â—eing he was to Ordain Elders in the plural numâ—er in every City and by the Scripture these Elâ—ers are Bishops then mo Bishops then one was â— be in every City which is contrare to the Episâ—opal Constitution 4. If it be said that Titus â—as Archbishop or Metropolitan Answ This â—cketh nothing but Proof which no where can â—e had For the primitive gospel-Gospel-Church knew â—o such thing as either a Diocesan Bishop Archâ—ishop or Metropolitan long after the Death of â—imothy and Titus there being no certain Rule â—or modeling of Diocesses until the Reign of Conâ—antine the Great at which time the Church did â—ollow the Civil Government as to Diocesses this â—ishop Stilling-fleet maketh out in his Irenic page â—76 377. 5. There is nothing to be found in â—e Scriptures to countenance this Assertion that â—itus was Archbishop of Crete all that can be said is â—at he was sent to Crete upon a piece of special serâ—ice for the Church which made him no more Biâ—op there then when he staid some time in other â—laces Aquinas run into the same Mistake as â—o Dalmatia for because Titus went to Dalmatia â—herefore he calls him the Bishop of Dalmatia 6. â—f it be said that the least that Bishops can Gain from Titus being left to Ordain Elders is that â—shops have sole Power of Ordination seing Tâ— alone ordained Answ This is but to begâ— Question for we deny that Titus was a Bishâ— let that first be proved And 2. That he ordaâ—ed as a Bishop And 3. That he ordained aloâ— For his ordaining of Elders makes him no Bishoâ— no more then the Apostle Pauls ordaining maâ— him a Bishop they ordained as Extraordinaâ— Officers in the Church making way for Bishoâ— or Pastors and though Titus was invested wiâ— extraordinary Power above any Bishop or Pastoâ— yet that it self will not prove that he ordained sâ— paratim without Presbyters Because he was Ordain Elders in the same manner that was the â—stablished Way of the Church in conjunction wiâ— Presbyters as the Apostle Paul did lay his hanâ— on Timothy conjunctim with the Presbytry thâ— is joyntly with a Presbytry Object 2. The Epistles to the seven Church of Asia are directed to the Bishops of these Chuâ—ches because each of them is directed to one siâ—gle Person called the Angel of the Church Answ That these Epistles are directed to tâ— Bishops of these Churches in the Scripture seâ— we easily acknowledge but then no advantaâ— to the Episcopal Cause is gained For if these Aâ—gels be Bishops and Bishops the same with Prâ—byters then ye are just where you were not liâ— â—d one step higher than a preaching Presbyter or â—ospel-Pastor 2. Whereas the Angel is spoken unto in the sinâ—lar number you have no advantage by this either â—r you shall find one and the same Angel spoken â— in the plural number As to the Angel of the â—hurch of Smyrna Rev. 2. 10 The Devil shal cast â—me of you into Prison the Speech is directed unâ— the Angel yet the plural number is used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to â—ew that it 's not one single Person only that is deâ—ted by the Name of Angel so also to the Angel â—f the Church of Thyatira but unto you I say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—ere the Angel is expresly spoken unto in the pluâ—l number So that any Argument from the â—ame Angel utterly faileth you For though an â—gel be named in the singular number yet that by â—e Name Angel is understood a collective Body â— Ministers is evident otherwise let any Man â—nder a Reason why the Angel is spoken to in the â—ural number as mo than one And hereby we â—ve solid ground to think that the Angel is spoâ—n to in the plural number purposly to obviat or â—rrect the Misapprehensions of any who would â—ink that a Bishop over Presbyters is understood â— the Word Angel Object 3 But the Government of the Church â— Bishops having Authority Jurisdiction over â—esbyters is so Antient that we cannot judge it â— any lower Derivation then from the Apostles albeit we have it not by express Scripture Answ 1. If you have such a Government the Church by due consequence from any Scriptuâ— of the New Testament We are ready to yeâ— Subjection albeit ye cannot Prove it by exprâ— Scriptures ye shall not be so hard put to it â— for you only to Affirm and Assert it Apostoliâ— without any Proof cannot convince Mens Judgâ—ments and satisfie their Conscience in a matter so great Importance Your selves being Judge if you have Proof for it make it appear Bishâ— Laud and some other Bishops with him said oâ— publickly if Prelacy were not the Apostolick Gâ—vernment they would forth with throw away thâ— Rotchets But they kept them as long as thâ— could and the Proof went no further upon whiâ— Mr. Pryne did challenge them for breach of Pâ—mise VVhy do ye not stop all our Mouths â—proving your Assertion and so satisfie a great Bâ—dy of Protestants at Home and Abroad Who giâ— Reasons from Scripture contrare to your Asserâ—on And to say it must be Apostolick because its Antiquity is little less then to say we will haâ— it from them whither they will or not their Dâ—ctrine and Practice refuse and yet it must be â—torted from them 2. We have made it appear already that the â—postles did prescribe another Form of Governmenâ— be managed by the Ministers of the Gospel in â— â—ty of Ministerial Power and how to impose uâ—on our own Reason and Belief that by some inâ—isible Prescription they have contradicted all â—is were hard measure should we or can we â—ject what they have Recorded by Inspiration of â—e Holy Ghost and betake our selves to some fanâ—ed Tradition Could this be a safe Way for our â—onsciences Or could we Answer to GOD for â— Your selves being Judges 3. If the Antiquity of Prelacy be at last its only â—ea and strongest Defence Cyprian will soon Anâ—er for us that Antiquity without Verity is but mouldy â—rror and as Sir Francis Bacon termed it a Cypher â—ithout a Figure 2. If this Plea should hold Good then there â— a Door opened for the most Antient Errors â—herewith the Church was infested even in the Aâ—ostles times and such as soon after endangered â—e renting of her Bowels 3. And however Antient Prelacy be found yet may and doth suffice us that it hath no Institution â— the gospel-Gospel-Church by Christ or his Apostles â—nd therefore can claim no better than Humane Appointment for which Appointment no Commisâ—n was granted to the Church Object All that is Alledged by you against Eâ—iscopacy is but your own late Sentiments For â—e Antient Fathers who understood the State of â—e Primitive Church better than you do generally bear Testimony that Bishops have been in all Agâ— of the Gospel-Church Answ We are of the same mind with Augâ—stin who being urged with the Authority of â—prian answered That what he spoke according to â— Scriptures he would
that is given to us whither Prophecy let â— Prophecy according to the proportion of Faith or Minâ—stry let us wait on our Ministry or he that Teacheâ— on Teaching or he that Exhorteth on Exhortation â— that Giveth let him do it with Simplicity he that Ruâ—eth with Diligence he that sheweth Mercy with Cheeâ—fulness Ephes 4. 11. And he gave some Apostles anâ— some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pâ—stors and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints fâ— the Work of the Ministry for the Edifieing of the Bâ—dy of Christ As for any other Scriptures alledged to favour thâ— Episcopal Cause they shall be considered in theiâ— due place But these Scriptures now mentioneâ— are the places that all Church-Officers do ordinarily betake themselves unto who are willing tâ— have their Commission and Title tryed by thâ— Word of GOD because by them we are particulaâ—ly instructed Who they are whom GOD hath sâ— in his Church and in what order as first secondâ—rily c. now let the Reader demonstrate a Bishoâ— over Presbyters by any of these Scriptures and â—e shall not want reverence let him appear and â—ell us plainly where he fixeth his claim for he will â—ot for Truth and Modesties sake challenge all â—hese Offices and Gifts to be his and some of them â—eing now out of his reach and ceased as Miâ—acles Gifts of Healing and Diversities of Tongues â—t's agreed that all these may be laid aside from â—his Debate as Extraordinary Some of the Offiâ—es mentioned are too low for a Bishop being the â—owest Set of Church Officers as Deacons under â—he Denomination of Helps giving with Simplicity â—nd Cheerfulness neither will these be concerned â—n this Debate We shall come then to the Highest and First in â—he Roll the Apostles being set down first and Biâ—hops now the First and Highest in the Church â—ere some of them fix their Claim as Successors â—o the Apostles and plead it with all earnestness â—ut no successe for lack of Arguments and the â—eight of Arguments against it and that VVe be â—ot amused with big and ambiguous Words not â—nderstood We crave that Justice of those who â—aintain this Apostolick succession to let us know â—hat they understand by it if it be that Prelats â—â— the Gospel-Church have succeded to the intire â—ffice of Apostles or 2d if they have fucceded unâ—o the Doctrine of the Apostles or 3d. unto such â—ospel-Administrations performed by the Apostles as were necessary to continue in the Gospâ— Church as Preaching administration of Sacrameâ— Discipline c. or 4th if by Apostolick Succâ—sion they understand Apostolick Institution Tâ— is such as have Commission from Christs Apostlâ— to Feed his Flock If the first of these be affirmed that Bishops â—ver Presbyters succeed to the Apostles intire Offâ— Then First we have many moe Apostles than eâ— Christ did Institute for all Diocesan Bishops mâ— be Apostles 2. Then they have all immediat Commissiâ— from Christ as all the Apostles had For we mâ— see that when one Apostle was wanting the Detâ—mination who should fill his Room the immeâ—at Decision thereof was left to GOD by Lots â— Acts 1. When Mathias was appointed to take pâ— of the Apostleship from which Judas fell by Traâ—gression This manner of Election our Bishops wâ— not pretend 3. If Bishops Succeed to the very Office aâ— Commission of Apostles then they are infallible Doctrine and may write Canonick Scriptuâ— which their modesty will not challenge 4. If Bishops succeed the Apostles Office thâ— shall all lose their Diocesses for the Apostles â— no Diocess but the wide World they had no liâ—ted Bounds but the Bishop is restricted by Lâ— limited Bounds for as Diocesan his Power extenâ—eth no further then the circumscribed Diocess â—hereof he is Bishop Secondly If it be said that Apostolick Successiâ— is by succeeding to their Doctrine then all Gosâ—el-Ministers have the same claim for they also reach the same Doctrine feeding the Flock with â—e same sincere Milk of the Word So that eâ—ery faithfull Gospel-Pastor preaching sound Doâ—rine neither Corrupting Diminishing nor Adâ—ing to the Word of GOD may put in his Claim â—r this Kind of Succession And that with greatâ— confidence than such as make Additions of doâ—rinal significative Ceremonies of their own Inâ—ention For the third manner of Succession to these Goâ—el-Administrations which were to continue in the â—urch tho' performed by the Apostles Consider â— First That all Gospel-Ministers partake equalâ— of that manner of Succession As they are Paâ—rs entrusted by Christ with the feeding of his â—ock Let the Maintainers of imparity among â—ospel-Ministers shew a Difference or what Miâ—sterial Acts are reserved to some and denied to â—hers 2. These Gospel-Administrations now to be â—erformed by the ordinary Pastors of the Church â—ke not their Original Authority from the Apoâ—olick Office but from Christs Commission and Precepts to the Pastors of his Church to perfoâ— these Ministerial Acts the Pastor being a distiâ— Officer in the House of GOD dependeth not â— the Apostolick Office nor is there any need for â— Because the Pastor hath his Commission distiâ— from the Office of an Apostle though the mattâ— of their Administrations in some things coincidâ— yet that maketh not the two distinct Offices coiâ—cide the Pastors Office being entire by it self the Gospel Charter Fourthly If by Apostolick Succession be meaâ— only Apostolick Institution that is that these aâ— the Apostles Successors whom the Apostles dâ— Institute and Appoint to be the Pastors of tâ— Church This manner of Succession we acknoâ—ledge to be most firm and therefore whosoevâ— can instruct their Office in the Church to be Apostolick Institution have the true Right aâ— Title and therefore shall now most willingly joâ— Issues for its Trial knowing that Bishops ovâ— Presbyters were never instituted by the Apostlâ— as shall hereafter appear Object Some Bishops can draw the line of â—piscopal Succession from the Apostles days unâ— this day Answ A line of Episcopal Succession that is the Succession of Diocesan Bishops for its Bishoâ— of that new Cut Model who are concern'd this Debate such a Line of Succession can no Mâ— draw from the Apostles Times The Reason is obâ—ious because there were no Diocesses and thereâ—ore no Diocesan Bishops long after the Apostles â—imes For the first three Centuries the Church was under Heathnish Persecutors incapable of aâ—y Diocess for a Bishop and therefore Euseb commonly calleth the Bishop a Bishop of a Parish the Church knew not what a Diocess was before Conâ—tantin appeared and then began to follow the Mode of the Civil Government 2. Tho' a Line of Succession could be drawn from the Apostles Times that is of Scriptural Bishops having no greater Charge then they could personally oversee Yet as this maketh nothing for Diocesan-Bishops so it proveth nothing of Apostolick Succession because a Succession from the Apostles Times can never prove a Succession to the Apostolick Office the one cannot infer the other Object Some Apostles came
was the Will of GOD that such an Officer as a â—shop over Presbyters should be in the House â— GOD that they might obey him in the LORâ— 3. The Apostle in the following Words giveâ— Warning that after his Departure grievous Wolvâ— shall enter in among them not sparing the Flock aâ— verse 30. of their own selves shall Men arise speaâ—ing perverse things to draw away Disciples after theâ— Yet for all this Danger he giveth no Direction set up a Bishop over other Ministers for presâ—ving the Flock nor any Intimation that it wâ— the Will of GOD to provide such a Remedy aâ—terwards But requireth the Pastors to Watch aâ— commendeth them to GOD and the Word of hâ— Grace which was able to Build them up wheâ— by we may see they are remitted to the word for Dâ—rection in what concerneth his Church and nâ— to invent without the Word a Remedy of theâ— own devising 4. From the same Scripture â— are also instructed that the instituted Pastors â— the Church are to feed and take heed unto all â— Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath maâ— them Overseers And therefore Gospel-Ministeâ— are to have no greater Charge than such as thâ— may perform all the Duties belonging to a Pastoâ— to all the Flock And if any Minister assumâ— greater Charge than he can perform these Duâ— unto then it is not that Charge that the Holy Ghâ— hath committed to him If it be said that the Bishop feedeth the Flock â— his Substituts such as he is pleased to appoint Answ But quo jure by what Right or Authoâ—ty can he substitute another to do that which he â—th assumed for his own Work and personal Perâ—rmance it was a doubt that the learned Sir Franâ— Bacon said he could never be resolved of how a Man that had a Trust committed to him for his perâ—nal Faithfulness could delegate that Trust to another â—d if a Bishop say he never engaged to Feed so â—any then it may be justly replyed he was never â—astor to so many Why then should he presume â—e Title and Name of their Pastor When he â—â—weth it simply impossible for him to Teach â—d Feed them or the twentieth part of them acâ—rding to the Duty of a Pastor It 's also to be observed that as by this and maâ— other Texts the Ministers of the Gospel have â—ual Pastoral Authority de jure so we find in the â—riptures that de facto they are placed in Possessiâ— of this Ministerial-Power and exercise it with â—vine Approbation For Presbyters ordain Miâ—sters as 1 Tim. 4. 14. and are therein approved â— the Apostle Timothy being charged not to neâ—ct the Gift he had thereby received 2. A Comâ—nity of Presbyters exert their Power in Church â—scipline and are required by the Apostle so to â— 1 Cor. 5. 4. and 5. verses This Sentence was â—icted by many not by one assuming the sole Power of Jurisdiction to himself which is câ—sonant to our Saviours Doctrine Matth. 18. 1â— who requireth the offended Brother to tell â— Church not a single Person if Christ had coâ—mitted the Power of Discipline to One than â— Complaint of the offended Brother should hâ— been to that One for to whom should he Coâ—plain but to such as had Power to do him Justiâ— and remove the Offence But we see Christ's â—pointment is not to make Application to One â— to the Church Therefore it 's no Institution Christ that authoritative Church-Power be loâ—ed in one Person So also we find that Presbyters are Constituâ— Members of that famous Juridical Synod at Jeâ—salem Acts 15. the Apostles and Elders came to â—ther to consider the Matter in which Assemâ— there is not one found to Over-rule the Rest â— assuming a negative Voice Though some presâ— had more just Authority in the Church than â— now on Earth can pretend to yet all had fâ— liberty to speak their Judgement and all carâ— by Suffrages and that which was concluded plâ—ed the Apostles and Elders and is published in â— Name of the Apostles and Elders whereby it's parent that in the Apostles time Presbyters â— in the actual exercise of Church-Government â—therwise the Decrees of the Synod had never â— published in their Name We shall not at prâ— multiply Arguments but let these three be duely â—nsidered 1. That the Office of a Prelate canâ—t be found in the Roll of Church-Officers 2. â—rists Discharging his Ministers to be one of â—em Greater than another And 3. The Diâ—e Institution of parity among Ministers Object Timothy and Titus are called Bishops in â— Bibles therefore Bishops are by Divine Instiâ—tion Answ All Gospel Pastors are Bishops accorâ—g to the Word of GOD and therefore tho' â—ey were Bishops which cannot be granted â—t the Episcopal Cause gaineth nothing because â—shops above Presbyters are never found in our â—bles 2. These Postscripts to the 2d Epistle to Tiâ—thy and the Epistle to Titus are not Canonick â—ripture but added several Ages after the Canon Scripture was closed and after the Church beâ—n to degenerat which is irrefragably evinced Mr Pryn in his Unbishoping of Timothy and â—us and is acknowledged both by Papists and â—ers that the most antient Copies have no such â—stscripts and therefore our Bibles have these â—stscripts still at some distance from the rest of â—se Epistles But the Difference is not altogeâ—er so observable now as formerly when these â—stscripts were purposely Printed in very smal â—aracters to make the Difference discernable by all who read them 3 Timothy is expresly â—led an Evangelist 2 Tim. 4. 5. and therefore coâ— not be a Bishop neither in Scripture sence aâ— Pastor to a particular Flock whom he might pâ—sonally oversee nor in the Prelatical sence as a â—ocesan Bishop because an Evangelist was noâ—â—mited to any particular bounds as hath been cleâ—ed already And to say that Timothy was Bishâ— of Ephesus is against reason for Timothy was pâ—sent with the Apostle Paul when he commitâ— the Charge of the Flock to the Presbyters in coâ—mon but no mention of Timothy as their Bishopâ— whom the Charge had chiefly belonged if he hâ— been the only Bishop of Ephesus As for Titus he was employed in the like Gâ—pel-Service from one place to another as Timâ— was But it 's said Tit. 15. That he was left in Cretâ— ordain Elders in every City therefore he had Episâ—pal Jurisdiction Answ 1. Timothy and Titus were both exâ—ordinary Officers in the Church as appears â— their constant Travels from place to place thâ— Work being to erect Churches and plant Bishâ— or Presbyters in these Churches but not to Bishops of them themselves their Power beâ— greater than ordinary Bishops or Pastors as is â— served by Chrysostom on Eph. 4 that their Work â— to plant Churches and Bishops or Elders to be theiâ—â—dinary Pastors 2. Seing Titus was to ordain Elâ—ers in every City of Crete then where was his own â—iocess For it cannot be supposed that he did â—rdain himself Bishop of one of these Cities 3.
willingly accept but when he spâ— without them with his good leave he would dissent â— well knew that the best of sinfull Men were Fâ—lible and no Man to be followed further then â— was a follower of Christ 2. When it 's said that the Fathers do generalâ— assert Episcopacy was in the Church it will nâ— thence follow that they asserted it should be the Church it 's one thing to affirm that in thâ— and the other place there were Bishops over Preâ—byters but another thing to affirm there was Dâ—vine Institution for such Prelacy there 's vast diffâ—rence between the two and where this is not aâ—verted the Testimonies of the Fathers are bâ— wrested and perverted as if they all approved Prelacy because they make mention of Bishop For 3. We shall find the choise of the Fathers â—claring that from the beginning it was not so aâ— that the Difference between Bishop and Presbâ—ter came in to the Church by Custom but by â— Divine Appointment That the Church in â— primitive times after the Apostles was governâ— and should be governed by the common Couâ— â—f Presbyters and therefore we are willing they â—pear and speak for themselves knowing they and up for us more than for you Palycarp Epist ad Philip. perswadeth the Peoâ—e to Obey their Presbyters as Christ We are not â—ncerned in his manner of Expression if it appear â—yperbolick this being sufficient to us that his â—xhortation is to obey Presbyters in the Lord but â—t Bishops over Presbyters Ignatius Epist ad Trallens requireth the People subject to the Presbytry calling it Gods Court. Ireneus lib. 4. cap. 44. it becometh you to be Oâ—diâ—nt to Presbyters who have their succession from the â—postles And in his Epistle to Victor called Bishop of â—ome he hath these Words The Presbyters of Rome whom you have succeeded This Epistle and this â—ententence in it is quoted by Euseb lib. 5. cap. 23. â—hereby it 's evident that all the Bishops of Rome the second Century were but Presbyters in Ireâ—us his Judgement Tertull. Apolog. cap. 30. calleth Presbyters preâ—ents of the Churches Praesident probati quique Senioâ— Theophylact. in Philip. 1. affirms that whiles the â—postles lived the Names of Bishops and Presbyters â—ere not distinguished Chrysostom commenting on the same Scripture â—clareth himself to be of the same mind Jerom is more plain then pleasant insisting length in the Probation of his known Assertiâ— that Bishops over Presbyters are not by Diviâ— Institution for which he quoteth many Texts aâ— Commenting on the first cap. to Titus saith a Prâ—byter is the same with a Bishop and before that Faâ—ons did arise in Religion by the instinct of the Devil â— Churches were governed by the common Council of Prâ—byters It 's strange that this Discourse of Jeroâ— escaped an index expurgatorius confidering hâ— Bellarmin and others fret when ever it 's mentioâ—ed it 's so plain and full against the Divine Rigâ— of Prelacy That some of them spare not to saâ— the Good Old Father erred But he goeth onâ— his Epistle to Euagr. and saith let Bishops know thâ— it 's rather by Custom then by the Lords Appointmâ— that Bishops are above Presbyters Ambrose on Eph. 4. saith that Bishops were set â—bove Presbyters by a Council But giveth no accouâ— of the time and place of that Council Howevâ— that same which he saith sufficeth because suppâ—sing it were enacted by a Council then the preâ—tion was but by Humane Authority August Epist 19. confesseth that it was but by present Custom of the Church that Bishops were greâ—er than Presbyters Gregor Naz. orat 28. wisheth the utter Abolâ—on of Prelacy calling it a Tyrannical Government Theodoret. commenting on Phil. 1. saith tâ— these Bishops mentioned in the Text were Presbyters Oecumenius commenting on the same text deâ—lareth himself of the same mind Chrysostom commenting on Hebrews saith â—at Heb. 13. 17. made always his Soul to tremble â—hen he thought on it and Homil. 34. page 602. falâ—th a wondring if a Bishop can be saved any of them â—peciallie whoâ—are greedy of so great a Charge Hom. â— page 627. he calleth them miserable Wretches who â—esire it for saith he thou must give an account of all â—hom thou Rulest these are the words of Chrysoâ—om Basil de Spir. Sancto saith that by Ambition to overnall all Church Government came to nothing Many mo ' might be added but we suppose ye â—ill think these too many speaking at this Rate It should also be observed that Bishops of old â—mmonly had no greater Charge then they could â—ersonally oversee So Euseb lib. 10. cap. 4. saith expresly that a Bishop â—d no greater Charge then he could take personal notice their Souls And lib. 6. cap. 29. saith that an 236. the faithfull in Rome did meet together in one place chuse another Bishop in Place of Anterus Cyprian lib. 2. epist 5. When a Bishop was to Chosen the whole Body of the People were called toâ—her that he might be Elected before all their eyes and the suffrage of the whole Fraternity Here are two â—ings to be Noted that the Body of the People Elected their own Bishop next that the People whom the Bishop was to take Charge could meâ— together in one place One Bishop had common â— but one Altar or Communion Table so that oâ— Bishop now after the New Model taketh a greaâ—er Charge than would have well served twenâ— yea fourty in former times Primat Vsher in his Relig. of Irish saith that Pâ—trick Planted in Ireland 365. Churches and as mâ—ny Bishops and that afterward in Malachias tiâ— the Bishops were more multiplied Let that numbâ— be compared with the present number of Bishoâ— in Ireland And then let the Reader Judge wâ— hath the greatest regard to Antiquity or who tâ— Bishops are that are most capable to Dischargeâ— Pastoral-Duty to the Flock whether few aboâ— twenty in a Nation or many hundreds And if â— will not regard the account given by Mr. Clerks and others though convincingly demonstratâ— that many Bishops lived so near to one anotheâ— and their Sees so contiguous that their Charâ— could not exceed the Bounds of an ordinary Parisâ— and that many of them were Bishops of Villagâ— yet ye will take notice of your Friend Mr. Fulâ— who saith that Bishops of Old were set too thick for â— to grow Lydda Jamina and Joppa being Episcopâ— Towns and all of them within 3 or 4 Miles of othâ— For Bishops had then their Sees in Poor Contemptiâ— Villages And that none may think he speaketh random Sozom. confirmeth the same that Villages â—ad their Bishops lib. 7. cap. 19. Object But the Church upon mature Delibeâ—ation found it expedient to invest some with â—ower and Authority over many others for preâ—enting or healing of Divisions and keeping all in Unity and good Order Answ The most knowing and moderat of the â—piscopal Perswasion take Sanctuary here and â—resume no higher alledging the Church was â—onstrained to it for compescing turbulent Huâ—ors and
his Liturgy which evâ— Papists though most fond of Forms are ashaâ—ed of therefore Bellarm. de Jacobi Liturgia paâ— 146. and 150. confesseth it spurious 2d Reason as there were no Liturgies in the â—postles times for Divine Service so the Churâ— wanted a fixed Liturgy for the space of 600 yeaâ— Dr. Burnet in his History of the Reformatioâ— maketh it appear that Liturgies were not so muâ— as the matter of Publick Consultation for â—â— years after Christ And that the first Liturgy tâ— was Imposed was Composed by Gregory an 60â— Others also more antient Confirm the same â— Socrat. who lived in the fifth Century lib. 5. cap. â—1 page 698. saith that generally in any place aâ—ong all sorts of Worshippers there cannot two be found â—greeing to use the same Prayers Sure then there was â—o Liturgy obliging them to agree in a Set-Form â—amous Bishop Vsher affirmeth yet more Relig. of â—e Irish cap. 4. page 31. that the Roman Vse was â—ought in to this Nation but 500 Years before his own â—me by the Popes Legats Gillibertus Malachias â—d Christianus whereby as Mr. Clarkson observes â—at the Roman Liturgy was not admitted here â—efore the 12th Century so that imposed Liturâ—es are but a Novelty in the Church And to this â—ree the Testimonies of antient Fathers making manifest that the Churches publick Prayers â—ere not read out of a Book Justin Martyr Aâ—ol 2. page 139. saith their Prayers and Thanksâ—vings were according to their Ability and very â—ean Abilities would serve to read Prayers if â—ere had been any such extant But Tertull. Apolog. 39. maketh it yet more plain who saith â— Pray without a Monitor because we Pray from â— Heart These Testimonies make it abundantly appear â—at the first imposed Liturgy was no Elder but â—ntemporary with the Popes Establishment and â—t received in this Nation several hundreds of â—ars afterward and that this Liturgy was first â—posed when a Pope was Imposed as an Universal Head to the Church doth conciliate no great â—neration for that Composure it 's also notouâ— known that the Liturgy unto which we are reqâ—red to Conform was taken out of that Roman â—turgy and though many Things were left out our Liturgy which were in the Roman yet tâ— Argument made use of for gaining of Papists â— the Communion of the Protestant Church by Prâ—clamation in the Reign of Edward the 6th â— that they should hear their own Service in English whâ— formerly they heard in Latin 3d. Reason as neither Christ nor his Apostâ— did form any Liturgy for Divine Service so nâ—ther He nor any of his Apostles did ever give Coâ—mission to other Men for Composing such a Foâ— of Divine Service which should oblige othâ— to Use it whereby it 's manifest that such a Foâ— of Service wanteth Divine Institution and theâ—fore we cannot Consent to it as any Ordinanceâ— GOD. 4th Reason because Mens Composing and Iâ—posing a Form of Worship without Divine Inâ—tution or Commission casteth an injurious Imâ—tation upon those to whom the Care of the Châ—ches was committed as if the Church had not beâ— sufficiently provided for the Service of GOD â— all that Christs Apostles had prescribed But tâ— Men were constrained to devise some new and bâ—ter Way than what we have by Scripture Direâ—â—n this is such a Reflection as we cannot be guilâ—y of if any shall say the Composers of the Liturgy no doubt had Direction from GOD before â—hey attempted such a Work Answ Let this Direction or Appointment appear and We shall Conform to it or if any shall say that the Exterâ—als of Worship and the manner of Church-Administrations are left to the Discretion of Church-Officers and so they may Compose a Model of Service as they think most expedient for the Churâ—hes Good Answ There is great Difference between a Model directing the external Order of â—hat Worship which GOD himself hath Appoinâ—ed as to common Circumstances for Time and Place and how one part shall Succeed another â—nd such a Model wherein is contained Worship â—o be offered to GOD which he hath not prescribâ—d Church-Officers may safely do the first but â—ave no Power for the second The Worship of GOD is not such a trivial matter but that Christ â—r his Apostles in his Name would have given Directions for what was necessary will Liturgists â—ndeed claim to more Authority and Wisdom for Gospel-Administrations than CHRISTS Apostles â—ho never imposed but left us free of such Bonds 5th Reason The imposing of a Form of Divine â—ervice composed by one or a few derogateth â—om the esteem due to other Ministers of the Gosâ—el both of your own Perswasion and others and is a real Reflection against your Selves as if in â— Age there were Men so qualified for the Scrviâ— of GOD no Men assisted by the Spirit of GOâ— for Gospel-Administrations as if no Ministers haâ— the Blessing and Benefit of Christs being with hâ— Servants to the end of the World no Ministeâ— partaking of these Gifts that Christ received fâ— Men But only a few Composers of Liturgy thâ— all others must take both Matter and Form â— Divine Service from them and so to serve GOâ— with that which cost them nothing and yet thâ— Composers but Men not so much as pretendinâ— to Divine Inspiration or any Commission froâ— Christ for the said Composure by what Argâ—ment can a Minister of Christ convince his owâ— Conscience that it is his Masters Will to be serveâ— in that manner And if he please not his Mastâ— what Comfort can he have in the Service Anâ— how can he know it wil be pleasing to him excepâ— one way or other he had revealed it 6th Reason The obliging of Christians â— serve GOD by an imposed Liturgy is a Lording â—ver the Heritage of GOD Which is expresly foâ—bidden And that it is a Lording over GODS Hâ—ritage is evident because it 's imposed as one of thâ— principal Terms of Communion with the Church sâ— that such as will not Conform to it shall be Exclâ—ded the Churches Communion this is to take Dominion over Mens Faith and Consciences Fâ— â—f a Mans Conscience will not permit him to make â—hat his Worship to GOD which is only devised â—y Men Yet he must either Comply renitente â—onscientia against his Light or shall be no Memâ—er of the Church Next it's a Lording over the Heritage of GOD â—ecause it depriveth us of our Christian Liberty â—hich we must stand fast in after Christ hath made â—s free We are not to be entangled again in a â—oke of Bondage But to be obliged to serve â—OD by a Form he hath no where commanded a very Bondage depriving us of our Liberty to â—erve our LORD as himself hath Appointed for â—e plead for no Lawless Liberty only in the â—ure Matters of GOD his Worship and our Conâ—iences we desire to be Subject to GODS own â—ppoiniments and not to the Ordinances and Comâ—andments of Men. 7th Reason A peremptory imposed Liturgy â—epriveth us of the Benefit
the rest he approacheth that â—age and when he hath it purposly straight beâ—re him and near to it he Worshippeth 6. In the mean time he saith I purpose no Worâ—ip to that Image but I Worship GOD before it â—doro Deum sub hac Figura figuratum the Questiâ— thus stated the Doubt is easily resolved and â—t the Reader judge if that manner of Worship â—e not forbidden expresly by the Law of GOD â—d whatever Protestation be against all deference â— the Image if it be not protestatio contraria facto by â—ch a Man Object When we Kneel at the Sacrament we are then Praying to GOD and who can be blâ—ed for Prayer Answ No Christian will be against Prayâ— and in a special manner Men should pray for â— blessing of that Holy Ordinance that they â— have true spiritual Communion with CHRISâ— which is not only to be solemnly performed at Consecration of the Elements but each Comâ—nicant is to be frequent and fervent in Prayer fore they come to the Sacrament Yet Prayeâ— not the proper Work of Communicating in very time when we partake because the Natâ— of the Work is to Meditate and Feed upon Chrâ— receiving him into our Hearts by Faith when receive the Bread and Wine and therefore Prâ—er not being the Communicants immediat Duâ— when he is eating that Bread and drinking of Cup so neither can Kneeling be his present Duâ— Object But we are to Pray always Answ That Praying always is not so to be â—derstood as if we were not to allow time for otâ— Duties differing in their Nature from Prayer are to Believe hear the Word Praise c. these are not prayer so we are to partake of Châ— Body and Blood in the Sacrament yet that pâ— taking is not Prayer It should also be considered that there is gâ— Difference between stated set time for Prayâ— and some speedy Ejaculations to GOD which â— performed without interruption to another â—ty But to turn the Sacrament to a stated â—ayer from the Beginning to the End of Partakâ—g goeth too near the over-turning of the very â—ture of the Sacrament So that it might be justâ— enquired at any Person who Kneeleth all the â—e he Partaketh whither he be Praying all that â—e or not If he say that he was not all that â—e Praying Then it may be demanded why he â—s all that time on his Knees if not about immeâ—at Worship as Prayer if he say that he was all at time in Prayer then it may be said the Man â—th been at Prayer rather than Communicating â—ecause it 's impossible the Man could Communiâ—te aright if he allowed no time for Meditation discerning the LORDS Body and receiving of â—im Spiritually when he received the Bread and â—ine but spent all the time of Partaking in Prayâ— which by its Unseasonableness diverteth the â—oul from its immediat Duty The comfortless Original of Kneeling at the â—ords Supper is also to be remembred coming in â—ith Popish Transubstantiation And Papists do â—et frankly tell the World that if they did not beâ—eve CHRISTS Corporal Presence in the Sacraâ—ent they would allow it no VVorshipping-Poâ—ure Our 4th Exception Is against the Sign of Cross in Baptism because it 's performed as Act of VVorship without Divine Institution Aâ— therefore cannot approve of it as a warrantaâ— Administration but Judge it vain Worship Disâ—proved of GOD. Here are three things to be considered distinâ—ly 1. That as the Sign of the Cross is Used â— Baptism it is Worship 2. That it is VVorsâ— without any Institution of GOD. And 3. Tâ— therefore it is Vnwarrantable For the First that its VVorship is evident â—cause by the Sign of the Cross Persons are soleâ—ly Dedicated to GOD the which Dedication is its own Nature an Act of VVorship For This Dedication is an actual solemn Acknowledâ—ment of GODS Soveraign Dominion Right aâ— Title to the Persons so Dedicated and therefoâ— is present Homage rendred to GOD which VVorship 2ly This Dedication is directed GOD and terminats in Him and therefore is Woâ—ship for a deliberat Solemn Devoting of Persoâ— to GOD cannot be performed without immediâ— Application presenting the Persons to GOD whâ—ther for Blessings or Services otherwise it câ— be no Dedication to Him There can be no Evasion for this nor any Wâ— to Vindicate it from being an Act of VVorshâ— while these who Use the Sign of the Cross oâ— and declare it to be a Dedicating Sign And that the Reader may see this Dedication â—cknowledged take the Bishops own words for it â— his second Admonition Appendix page 25. And â—t only Our Church but all other Christians from the Apostles time have for this Reason looked on making â—e Sign of the Cross as a very fit Instance and Declaâ—tion of their Glorying in CHRISTS Sufferings and â—adiness to follow Him in them which is an effectual â—edication of our selves to his Service This Asserâ—on is highly Uncharitable for if all Christians â—nce the Apostles time have so looked upon the â—ign of the Cross then it followeth that they are â—t Christians who look otherwise on it the Conâ—quence cannot be avoided if this Assertion be â—ue But that which these words are quoted for to prove that the Sign of the Cross is used for a â—edication of People to God which the Canons of â—e Church of England doth also affirm Can. 30. â—he words are so that for the very remembrance of â—e Cross which is very Precious to all them that rightly â—elieve in Jesus Christ and in the other respects mentioâ—ed the Church of England hath retained still the Sign â—f it in Baptism following therein the Primitive and Aâ—ostolical Churches and accounting it a Lawfull outâ—ard Ceremony and honourable Badge whereby the Inâ—ant is Dedicated to the Service of Him that dyed upon â—e Cross as by the words used in the Book of Common-Prayer it may appear No farther Notice shal be taken of these woâ— at present but that they Declare the Sign of â— Cross to be a Dedication of Infants to the Servâ— of CHRIST and this Dedication to GOD beâ— confessed is sufficient to Prove it Worship Offerings made and given to GOD were alwaâ— parts of Worship The second Thing is that this Worship by â— Sign of the Cross is without any Divine Institâ—on which will be acknowledged by all who câ—sider what Divine Institution is and where iâ— to be found If the Scriptures be wholly Silâ— never mentioning never Commanding any sâ— Sign to be Used either by express Words oâ—â—ny true Consequence then it can have no Divâ— Institution But no colour for it can be foundâ— the whole Book of GOD therefore it wantâ— Divine Institution If Men could show any Pâ—scription for it we would Debate it no more But seing the Sign of the Cross in Baptism destitute of all Authority from GOD either â— Precept or Example We cannot but look upâ— it as meer Will-Worship and therefore an â—warrantable Administration in the Church of Gâ— which we cannot Conform
of GODS Gifts purâ—ased by Christ and bestowed by his Spirit on â—inisters for the Edification of his Church and â—erefore we cannot approve of it For by this â—nted Form whatever measure of the Spirit of â—ayer be powred out upon a Minister Helping â—d Teaching him what to Pray what ever enâ—gement of heart be given by the Spirit of Grace â—d Supplications Yet nothing of this must apâ—ar for the Good of the Church Because the mans mouth is muzled up by a peremptory Forâ— which we humbly conceive is most dangerous aâ— a great Obstruction to the Churches Edificatioâ— 8th Reason Though our blessed LORD haâ— given us a Patern of Prayer and therein a sumâ— all we are to Pray for Yet when the best of Mâ— offer to make a Collection of the Particulars coâ—tained in that Summe though the Patern be Pâ—fect yet their Collections are always Lame aâ— Deficient considering tbe innumerable Neceâ—ties of the People of GOD And so faileth of pretended End to furnish People with all manâ— of necessary particular Petitions to GOD Fâ— hundreds of Instances may be given of necessaâ— Petitions all of them according to the Wordâ— GOD and particularly founded on the LORâ— Prayer Yet no mention of them in the Bookâ— Common-Prayer And therefore such Forms Mens devising do but limite and straiten the Châ—ches Prayers they are so far from being a Heâ— especially when they are so enjoyned that sucâ— Form shall be used and no other 9th Reason The Case of Souls in this Lifâ— very various Sometimes secure and need to â— awakned sometimes cast down and need to â— Comforted sometimes in Doubts by reason their Ignorance Weakness and Guilt the Dâ—pensations of GOD toward them are also very â—rious sometimes Humbling and sometimes Coâ—forting And therefore the reading of Scriptures 〈◊〉 Prayers are to be Adâ—pted to the Conditiâ— of the People so far as Ministers can be acâ—inted with their Condition and Exigences â— by a stinted Form the poor People must take â—at falleth out such a day of the Year whither â—e suitable to their present Need or not they â—ll have no other for that time the Minister is â—und to read his set Task If the Righteous â—OD should by some sudden Judgement call his â—ople to speedy Repentance and Mourning yet â—he Book appoint a Feast-day of Joy at that veâ— time the Minister and People must do as the â—ok requires and then behold Joy and Gladness â—en GOD calleth unto Mourning which is an â—quity that GOD doth most severely threaten â— 22. 12 13 14 verses So on the other hand â—en it pleaseth GOD to grant some signal Deliâ—ance to his Church that requireth present soâ—n Thanksgivings to GOD if the Book reâ—ire that to be a time of Humiliation and Mournâ—g the Book must be obeyed rather than the â—esent Call of GOD but Moses the Servant of â—e LORD was of another mind Exod. 14. 30. the â—ORD saved Israel that Day out of the Hands of â—e Egyptians and in the beginning of cap. 15. â—en sang Moses and the Children of Israel this Song â—o the LORD not deferring it as prelimited by â—me other Work So Ministers of the Gospel being the Stewards of CHRIST are required do all to Edification attending the present Dutâ— the People of GOD Being also obliged to disâ—bute that Food Christ hath provided for theâ— due Season that every man may have his Porâ— as his Necessity requireth 10th Reason That manner of Service to Gâ— which we cannot perform in Faith we canâ— Comply with but serving GOD by an impoâ— stinted Form we cannot perform in Faith â— therefore cannot Comply with we cannot pâ—form it in Faith because we know of no Authoâ— such a Form hath from GOD as any Ordinaâ— of his And therefore seing we have no way be convinced that it is the Will of GOD we seâ— him after that manner no Ground no Preceâ— no Promise for our Faith to fix upon We câ— not perform that Service in Faith and so to uâ— would be Sin As for the Book of Common-Prayer and the Pâ—ticulars therein which hath been so offensive the Consciences of many we need do no more put you in mind of a part of these Complaints aâ— Exceptions published by those who had Commiâ—on from King Charles the 2d to alter and ameâ— it They except against the reading of the Aâ—cryphal Books desiring that nothing be readâ— tâ—e Church for Lessons but the Holy Scriptures â— the Old and New Testament They except aâ—inst the Religious Observation of Saints days as â— they were Holy Days having no Foundation in â—e Scriptures They except against that Version â— the Scripture used throughout the Liturgy as â—ving many Defects whereof they give particuâ—r Instances Likeways that the Liturgy is Deâ—ctive as to Prayer in the confessing of Sins Peâ—tions and Thanksgivings that the Body of the â—ayer-book consisteth much in Generals and that â—e Catechism is Defective as to many Doctrines â—f our Religion They except also against the â—eoples uttering a great part of the Petitions in the â—etany whereas the Minister should be the mouth â—f the Congregation and that the speaking of so â—any occasioneth a confused Murmur in the â—ongregation whereby what is read is less intelliâ—ible and therefore unedifying They also exâ—ept against the aery sign of the Cross in Baptism As â—so that none may receive the Lords Supper who â—ares not Kneel in the Act of Receiving which was â—ft free 1. and 2. Ed. 6. and was not the Gesture â—e Apostles used nor in the purest and primitive â—mes of the Church They except also against â—hese words of the Rub. The Body of our Lord â—esus Christ which was given for thee preserve thy â—ody and Soul unto they everlasting Life they desire â—hat the Minister be not required to repeat the words to each one in the singular number but it may suffice to speak them to diverse jointly â—cording to our Saviours Example they Compâ— also that when a Child is to be Baptized the Gâ— fathers and God-mothers are concerned but mention of the Parents in whose Right the Châ— is Baptized and who are fittest both to Dedicâ— it to GOD and to Undertake to GOD and Church for it They also except against thâ— words in the Prayer after Baptism viz. thaâ— hath pleased thee to Regenerate this Infant by â— Holy Spirit they declare that they cannot Faith say that every Child that is Baptized is generated by GODS Holy Spirit And in the lâ— Rubr. before the Catechism it 's said to be certâ— by GODS Word that Children by being Baâ—tized have all things necessary to Salvation and undoubtedly saved these words they complain of dangerous These are a few of the many Exceâ—tions mentioned in that grand Debate and an mendation earnestly and modestly pursued as â— mean to prevent our separated Assemblies but tâ— Pursuers for Peace constrained to desist wiâ— Grief being disappointed of their just Expectâ—tions Our 3d. Exception is because Kneeling at tâ— Lords
desiring soâ— Knowledge of a Ministers Gifts and godly Coâ—versation before they receive him as their Pastoâ— 2. The possibility of their erring in Election caâ—not deprive them of their Priviledge 3. If thâ— should erre yet their Electing maketh not tâ— Man their Minister untill he be Ordained aâ— if the People have erred then the Ministers mâ— forbear Ordination untill a qualified Person â— Chosen And so both Ministers and People preâ—rve their due Rights And where this is not â—bserved it commonly occasioneth an unprofiâ—ble Ministry and Comfortless both to Minister â—nd People 6. We cannot be of that Communion where â—ur Confession of Faith and Catechisms are publickâ— on all Occasions ridiculed and exposed to Conâ—mpt Is it to be imagined that your selves would â—atiently sit and hear the most important Articles â—f your Religion openly vilified And if ye could â—ot bear it your selves why should ye expect it â—f us Who have Cause to Praise GOD for so Orthodox a summary of the Christian Religion â—s is contain'd in these Books Is it reasonable to â—hink that by our Presence and Silence we should â—ppear to approve the condemning the publick â—tandard of our Religion Your selves being â—udges 7. We are so perswaded of tbe soundness of the Doctrine contained in our Confession of Faith â—nd Catechisms Larger and Shorter that whereâ—oever these are contradicted we have just Cause â—o suspect the hearing of unsound Doctrine and are â—equired by the Word of GOD not to hear the Inâ—truction that causeth to erre from the words of Knowâ—edge We know that the Doctrinal Articles of the Church of Engl. are Sound and we Challenge aâ—y Man that dare say we ever speak of them but with a due regard And it were much to be â—sired that all who make Profession of these Aâ—cles would faithfully Adhere to them in their Dâ—ctrine But in the next Place some Alledge that thouâ— we be not free to Joyn as fixed Members of tâ— Established Church nor could we be received such without Subjection to Episcopal Goverment their Discipline and Ceremonies Yâ— why should we be so shy as not to hear their Miâ—sters at any time we being all of one Faith That the Reader may have Satisfaction Consider First that we are not as Scepticks wâ— have either their Religion or manner of Worshâ— to seek as not knowing what Church-Commuâ—on to chuse For we are both in Judgement aâ— Practice established already what manner of Woâ—ship we should Adhere to And therefore need â— expose our selves as unfixed Some of your selâ— have reproved severely these who are of itchâ— Ears and the Rebuke is directed to us of this Diâ—cess We shall advert to what he hath said aâ— beware of that Evil hoping that while we are câ—tent with hearing of our own we shal not be chaâ—ed with that Guilt of itching for others 2. We desire also it may be remembred tâ— some of yours particularly Dr. Stilling fleet nâ— Bishop hath Published his Reflections agaâ— those of our Communion who at sometimes â— â— hear and Joyn in your Worship Because they â—ntinue not making this the Argument that if we â—ink it Lawfull at sometimes why not at other â—mes and that Constant Communion is due where â—ccasional Communion is allowed But another â—f a great Character in the Defence of his Answer â—o the Case of Protestant Dissenters stated and arâ—ed though under the covert of anothers Name â—ath raised the Censure to such a pitch that they â—ppear to be Men of flexible and profligat Conscienâ—es who at sometimes Joyn in Worship with the â—stablished Church not Resolving to Continue â—ow then can you advise us to Occasional Comâ—union If it be not for this Reason that you â—ay take Occasion to Reproach us as Men of no â—rinciples who will turn and return with the Tide â—f Worldly Interest But belike you may have the â—ss Occasion for this Imputation hereafter this â—eing the best Use ye make of it Can any Man â—f sence judge it a rational Method for drawing us â—o your Communion at any time to tell us it must â—e always otherwise we are but Men of a profligat Conscience It would hereby appear that you desire none of us to come near you and discharge us to Joyn in your Worship as we would not be Stigmatized the next day for profligat Persons 3. Whereas it 's said we are of one Faith it 's well this is acknowledged and long may it be so But some Observe that this is rarely Confessed except when you mind to improve it for an Impâ—taâ—ion that being of one Faith we are thereby oâ—liged to Conformity and wilfully Obstinat in â—fusing it As if our being of one Faith engagâ— us to any manner of Worship you require Coâ—manded of GOD or not But it may be inferrâ— with greater Reason since we are of the saâ— Faith therefore you should make the Door Pâ—tent and admit us freely and not to cast the stuâ—bling Blocks of unprofitable Ceremonies in oâ— Way Which your Selves Know and Confess mâ— be laid aside without Sin But such as we cannâ— Comply with without Sin yet you will not paâ— with one of these useless Ceremonies if we shouâ— never come nearer you But in the last Place that which is urged as moâ— plausible when it appears we cannot be fixâ— Members of your Communion and are not pleâ—ed but rather angry at Occasional Communioâ— that at least when People want Ministers of thâ— own as many of them do often want why do nâ— they then go to the Parish Church why do nâ— your Ministers positively declare their Opinioâ— For Answer to this Consider First That it is the Affliction of many Feareâ— of GOD to want the Benefit of publick Gospeâ— Ordinances every Lords Day we say it's theâ— Affliction but cannot so easily grant that it is thâ— Sin when their circumstantiat Case is such thâ— â—t sometimes they must either want or Wound â—heir Conscience by Joyning in Acts of Worship â—hich they cannot find to be approved of GOD They dare not act as joint Worshippers in these â—ery Acts lest they not only partake of other Mens Sins but be active in sinning themselves Such as are in this Case are rather to be pitied than â—ensured Bishop Stilling fleet hath these remarkâ—ble words in his Irenic page 119. 120. Let Men â—urn and wind themselves which Way they will by â—â—e very same Arguments that any will Prove Sepaâ—ation from the Church of Rome lawfull because She â—quired unlawfull Things as Conditions of Her Comâ—union It will be proved Lawfull not to Conform â—o any suspected or unlawfull Practice required by my Church-Governour upon the same Terms If the â—â—ing so required be after Serious and Sober Enquiry â—dged Vnwarrantable by a Man 's own Conscience Grant but this Liberty allowed by this Learned â—ishop to forbear any Suspected or Unlawfull â—ractice though required by a Church-Goverâ—our And then you will be more sparing in Condemning the Practice of sober Christians whose great