Doctrine is so farr from it that the better sort of heathens would blush to own for brevity sake I shalâ— reâ—err you to the first and second part of the mistery of Jesuitisme the Jesuites morralls set out bâ— a Sorbon Doctor Mr. Fowles his History of the treasons and rebellions of these holy men the two former of these bookes assure us that by the Doctrine of probability and a good intention the fowlest Sins are at most but venial Dub. The Jesuites are but one party in the Church of Rome many oâ— their tenents and practises disclaiâ—â—d by other of the papists and therefore the whole Church is not chargeable with their errors Firm. Untill that Church doth expresly Condemn thâ—m and Execute Ecclesiasticall Censurâ—s upon such of her members as do broach those damnable Doctrines doth make them recâ—nt or excommunicate them she is chargeable with them Dub. I am of your opinion and do firmly believe the pâ—esent Câ—urch of Rome to be neither Holy nâ—â— Câ—tholiâ—k but an unsound member of that Church but what say you to the first â—oundeâ—s and â—athers of their Church were not tâ—ey vâ—ry 〈◊〉 men Firm. â— Bâ—llarmine could prove what he takes for granâ—ed that tâ—e Fathers and Founders oâ—â—heir Chuâ—ch as it now stands were the hoâ—y Patriarchs Prophets and Apostles I should agree with him in that note but the truth is they have no more right to call them their Fathers and Founders then the Scribes and â—harisees had to caâ—l Abraham their Father from whose faith they had so miserably declined the Fathers of the present Church of Rome as 't is now were the corrupt Councells which were so many pack'd Juryes and the popes of whose Sanctity you may consult Platina who was a Papist By what I have said I hope you are satisfied that you had no justifyable reasons to adhere to the Church of Rome as 't is now so much declined from the Primitive let me know how and why you did forsake it Dub. I am fully satisfied that the reasons which drew me over to that Church were false and fallacious and am now as much confirmed that the reasons which made me leave her Communion are solid and demonstrative 1. Which were her monstrous unnecessary imposible Doctrine of transubstantiation Firm. How do you prove that to be unnecessary Dub. The change of the bread and wine into the very body and blood of Christ is unnecessary because certain it is and they of the Church of Rome acknowledge it that there never was any such change in the Sacraments of â—he old Testament neithâ—r is there any in the other six of the New as the Papists are pleased to multiply them now if all other Sacraments without any such miraculous change do attain their ends for which they were instituted why should it be required in the holy Eucharist why not rather in that of baptism why should not the baptismall water be changed into Christs very blood this being the Sacrament of Regeneration that that of Nutrition surely as great a power and vertue is required to regenerate and make a Christian as to nourish and strengthen him Again the faithful both before and under the law did eate and drink the body and blood of Christ in a Spiritual manner before he had either body or blood They did eat the same Spiritual Meat and dranke the same Spiritual Drinke 1. Cor. 10.3 what need is there then of a Transubstantiation If we seriously peruse the sixt Chapt of St. Iohns Gospel we may learne that the body of Christ is eaten and his blood dranke in a Spiritual manner that when the Disciples murmured at what our Saviour had delivered in the former verses to satisfye them he replyes that the words which he spake were spirit and life Ver. 63. and not to be understood according to their gross conception I know some the Church of Rome affirm that in â—hat Chapter our blessed Saviour speaks not of a Sacramentall eating of the body of Christ but certainly is his body may be eaten and his blood drank without any such monstrous change by every true beleiver not Receiving why may not he eat the body and drink the blood of Christ without any substantiall change of the Bread and Wine when he receives besides â— most if not all of the ancient fathers who held a necessity of giveing the Eucharist to infants urge the 53. verse of this Chapter for their opinion and practise except yee Eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Bloud ye have no life in you Surely therefore they conceived that our Saviour meant by these words a Sacramentall eating how then dare any of the Clergy of the Church of Rome expound it otherwise seeing they take an oath never to expound Scripture but according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers see the forma juramenti professionis fidei Conc. Triden Sess. 24. Cap. 4. de Reformatione Firm. I very much approve your reason against the necessity of transubstantiation Let me here from you why you tearme it monstrous and impossible Dub. 'T is therefore monstrous and impossible because it implyes Contradictions and grosse absurdities 1. that a body is not a body an accident is not an accident for if there should be such a change the sâ—me numericall body of our Saviour must be in Heaven and Earth nay in ten thousand places at the same time â—it must be extended and not extended it must have dimensions and no dimensions finite and not finite which cannot be no not by Gods omnipotent and absolute power how do the schoolmens Noddles abound with nicetyes quidditys perseities Chimaeras to solve such incompossibilities 2. This strange Metamorphosis doth make accidents to be no accidents it takes away the very being of them for accidâ—ntis esse â—st inâ—sse the being of an accident is in-being here must be Colour sapor odor quantity without a Subject which is all one as if we should say a man might be a man without a reasonable Soule In a word I would willingly learne what does become of Christs Body and Bloud after 't is received into the mouth or if any prophane mouse should swallow part of it or lick up a drop of the bloud and thence into the stomach whether it be retransubstantiated into bread and wine or else be converted by the concoctive and nutritive faculty into the body of the Communicant as other nourishment is and then t will necessarily follow that Christs Body is essentially united unto and made one with the Body of every Communicant which borders very nere upon Bâ—asphemy for by this means Iames Nailer will ere long quod animus mâ—minisse horret be Jesus Christ. 3. This Transubstantiation if any such thing were possible is wrought by a miracle but was ever any miracle done by Christ and his Apostles which was not discernable by the sences when â—e cured the blind the dumb the lame when he turned water into wine was not this manifest
to the Sight the Smell the Tast shall we think that the God of truth Gave to mâ—n five Scences to deceive 4 of them by one pretended miracle or that 't is his method to informe the mind by Impostures if one or two or three Senses may be deceived why not all then what will become of Romes orall Tradition for may not the eare be deceived as well as the eye the nose the tast the touch here are 4 Sences to one against that tradition and then how are the papists certain of what they have received from the present Church or how is shee certaine of what shee received from the Church immediatly before her is not the doctrine of Transubstantiation which teaches men not to believe their eyes and other of their Sences a ready way to Atheism and infidelity for if four of the five Sences may be deceived then farewell all tradition and if these inferiour faculties may be thus bafled what satisfaction could it have been to St. Thomas that Christ was truly risen from the dead by putting his finger into the print of the nailes or his hand into his side But beside what sence and reason witness against this monstrous opinion the Scripture is clearely opposite unto it for Christ at the institution of this Sacrament did not take his own Body into his handâ— but Bread he brake not his owne Body but Bread he did not eat his own Body he did not drinke his owne Blood but he drank of the fruit of the Vine Mat. 26.29 for so he called it after Consecration and Distribution I will not drink henceforth of the fruit of the Vine c. in like manner St. Paul 'T is stil this bread and this cup. 1. Cor. 11.26 When our Saviour saies Hoc est corpus meum what doth hoc stand for either it must signify this thing in my hand i. e. the bread or else his own body which body he holding in his hand utters these words hoc est corpus meum that is corpus meum est corpus meum a mere Identical trifleing proposition which according to all Logick is most absurd and destroys the very nature of a Sacrament which consists of two essential parts the sign and the thing signified besides they of Rome conâ—ess that the Body of Christ is not present under the species of Bread and Wine when the Preist begins to pronounce hoc nor till he hath uttered the last sillable um hoc est corpus meum such poore shifts these men are forced to use As for antiquity so much boasted of by those of Rome I know that some of the fathers to draw mens minds from the earthly elements to heavenly misteries used now and then high Rhetoricall expressions never dreaming of any substantiall change of the elements into the Body and Bloud of Christ as is evident from Iraeneus Panis Communis post consecrationem non est amplius panis communis sed efficitur Eucharistia quae constat ex duabus naturis terrenâ caelâ—sti haec oblatio â—st figura corporis sanguinis Christi Ambrose 1. ad Cor. Cap. 11. lib. 4. de Sacram. Non dubitavit dominus dicere hoc est corpus meum cum dedit fignum sui corporis Aug Epist 23. ad Bonifa 12. Cap. contra Adiman Hoc est corpus meum i. e. typus corporis mei Terâ—ull Panem vinum Appellatione corporis sanguinis honoravit non naturam quidem mutans sed naturae gratiam adjiciens Theod. dial 1. 2. In a word the ancient fathers who opposed the Eutychian haeresy did make use of the sacramentall union of Bread and Wine to the body and blood of Christ shewing that the humane nature of Christ is not more changed into the divine then the Sacramentall Bread and Wine is into the very Body and Blood of Christ therefore they believed no such thing as that monstrous Popish transubstantiation So that we see the falsity and absurdity of it by Scripture antiquity common sence and reason besides the great danger of Idolatry in worshipping a piece of bread if there be no transubstantiation as some of the papists themselves confesse and they also acknowledge that if the Priest that consecrates were not rightly ordained or that he did not actually intend to consecrate or that he omitted any one Ceremony which they call necessary at the time of consecration that the Bread and Wine are not duely Consecrated and consequently no transubstantiation and therefore great probability that the Papists in worshipping the host do frequently comitt the very great Sin of Idolatry which was to me one great reason of forsaking their Communion Firm. Truely 't was a substantiall reason and such an one that has wrought upon others beside your selfe however I desire to hear from you what further reasons you had to leave the Church of Rome Dub. The next which I shall acquaint you with is the half Communion so manifestly against scripture and antiquity Our Blessed Saviour at the instituition of the Sacrament commands drinke yee all of this whereas at the giveing of the bread he said only take Eate foreseeing and obviating this grand error of the Church of Rome 't is true the persons then communicating were only his disciples which had received their Commissioâ— to preach the Gospell before that time but not in that ample and full manner as they received it after his Resurection as is plain from Iohn 20 22 23. and Mâ—t. 28 29. but be it granted that they were all in full orders and upon that account the Cup was given them otherwise they should not have received it by the same reason the bread might be denyed to the people because none but Priests did then Communicate but we know that a Priest when he doth not consecrate is in the place of a Lay-man and consequently the disciples not consecrating at the Supper were no better and therefore according to the doctrine and practise of the Church of Rome should not have received the Cup. But what will they thinke of the whole Church of Corinth to whom St. Paul sent a first and second Epistle they cannot imagine they were all Priests observe then how â—e â—xhorts all of them to examine themselves in order to the receiving of the holy Eucharist under both kinds 1. Cor 11. this is so eviâ—ent that our adveâ—saries have nothing to Reply As for Antiquity the practise of the Câ—urch of Rome is clearly against it as Iam able to demonstrate from express testimonies of the fathers but our learned writers have â—aved me that trouble those that please may peruse Chamiâ—re Châ—mnitius Iewell Cracanthorp The confeâ—sion of the Councell of Coâ—stance stands as a lasting Monument against the Popish innovation in this particular the words are these we decree in like manner that though in the Primitive Church the holy Eucharist was received under both kinds by the faithfull yet this Custome to avoid some dangers and scandals is reasonably
introduced that it should be received by the Preists only in both kinds by the people in one is not this with the Socinians to make the Sacraments mere indifferent Ceremonies alter able at the Churches pleasure But the Councell of Trent flyes higher if any man shall say that all faithfull Christians by Gods Command or for necessity of Salvation ought to Receive the Sacrament in both kinds let him be acursed I wonder whether Pope Gelasius sate in or was out of his infallible Chair when he roundly said we find that some do abstain from the Chalice of the Sacred Blood let them receive the entire Sacrament or be kept from the whole because the division of one and the same mystery cannot be without grand Sacriledge Either the Pope was not infallible or the present Church of Rome is most Sacrilegious Firm. You rightly Judge and were their fancy of Transubstantiation true as nothing is more false and ridiculous yet were it not sufficient to debar the Laity of the Cup because they receive the Blood of Christ with his Body for this is not to drinke but to eat it and besides the Sacrament is not a sign of his Blood in the veins but as 't was shed and powred out might not the Preists as well receive his Blood with his Body and then 't were as superfluous for them to drinâ—e of the Cup as for the people but I pray proceed in your reasons against Popery Dub. My third reason is taken from the invocation of Saints departed which is against Scripture and antiquity 't is an attribute belonging to God alone that â—he is a God hearing Prayers 'T is a chiefe part of his worship thou shalt Worship the Lord thy God and him oâ—ely shalt thou Serve it robs Christ of one part of his Preistly office who now sitts at Gods right hand interceding for us there is but one Mediator betwixt God and man the man Christ Iâ—sus certainly is holy men both before and under the law prayed to God alone through faith in the promised seed or Messias without invocateing any departed Saint because there was none then as they of the Church of Rome confess admitted to the beatifical vision and consequently could not know the need or praiers of men upon earth in the Glass of the Trinity there is less reason now to make our adresses to the spirits of just men made perfect Christ himselfe sitting at Gods right hand and Interceding for us Besides the worship of Angells is forbidden by St. Paul Col. 2. and the Angell in the Revelation twice sorbade St. Iohn to worship him Cap. 19. and 22 yea the worshippers of Angells were in the primitive times branded with the title of haereticks under the name of Angelici and therefore much less ought wee to worship the Saints departed for certainely they being the more excellent Creatures are much more capable of such worship then the soules of men that are now in Abrahams bosome in Paradise not yet in that perfect bliss and glory which they shall enjoy when their soules and bodies shall be reunited but according to many of the fathers in a certaine and joyfull expectancy of it after the last and finall judgment where the place of their present abode is I shall tell you when â—he fathers are agreed about it For this Saint worship certain it is there is no express Scripture and 't is as certain there is no generall consent of antiquity let any man peruse Mr. Meads excellent treatise of the Apostacy of the latter times wherein 't is apparent how the Cannonizing of Saints in the Church of Rome agrees with the heathens Apotheosis their praying to them with the worshipping of Heroes their Dij Medioxumi their haveing severall Saints for Patrons of Particular Countryes Trades and Callings Phisitians for divers diseases like the heathens Dij Tutelares as may be seen in Chemnitius his examen and in other learned men Firm. You need not spend more words about this grosse superstition which is nothing else but a mixture of Christianity and Paganisme and of all the errours of the Church of Rome most dangerous for the Lord our God is a jealous God and will not suffer the honour and worship that is due to him alone to be given to any other Dub. I shall submit to your advice and proceed to a fourth reason against Popery which is their adoration of images so much condemned in holy Scripture what more expressly forbiden then image worship by the second Commandement which they of Rome have Cunningly left out in their mass books offices Primmers and Catechism's and without all shew of Reason asserted it to be a positive Command belonging onely to the Jews how demonstratively is the fourth of Deutronomie against it from the 12 verse to the 18 many other texts might be urged to the same purpose all which the Schoolmen endeavour to baffle by their Pittifull distinctions betwixt an Image and an Idol a picture upon a cloath and one ingraven in wood or stone betwixt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which every Esurient Groeculus every mean Sciolist will smile at betwixt Mediatè Relutivè and Terminative which aâ—e distinctions at least some of them without a difference mere Chimericall phansies if a man shall seriously peruse the 13 and 14. Chapters of the Book of Wisdome which at Rome is Canonicall Scripture and consider what answers the Heathens returned to those that objected against them their Idol worship that they worship not the Image but the Numen or divine power it represented he will easily discern that the wiser sort of Heathens made as wise Appologies for their Image worship as the wisest Papists do for theirs As for the antiquity of this grosse superstition both Fathers Councels are against it as is evident from that excellent Homily of our Church concerning the perill of Idolatry if it be replyed t were the images of the heathens they opposed true 't is for in the first ages of the Church there were no others the Christians of those times abominateing all image worship but the reasons they give against the heathen Imagery wound the Church of Rome under the fifth rib no Christian Church did then use images in their oratoryes in after ages they were admitted only for an historicall use as may be seen in St Gregories writings who lived above 600 years after Christ true 't is by the Second Nicene Councell their worship was decreed and so this iniquity was established by a law such a one as that packed convention could legitimate and hence forward not only the pictures of Saints but of God himself and of the Blessed Trinity were set up in Churches which was an high dishonour to the Glorious Majesty of the Almighty to be portraid like an old Man and gave an occasion to ignorant people to conceive him to be so indeed hence I have heard some of them say when they swore by God that they
perswaded that Shisms and Heresies are the necessary consequents of mens invading the Ministry without regular Ordination But for my better satisfaction I pray you let me understand the reasons that make against this Independent practise Firm. My Reasons are these drawn First from plain Scripture as Ierem. 14.14 and 23.21 where there is a complaint against those Prophets That Prophesied lyes in Gods name and he sent them not And again the same Prophet I have not sent these Prophets and yet they ran I have not spoken unto them and yet they Prophesied therefore they shall not profit these people at all Neither was this Sending and Calling a necessary requisite only under the Law but also in the time of the Gospel The first that were ever called and sent to preach the glad tidings of the kingdom of Heaven were the Apostles who were first Disciples to the best of Masters before they were sent out to Preach First Qualified foâ— the work and then Sent. So upon the treason and death of Iudas Matthias was made an Apostle in his place but by Election and Ordination Acts 1. Heb. 5. No man must take this honoâ— upon him but he that is called of God either immediately or by the Governors of the Church and hereupon it was that St. Paul left Timothy at Ephesus and Titus at Creete to Ordain Elders in every Citty instructing them how the Priests and Deacons ought to be qualified 'T is well worth our observation how the Apostle makes the salvation of men to depend ordinarily upon the Preaching of Sent and Called Ministers Rom. 10. Whosoever calleth upon thâ— name of the Lord he shall be saved but such Calling presupposeth Believing Hearing Preaching Sending how shall they Preach except they be sent Dub. 'T is evident by the Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament That no man ought to take upon him the Office of a Minister before he has a lawful Call from the Church or can by working Miracles make it appear that he is immediately called from God which is not now to be expected Firm. And 't is as evident from the practise of the Church from the time of the Apostles even to this present age for he that shall peruse her Records shall find that whosoever did presume to take upon himself the office of publick Preaching or Administation of the Sacraments without an extraordinary Call arrested by Miracles or an ordinary one from the Governors of the Church was ever accounted a Theif and a Robber no true Shephard that entred in at the Church door but crept in or climb'd up some other way And hereupon Tertullian complains That in their Heretical Conventicles their Women were bold pratlers they did preach dispute baptize meer Laicks did usurp the Priests office by which means instead of converting Heathens they did pervert Christians St. Hierom also in an Epistle to Paulinus complains That every one did presume to interpret holy Scripture prating old women doting old men Husbandmen Masons Iacks of all trades even as it has been in this divided Nation Trades-men Shoemakers â—oblers Glovers Taylors have skip'd from the Shop to the Pulpit and have left stitching of graments to make a rent in the Church Dub. There is no ingenuous man that is acquainted with the Tenents of Anabaptists and Quakers that will deny that our Sectaries have sharpned their Tools which they have used against us at the Forges of these Philistins Have you any thing else to object aginst these Schismatick practices Firm. Yes The prudential order which is used in all other callings the ablest Lawer Gentleman Soldier muâ—â— not execute the office of a Judge Justice of Peace Commander in war without a Commission a Student in Physick cannot practise without a Linence no man can set up his Trade in a well Governd Corporation untill he has serv'd out his Appâ—entiship and is made a Freeman Such excellent order is observd in Civil affâ—irs but in the great concerns of the Church there should bâ— nothing but confusion if these men might be sufferd to act according to their irrational and extravagant Phansies Dub. 'T is most apparent that their actions are against Scripture the practise of the Cartholick Church and the dictates of reason which no Christian no Sober man will contradict Therefore let us leave this headless Faction and discourse about Presbytery which has the most plausible reasons for its Nonconformity to our Church of any other that do seperate from us DIALOGVE VII Against Presbytery Firm. THe first step you made out of our Church as I have heard was unto Presbyterie I desire to know the reasons why you left our Communion and made choice of theirs Dub. I confess the first step I made out of the Church of England was into the Tents of Presbyterie thence to the Independents and so to the Anabaptists and at last I became little better then an Atheist as I before have declared Thus unhâ—ppy man as I was being out of the true Church I was like Noah's Dove out of the Ark fluttering over the Floods of Eâ—rors and boiâ—terous waves of Shismâ— Factions and Heresies finding no firm land for the sole of my foot to rest upon Firm. This was not your case alone but of many â—n unâ—table soul thâ—t in those laâ—e times of Rebellion confusion Eph. 4. has been blown about with every wind of doctriâ—e by the sleight of men Jesuits Priest and Socintans and their cunning craftinesâ— whereby they havâ— lain in wait to deceive An â—â—ence it was thâ—t the Prophet David's curse fell heâ—vy upon them for they have fallen from one wickedness to another from one wicked opinion to a sâ—â—ond a third c. till at length they have turned Seekers Scepticks Atheists and Scoffers at all Religion Dub. This was once my condition but praised be the Lord who has brought my foot out of the snare I have by his blessing shaked off all those wild and groundless fancies and am more then half perswaded that the Church of England is one of the moâ—t Orthodox Apostolical Churches under the cope of Heaven However for my better confirmation let me hear your answers to those exceptions which the Presbyterians have urged against her goverment by Arch-Bishops Bishops Deans and Chapters her Lyturgie her set Forms of Prayer her Ceremonies her receiving persons of scandalous lives and grosly ignorant in the principles of Religion to the holy Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ. These were the great scandals at which I somtimes stumbled and fell from the Communion of the Church into the Congregation of our Classical Brethren Firm. I shall mosâ— willingly give in my answer to those exceptions in that order you have ranked them Therefore in the first place let me hear what you can object against our Bishops Dub. I have been told They are Antchristian not heard of in the Primitive times Such Plants as our Heavenly Father hath not planted and therefore to be rooted
tender consciences and the occasions of many shâ—rp contentions amongst Christians agreeing in the substantials of Religion and seing that Conformists themselves confess them not to be in their own nature necessary but only expedient for order and decency were it not better they were laid aside then continued is they are the perpetual causes of discord and dissention amongst us Firm. And are order decency and uniformity without which there wiâ—l be neither â—ove Peace or Unity suâ—h inconsiderable nothings that a few innocent Ceâ—emonies must be utterly abollished to gratifie the dogmatizing humors of those men who esteem things in themselves indifferent to be sinful and unlawful which is sâ—â—t Superstition 'T is indeed much to be lamented that we should quarrel about Mint and Cummin to the prejudice of more weighty and material duties and the scandal of our Religion But by reason of our innâ—te and acquited corruptions 't is necessary that offences should come yet wo be unto that man by whom they come I know weakness and renderness of conscience is much pretended and we ought to take heed how we offend any of Christs little ones but how can these men be reckon'd in the number of weak or little ones who seem to themselves so great so strong and able in the things of Religion and for their tendernesse of conscienâ—e we appeal to their bloody civil Warrs 't is well known by whom and how they were began and carryâ—d on till at length they came up to the death of the King tho I believe very much against the intentions and designs of the most grave and sober men of that Party Dub. But really Sir were it not more beseeming Christian prudence so far to condescend to our dissenting Brethren who agree with us in the Doctrine of our Church in taking away at least some of those Ceremonies which are more liable to exception then to comply with the Superstitious Papists in the use of them Firm. I confess some moderate men have thought so especially since we are frustrated of of one main end for which our first reformers retained them which was to draw over the Papists into the Communion of our Church which they did adhere unto for the Ten first years of Queen Elizabeth until they were interdicted by the Popes bull But seeing we are deprived of all hopes of that much desired issue and that by the cunning of Priests and Jesuits stirring up and animating the Conformists and Non-conformists against each other about these Ceremonies Our differences amongst our selves do daily increase and multiply some wise and peaceable men have desired that the use of certain of those Ceremonies might be forborn at least for a time which not withstanding they are still continued These peaceable men abhor the great sin of Separation do continue their conformity to the rites of our Church daily begging at the throne of Grace that the God of truth and peace would for his mercy â—ake so assist those powers which he has ordained that they may be instrumental for the establishing of truth and peace amongst us Dub. I like well of the temper of these men and wish that their moderation were not only known unto but practised by all men for certainly if the Spirit of love peace and meekness did rule more in our peevish and froward hearts we should enjoy a greater measure of Peace Love and Christian Charity then these angry times have hither to been happy with I return you my hearty thanks for that satisâ—action which you have given me in those scruples which have much troubled me about the Goverment Liturgie and Ceremonies of the Church of England there is yet one thing behind at which I have somwhat been scandalliz'd 't is this Your Church does receive persons who are notoriously proâ—hâ—ne in their lives and grossly ignorant in the principls of Religion to the Holy Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ besides she tollerates at least Ministers that are scandalous in their conveâ—sâ—tion frequenters of Alâ—-houses not at all serious in Religion shew little sence of it in their discourses Preaching or practises men of little conscience and of as little learning Firm. This accusation is most fals whether it springs from spite or malice or extream ignorance I know not sure I am our Church orders that no suâ—h persons be admitted to the Holy Sacrament thâ—t no such Ministers be permitted to officiate that they are to be suspended once and again and if they do no not reform they are to be deprived for the first you may see the Rubrick before the Communion and the 26. Canon For the Second see Artic 26. and Canon the 74. and 75. and Canon 10. made 1640. which are so clear against the admitting of profane persons to to the Communion or tollerating of scandalous Ministers without due Punishment that whosoever chargeth these abuses upon our Church must be grosly ignorant or very malitious Dub. Yet we see that such prophane persons are admitted to the Sacrament as members of your Church and such unworthy Minsters are allowed to officiate Firm. Such persons are no members of out Church but rather the Synagoge of Satan and that Minister who does admit such persons natoriously prophane to the Holy Sacrament is a greater Non-conâ—ormist to the orders of the Church then he that scruples at a Surplice and those Church-wardens who neglect to present them are guilty of Perjury and ought to be debar'd themselves from the Communion Can. 26. Dub. 'T is evident that such Ministers are not Punished either by Admonition Suspensition or Deprivation Firm. This is not true in all places to my knowledge where such Ministers or people escape unpunished 't is mostly by the fault of the Church-wardens and Sides-men in not presenting them for what Judge either Ecclesiastical or Civil can punish offences that are not brought before him Dub. But many times offences and scandalâ— have been presented and the offender not punisâ—â—d yea your Ecclesiastical Judges are more severe against those who are Non-conformists to the laws oâ— the Church â—hen agâ—inst those that are Non-conformists to the laws of God as profane irreligeous wretches Firm. No mâ—n câ—n excuse the personal abuses that are committed in any Court Civil or Ecclesiastical all Court Officers never yet were nor ever will be men of integrity â—nd of unbias'd judgments no question that many abuses which are committed by the Officers of Ecclesiastical Courts might be prevented if the Bishops would be somtimes personally present in their respective consistoâ—ies as was intimated they ought to be Canon 11. made 1640. If we must seperate from a Church that enjoyns no Intollerable conditions for Communion with her because of some personal â—aulâ—s of those who are entrusted with her Goverment we must turn Seekers for where shall we find a Church whose Officers are alwaies all of them impartially just and upright Dub. I confess there is no good reason we should seperate from a Church