly, It is called the Nicen-Creed in the Book of Common Prayer, particularly in the Martyrdom of King Charles I. and in the Restoration of King Charles II. The Church of England is not pofitive upon the proper Denomination of the three Creeds, that is to fay, That the Twelve Apoftles were the Compofers of the very Words in that Creed; but that what is comprehended therein was Apoftolick Doctrine: Or that which is called the Athanafian-Creed, was Compofed by Athanafius himself, but by fome who understood and were acquainted with Athanafiu's Anti-Arian Principles. And 'tis well known, that the Creed which was compofed in the Council of Nice was enlarged in the Council of Conftantinople; but commonly it goes under the Name of the Nicen-Creed, and it is as you would add another Piece of Silver to a Silver Plate, and fo make the Plate more large. But how in any Senfe it can be called the Trent-Creed, as it stands in the English-Service, I leave it to the Determination of the Judges of all Parties and Perfwafions. Mr. 4- p. 8. Falling into his Art of Divination, fays, It may be worth the while to enquire, What has led Mr. Calder,into thofe miftakes about the Nicen and Trent-Creed? The Matter, he fays, is plainly thus, When Proteftants difpute against the Papifts, they never meddle with the Twelve firft Articles of the Trent-Creed, because they are uncontroverted betwixt them, and he has fallen upon fome fuch Proteftant Books, where the Twelve laft Articles are fet down, and has from bence concluded there were no more in the Original Draught. Mr. Calder Mr. Calder offers to prove before a Library-Court, That he never had, nor faw any fuch Proteftant Author but what mention'd the Nicen-Creed before the Trent; and will produce Two Books which he had of his own. First, An Anonymous Minister of the Church of England, his necessary Obfervations upon a Book called, An Effay toward a Probofal for Catholick Communion, &c. Printed at London, 1705. Another is Dr. Fowler Lord Bishop of Glocefter in the Cafe of Symbolizing with Rome, Where he begins with an Article or Two of the Nicen-Creed, and stops with an ʊc. And with these Words, and fo on, till the end of the Nicen-Creed, and then he fully fets down the Twelve Tridentine-Articles, which he calls their own Stuff, all which (faith he) may be feen at the end of the Council of Trent. How could Mr. Calder be misled by fuch an Author, efpecially when he never wants the Council of Trent at Hand? I come now to the point of Hippolytus Bishop and Martyr, who Lived in the 220 Year of God, in the Age of Martyrdom and Miracles; and who faid, That the turning out the Reading of Scriptures, and Set-Forms of Prayer out of Churches was a fign of the Antichrift's prevailing in the Chriftian Church. And of this Hippolytus. Mr. A faid, That all the Church of England Writers rejected him with one Voice, as an ignorant, fabulous, and foollifh Fellow. Mr. Calder cited two eminent English Divines, which quoted that fame Sentence of Hippolytus with Approbation. First, Dr. Hammond in his Preface to the Annotations on the Palms p. 5. which he took out of Bibliotheca Patrum. 2dly, Dr. Comber, in his Preface to his Commentary on the Book of Common-Prayer, citing that Paffage out of S. Jerom upon Daniel, with Approbation. Now let the Library-Court of any Perfwafion or Party, judge, if Mr. 4- Answers p. 1o. of his Letter, be Honeft or Ingenuous. The firft Anfwer is, Does Dr. Hammond pronounce the Book to be genuine? Not he. He was not upon a Dispute with an Adverfary; and therefore did not concern himself to enquire, whether it was genuine or spurious. That is in plain English, that the eminently Pious and Learned Dr, Hammond, would fay, write, or do any thing, true or falfe, right or wrong, to maintain the Cause he defended. But let the Judicatories I Appeal to, determine, whether or not Dr. Hammond look'd upon Hippolytus to be genuine. Again, fays Mr. A-- p. 10. Does the Bibliotheca Patrum, at least from whom Hammond cites it, pronounce it to be genuine? No, fo far from it, that Joannes Picus the Publisher of it cautions the Reader against the Errors, and is plainly of the mind, that it was not the Bishop of Porta was the Author of it. To which I Anfwer, That befides the Unreasonablenefs of fo much as thinking, that the Learned Mirandula fhould be at the toil of Tranflating a spurious Book, and place it with the genuine Writings of other Fathers; yet how can Mr. A-- make that a Reason, that he look'd not upon the Book as genuine, becaufe he cautions the Reader against the Errours in it? Might not Picus do fo of Origen? Or might not any publish Tertullian, Auguffin, or any other Greek, or Latin Father their genuine Works, and yet caution the Reader against their Erroneous Opinions? S. Hippolytus has two Opinions which the Publisher mentions, to wit, That St. John never Died; and that the Antichrist was one that should appear in a Phantaftick Body, yet the Publisher looks upon the Work as genuine? And that Joannes Picus the Publisher, (as Mr. A-fays) is plainly of the mind, that the Bishop of Porta was not the Author of it, the juft contrary fhall be proven out of the Publisher's Preface, and the Margin tells that Hippolytus was a Grecian by Birth, and that he wrore in Greek, but was an Italian Bishop at Porta. This could not efcape Mr. A--'s Eyes, I refer to the Judicatory, whether or not he deferves to bear the Character of those who are faid to have Eyes and fee not; and to determine, how fuch a Man fhould be treated,that impofes fo wilfully upon his Reader, or whether or not he should be fufpected in all his other Writings as an impudent Impoftor? Again, p. 1o. Mr. A-- Queftions thus, "Did the Publisher of it certainly know, at least whether it was Originally Written in Greek or in Latin? Not he, Per me liceat duo fint Hippolyti, &c. For me let there be two Hippolytus's, "one who Wrote in Greek, and another who Wrote in Latin. I Answer, That the direct contrary is to be found; for in his Dedication to Charles Prince and Cardinal of Lorrain, he exprefly afferts, "That he was well informed, that S. Hippolytus Bishop and Martyr wrote a Treatife upon the End of the World, the Antichrift, and of the Second Coming of Chrift. It is Writen in Greek and to be had at "Venice, and particularly that he was thus informed by S. Jerom in his Catalogue of Ecclefiaftical Writers, that S. Hippolytus wrote a Treatife concerning the Antichrift. Now if he had written in Latin, why fhould Mirandula be at the pains to Tranflate it out of Greek? Befides Mirandula never afferted, that the Latin Hippolytus wrote any thing at all as Mr. A-- alledges. This alfo Mr. A-- might, but would not fee, nor tell the World, that he did fee it: And tho' Picus for his part,' fays, Let there be two Hippolytus's, the one a Latin, another a Grecian; yet he concludes that it was the Greek Hippolytus who wrote that Treatife of the Antichrift. Let this be Examined by all that have the Paris Edition of Bibliotheca Tatrum p. 343. Printed in the Year 1624. Again p. 1o, and 11. Mr. A-- propofes another Queftion thus. Mr. Calder's other Author, is Dr. Comber, whe (ays Calder) cites the fame Words from S. Jerom in his Preface to his Book on the Liturgy. Very well, Does Dr. Comber vouch the Book to be genuine? Not he. Does S. Jerom vouch the Book to be genuine? You may fee his judgment on Hippolytus prefixed to the Book of Bibliotheca Patrum, if you find any fuch thing there, your Eyes are better than mine. To this I Anfwer, Whether his Eyes be better than mine or not, I leave it to the Judges to determine; whether my Confcience be better than his, I leave it alfo to their Decifion. Mirandula looks on that Work of Hippolytus to be genuine, and thought that S. Jerom did fo too as will be made appear by Reading of Picus's Preface. Dr. Comber likewife cites that Sentence from S. Jerom in his Commentary upon Daniel, and that with Approbation. Again Mr. 4- p. 11. tells, That S. Jerom, gives a Catalogue of S. Hippolytus's Works,but not a Word of that Work De Confummatione Seculi, out of which that citation is taken, Mr. A-might fee twice in that Preface to S. Hippolytus's Work, Firft by Picus, that S. Jerom tells, that Hippolytus wrote De Antichrifto; and alfo in S. Jerom's own Words, S. Hippolytus wrote De Antichrifto whence that Sentence is taken p. 357. of Bibliotheca Patrum, 2d Tom. Paris Edition. Now De Antichrifto, De Confummatione Seculi is all one Treatife, and it is from that Treatife that the Sentence is taken. And now although S. Jerom was uncertain, where S. Hippolytus was Bifhop, in thefe Words, Nomen quippe urbis faire non potui, will that fay that he doubted of his Works? For though the Author of the Whole Duty of Man be not known,, fhall we therefore reject the Works as fpurious, because we cannot know either the Name nor the Place where he liv'd? Is it not then a fad matter that the World should be thus deluded with palpable Falfhoods, and fuck weak Reasonings? Mr. A--p. 11. In his Letter to a Friend, concludes thus, Admit the Citation were genuine, it makes nothing against us. It runs thus," Liturgy fhall be extinguifhed, the Singing of Pfalms fhall ceafe, and the Reciting of Scriptures fhall "not be heard. Now all this (fays Mr, A--) is nothing else but an enlargement upon our Saviour's Words, That Iniquity fhall "abound, and the Love of many fhall wax cold. This indeed is a very rare Expofition; yet I think it will make for the Liturgifts, & fo the meaning will be," When "Wickedness overflows like a Deluge, and Love and Charity is frozen and dead; then Schifm fhall deftroy the "Unity of the Church, and Set-Forms of Prayer and the publick Reading of the Scriptures fhall be turned out of "Doors. I have 1 I have many more things to fill up an Indictment against Mr. A-- but Lfhall conclude with an Opinion of his in p. 13. That he will not allow Mr. Calder the Name of a Minifter. Surely if Mr. Anderfon be a Minifter, by vertue of his having the Hands of a Presbytry laid upon him, Mr. Calder is much more fo,having the Hands of a Bifhop and Presbyters too, laid upon him. But Mr. Calder will not allow Mr. A-- to be lawfully Ordain'd, because they were not Presbyters that laid their Hands upon him; and albeit they were, yet fingle Presbyters were never allowed to Ordain without a Bishop. Mr. Calder will prove his Ordination from the firft Proteftant Arch-Bishops and Bishops in Britain; and then neither the Latin nor Greek Church can deny, but he can prove his Ordination upwards to the Days of the Apostles. But let Mr. A-- and his Adherents prove their Ordination from either John Calvin or John Knox, who had no more Power to confer Orders,than a Baptized Laick had Power by his Baptifm,to Baptize others: And if the Party cannot do this, far lefs can they prove their Succeffion from the Presbytry that laid their Hands on S. Timothy, fuppofe they had been fingle Presbyters; yet the Apostle S. Paul was prefent, who calls it the laying on of his Hands, 2 Tim. 1 Chap. 6. v. Many Chiefs in Scotland are Hundreds of Years older than Presbytry, but they cannot prove by their Charters their Antiquity as old as our Epifcopal Ordination. It was by this Rule that the Primitive Churches guarded themselves against Self-fenders, Self-comers, Upftarts and Intruders. See Tertullian in his Book of Prefcriptions against Hereticks 32 Chap. "Let them faith he declare the Original of their Churches, let them turn over or find out the Order of their Bishops, running down by "Succeflion from the beginning, that this firft Bishop of theirs had an Apoflle or Apoftolick Men, that never fepa"rated from the Apoftles for his Founder, and Predeceffor. For after this manner do Apoftolick Churches produce "their Accounts, as the Church of Smyrna had Polycarp placed there by S. John, and the Church of Rome, Clemens, "Ordained by S. Peter; even as other Churches can demonftrate, who were Ordained Bishops over them by thofe "of the Apoftolick Succeffion. Whether then fhall Mr. A-- go for the Foundation of his Miniftry? Not to the Body of the People; for that is Independency: Not to the Magiftrate; for that is Eraftianifm: Not to the Call of the Spirit; for that is Quaterim: Not to Apoftolick Succeffion; for that is Epifcopacy: And it is not in their Power fo to derive their Succeffion. Confeqnently all their Ministerial Acts are void and null; fo that an honeft Country-Man's Baptifm, or a Midwife's, is as good, yea better than theirs, if they be not Schifmaticks from the Church; for they pretend Neceffity, but the Presbyterians pretend Authority. Now the Ordination of Presbyters being proved by the Apoftolick Succeffion of Bishops, and they in Arch-Bishops, Primates, Metropolitanes and Patriarchs." For, as Calvin fays in his Epistle to the King of Poland, the Ancient "Church did appoint Patriarchs and Primates in every Province, that by this Bond of Concord,the Bishops might the "better be knit together. I fhall therefore prove my Ordination up to Arch-Bishop Cranmer, the firft Proteftant Arch-Bishop in Britain. Mr. Calder was Ordained by the Bishop of Fdinburgh, who was confecrated by Bifhop Sharp, who was at the King's Restoration Ordained first, Deacon; then, Presbyter; because the Bishops of England did not look upon his Presbyterian Ordination as valid, and then was confecrated Bishop. Now in the 1663 Year of God was Gilbert Shelden, Arch-Bishop of Canterbury; before him was William Juxon in 1660. In 1633 was William Laud. In 1610 was George Abbot. In 1604 was Richard Bancroft. In 1583 John Whitgift. In 1575 Edmund Grindal. In 1559 Matthew Parker. In 1555 Reginald Pool. In 1533 Thomas Cranmer. Hereafter I fhall give a Lift of all their Succeffion to the Apostles. Mr. Calder in all this Libel has not brought a railing Accufation against Mr. Anderfon, for all his reviling and Scoundrel Language againft him; but prays in the Words of an Angel of Light against an Angel of Darkness; The Lord rebuke thee. His Lyes, Slanders, and Calumnies, will do Mr. Calder as little Harm, as the Viper that leapt on S. Paul's Hand. ADVERTISEMENT, T Hefe are to give Notice to all Men of Candour and Knowledge, of any Party or Perfwasion who love the Truth,and hate impudent Lyers,and allow that all publick Impoftors,and impudent Cheats should be expofed as abominable Monsters to the World, and be chaftifed with all the juft Severities that fraudulent Villains deferve That Mr. Robert Calder, Minister of the Gospel, for the prefent at Edinburgh, bas Printed a Sheet of Paper against Mr. John Anderfon the Presbyterian Incumbent at Dumbarton, who makes it bis Bufinefs by Lying, Slandering and Reviling Pamphlets to Difcredit the Church of England, it's Clergy and Book of Common-Prayer; and alfo the Liturgick Clergy of Scotland; that the faid Mr. Calder demonftrates from the Pamphlets written by him and Mr. Anderfon, That the faid Mr. Anderfon is one of the grofleft Lyers that ever put Pen to Paper. And for the clear Probation thereof, Mr. Calder invites any who please in the City of Edinburgh, to bis Meeting-Houfe in Todrigg's Wynd, On Wednesday's and Frydays for three Weeks after the Date hereof, betwixt 11, and 12 in the Morning, and 2 and 3 in the Afternoon, that they may fee with their Eyes, and bear with their Ears Mr. Calder's Indictment against Mr. Anderfon, proven from the Books which are cited in the Libel which whenproven, is to be fent to all the Universities in the Three Kingdoms, from whence we are to expect the Cenfure that fuch a Deceiver deferves. • Mr. Calder alfo bath wagered Twenty Guineas against Mr. Anderfon's other Twenty, That be neither dare nor can make good a Point, which he confidently undertook to prove, and is mentioned in that Libel. Mr. Calder allo, in that Paper against Mr. Anderfon, who denies Mr. Calder to be a Minifter, offers to prove the Validity of his Ordination in a Catalogue up to the Apostles; and gives a De fiance to Mr. Anderson to prove his in a Lineal Succeffion of Presbytry from either John Knox in Scotland, or John Calvin in Geneve, who had no Power to confer Orders. |