once thorowly understood our Cause I should not doubt of their determining for us I have respect to what you say Pref. p 77. And to come nearer to you yet If a Council could be called of all the Protestant Churches in Christendom and let any one of these be set in the Chair that would indifferently hear what both Parts have to say I would only exclude such as you for what you say Rat. Acc. p. 292. and 338. What Justice or Reason is there that the Party accused should sit Judg in their own Cause None of the Parties accused seem fit to you either to be Iudg or Iury and with this Caution only I should not distruct our Cause if such a Council had the hearing of it One thing more I learn from these Letters viz. When I see that such eminent learned Divines are so mistaken and drawn to misrepresent so considerable a numbâ—r of their Brethren living in the same Age with them and not very far remote from them it satisfies me how much more easy it was for the Romish Party being uppermoâ—â— in the World to cloud and obscure those who at any time appeared against their Errâ—rs and Corruptions As the Lord Faulkland Answer to Mr. Montague p. 281 If he consider the great Industry of his Church in extinguishing those whom they have called Herâ—ticks and also their Books so â—hat we know scarce any thing of them but from themselves who are too partial to make good Historians if he considâ—r how carefully they stop Men's Mouths But here I shall stop my Pen. So much to these Letters Yet for a Conclusion I have a few Words more particularly to you Now Reverend Sir Be not offended at my plainness I hope 't is for the Interest of the true Protestant Religion that I appear in this Cause how weak and unworthy soever My Charity I speak my heart is not confined to a Party no not so set upon that which you would call my own but where I have reason to believe others of a different Perswasion are more holy and live more like Christians I would esteem love and honour such more I am not conscious to my self of wishing you the least harm or enjoying your Dignities or Estate Live or dye sink or swim however things go with me and mine I hope it is my Hearts desire it may go well with the Church and People of God I see the Protestant Interest in a lamentable tottering State Methinks all that are true Friends to it should readily yield it would stand firmer on ample Ground Terms of Communion of a due latitude than on such a narrow Bottom that admits not of a Multitude of sound Christians who would be firm to it Yet the latter of these you plead zealously for though it is plain your dividing them from you by unnecessary uncatholick Terms must needs weaken both you and them This I cannot but be sensible of and think it my Duty to lament Unless the Lord shall incline you to a more moderate Course than you have lately taken in reference to Dissenters I know I may expect a fiercer Assault from you But I know as well what Ground I stand on and further am bold to say you cannot hope for Success in this Cause without first destroying a considerable part of your own Works not only pulling down your Ireniâ—um a good Sconce however now slighted but also sadly battering and shaking that goodly Fabrick your main Fort the Rational Account too And if you causelâ—sly destroy what you had so well built and what is fortified and strengthened with so much Reason will you not make your self a Transgressor And may not this add something to the grief of your Wound as Aejop has it of the Eagle to be shot with your own Feathers Yet Reverend Sir I would be more concerned far on other Accounts for you Refrain now from these Men and let them alone for if the Work wherein they are employed be God's Work then you cannot seek to overthrow it but therein you will be found a Fighter against God Oh! be well advised what you do further this way You may be under a sore Temptation seeing your self so far engaged in this Cause possibly you may think it would be a Dishhonour now to retract But if by this Undertaking of yours you seek to deprive very many Souls of the ordinary means of Salvation forbidding us to preach to Sinners that they might be saved if thus you set your self in some measure to obstruct the Course of the Gospel if you so far oppose the Interest of Christ your great Lord and Master if you are against what may be truly called God's Worship and truly Religious Exercises be assured this shall not be for your Honour in the End For the Lord has said Them that honour me I will honour and they that despise me shall â—e lightly esteemed And you know further our Lord Jesus Christ hath denounced a sad Wo unto such as take away the Key of Knowledg from Mâ—n And ought you not to think seriously of it whether you may not be accounted to have a special Hand in procuring what further Opposition and Sufferings your poor Brethren may meet withal If â—en should be animated and set on by your Writings to fine impoverish imprison c. them being falsly perswâ—â—â—d that in persecuting them they should do God and his Church good Service can you be found altogether clear in this matter And is it not a dangerous thing not only to scandâ—lize and injure a Prophet or eminent Saint and Servant of God but 〈…〉 offind the least and weakest Believer Mar. 9. 42. Whosover shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me c. There we see Christ makes not a light matter of it You may go on censuring such as guilty of as great a Sin as Murder when nothing but a fear of sinning keeâ—â— them from dâ—ing as you would have them But when you have said â—â—ll you can against them and tho you will not allow them to be Members of any Church upon Earth yet with all your Authority was it greater you cannot shut them out of Heaven you cannot separate them from Christ As P. Martyr Caeterum dicâ—nt quicquid velint â—â—â—quam efficient quiâ— vivdentes â—â—â—ertes ad praescripâ—um Verbi Dei sâ—â—â— faelices The best of it is they may be happy for all that you can ever say or do Yea though they were supposed under some Misapprehensions as suppose Conformity lawful in â—â—self yet their Non-conformity and Non-compliance with you through Conscientious Tenderness is better than a rash precipitaâ—â— or dissemâ—ling hypocritical Conformity would â—e And thus endeavouring as near as they can to keep to the Rule of the holy Scripture avoiding what they cannot but suspect is not according to that Rule they may be in a safer way than if they were in external Communion with you And so much I have from my Lord Faulkland
ours 'T is impossible for you to assign any Reason for the Cross in Baptism c. à natura rei now but what would have been as pleadable even in the Apostles times and at all times since Then is it not most probable that Christ would have made an universal Law for them that should equally respect all Churches had it been his Mind to have such things in his Church Indeed we find Christ hath instituted what religious Rites and Ceremonies he would have observed in the Sacraments of the New Testament And where he hath determined the matter himself what have Men to do more than to submit to his Determination What can Men do that come after the King None are like to do his work better or know his Mind better than himself 6. If the exerting such a Power be found contrary to many express Commands in the Word how can we imagine such a Power conveyed to Church-Governours in any general Command there The Scripture is no where contrary to it self Consult Rom. 14. 1 2 3 4 5 13 14 15 v. 17 to the end of the Chapter And Chap. 15. 1 2. Are there such plain Commands in Scripture for mutual Forbearance and against judging and despising one another for such things as God hath not commanded and against offending the weak or casting a stumbling-Block in others way and for preserving the Peace and Unity of the Church and can we think it probable or a thing credible that Christ would have all such Commands set aside meerly for the sake of things called indifferent Ceremonies Or that the Commands or Determinations of Church-Governours about such Matters should be of Force against the standing Rules and Laws of Christ who is King of his Church Matters of Order and Decency are things of another Nature necessary in genere as I have said before and yet Men cannot oblige us to this or that particular Order when it is repugnant to that whereunto it should be subservient Then much less is it the Will of Christ that meer indifferent things if no worse should take place of great and necessary Duties Such indifferent things must either be made necessary or else you must say it cannot be avoided That the Churches Peace may be broken sound Ministers and Christians that scruple the lawfulness of them may be ejected and cast out of Communion or their Consciences may be ensâ—â—red unnecessarily And yet one that ever read his Bible might know so much that the Governours of the Church have other work to do And as the second Book of Homilies says p. 3. Better it were that the Arts of Painting Plaistering Carving Graving and Founding had never been found nor used than one of them whose Souls in the sight of God are so precious should by occasion of Image or Picture perish and be lost So indeed better it were that no such Ceremonies had ever been appointed by Men than one Soul should be ensnared by them â—r one Minister or Member of Christ suffer 7. I query If Christ had not appointed the Sacraments of the New-Testament whether it had been in the power of Church-Governours to have appointed washing with Water in token and to put us in mind of our being washed and cleansed by the Blood of Christ and by the sanctifying influence and operation of his Spirit and so likewise to have appointed the eating and drinking of Bread and Wine as signifying that our Souls are to feed upon Christ whose Body was broken and whose Blood was shed for us Had not these been of the same Nature and as lawful as the significant Ceremonies which the Church hath taken on her to appoint Then let the People understand the Power of the Church that if Christ had never instituted Baptism and the Lord's Supper she could yet have in part supplied that want with those significant Ceremonies that would have been something like them 8. If Church-Governours have power to appoint such a Ceremony as the Cross in Baptism for Instance then they have power to add to the thing which God hath commanded and to make new parts of Worship But Deut. 4. 2. 12. 32. forbids that You grant p. 337. That for Men to make new parts of Divine Worship is unlawful For that is to suppose the Scripture an imperfect Rule of Worship and that Superstition is no Fault c. The Cross in Baptism is an Addition Tho you seem to understand the prohibition of adding to the Word of things directly repugnant yet that is not so properly an Addition as an Abolition As one says Prohibetur hîc additio non tantùm contrarii quae non tam additio est quà m abolitio sed etiam diversi v. M. Poli. Synops. Crit. in Deut. 4. 2. Methinks we may know what it is to add if we understand what it is to diminish then as they might not diminish or take away from God's Worship one significant Ceremony which the Lord had instituted by a Parity of Reason it would seem to follow that they might not introduce or add one significant Ceremony to the Worship God had instituted The Cross in Baptism is made a new part of Worship For that which is used in God's Worship in such a manner and to such an end that there needeth nothing but Divine Institution or God's appointing it to be used in that manner and to that end to make it a part of the true Worship of God that is made a part of God's Worship tho falsly for want of Divine Institution Had Christ appointed the Cross in Baptism as the Church hath appointed it to be used in token that we should not be ashamed c. had Christ appointed it by that Badg to dedicate us to the Service of him that died upon the Cross no doubt it had thus become a part of God's true Worship Here you speak short p. 348. The Canon says It is an honourable Badg whereby the Infant is dedicated to the Service of c. And what is that but a Sign from Men to God to testify their Subjection Which by your own Confession there is an Act of Worship and yet you will have it no such thing P. 355. you say If Christ had instituted it with such Promises then no doubt c. And I say If Christ had instituted it only in token that we ought not to be ashamed to confess him which is less than that hereafter we shall not be ashamed had he appointed it only to signify our Duty it would yet no doubt have been made a part of Worship And I hope upon second thoughts you will say the same Some other Passages relating to this Matter I would have glanced at but it is time to hasten to an end of this Conclusion I have been so long upon Yet methinks your slighty Exposition of the second Câ—mmandment p. 141. calls for one glance here Can you find no more in the Affirmative part of it than a Command to worship God without
Instance he gives there is convincing If a Souldier knew his Captain his Leader was for opening the Gates to the Enemy and yet followed such a Leader keeping Rank and Order so unseasonably he would shew himself a Traitor rather than a faithful Souldier The Disciples would seem to have been for Order there as you are when they were hindring Christ's Service Mar. 9. 38. Luk. 9. 49. Master we saw one casting out Devils in thy name and we forbad him because he followeth not us Now I heartily wish even for your own sake from that true and due Respect I owe to you that you would more impartially examine what you have been doing and reflect upon your self consider seriously whether you are not forbidding and condemning some as faithful Followers of Christ as your self even in their serving Christ and serving their Generation What are your Thoughts of such as Iospeh and Richard Alleyn with divers others that might be named who kept to their ministerial Work and as you say of Father Latimer never repented them of it If now they have that Well-come home Well done good and faithful Servants enter into the Ioy of your Lord. How far are they above all your Censures And me-thinks it deserves Men's serious Consideration whether they pray as they ought Thy Kingdom come or whether indeed they act not against their own Prayers who indeavour to hinder the preaching of the Gospel a means of enlarging and building up God's Kingdom And as you declare to the World p. 394. you are one that believes a day of Iudgment to come which I would not once question I beseech you Sir think well of what that well disposed Gentleman as you call him says I think gravely and piously Letter out of the Country pag. 38 39. Let us bring the Cause before our Supream and Final Iudg. And bethink your self whether of these two things he will be most likely to have regard unto the saving of Souls which He bought with his Blood or the preserving inviolate certain Humane Institutions and Rules confessed by the Devisers of them not to be necessary c. And so much of your first Conclusion and mine Your second Conclusion follows Preface p. 73. 2. Those are new Churches when Men erect distinct Societies for Worship under distinct and peculiar Officers governing by Laws and Church-Rules different from that Form they separate from Here 1. I cannot but look on you as very unfortunate unhappy in this Cause you have espoused How oft do you greatly expose your self that what you urge agianst your Brethren may justly be retorted on you So here how plain is it that you look but on one side which as I remember you suppose those that differ from you to be faulty in Had you not one Thought that if you owned such a Conclusion as this I should be likely to tell you you had spoiled your Cause Nihil quod nimis satis that by proving too much you would in effect prove nothing of that you aim at Should you not have considered what an Argument you here put into the Mouths of the Dissenters against the National Church of England against Diocesan Churches and against Parochial Churches too 1. Will not many be ready to tell you that it follows undeniably from this Conclusion of yours that you have made the National Church of England and the Diocesan Churches therein New unlawful Churches because under divers peculiar Officer governing by Laws and Church-Rules different from the Apostolical Primitive Church as from other Reformed Churches If those are new unlawful Schismatical Churches with you that are under distinct and peculiar Officers governing by Laws and Church-Rules different from the Apostolical truly Primitive Churches as I suppose it must come to that Primum in unoquoque genere est Regula Mensura reliquorum what work have you made here What an heavy Task and hard Province have you taken on you Can you ever prove that there are no Officers Laws Rules and Orders in your Church different from what were in the true Primitive Church Can you ever find all these Officers Arch-Bishops Lord-Bishops Deans Chancellors c down to Apparitors in the Primitive Church Will you undertake to find there all our Ecclesiastical Canons even Rules for kneeling in the Act of Receiving for signing with the Cross in Baptism for excluding the Parents and setting God-Fathers and God-Mothers in their stead with a Rule for peculiar appropriate Vestments c. To say here that though you have peculiar Officers Laws and Rules different from the Apostolical Primitive Church yet you do not own your selves to be a Church separate from that Primitive Church will not bring you off For this many Dissenters likewise say they separate not from you but hold Communion with you in all that is necessary and further have more Local Presential Communion with you than you can pretend to have with the Primitive Church Yet you will have their Assemblies separate Churches while they worship God by any other Rule than yours though their Worship be as agreeable to the Scripture-Rule And yet can you or any mortal Man prove that others may not be allowed to differ from you in such things wherein you differ from the Apostolical primitive Church Again it will as little help you to say That you speak of particular Congregations or Societies for Worship For 2. Do you not here make your Parochial Congregations also New Churches If the Primitive Church had not your Liturgy were not bound to the use of your Book of Common-Prayer then you cannot deny but you are under a somwhat different Rule And are there not some Parishes that have only Deacons to officiate And may I not be bold to tell you that you can never prove your Deacons the same with those in the Churches erected by the Apostles According to P. Paul Sarpi of matters Benefic N. 27. Deacons were Ministers of temporal things You your self say p. 311. It was no properly Church-power which they had but they were Stewards of the common Stock Then are not Deacons that are allowed to preach and baptize c. different Officers By this time I hope you will be sensible what a Wound you have given to the Cause you take upon you to defend by this Conclusion which is my first Note upon it 2. At the first view and reading of this your second Conclusion I was willing to hope that then you would not condemn such Assemblies as Mr. B's who leave the ruling Work to you and are glad if they be permitted to preach and hear God's Word and do not separate from you but joyn with you even in Sacraments as well as other parts of God's Worship But looking farther into your Book I see my Mistake For you say pag. 98. as was cited before No Man denies that more places for Worship are desirable and would be very useful where c. But is it possible that Mr. B. should think the Case alike where
esse â—isi verbo Dei And then it would be seriously enquired whether to require Assent and Consent to another Book besides the Bible a Book in Folio and to all things contained in it be not to have Dominion over Mens Faith Many are in doubt here whose doubts you have not so far as I can perceive yet resolved You your self must grant that the Churches of God have or should have no such Custom to tyrannize over the Faith and Consciences of Men that is Lording it indeed As here Vnreas of Separat p. 184. You cite M. Claude allowing or maintaining Tyranny over Mens Consciences to be a justifiable Reason of Sâ—paration And Le Blanc p. 185. And the Confession of Strasburg p. 188. That they look on no human Traditions as condemned in Scripture but such as are repugnant to the Law of God and bind the Consciences of Men. And Ioâ— Crocius ib. Ceremonies forbidden break the Churches Unity yet its Communion is not to be forsaken for one or two of these if there be no Tyranny over the Consciences of Men. And Bishop Davenâ—nt p. 189 190. Who grants that Tyranny over Mens Faith and Consciences would be a sâ—fficient Reason to hinder Communion As he says Sentent D. Dav. p. 6. If some one Church will so have Dominion over the Faith of others that she acknowledgeth none for Brethren or admits none into Communion with her nisi credendâ— ac loquendi legem ab eadem prius accipiant the Holy Scripture forbids us thus to make our selves the Slaves of any Mortals whosoever they are our one only Master Christ forbids Quae hâc lege in Communionem alterius Ecclesiae recipitur non pacem inde acquirit sed iniquissimae servitutis pactionem Here I set down a little more than you cite as indeed it was not for your purpose To these you agree P. 221. Not but that I think there may be a Separation without Sin from a Society retaining the Essentials of a Church but then I say the Reason of such Separation is some heinous Error in Doctrine or some idolatrous Practice in Worship or some Tyranny over the Consciences of Men c. This Tyranny over Conscience with you is an imposing of unlawful things Which I infer from those Words p. 208. A prudent and due submission in lawful things lies between Tyranny over Mens Consciences and endless Separation With Bishop Davenant it is credendi ac loquendi legem dicere Now if this be the Case of Non-conformist Ministers that others would tyrannize over their Consciences will it not justify their Separation which is but a Separation secundum quid And if you deny this to be their Case be pleased to give a sound and solid Answer to those few Pages of the second Plea for Peace towards the end p. 116 c. Qui tyrannidem in Christianissimum vel usurpat vel invehit ille Christum quantum potest ê solio dejicit c. Amyrald in Thes. Salmur p. 435. §22 8. Will you say every Man is bound for Peace-sake to submit to the Determination of Church-Governours whatever his private Iudgment may be When his Judgment may be that such a Determination is against the Word tho never so many Churches and Councils judg otherwise And when his Judgment may be that submission to such Determination of Men would be real Disobedience and acting contrary to the Will of God If his Conscience be rightly informed then he opposeth the Authority of Scripture and the Iudgment of God to the Iudgment of Men as Chillingworth says p. 309. which is certainly allowable If his Conscience and Judgment be erroneous yet he must suspend the act of Submission to such Determination till he can be better informed or acting here against his Iudgment and Conscience tho erroneous he would greatly sin As suppose the Governours of the Church to have determined that we shall all declare our Assent unto that in Preface before the Book of Ordination That it is evident unto all Men diligently reading Holy Scripture and Ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been these Orders of Ministers in Christ's Church Bishops Priests and Deacons as several Officers You could not have submitted to such Determination while your Judgment was the same as when you wrote your Irenicum This is evident from what I noted thence Rector of Sutton p. 41 66. Nothing can be more evident than that it rose not from any divine Institution c. Could you have dissembled with God and Man for Peace-sake But more of this afterwards But I am thinking you may possibly object That you speak of things supposed to be left undetermin'd whereas I Instance here in a matter that the Word determines Yet I hope this may be more convincing Let us for this once suppose that you could now prove from Scripture that the Bishops Office is distinct from that of Presbyters yet I hope you will grant me that you could not have submitted to such Determination of the Church while you believed no such thing And then I have what I would have Every Man cannot lawfully submit to the Churches Determination though it be according to the Scripture that is so long as his Judgment is the Determination is without and against Scripture then must not the same be said of such Determination as is besides the Scripture I know you will not say the Churches Word is above God's So you see how this part of your Rule falls short of what you aim at One thing you have under this Rule Irenic p. 124. I should take a little notice of some-where and let me do it here There must be a Difference made say you between the Liberty and Freedom of a Man 's own Judgment and the Authority of it So by being under Governours a Man parts with the Authority of his Iudgment but you would not have him deprived of the Liberty and Freedom of his Judgment otherwise to what purpose is this distinction brought Now I would not be so uncharitable as to think that by the Liberty of a Man 's own Iudgment you could mean a Liberty of professing and declaring contrary to his own Judgment in Submission to the Determination of Church-Governours for the Churches Peace And therefore I say your Rule here is short and reacheth not to our Case 2. You say in this last Conclusion that in Mâ—tters of meer Order and Decency every one for the Churches Peace is bound to submit to the Determination of the lawful Governours of the Church Here 1. This is readily granted if by Matters of meer Order and Decency you understand Matters of meer Order and Decency As you seemed to understand no more when you wrote your Iren. For there you distinguish betwixt Ceremonies and Matters of meer Decency and Order for Order-sake And you further say that Matters of Order and Decency are allowable and fitting but Ceremonies properly taken for Actions significative their Lawfulness may with better Ground
Ordinance and that now they do only claim Superiority from her Majesties Supream Government If this be true then it is requisite and necessary that my Lord of Canterbury do recant and retract his Saying in his Book of the great Volumn against Cartwright where he saith in plain Words by the Name of Dr. Whitgift that the Superiority of Bishops is of God's own Institution which Saying doth impugn her Majesties Supream Government directly and therefore it is to be retracted plainly and truly And I find something like this in that small Tract called English Puritanism c. 6. § 6. They â—old that all Arch-Bishops Bishâ—ps Deans Officials c. have their Offices and Functions only by Will and Pleasure of the King and Civil States of this Realm and they hold that whosoever holdeth that the King may not without Sin remove these Offices out of the Church or 〈◊〉 these Offices are Jure divino and not only or meerly Jure humano That all such deny a principal Part of the King's Supremacy which indeed you must hold as to Bishops if you can prove them an Apostolical Institution Though I know the time when you was of another mind Rector of Sutton p. 41. Will not all these things make it seem very improbable that it should be an Apostolical Institution And pag. 40. you believed that upon the strictest Enquiry it would be â—ound true that Ierome Austin Ambrose Sedulius Primasius Theodoret Theophylact were all for the Identity of both Name and Order of Bishops and â—reâ—byters in the Primitive Church Now suppose the Civil Governours should determine the Government by Bishops as superiour to the rest of the Clergy to be only jure humano that they had Power to alter if they pleased and should require Assent to this their Determination and the Ecclesiasticks on the other hand should be of your mind resolving not to give up the Cause of the Church or disown its Constitution and should determine it to be Iure Divino vel Apostolico and to be owned of Men as such In such a Case whether must the former for the Churches Peace think themselves bound to submit to the Determinations of the latter Or to which of their Determinations must others submit For none but such as the Vicar of Bray could submit to both Thus I have gone over your three Conclusions which you seem to make great account of What great Service they are like to do you let the Impartial Reader judg Instead of my third Conclusion I would offer to Consideration Chap. 26 of Corbet's Kingdom of God among Men. of Submission to Things imposed by lawful Authority p. 171 c. Particularly pag. 173. Though the Ruler be Iudg of what Rules he is to prescribe yet the Conscience of every Subject is to judg with a Iudgment of Discretion whether those Rules be agreeable to the Word of God or not and so whether his Conformity thereto be lawful or unlawful Otherwise he must act upon blind Obedience c. with what follows in that Page And pag. 174. It is much easier for Rulers to relax the strictness of many Injunctions about matters of supposed Convenience than for Subjects to be inlarged from the strictness of their Iudgment And blessed are they that consider Conscience and load it not with needless Burdens but seek to relieve it in its Distresses You go on with me Preface p. 74 But he urges another Passage in the same Place viz. That if others cast them wholly out of Communion their Separation is necessary That is no more than hath been always said by our Divines in respect to the Church of Rome But will not this equally hold against our Church if it excommunicates those who cannot conform Now may not it be said here as Rational Account p. 336. beginning They did not voluntarily forsake the Communion of your Church and therefore are no Schismaticks but your Carriage and Practices were 〈…〉 them to joyn together in a distinct Communion from you And may not your own Words ibid. p. 356 be returned Scil. That by your own Confession the present Division and Separation lies at your door if it be not made evident that there were most just and sufficient Reasons for your casting them out of your Communion And supposing any Church though pretending to be never so Catholick doth restrain her Communion within such narrow and unjust Bounds that she declares such excommunicate who do not approve all such Errors in Doctrine and Corruptions in practice which the Communion of such a Church may be liable to the cause of that Division which follows falls upon that Church which exacts those Conditions c. Here it is to be noted that your own Words Irenic p. 123 124. objected against you Rector of Sutton pag. 30. are as follow This Scil. entring into a distinct Society for Worship I do not assert to be therefore lawful because some things are required which Men's Consciences are unsatisfied in unless others proceed to eject and cast them wholly out of Communion on that account in which Case their Separation is necessary Whence I inferred that if Ministers be wrongfully ejected and wholly cast out of their publick Ministry for such things as their Consciences are not satisfied in for not conforming in unlawful or suspected Practices it becomes necessary for them to have distinct Assemblies in this case at least if there be need of their Ministry Yet I cannot find that you have one word in Answer to this That one would think either you knew not well what to say to the Case of the ejected Non-conformists or that they were so very despicable in your Eye you thought them not worth taking notice of at all Now to your Answers 1. Our church doth not cast any wholly out of Communion for meer Scrupulous Non-conformity in some particular Rites Yet whatever you say here I doubt a Man though he hath his Child lawfully baptized is not secured from the Sentence of Excommunication if he bring it not to the Church to be crossed And though a Man would joyn in the Communion yet if he be not satisfied to receive the Sacrament kneeling by the Rules of the Church he is to be debarred from the Sacrament and then liable to Excommunication for not receiving And being once excommunicated I would know what parts of publick Worship the Church allows him to communicate in Thus there seems to be little more than a Colour and Pretence in this first Answer if the Rules of the Church be followed But you further say Preface p. 74 75. 2. The Case is vastly different as to the necessity of our Separation upon being wholly cast out of Communion by the Church of Rome and the necessity of others separating from us supposing a general Excommunication ipso facto against those who publickly defame the Orders of the Church In the Church of Rome we are cast out with an Anathema Now 1. If there be a necessity of our Separation
also May I give away the needful helps to my Salvation because others have them should their Salvation satisfy me instead of mine own First Plea for Peace p. 89 90. Whether should Men persuade the poor to famish rather than against Law to beg because if thousands of them dye of Famine yet other People are supplied ib. p. 102. Q. 14. Whether the antient Christian Pastors preached not against the Will of Princes for 300 years and after that against the Will of Christian Princes as Constantius Valens Theodosius junior Valentinian c. And whether not only Apostles said that God was to be obeyed rather than Men but such as Timothy who was ordained by Man were not strictly charged before God and the Lord Jesus Christ who will judg the living and dead at his appearing and Kingdom to preach the Gospel and be instant in season c. ib. p. 226 227. Q. 15. Whether any Man hath Authority to forbid a Faithful Minister of Christ who forfeiteth not his Office-Power to perform the Office to which he is ordained And whether such remain not under a Divine Obligation which Man's Law cannot dissolve Whether it be not right as Bishop Bilson saith If Princes forbid us we must go on with our work What if an Interdict silence all the Ministers in a Kingdom Must all obey What if it silence more than can be spared without the Churches wrong And whose Laws be they that would so bind Is it Infidel Princes or only Christians Is it Papists c. or only the Orthodox Must God ask leave of Rulers to be worshipped as God Hath God made Men Judges whether the Gospel shall be preached or not or whether People shall be Saved or left to perish in their Ignorance and Sin And how cometh the Orthodox to be authorized to do Mischief or to forbid the needful preaching of the Gospel any more than an Heretick or a Christian more than an Heathen Is he not bound to do more good than they rather than authorized to do more hurt Answ. to Dr. Stil Serm. p. 84 85. or 78 79. See also p. 21. Q. 16. Where such Sins are made the condition of Ministration by Men in Power as that all the whole Ministry of a Kingdom are bound in Conscience to deny Consent and Conformity thereto Whether is it not the duty of all the Ministry in primo instanti to forbear their Ministerial Office or of none the Reason being the same to all Now if all these must forbear or lay down their Office because forbidden by Men to exercise it then is it not in the Power of a Prince to cast out Christianity when he pleaseth and to deny God all publick Worship And must we not then ask leave of Rulers that Christ may be Christ and Souls may be saved as if the Keys of Heaven and Hell were theirs First Plea for Peace p. 114 115. But whether must not all agree that to silence all the Ministers of the Nation is a thing that God hath not given any Man authority to do because of the necessity of their Ministry and consequently to silence any necessary Ministry at all ib. p. 223. And if all must not lay down their Ministry why must a 1000 or 2000 do it rather than all the rest If it be said the rest are a competent supply to the Churches how shall we be sure that other Mens sinning will absolve the Innocent from their Duty As if I were bound to be a Minister only till other Men will Sin And where can the Wit of Man ever set Bounds as to this Matter Will it not be granted that if the most in France conform to Popery this will not disoblige all others from the exercise of their Ministry And who then can say what those Untruths and Sins are which a weak and erring Ministry may be guilty of which shall serve to disoblige the rest And were not this an easy way to introduce any Error by forbidding any but the Defenders of it to Preach Ib. p. 115 116. Q. 17. Whether God hath authorized the Magistrate to chuse and command in what Words only every Pastor shall publickly pray to God and what Books and Words of Men he shall profess Assent and Consent to and what dedicating Symbols of Christianity he shall use as engaging in the Christian Covenant and to command Ceremonies and Modes for Dissent wherein he shall deny Baptism and Church-Communion to all Dissenters tho the things be taken to be indifferent by the Magistrate and great Sins by the Dissenters Answ. to Dr. Stil Serm. p. 14. Q. 18. Whether Pastors usurp not Power over one another when they command all about them to speak to Men from God or to God from Men in no other Words but what they the Usurpers shall write them down making Ministers but Cryers to read their Prescripts and Proclamations Second Plea c. p. 142. Q. 19. Whether any but Volunteers should be taken for true Christians or admitted to Holy Communion to receive the Seals of Pardon and Life Way of Concord third Part p. 27. § 7. And whether Pastors of the Churches should be constrained to administer Sacraments to any against their Consciences Whether it be not their Office to be Judges who is to be baptized and to communicate Ib. p. 123. Q. 20. If any be urged to take a Re-ordination against their Judgments whether Morals must not be preferred before Rituals and Rituals never set against them And whether they should not be of this Mind that deny the Scriptures to have unchangeably fixed all Rituals and yet confess that Morals are fixedly determined Ib. p. 214 215. It is not contrary to the temper of the Gospel which ever subjecteth Ceremonies Rites and External Orders to Morals and to Man's Good and the great Ends Ib. third Part p. 81. Q. 21. When the most learned sober judicious Conformists differ not at all from us about the Matter it self to which we deny Conformity but confess it to be unlawful as to the hardest Points of the imposed Subscriptions Oaths Declarations and Covenants and only take the Words in such a Sence in which we our selves could take them were we persuaded that it was indeed the true meaning of them Query hereupon How it comes to pass that they who are as much as we against that Sence which we disown and agree with us in the Matter should deserve Liberty Honour and Preferment for otherwise interpreting the Words of the Law which the Lawgivers themselves will not interpret when our Supposition that the Law-makers mean properly as they speak is taken to deserve Scorn Silencing c. from them that will not expound their Words to us Iudgment of Non-conformists in Second Plea c. p. 116 117. And seeing as those worthy Conformists must grant that if the Words of the Laws be properly to be understood and not with their Limitations then the Conformists are in the wrong and the Non-conformists in the right
teach not Heresy nor preach down Holiness c. and deny us not their Communion unless we will sin or a Conformists that will hold Communion with none but his own Party but separates from all other Churches in the Land Ib. p. 41. Is he a greater Separatist that confesseth them to be a true Church and their Communion lawful but preferreth another as fitter for him or he that denieth Communion with true worshipping Assemblies as unlawful to be communicated with when it is not so If the former then will it not follow that condemning them as no Church is a Diminution or no Aggravation of Separation and the local presence of an Infidel or Scorner would be a less separate state than the absence of their Friends If the latter which is certain then will it not follow that if we can prove the Assemblies lawful which they condemn they are the true Separatists that condemn them and deny Communion with them declaring it unlawful Answ. to Dr. Stil Serm. p. 47 or 49. Q. 80. And whether is not the Separation of whole Churches much worse than of single Persons from one Church when it is upon unwarrantable Cause or Reasons Ib. p. 31. Now how many of the Dissenters frequently communicate with them while they generally refuse shun and condemn our Assemblies Are there no true Churches to be found in the World that have no Bishops of a superior order over Pastors And were there not true Churches in England in that long Interval of Episcopal Government And are not they as justly to be charged with Schism and Separation from those true Churches which were before the re-establishment of Episcopacy as they that are commonly charged by those Encroachers and Invaders of other Mens Rights Vid. Sacril Desert p. 60. Q. 81. Seeing the Universal Church is certainly the highest Species whether have any Authority on pretence of narrower Communion in lower Churches to change Christ's terms of Catholick Communion or to deprive Christians of the right of being loved and received by each other or to disoblige them from the duty of loving and receiving each other Whether can humane Power made by their own Contracts change Christ's Laws or the Priviledges or Forms of Christ's own Churches Way of Concord p. 111. § 14. Q. 82. Whether the greatest and commonest Schism be not by dividing Laws and Canons which causlessly silence Ministers scatter Flocks and decree the unjust Excommunication of Christians and deny Communion to those that yield not to sinful or unnecessary ill-made Terms of Communion ibid. third Part p. 13. § 43. And if any proud passionate or erroneous Person do as Diothrephes cast out the Brethren undeservedly by unjust Suspensions Silencings or Excommunications whether this be not tyrannical Schism First Plea c p. 41. And as we say of the Papists that they unjustly call those Men Schismaticks whom they first cast out themselves by unjust Excommunication may we not say so of any others especially if either for that which is a Duty or for some small mistake which is not in the Persons power to rectify no greater than most good Christians are guilty of their Church-Law says he shall be excommunicate ipso facto ibid. p. 104. See also Answ. to Dr. Stil Serm. p. 47. or 49. § 8. Q. 83. Whether making sinful Terms of Communion imposing things forbidden by God on those that will have Communion with them and expelling those that will not so sin whether this be not heinous Schism First Plea c. p. 41 42. Q. 84. Whether all those would not be deeply guilty of such Schism who by talk writing or preaching justify and cry it up and draw others into the Guilt and reproach the Innocent as Schismaticks for not offending God Ib. Q. 85. If any will confine the Power or Exercise of the Church-Keys into so few Hands as shall make the Exercise of Christ's Discipline impossible or shall make Churches so great or Pastors so few as that the most of the People must needs be without Pastoral Oversight Teaching and publick Worship and then will forbid those People to commit the care of their Souls to any other that would be Pastors indeed and so would compel them to live without Christ's Ordinances true Church-Communion and Pastoral Help whether this would not be Schismatical and much worse Ib. p. 44. Q. 86. When able faithful Pastors are lawfully sâ—t over the Assemblies by just Election and Ordination if any will causlessly and without Right silence them and command the People to desert them and to take to others for their Pastors in their stead oâ— whom they have no such knowledg as may encourage them to such a change Whether this can be defended from the charge of Schism As Cyprian in the case of Novatian says that he could be no Bishop because another was rightful Bishop before â— Ib. p. 49 50. Q. 87. Whether the way to heal us be not 1. To approve the best 2. To tolerate the tolerable 3. To have Sacraments free and not forced 4. To restrain the Intolerable 5. This to be the Test of Toleration Whether such tolerated Worship do more good or hurt in true impartial Judgment 6. Magistrates keeping all in Peace Way of Concord third Part p. 144. Q. 88. Whether it be not a weakning of the King's Interest to divide his Subjects and build up unnecessary Walls of Partition between them and to keep them in such Divisions seeing a Kingdom divided against it self cannot stand And whether it be not unsafe and uncomfortable to a Prince to rule a divided mutinous People but sweet and safe to rule them that are united in mutual Love Whether they that would lay the Peoples Concord upon uncapable Terms would not bring the King's Interest in his Peoples Love and willing Obedience and ready Defence of him into too narrow a Bottom making him the King of some causlessly divided and espoused Party which must be set up to the Oppression of all the rest who are as wise and just and loyal as they Second Plea c. p. 76. § 24. Si in necessariis sit Vnitas In Non-necessariis Libertas In uâ—risque Charitas Optimo certe loco essent res nostrae To make a rounder number I may add from Mr. M. Godwyn his Negro's and Indians Advocate pleading for the Instructing of them and so admitting them into the Church a Book lately Printed and Dedicated to the Arch Bishoâ— of Canterbury Q. 89. Whether Is the wilful neglecting and opposing of it as he says in the Title-Page no less than a manifest Apostacy from the Christian Faith Can no Christian ever justify his omitting any possible lawful Means for the Advancement of his Religion as he says p. 91. Are all professed Christians absolutely bounâ— in their Places to endeavour the same by their Vow in Baptism and their very Profession Q. 90. Then are they not bound in their Places to endeavour the Advancement of Religion as well at home as abroad And do they not owe as much Service herein for Christ's sake towards their own Country-men as towards Strangers Should not English-men be as well concerned for English-men as for Indians And when the State of Religion is so visibly declining in England Atheism Ignorance Error Profaneness Popery and Superstition encreasing and getting up so fast amongst us is he for any great Advancement of Religion that would send away all Non-conformists if there be thousands of them to his Negro's and Indians for this wise Reason that There is no want of their Labours at home FINIS ADVERTISEMENT THe Readers is desired to take notice that these Papers were sent to London by the Author on the latter end of February or beginning of March last but by reason of the multitude of Pamphlets they could not get through the Press sooner The Ingenuous Reader is â—â—so desired to pass by the Errata the Author being remote from the Press these few he hath observed in some of the Sheets he hath seen viz. ERRATA PAge 5. l. 6 r. above P. 20 l. 24. r. do you not P. 21. l. 12. r. Wages P. 22. l. 22. r. Contrarywise P. 23. l. 24. r. and. P. 24. l. 18. dele down P. 28. l. 1. r. Triarios P. 57. l. 6. r. single-soal'd P. 62. l. 29. r. excite greater P. 63. l. 24. r. Church P. 70. l. 30. r. Inobedientia P. 72. l. 19 20. r. betray P. 81. l. 35. r. for P. 83. l. 36 r. did he at all
abroad how did it shake the Heavens and darken the Skies O Lord my Heart trembleth to think upon it how many godly and worthy learned Preachers were silenced deprived and greatly disgraced How were the holy Ministers divided and distracted How were the Christian Subjects grieved and offended and the Papists and wicked Men encouraged and emboldened What a damp brought it to all Godliness and Religion and since that time what horrible Wickedness Whoredom Drunkenness and all shameless Filthiness and what grievous Plagues of God one succeeding another have followed evey good Christian Subject must needs see and lament So he who was no Separatist And I hope Sir you and I are agreed that these things last spoken of were no part of England ' s Reformation And now Sir give me leave to tell you in some of your own Words Preface p. 47. We were in a lamentable case as to the Defence of the Reformation if we had no more to plead for it than we have indeed to plead for such mischievous Impositions And this seems to have been the sence of the Queen's Council in that Letter which the modest Enquiry p. 16 17. lays before you Therefore Sir I beseech you as you would not blast the Credit and Honour of the Reformation place it not in such things as rather brought a Deformation on us Here I know not well how to reconcile you to your self For p. 365. You say It was the great Wisdom of our Church not to make more things necessary as to Practice than were made so at the Settlement of our Reformation but whether there be sufficient Reason to alter those Terms of Communion which were then settled for the sake of such whose Scruples are groundless and endless I do not take upon me here to determine And Preface p. 53 Although the Arguments are very plausible one way yet the Objections are very strong another The Union of Protestants the Ease of scrupulous Consciences the providing for so many poor Families of ejected Ministers but not a word of providing for so many poor Congregations and dark corners of the Land that have need of them Are great Motives on one side But the weighty Considerations on the other side pag. 54. And double in number too as you reckon So here I see your Mind as you hold the Scales you might and would determine that there is no sufficient Reason to alter those Terms of Communion which in the great Wisdom of our Church were setled for the sake of such whose Scruples are groundless and endless For certainly those Arguments that are only plausible with you would not weigh down such as are strong and cogent nor a few Motives weigh down more weighty Considâ—rations But then what did you think of when you put that Question Preface p. 81. Is there nothing to be done for Dissenting Protestants Do we value a few indifferent Ceremonies and some late Declarations and doubtful Expressions beyond the satisfaction of Mens Consciences and the Peace and Stability of this Church And how happy had England been if such things had not been so over-valued As to this material Question you deliver your Opinion you say freely and impartially How Sir what Are you for altering what was setled in so great Wisdom by Men of so great Integrity such indefatigable Industry such profound Iudgment Is this for the Honour of our Reformation Is not this to blast the Credit of the Reformation I shall not take upon me to animadvert upon the whole of your Answer to this material Question presuming it will be scann'd by some of better Judgment Only one or two things I cannot but take notice of So I heartily thank you for that P. 82. 3. Notwithstanding because the use of Sacraments in a Christian Church ought to be the most free from all Exceptions and they ought to be so administred as rather to invite than discourage scrupulous Persons from joyning in them I do think it would be a part of Christian Wisdom and Condescension only here I would say Duty in the Governours of our Church to remove those Bars from a Freedom in joyning in a full Communion Now thanks for thus much and hold to it Sir Tho I have two great and learned Men of the Church of England worthy of Note with you just at hand that grant as much of other parts of God's Worship as you do of Sacraments scil that they should be free from all Exceptions See Hales of Schism in Miscel. p. 216 217 218. And you were once of his Mind Irenic p. 120. And Chillingworth p. 180. If all Men would believe the Scripture and freeing themselves from Prejudice and Passion would sincerely endeavour to find the true Sence of it and live according to it and require no more of others but to do so nor denying their Communion to any that do so would so order their publick Service of God that all which do so may without Scruple or Hypocrisy or protetestation against any part of it joyn with them in it who does not see that c. Again I cast my Eye on that p. 87. where you would have indulged Persons to pay Twelve pence a Sunday for their absence from the Parochial Churches which you say cannot be complained of as any heavy Burthen Which such will not thank you for You would have them indulged and not indulged And is Twelve Pence a Week no burden to those that with hard Labour have much ado to maintain their Families can scarce clear Twelve Pence per Week See what it is to be rich in this World that makes some insensible of the low Estate others live in And would you have Servants thâ— polâ—â—d too tho their Wages may not amount to so much But now at last I come to that which I said makes you hardly reconcileable to your 〈◊〉 Preface p. 92. Such a Review made by wise and peâ—â—â—able Mâ—n not given to Wrath and Disputing may be so far froâ— being a Disâ—onâ—ur to this Church that it may add to the Glory of it And the likâ— you 〈◊〉 say of removing those Bars to Communion in Saâ—â—â—ments becâ—â—â— it would be a paâ—t of Christian Wisdom Now lay things together Dr. Stilling says Preface p. 53 54. Tâ—ere are strong Objections and weighty Consideratiâ—â—â— against the Alteration of the established Laws And p. 364. would not take upon him to determine Whether there be sufficient Reason to 〈…〉 terms of Communiâ—â— settled And yet Dr. Sâ—lling says Preface p 82 92. That an Alteration would be a part of Christian Wisdom and so far from being a 〈◊〉 to this Church that it would add to the Gloâ—â— of it And 〈◊〉 on I put this Query Whether Man are justly charged as blâ—sting the Honour of the Reformation for dissenting in such things which it would be the Churches Glory to alter 3. Are you Impâ—rtial in the Account you give of the old-Non-Conformists as if it was their general Sence that Ministers were to forbear all
Preaching when 〈◊〉 In the Contents of your Book Part. 1 § 17. it is thus The â—ld Non 〈◊〉 Iudgment of the unlawfulness of Mens preaching here when forbidden by â—aws fullâ— cleared from some late Objections Which you undertake p. 78. c. That their Judgment and Practice was to forbear â—reaâ—hing in their Parish Churches while they were under Suspension I grant And did not the present Non-conformists follow them herein Did they not generally quit the Tempâ—es as well as their Tithes and Prâ—â—ts from Aug. 24. 62. yielding these to be at the Magisnates dispose They would not that you or others should call their Preaching as you do preaching iâ—â—pposition to established Laws whereunto they yielded as far as they could be satisfied it was lawful for them But do you your self beâ—â—â—ve that the old Non-conformists thought it unlawful for them to preach at aâ— when silenced Then you cannot take them to have been very honeâ—â— uprâ—ght Men who did so ordinarily 〈◊〉 from their own Principles Were not some of them glad of an opportunity of Preaching in another Diocess when they might not be suffered to preach where they lived And were not many of them for the exercise of their Ministry in private when they were denied liberty in publick Fr. Iohnson speaks of their sufâ—ering themselves to be deposed from their stated publick Ministy which you seem to overlook And so I think Bezâ— may well be understood of quitting their former publick Employments with whose Testimony you make so great a Flourish p. 21 22. What! is Beza for silencing and stopping the Mouths of such a number of faithful and able Ministers Would Beza even Beza at such a time as that be for silencing so many Preachers It appears that Beza was not of the Mind of our Adversaries That he expresseth no such terrible apprehensions at their quitting their Places as he doth at their Preaching in opposition to the Laws To which I return Were not the Non-conformists generally both at that time and since for quitting their Places rather than holding on in publick to the defiance of the Laws They have desired as far as they could to avoid the exasperating of Rulers They were not for opposing Sword to Sword as Bradshaw has it they were not movers of Sedition nor have been to this day And would Mr. Baxter even Mr. Baxter be for their silencing yet he says in his Search for the English Schismatick p. 37. It is not their Judgment speaking of the meer Non-conformists that they are bound to Preach when by opposing violence or the offending of Rulers it is likely to do more hurt than good and once preaching to deprive them of all the usefulness of their Lives c. But I doubt not there are many Christians yet alive who can remember some of the old Non-conformists and their preaching in private Houses when suspended from Preaching in Churches One writes me word that Mr. Hildersam used to preach in his own House when silenced and two or three Families came to hear him Another special Friend helping me to a sight of some Papers of Mr. E. Reyner formerly of Lincoln I meet with this considerable Passage For me to preach in this Place and at this Time is no way necessary since others may do it and I my self tho put by here may do it as well and freely elsewhere as in New-England Ireland Scotland Holland yea haply in some remote out-wing of the Kingdom And thus God in his ordinary Providence doth order it that his Church gains much by this course of removing Ministers and transplanting the Gospel to such Places as never heard the sound thereof before and in the mean while they may have time to do much good in private c. And I think this was the general Sence of the Non-conformists that they did not look on the censure of Suspension if unjust as a sufficient discharge from the exercise of their Ministry Had they thought themselves bound to cease Preaching whensoever they were prohibited by Men they were honester Men than to act so contrary to their Judgment as they used frequently to preach tho more privately or in Places where they were not known when suspended by the Bishops But these things were not to be publickly talkt of then when the High Commission-Court was up and there was such Inquisition after their Meetings I have this Account of Mr. Simeon Ash from one whose Father 's House was as his home sometimes that when he was sought after by Pursevants coming to them they had Meetings in the Night-time Another a Minister tells me he hath heard from Ancient Christians in Ringly Congregation that Mr. Iohn Angier sometimes Minister there being silenced and having his Chappel suspended by the Bishop of Chester used to preach to divers in his own House till such times as he was removed to Denton I suppose there are some in those Parts yet alive that can testify so much Mr. Westowbye I well knew His Bible was his Licence The Courts could not take him off but he would be at his Work in one place or other Once after my preaching for him when he was scarce able to get into the Pulpit for Age and Weakness accompanying it he entertained me with a Discourse of much of his Life past the Troubles and Opposition he had met with in the World and the great Experience he had of the most encouraging Success of his Ministry under his greatest Troubles that in his Travels he could write to his Wife as he said that God bad given him many Children she knew not of But to enquire after the Practice of particular Persons would be a tedious and endless Work You have the Iudgment of the Assembly under that Head of Ordination where they would have the Person to be ordained declare his sincere Intentions and Ends in entring into this Calling And his Resolution to continue against all Trouble and Persecution If that Assembly were Non-conformists then you see there the Iudgment of the Non-conformists But if they were generally Conformists then you see wee have the Judgment of a Learned Synod of Conformists for us 4. Are you not too partial in allowing Protestants to be occasionally present at some parts of Worship in the Roman Church and that frequently too to hear Sermons c. how far your et caetera may reach others cannot tell till you better inform them while you do not allow them to be present at the Worship performed in the Assemblies of Dissenters The former you are for pag. 108. To your Question there doth this make a Man to have Communion with the Church of Rome I answer yea so far as he joyns in their Worship so far he has Communion with them Sure you will not deny a Man to have any Communion with you in hearing the Word preached who comes for that End and that frequently too So here you must be supposed to grant Occasional Communion with the Roman Church in