will not I do I must retain them to that purpose if I be received on my termes otherwise into the Church I crave pardon of God for my faillings on either hand especially where my case in the work crept in to deflour my Sincerity in such a peice of Self deny all as I know else what was The prevailing interest of my heart I hope was right in the sight of God in what I did yet dare I not justfie my self but commit my case unto my Judge imploring his mercy and begging his pardon For when there is nothing almost that I do but upon a severe Examination I can find some slaws in it my self If thou O Lord should'st be extream to mark against me what I have done amisse how could I abide it I will bind my self therefore If I be fit so much more to my duty and in some kind of pennance for my infirmity shall be the more content that I take that course to make my return to the Vineyard as no man else hath endeavoured at least in such a Manifesto as this is And to the same end I shall yet commit this ensuing Memoriall to Posterity Notum sit omnibus ad quos haec spectant me J. H. legitime Canonice ab Episcopo Bathoniensi ordinatum fuisse Quod cum praegrave nimium Conscientiae meae ob priorem aliquam Ordinationem a Presbyteris sine Episcopo collatam visum est Ordinationem hanc denuò receptam non ad Ministerij Officium sed ad ejus Exercitium particulare ubicunque vocatus si vocatus fuero habendi eaque habita utendi egomet mihi Deus meus facillime omnia in quibus peccavi mihi condonans potestatem facimus For the third the Nine and Thirty Articles I must confess my self in this one thing something more difficult to be satisfied than others It is but distinguishing of the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church which includes the Government and Ceremonies and the most of my Brethren can Subscribe to these Articles without Scruple And no more than an Assent to the Doctrine I think is required by the Statute But I am one much in doubt concerning the Doctrine of some of our Articles I do think that the Article of Justification and the Eighteenth Article in the Authentick sense of them are questionable These words in the Eleventh article That we are Justified by Faith only are expresly contrary to the meaning of St. James And the meaning of those that composed the Articles at that time who had not the Light which is going now was I believe contrary also to the meaning of St. James Their mistake I apprehend Obvious who took St. Pauls justification by Faith without the Works of the Law to be all one as by Faith only In the Eighteenth Article likewise I believe it was the judgment and so the meaning of the Composers that no man who is not converted to the Christian Faith can be saved and consequently that every Heathen Man in the World must perish For this is consonant to the beginning and end of the Athanasian Creed that whosoever believes not that faithfully and keeps it whole and undefiled is undoubtedly Damn'd But for my own part I cannot be of this Opinion which seems to me inconsistent with the Goodness of God and Natural Religion I have offered some little Light and Argument for the salvability of some Heathen in my Book lately come out entituled Peaceable Disquisitions that will not or cannot I think be withstood by the Considerate and Equal I have offered also in the same book that reconciliation of Paul and James which I believe to be the Right I can believe no otherwise and I must have liberty therefore of some exception in these two Articles and perhaps in some others from that which I believe to be the Authentick Sense of them or I cannot Subscribe them Nay to say something that may seem strange I can subscribe the words of one of these Articles and yet not to the article without dispensation because I think the meaning of the Imposers to be more than the words come to I verily think the Composers of the Articles did believe that all Heathen are excluded Salvation yet do they proceed to their Anathema here which they have in no other Article with wary words which is not pronounced against any that say only some Heathen may be saved but against them who presume to say that every Man shall be saved by the Law or Sect he professeth so that he be diligent to frame his Life according to it which is a Doctrine I abhor my self as being against the sense of what I offer in my Book nam'd the scope whereof is to shew that there is but one Rule Law or Religion for the World to obtain Life by That this is the Law of our Lapsed Nature which is God's Grace administred under a threefold State Of the Heathen Of the Jews Of Christians That our Advantage over them lyes as the Apostle speaks in our having the Oracles of God which including the Minstry and Ordinances are we know those further and our ordinary Means which they have not to bring Men up to the Performance of that Law that is the Condition to us and them of obtaining Salvation by it This makes that Advantage so significant that in comparison of the state of the Jews or Common-Wealth of Israel and much more in comparison of our Estate the Heathen wanting these means are said to be dead in their Sins to be without God without Christ to sit in Darkness and the like that is I say Comparatively to us or Secundum quid when yet they are under the same Law I affirm in the Substance for Life as we and we know not but more than a few of them live with acceptance up to it When some Men will have Christians saved only by Morality and Good Nature it will be time and no Fault for others to make the Heathens Salvable by Grace and Christ Jesus This is not indeed here or there my concern to persue But that I have to observe to my present Purpose is as I am saying that though I know none that do scruple the Literal Sense of this article which is That no Man can be saved by any Religion but the True Religion yet so long as I believe that the Imposers did mean more to wit that no Man can be Saved in any Religion but the Christian which is another Matter As a Man may be Saved in Popery but not by it He may be saved from Popery in Popery and so from Idolatry in Heathenisme I have bin in suspense still how to Subscribe this Article unless it be only to the Words with Exception to the Authentick Meaning There is a threefold Interpretation An Authentick Vsual and Doctrinal Interpretation as Suarez has it De Legibus I will therefore advance here one Notion which will be received I think as Consonant to the Judgment of
doubt of their Integrity To frame any interpretation of the words of a Law and so Subscribe them in that sense which a man believes is not the meaning of the Law-giver is a prevarication of the Law for he pretends to Subscribe to the Law when he knows he does not seeing it is the Law-givers meaning and not the bare words is the Law but when I declare that I do not Subscribe to the Law in such or such particulars but on others Here is all the plainness that can be and so no breach of Sincerity and here is a doing what I can and so no neglect of my duty If any be ready to reply to me then you should have done thus and been more express upon the particulars of this Declaration in shewing what we may agree to and whereunto we are to make our exceptions I would have that man to know that I have done thus and with sollicitude so far as does serve me or save my own Conscience and it may suffice him that I have broken the ice or opened the way for him to do that farther as he would have had me do if his Conscience be not satisfied without it and he can get leave to do it Neither will my Shooes serve his feet or my Gloves come on his hands nor will my Limitations be the measure of every mans coalition Indeed I am sorry here to be more Subtill then this comes to already The Bishop I suppose will give me liberty to Subscribe in my own Sense and this I have said signifies nothing but I must recall my self It is nothing I mean unless we state this liberty of our own sense and know what we agree upon by if I by a liberty of our own sense any Bishop shall candidly understand my Subscribing this Declaration in such a sense as I can though I believe it not to be the meaning of the Law and he accepts of that and lets me express it this is no other then a liberty of Exception and we must beware that we stick not on scruple when we agree upon the matter In the way one thing is to be put out of doubt that though in Subscribing to an Imposition we must be supposed to subscribe it in the meaning of the Imposer if we say nothing yet if we make our Limitations or Exceptions and express them with leave to do so we contract no guilt or are obliged no further in Conscience than we consent thereunto and take the obligation on our Souls as may appear in the Oath between Rahab and the Spies I am sorry therefore I say that I am forced here to be more critical and nice than I would be I can be content to distinguish an Interpretation and a Limitation but I am very loath to distinguish any further between the Last and an Exception which vertually is implied in it nevertheless seeing I am breaking my own way and I cannot help it and seeing the use of words we know is to express the mind and every man consequently hath liberty over his own words to explain and distinguish them as he please I will in the first place distinguish for once these things An Interpretation A Limitation An Exception An Interpretation let me say requires the Sense or meaning of the Law-giver and that altogether and all of it A Limitation requires that meaning but not all of it An Exception signifies a deniall of it Again I must distinguish of the Submission to an imposition upon favour or without any In my former Paper about the Oxford-Oath I laid down a Rule to strew the way for our coming up to an imposition where we can without favour in those that administer it In this Paper I proceed to lay down another for our submission in case of favour when we cannot submit to the Imposition unless we obtain it I must in the last place yet distinguish more-over between the Subscribing to an Imposition in the form of words wherein it is enjoyned and the having liberty of our own expressions I must confess I have several times proposed this expedient for accommodating us to the Laws that our present Impositions might be required of us only in the matter and the End that is if we can come up to them so far as to agree in the chief substance of the thing enjoyned and answer the end of the Imposer it should suffice though we expressed our Consent in our own words This would make out Subscriptions easy and every one could tell what to do for himself but supposing that this will not be granted I am put against my will upon this curiosity Let us suppose then an Exposition made of any Injunction according to the meaning of the Law-giver If I assent to all of it I may submit to it and need no favour If I assent to part of it and not to all I must have the favour to make my Limitation If there be any Clause in it that I cannot assent at all unto I must have leave to put in my Exception or I cannot submit to it In the first case when an Interpretation alone does serve me I may Subscribe to an imposition in the form of words wherein it is enjoyned and so long as I can do so I may offer my interpretation for the avoiding of Scandal whether the Ministers of the Law are willing or not they must receive me In the last case when an Exception is need-full I cannot I think Subscribe to the form of words without prevaricating with the Law and they that Administer the Imposition may and I suppose will refuse me the license of using my own expressions In the middle case wherein I have need of a Limitation which I accounts less than an Exception and more than an Interpretation I may Subscribe I think to the words because there is a truth in the words with my sense and my sense is the meaning of the Law giver only because I cannot subscribe to all their meaning I must have favour to express my Limitations or restraint of the words to that sense or else I cannot Subscribe them I account with faithfulness but if I have the liberty to do so I am I think to steel my mind against all Scruple and if any comes into it to cast it out The Consideration of that one Text alone Be not righteous over much will bear me out I apprehend in such a Subscription To be yet Clearer if I can be possible If by a Liberty of my own Sense which I suppose the Bishop will give me he shall understand my giving the sense of the Law or declaring what I believe to be the meaning of the Law-giver and then Subscribing to the Imposition in that Sense which is a proper Interpretation here is no advantage to me or favour but what I may take my self If he shall understand my declaring a sense of my own though I believe it not to be the Sense of the Imposer this is a
great favour but I see not how I can be Subscribe to the words of the Imposition and he will not give me leave for all this to Subscribe in any other form If he shall understand my Subscribing so far as I can to the sense in the words enjoyned with liberty of Restriction of them to this meaning which vertually includes an Exception against what I cannot assent unto here I do humbly believe both that I may Conscionably Subscribe and he be satisfied in the matter If we be tyed to the Meaning of the Law-giver every jot the way is too Streight To frame to our selves any Meaning without Regard to the Law giver's is a Way too Wide But to Subscribe to the Meaning of the Imposer so far as I can and to forbear in what I cannot is the Way which I think safe and which I seek in this Paper Only I must add one thing after this that where there is no Form of Words imposed the Liberty of a Limitation and of an Exception comes to one and as I now distinguish these two Words I may again confound them according to my occasion Having thus distinguished then between an Interpretation and a Limation or Exception I must yet proceed so far as I do go to apply the same to my present Subscription that I may avoid all mistake and ambiguity and Consequently the laying a stumbling block before any In the first Clause I do not Subscribe to the proposition which it contains Vniversally but Indefinitely To wit with the Restriction of it to such a prudential state of the question as may be gathered out of such Authors I have named It becomes a Loyall Subject to Subscribe that Tenet and it becomes an Honest-man to Subscribe it no further or no otherwise than such learned and excellent persons upon study were able to maintain it There are several cases which are put by themselves by way of Limitation of it yet so long as we may believe that none of them came into the Minds of the Majority of Parliament in passing the Law and there were Actually none of them as could be put in regard to our present King we are to look upon it as the Intent of the Act that we should consequently object no such Cases to our selves in Subscribing to this Clause so that though I here use my Liberty of Restriction in regard to Others which I must tell I might be content my self as I suppose in the Oxford-Oath with an Interpretation only Nay I do not need any of this Caution at all in regard to Soveraign Majesty it self but in regard to those that are at his Commandment For let me understand by Taking Arms the Raising an Army or a War which I take to be the true Sense in Construction of Law and by the King his own Sacred Person only There is no Case I know but I may Subscribe That to take Arms against the King is Vniversally Unlawful In the Second Clause I am more fully perswaded that I do offer the true Sense of the Acts Of Vniformity and that at Oxford in reference to the Position which is Renounced and I am sorry at my Heart to see it possible for so many of Judgment and Temper as there are to be capable of any such Pre-occupation of Mind as to harbour once the Thought of another Interpretation which cannot be made but by supposing it the very Intent of the Parliament in those Acts to advance an Arbitrary Authority in the King above the true Regal Power he hath by Law And yet hath the late Discourses of People about the Test and later Matters with Stories thereunto appertaining brought such a Jaundise on our Imaginations that makes every thing look Yellow and Jealously to us as we even quite forget that the Meaning of these Acts is and must be the Sense Mind or Purpose of the Parliament or Major Part of both House at the time when they passed them and that is when there was not the least Breath of any such thing as an Arbitrary Government talked of or suspected by any It is plain enough there was in the Prevailing Part I say not in the Major Number which is against Reason and Charity to think an inveterate Resolution to suppress one sort of Men they hated which are now the Non-conformists and that indeed was all the Plot in that time which was going For let us suppose such a Question had bin proposed at the passing these Acts Whether the King should have a Power for the time to come to raise Money and make Laws without a Parliament Can any Man's Heart serve him to believe that such a Motion would have bin entertained or such a Vote by any Means under Heaven have bin obtained or could be yet from the Majority of both Houses To put the Question Whether by those Commissionated by the King in this Clause of the Subscription and that of the Oxford-Oath is meant any but the Legally Commissionated or such as can justify their Commissions and Actings by Law is all one in good earnest with the Knowing as to put this said Question And how then does any Man that understands and considers that he understands himself make a doubt of my Interpretation It hath bin talked that when it was endeavoured by some in the Upper Hose to put the Word Legally into the Test at the time when that was in Agitation it was refused But what of that supposing it were true Must this be the Reason on Necessity because they intended to make the Government Arbitrary I am given to understand for certain that when this Clause came into motion they did unanimously Vote that by the Commissionated the Legally Commissionated and nothing else was to be understood without any Contradiction So that the Reason why they put not in that Word Legally could not be because they had another Meaning but because this Meanning was so manifest so undoubted and yielded by all that there was no need to do it As also lest by the Insertion of more than needs they might give occasion to People for the time to come of questioning still the Legality of the King's Commissions So easily are we misled by Reports which are always Partial often mistaken Nay what if it were in the Thoughts of some Court Flatterers who are not alwayes the King's Friends to advance the Prerogative above its due Height Did we not see that as soon as this Suspition did but enter in the Thoughts of a few what a stir it this Test was but in the Upper House only there is no force at all in the Argument what a few Men at such a distance were contriving if they were so long as it is not to be imagined that the Major Part of both Houses at the time when the Acts were made had the least Intention or Thought of any such matter I will add that I am assured for my own part by certain Testimony that the King himself hath
said it more than once not only in his Publick Speeches which may be thought Popular but in his Private Retirement upon apt Occasions that he really desired and sought no more than his just Prerogative without Intrenchment on the Peoples Liberty As he needed not so he would not have said this to some upon the Occasion I know if he was not Cordial in it And if he should be of another Mind more lately which it were a Wickedness in us to think yet were that nothing as to the Acts of Parliament which have bin so long passed Nay that I may cut off this very Suggestion also Duke Laudardale in his Speech to the Convention of Estates at Edenburgh now must lately July 1678. hath these Words Majesty hath these Eighteen Years in all his Kingdoms solemnly professed his Abhorrence of Arbitrary Government his Ruling by the Law and his Inviolable Care to preserve the Liberty and Property of his Subjects I should not I must confess inculcate this thus much but in regard to the Oxford-Oath and that the Conscience of a Man is indeed as tender a Point as the Throne of a King For as for this Subscription alone if any can be of another mind yet he may put in his Particular Exception and say I Subscribe to it as unlawful to Resist any Commissionated by the King if their Commissions be according to Law if they be not I hold the contrary In the Third Clause I have one thing to remember which is to declare that I apprehend not that any Man by his Subscribing to conform to the Liturgy does engage or stand engaged because of that to forsake his Brethren presently who conform not and come no more amongst them or that he does debar himself thereby the Benefit to hear them or deprive others of his Labours to Preach with them at least if some of the Common-Prayer will but be suffered to be read by him I understand no such matter by it if any others do I enter my Exception For as I am one that have ordinarily gone to my Parish-Church not only joyning in the Publick Prayers but receiving the Sacrament there and never yet elsewhere though I am a Non-conformist So if I shall conform that is so far as I can which does but fix me so much more firm in that wherein I conform not I intend not but to be the same Man still as to the keeping in with my Brethren and to do as I did which is to be sometimes with them and for the most part with the Parochial Congregation I am convinced that it is a great Fault of the Non-conformist and Conformist both who fear God that they keep no more Fellowship with one another which were the nearest way to make up Difference and to understand better what is to be done by both for the Peace of the Church and for the Sake of our Religion And here I must advance a little in this Clause I think it enough for a License to Preach to Subscribe the same with the mentioned Limitations but if I should find in my heart to take upon me a Parochial Charge it were more fit and in order to that Work to Subscribe more strictly In short So far as I Assent and Consent so far I an say I will Conform For this is uniforme and that I may be express in that I do because it stands me upon I am come to an Agreement upon Treaty to change this Clause thus which differs little in the Import The Third Clause is a Promise as I take it to Read Common Prayer which I am not against and do therefore Subscribe That if I have a Publick Charge or Cure of Souls I Shall in the ordinary Lord's-Day Service by my self or by an Assistant according to the Usage of the Church conform to the Liturgy of the Church of England as it is now by Law Established Only if upon any occasion or Reason I shall sometimes shorten the Work I will not be held a Breaker of my Promise for that Nor shall the Omission of another be laid to my Charge In the Fourth Clause there is some Distinction and my Restrictions or Limitation on that Distinction I will add here some few Words for Explication of the Restrictions I do say there lyes no Obligation from the Covenant on any Person in a Private Capacity or Acting in a Private Capacity to endeavour any Alteration of Government By which Words I understand not only an Exception to such who are Public Persons that Act in Parliament which I express in the first Words in a Private Capacity but to all others likewise Acting in such a way as or in no other way than is warrantable by the Constitution of the Land which I express in the Word superadded or Acting in a private Capacity The Government of this Nation is a Mixt Government and there is something of it in the Hands of the Popularity The People may choose their Representatives for Parliament and tell them what they would have done and perswade them to endeavour it and Petition both Houses for it nay they Vote in them and in all this Act I count in a Publick Capacity though Private Persons so long as they do Act by Vertue of the Constitution I must account likewise if any seek the Reformation of the Church or any other Good for the Nation in Praying to God for it or Preaching suppose one Preaching to the Houses and Perswading to it and the like if you scrue up the Word Endeavour to that Height with the purpose only of having it done in an orderly way by a due Proceeding in Parliament that this is to be held Equivalent because whatsoever is done this way is warranted I say be the Constitution I dare not then deny but there does lye an Obligation on every Man in the Parliament as Publick Persons and on all Private Persons likewise so far as they can act in a Publick Capacity thereunto to Honour God in seeking the Reformation of the Church and the Publick Good But I Subscribe that there lyes no Obligation from the Covenant upon my self or any other Person to endeavour the same any otherwise but in a Political Capacity that is only as it can be obtained by a Rightful Act of Parliament If any think I have not expressed thus much aptly or fully enough in its place let him mend it to his own Mind who has occasion for it If suffices me as I have for the general once intimated if I have here and there together as Master of my own Sense and Explanations delivered my self from Scruple In the Fift Clause I do the like as in the fourth and then give my reason why I Subscribe upon the Restriction I dare not say that nothing in the Covenant is Lawfull or Obligatory They covenanted against Schisme Popery to Repent and amend their lives This must oblige those that took it Nay I dare no say that it is unlawfull top make any
most Men as soon as they have laid it to Consideration It is this that though I account all Laws in general are to be taken in that Sense only which we believe to be the Meaning of the Law giver because the Law is his Will and it is not the Words but his Meaning is his Will Yet do I judge that in these Articles of the Church which are not Laws nor Articles of Faith but Articles for Concord that is in the Words of the Cannon Articles for the avoiding Diversities of Opinions and for establishing of Consent touching true Religion there is no Man to be staked down to the Authentick Interpretation which I account that as a Man believes to be the Meaning of the Majority of the Convocation that passed the Article but to be allowed or rather he is supposed to be allowed and to take the Freedome of a Doctrinal Interpretation which is any Judicious Explication of such a Thesis or Doctrine as some of the Eminent Doctors of the Church or other Pious and Learned Author or Authors have offered to the Nation or indeed any such as a Man himself shall tender which in the Literal Grammatical Construction of the Article to keep to the King's Declaration before the Articles appears Rational and is satisfactory to his own Conscience and much more if it be allowed by the Bishop My Reason is because it must be conceived that when any Council Synod or Convocation of Divines do meet about an Agreement upon any Articles or Theses concerning Religion they are generally of divers Minds in the debating the Points and every one is to be supposed free in the Delivery of his Judgment until they come to draw up the Article or Doctrine into such Words as they are all to consent to and then if it be Composed so as they can yield to one another in the Words which they agree upon it is to be understood that there is an Universal Allowance tacitly granted from all to one another of abounding in their own Sense and so they came to a Coalition There is the Meaning then of the Majority and a Vniversal Meaning The Vniversal Meaning is above the Meaning of the Major Part. The Meaning of the Majority I believe in some of these Articles to be such as I cannot Subscribe them in their Meaning But forasmuch as I apprehend it the Vniversal Meaning that every one of those that are to pass their Vote in Establishing the Article should have the Liberty of his own Sense so long as he can but agree with the rest in the Words or in the Literal Construction of the Article if I bring an Interpretation of some Doctor or one of my own which may be supposed to be the same with any one of them who so consented to it with difference of Explication from others then must I be supposed to have the Universal Allowance of the Convocation for that Interpretation which I call a Doctrinal Interpretation I will confirm this by the Notoriety of the Practise in the Council of Trent The Doctors differed in most Points but as soon as through the Expertness of one of the Presidents famous for that Knack they were but put into Words as might salve their contrary Opinions they passed their Votes as Unanimous in the Council although they writ after also one against another citing the Council for them on both sides To this purpose are the Words of the King in his Declaration for the Ratification of the Articles to be considered We take Comfort in this that even in those curious Points in which the present Differences lye Men of all sorts take the Articles of the Church of England to be for them The Arminians with Doctor Hammond and the Calvinists with Bishop Vsher do Subscribe them and find out their own different Sense in them I will leave it therefore on the File as the fit Matter of a new Cannon if ever we have another Convocation to be declared that the Articles and Homilies of the Church are imposed and to be Subscribed not in the Authentick nor in the Vsual but in a Doctrinal Interpretation There being a Latitude in all Controverted Points and consequently some Diversity of Opinion to be allowed to Brethren for the abounding in their own Sense in the same Religion or else there can be no sufficient Foundation of Unity amongst any considerable Number of Men of Free Judgments in the World In the mean time if the case be put what a man shall do that scruples or doubts of the truth of any of the Articles whether he may satisfie himself with such an Interpretation before it be Authorized by a Convocation or otherwise I must answer that I apprehend a great deal of reason for it but dare not pass such a determination If I scruple any thing my self I shall declare it and unless I am satisfied in that sense of the point as I believe was the meaning of the Imposers I must fly to my remedy not of an Interpretation but of the liberty for Exception or Limitation and that indeed does my work This Scrupulosity and rigour of my mind for avoiding every thing of a Solemne lie though never so small does make me wish for such a Canon or the allowance of a greater Authority by some Act of Parliament I will therefore now turn me to the Higher Powers for I must beg their Pardon for this Endeavour of mine to make my return to the Vineyard before they have opened the way for us who can alone Legally do it I would hereby kindly provoke them to think at last on some Explanatory Act for Uniting the Protestant and restoring the Ejected who have now been out of our Livings above Fifteen year and no evil we hope hath been found in us besides our preaching sometimes and praying and the keeping of our Consciences And because it is said commonly by the Members of either House that if they knew what we would have or thought we know our selves they would do it I cannot forbear to present them with the Materialls of such a Bill in telling them what we would have from what is said already if they will but bear with the repetition For when the obtainment of such a blessing for the Nation is even near past my hopes yet must it be still in my prayers I may not be wanting to it in my endeavours and it cannot be beyond my Wishes Whereas then there are many jealousies arose about Popery to frame a Preamble as well as a body for such a Bill out of what is before delivered which makes it even necessary to the peace of the Nation that the Protestant interest be united and strengthened by all good and lawfull means and to this end there being this one proper expedient to wit the removing the occasions of Division which several persons do find to themselves in those late injunctions which yet were intended to the same purpose of Concord in the Realm That which we