the King. Else Men that fight against his Army may say they fight not against the King. And can the King make War without an Army M. I believe you are in the right 2. I ask you what is meant by the King's Authority Is it not by his Laws that are the highest Acts of his Authority L. There is no doubt but what 's done by Law is done by the King's Authority M. 3. How are we to know the King's Commission L. By his Seal M. I never heard of many of the Parliaments Army that ever saw any sealed Commission of those they fought against and would that excuse them L. No because it was notorious that the King owned the War. M. But suppose that any of his Soldiers came to take free Quarter or Horses or Plunder or to possess any Man's House or Lands how shall we know that they had Commission for these And may they be resisted till they shew their Commissions L. No because it will hinder the King's Service M. 4. What Seal must it be that must make a Commission L. Either the Great or Little Seal M. 5. Is it possible for the Law and a Commission to be contrary L. Some say No because it is no Commission if it be contrary to the Law. And some say No because it must be supposed that the King will grant no Commission contrary to Law. And some say Yea But when they are contrary the Commission is to be obeyed against the Law. And some say Yea And that the Law is to be obeyed against the Commission M. But if you are of so many Minds how are Doubters resolved what to Swear and what to do 1. If you say It 's no Commission that is contrary to Law who shall be Judge when it is contrary to Law If every Subject be Judge it is as easie to Rebel and say the King's Commission is illegal as it is to deny all the Authority of his Commissions L. The Iudges and Courts must judge what is Legal M. If the Judges yea or the Parliament shall judge the King's Commissions illegal will that make it lawful for the Subjects to resist them L. I dare not say so Therefore we must come to the later Opinion that the King himself is Iudge and that it is Legal eo nomine because it is his Commission and that Commissions suspend all contrary Laws Tho' I know many abhor this that would not have the King's Will to be above all Laws and Rule to be Arbitrary M. But suppose it be so the Subjects know the Laws to be the King 's by Promulgation How shall they be sure that Commissions are not counterfeit if they be contrary to them Must every Fellow be believed that produceth a Commission may it not be counterfeited L. The King's Officers that keep his Seals must be trusted by us seeing the King trusteth them M. 1. Then the King's Officers are set above all Laws and Judicatures as well as the King. 2. And why then are Judges Sworn not to be moved from Justice by the Great or Little Seal 3. But must we trust every Man that shews a Seal that he did not counterfeit it L. I confess that the Laws are most Publick and certain Notifications of the King 's Will. But it 's easie to raise more Doubts than the wisest man can answer M. Is it not possible for two Commissions to be contrary what if one Man have a Patent for Life to be Lord Admiral or Lieutenant of the Tower or the like and another come with a Commission to put him out and take Possession which must be obeyed L. He that hath the last Commission The former may not resist him For the later nullifieth the former M. Is it not then in the Power of the Keeper of the Seals to depose the King at his pleasure by sealing new Commissions to Conspirators to seize on his Garisons Guards Treasure Magazines Forts and Navy L. It must be taken for granted that the King will give no Commission against himself M. But his former Officers are not himself and if they must resign to new Commissioners how know they but it is the King's Will L. I tell you we must trust those that the King trusteth M. Then the question is whether it shall be in the Power of a Lord Keeper to depose the King or betray the Kingdom to whom he will because the King trusteth him with the Seal Or in the Power of a Parliament to judge whether a Commission be Legal or whether Laws or Commissions be of greater Authority L. There is no end of answering absurd Suppositions It is not to be supposed that the King will do wrong or so far trust untrusty Men. M 1. We must suppose that a Parliament may do wrong 2. Izaakson and other Historians say That King Iohn made over his Kingdom to the Pope and offered it to the Mahometan King of Morocco to help him against his Lords 3. Is it not possible that a Queen Mary or a Charles the Ninth of France might do what they did 4. Have not many Kings been ruined by trusting Traitors Did the King of Portugal's Brother and Lords answer the trust reposed in them when they Deposed and imprisoned him Is not History full of such Examples Who deposed the Emperor Ludovicus Pius but his trusted Clergy and Servants Who deposed the Empeperour Henry 4. but his own Son and his Clergy and Lords Abundance of the Greek Emperours were so used and some English and Scottish Kings L. Some body must be trusted and if they be Traitors who can help it M. But shall all entrusted Lord-Keepers or Lord Privy-Seals be so far encouraged to Treason as to tell them If you will depose the King who can help it We are all Sworn not to resist you How stands this with our Oath of Allegiance to the King And is not the King's life and welfare the interest of the Kingdom and is he not an Enemy to the Kingdom who destroyeth the King And do you think that one Lord-Keeper is fitter to be trusted with the Safety of the Kingdom than a Parliament and all the Courts of Justice When was there a Lord-Chancellor more Trusted and Honoured than Sir Edward Hyde Earl of Clarendon who had long been faithful to the King And yet neither King nor Parliament thought that he was more to be trusted with the Safety of the King and Kingdom than the Parliament was Else they had not Banished him L. A Fool may ask more Questions than a Wise man can answer and find Knots that no one can untye M. And are all we Fools that never Studied the Law fit to Answer all those Questions by an Oath which you that are a Lawyer cannot Answer by Discourse will you become abler to Answer them when we have Sworn them If you were at a loss about a Law Case in Westminster-Hall would you set all the Country and City Housholders that are Ignorant to decide it by Swearing
XXVII Of refusing others Parishioners from Communion according to Can. 28. Ch. 31. XXVIII Of Can. 38. Excommunicating Ministers for Repenting of their Subscribing Ch. 32. XXIX Of Can. 57. Excommunicating Men for going for Baptism and Communion from Ministers that never Preach to those that do Ch. 33. XXX Of Can. 58. making the Surplice necessary to Ministration Ch. 34. XXXI Of forcing Ministers by Can. 68. to Baptize all Children without exception of Atheists or Insidels Ch. 35. XXXII Of Can. 72. against Fasts and Prayer unlicensed Ch. 36. XXXIII Of Excommunication by the three last Canons Ch. 37. XXXIV Of renouncing all Obligation by the Covenant as on me or Any other to Endeavour any alteration of Church Government Ch. 38. XXXV Of the Oxford Oath never to Endeavor such Alâ—â—â—ioâ— Ch. 39. XXXVI Of Subscribing and Swearing that the Position is Traitorous of taking Arms by the King's Authority against those Commissioned by him in Pursuance of such Commission without Exception A Lord Keeper's Seal to a Commission to Conspirators to seize the King's Forts Magazine and Guards may so depose him Ch. 40. XXXVII Of Assenting and Consenting to the damning Clauses in Athanasius's Creed Ch. 41. XXXVIII Of saying Common-Prayer twice a day every day in the year or dinarily Ch. 42. XXXIX Of forcing unwilling Men to the Sacrament and Accusing and Excommunicating the refusers Ch. 43. XL. Of forsaking our Ministry and ceasing to Preach the Gospel Whether it be not Sacriledge and Cruelty in us and of Banishment 5 miles from all Corporations c. Ch. 44. Of Lay-Conformity I. Whether all men must trust their Souls on the Pastoral Conduct of all such as our Patrons will choose and the Bishops institute Ch. 45. II. Whether Parents have not more right than our Patrons to choose Pastors and Church-Communion for their Children Ch. 46. III. Of forcing Men to Schism by renouncing Communion with true Christians and true Churches Chap. 47. IV. Of binding all the Laity to live without any more benefit of Church-Discipline than is used by the Bishops and their Courts Ch. 48. V. Of discountenancing the fear of Sin and the serious practice of Godliness divers instances Ch. 49. VI. The Laity denied Baptism who refuse the foresaid sort of Godfathers excluding the Parents Ch. 50. VII Baptism denied to them that dare not submit to the dedicating Symbol of Crossing Ch. 51. VIII Of Rejecting not-kneelers from Church Communion Ch. 52. IX Of denying Lay-men Communion in a Neighbour Parish-Church when they dare not Communicate with their own Parishes For the Reasons aforesaid Ch. 53. X. The Laity must Swear never to endeavour any Alteration of Government in the Church without Exception Ch. 54. XI The Laity must swear an Abhorrence of taking Arms against any Commissioned by the King without Exception when they understand not whether every one be the King's Commission that is signed by the Lord Chancellor or Privy Seal though it be against Law and tend to overthrow King and Kingdom Ch. 55. XII Whether all trusted in Corporations may declare that there is no Obligation on them or any other from the Oath call'd The Solemn League and Covenant not so much as to repent of Sin or oppose Profaneness Popery or Schism and defend the King and so that G. Monk's Army and all the rest of the Three Nations that restored the King as obliged to it by that Vow were all deceived and not so obliged and whether all the Subjects must be sure of this Ch. 56. Of Thirty tremendous Circumstances and Principles which all agree in that affright Men from Conformity Ch. 57. The Reasons for Conformity considered Ch. 58. Whether Communion with so faulty a Church be lawful Separation confuted Ch. 59. A Draught in ten Articles of that which the Reconciling Nonconformists desire for healing our Church Divisions In the words which they judge meetest to that use Ch. 60. The Reasons of those ten Articles distinctly render'd Ch. 61. Whether the Extirpation of the Nonconformists be not rather to be attempted than a Vnion with them by these means Handled with reference to a late Treasonable Plot against the King. Ch. 62. Fifty Questions proposed to unjust Silencers ERRATA PAg. 100. l. 31. for I read It p. 103. l. 22. for Corners r. Courts p. 107. l. 38. for is r. is not p. 113. l. 13. for our r. one l. 14. for Clergy r. Churches p. 115. l. Penult r. Stoughton p. 124. l. 13. for our r. one p. 129. l. 15. for it is r. is it p. 131. l. 25. r. well as p. 134. l. 13. r. If it p. 144. l. 23. dele revoked THE True CASE OF THE English Nonconformity In a DIALOGUE between A Silenced MINISTER and a LAWYER CHAP. I. The Introductory Conference Lawyer SIR the danger of the Kings Dominions by our Irreligious Contentions about Religion possesseth the observers with just indignation but all know not on whom to lay the blame some lay it on the Bishops and some on the Nonconformists and some on both I am unwilling to wrong any but when I think of our danger and hear that it is but Ceremonies and things indifferent for which you break the Law and make a Schism in the Church and weaken us by divisions I cannot but think you deeply guilty Minister How long have you so judged L. These twenty years ever since you were put out M. Did you ever by Reading and Conference with those that you censure acquaint your self truly with their Case L. I have seen some of your Books but I have not talkt much of these matters with any of you but I read and hear from the Doctors of the Church what you are and what you hold M. Will you take us to be the just reporters what they are and hold L. No you are Adversaries and partial M. And are not they as much so to us Is not every man fitter to profess his own Faith than his Adversary is And have you done well to judge before you heard and tryed Shall Judges do so on the Bench Have you not all these years continued guilty of false judging and uncharitableness and that against a great number of the innocent And if you every day prayed for forgiveness but as you forgive even an enemy and real injury what have you done all this while in condemning the guiltless L. Why have you not in Writing given the World just satisfaction if you are guiltless What sin have you proved to be in the Conformity required of you I see no such proof M. You know what penalties the Law layeth on any that deprave the Common-Prayer Books and that all are Excommunicate ipso facto that do but affirm any thing to be against Gods Word in any Office of your Church Government in any Word or Ceremony in your Liturgy c. Can. 5. 6 7 8. And you know what follows Excommunication here And you know that till of late years the Press was shut up to us But have
any School-master but an Usher or Monitor or any Physitian or any Mayor or Justice under him 6. That they have set up a false humane Discipline before described instead of Christ's which they have taken down And all this we dare not justifie by a confederacy by Oath IV. And we think that the fourth thing which we stick at needs no other reason suppose the species of Diocesans were of God's appointment and only the numerical Bishops usurpers we can submit and live peaceably but we cannot swear obedience to them They plead more than we for the power of ancient Councils and Canons I have elsewhere fully proved as Paul of Venice hath done and Mr. Clarkson and Dr. Burnet and many others that many great Councils nullified the Episcopacy of all that came in without the election or consent of the Clergy and Flocks And we our selves cannot conceive how any man can be the Pastor of those that consent not though we can easily conceive that Dissenters may oft be obliged to consent when they do not so may a Son or Daughter be obliged to obey their Parents in consenting to Marry such as Parents choose for them when yet it is no marriage till that consent How few in a Diocese ever know of the Bishops Election till it's past and how few consent I need not tell We can submit to these but not swear Allegiance to them V. And in all the foresaid cases we have another disswasive 1. It is so much of the King's Prerogative that all Subjects must swear Allegiance and Fidelity to him that in almost all Nations it hath been thought dangerous to make the Subjects also swear obedience to every Justice or inferior Officer lest it should make them too like Kings 2. Lest the Subjects should be entangled between their Oath to the King and their Oaths to all these Officers in case of the Officers contradiction to the King 's 3. Lest so many Oaths should make that Government a snare to the conscientious which should be for their ease and safety 4. Lest so much swearing make Oaths contemptible and bring in perjury and endanger the King who should by our Oaths be secured 2. And I have elsewhere named many Councils and Canons which prohibit Bishops this practice of making the Clergy swear fidelity to them and have condemned it as of dangerous consequence And they that are for Councils should not engage us causelesly against them 3. The present Impositions greatly stop us till we better know what it is that we must do We have cause to make a stand when we are all sworn never to endeavour any alteration of the Government of the State which we readily obey and yet seem to be called to do that which we are told by some is an alteration of it That is the making of our present species of Archbishops Bishops Deans Archdeacons yea Chancellors Officials Commissaries c. as unchangeable a part of the Government as Monarchy it self is and so disabling the King to make any alteration in them For set all this together and consider 1. All the Clergy is bound or sworn to obey both Bishops and every Ordinary 2. The Canon ipso facto Excommunicates every man that affirmeth that the Church Government under his Majesty by Archbishops Bishops Deans Archdeacons and THE REST THAT BEAR OFFICE in the same is repugnant to the word of God so that all the Lords and Gentlemen in England that have affirmed that the Government by the Keys as used by Diocesans over hundreds of Churches or by Archdeacons Lay Chancellors c. is repugnant to God's word being already ipso facto Excommunicate how far they are capable of being Parliament-men I know not but I suppose if in Parliament they shall affirm any such repugnancy they are Excommunicate and without the Act of King and Parliament no alteration can be made 3. And now to fix them all the Kingdom is sworn never to endeavour any alteration in the Church Government viz. In the Corporation Act the Militia Act the Vestry Act the Oxford swearing Act after the Act of Vniformity And is not every Chancellor or Archdeacon or Bishop now made as immutable necessary a part of the Kingdom as the King L. You speak ignorantly for want of acquaintance with the Law Do you think King and Parliament oblige themselves It is only particular subjects out of Parliament that they oblige M. I. But when the Parliament is dissolved are they not all particular subjects save the King. And are they not all then hereby bound And do you think that it was the meaning of the Act that they who swear never to endeavour alteration may yet endeavour it if they be chosen Parliament men I will manifestly disprove it All these Oaths do joyn the Government of Church and State together Yea and put the Church-Government first as if it had the preeminence But it was never the meaning of the Oath that the Parliament may endeavour to alter Monarchy which is the State-Government Ergo it meant not that they may endeavour to alter Prelacy or Church-Government II. But suppose it be as you say They that know the present thing called the Church of England know that their Writers openly maintain that the Obligation of the Canons depends not on the Parliament save only as to the forceable execution of them but on the authority of the Church as a Society empowred by Christ And therefore that King or Parliaments at least may be Excommunicated by them as well as others All are Excommunicate men that do but call their Government sinful CHAP. VII II. Of the restraint of Ordained Ministers from Preaching and expounding any Scripture or Matter or Doctrine Can. 49. L. WHat is it that you have against Conformity in this M. I. That men are at once made Christ's Ministers and forbid to exercise that which they are Ordained to II. That we are laid under the hainous guilt of breaking our Vow when they have engaged us to make it and of betraying mens Souls by omitting a vowed duty 3. That we are forbidden that which is the duty of every Lay Christian that is able as if they would suppress Religion and Charity it self L. But you do not swear or subscribe to this Canon M. 1. But we are bound by them to obey this Canon for it is the Law of the whole Church of England 2. I have shewed you that swearing obedience to them must mean obeying their Laws which are far more of weight than particular mandates L. But as long as you may have Licenses how doth this put you on any sin of omission or commission M. Both their words and their deeds tell us that they Ordain more than they Licence to Preach or Expound any Doctrine And is it no sinful omission think you for all the rest to forbear all this 2. And many were Ordained heretofore who by the new Act of Uniformity are denyed Licenses without new Professions and Covenants
Licensed as is aforesaid presume to appoint or hold any Meetings for Sermons c. nor attempt by Fasting and Prayer to cast out any Devil c. L. All this was done to prevent Abuses M. It fell out well that they did not forbid Christianity or reading Scripture in a known Tongue to prevent abusing it And next that they forbad not Law and the use of Reason which is most of all abused But do not you thâ—â—k that they make very unworthy Men Ministers or that they change or maim the Pastoral Office when no Minister no not the wisest may be trusted to fast and pray with his Neighbours Should a Master of a Family be forbidden this in his House the Iews forbad it not to Cornelius What jealousies have such a Clergy of one another And of Preaching Fasting and Praying What if some Neighbours have some great Temptations some great Guilt some great Danger by a Plague or the like or some great Affliction some Friends near Deathâ— or some important Business of great moment as Marriage Travel Navigation c. Must the Bishop know all their secrets that their Pastor at home must know Or is he a capable Judge for many Hundred Parishes when they must Fast or Pray Or did you ever know any go to him for such a License Are not those unworthy Ministers that be not fit to be trusted to Fast and Pray with their People while the Law is open to punish all abuses of it And are not those over-subject to Prelacy that will Swear Obedience in this any more than against Preaching the Gospel Dan. 6. 5. We shall not find any occasion against this Daniel except we find it concerning the Law of his God. Chap. XXXVI Point XXXIII Of the Excommunication of the three last Canons M. THe quality of the rest of the Canons resolve me that it is unlawful for me if commanded to publish an Excommunication against any upon the three last L. What â—e the three last M. The 139th is Whosoever shall hereafter affirm that the Sacred Synod of this Nation in the Name of Christ and by the King's Authority assembled is not the true Church of England by Representation let him be Excommunicate and not restored till he repent and publickly revoke this his wicked Error L. What fault can you find with this M. 1. No Man can tell what is the Church representative till they know which is the Church real And this they tell us not either as to Matter or Form. 1. Whether the Church real be only the Clergy or also the Laity Whether the King and Parliament Nobles Gentry and Commons be all Represented in the Convocation If yea by what Law or Power And may we say that King and Parliament do what these do What need they then after to confirm their Canons And they that hold the Church Laws bind in Conscience as such before King and Parliament confirm them will bring King and Parliament under their Obedience if not Excommunication But if they pretend not to represent the King and Laity they falsly exclude them from being part of the Church 2. They are utterly disagreed de Forma what the Church of England is either it hath an Ecclesiastical constitutive Soveraign Power or not If not it is not an Ecclesiastick Body Politick And of late their disputing Doctors plainly confess that it hath no such specifying Summa Potestas and so is formally no Political governed Church The King's Government of it by the Sword which none deny they say is but an Accident of it and not Essential to the Church And so in sum it is but a meer Community or a voluntary Confederacy of many Churches that make no unifying Politie And that is to be a Church only in a loose and not proper sence as the Assembly at Nimegen was a Kingdom 3. I doubt not but Thousands of Lâ—y-Men and many Dissenting Ministers are true Parts of the Church of England And therefore that the Convocation represented our part only of that Church 4. If they be but a Community they can make no Laws but only Contracts Laws are only the Acts and Instruments of Rulers Therefore we owe no Obedience to them as being no Commands of Rulers till the Civil Power make them Laws save as particular Pastors may make them Laws to their several Flocks 5. If they make them obligatory Church-Laws as the Acts of the Convocation then it seems the Representative Church governeth the Real and the Presbyters in Convocation exercise a Legislative Power which is the highest that Bishops can pretend to 6. These being left thus in uncertainty in the dark how comes that Man to deserve Excommunication or be wickedly erroneous that herein declareth his dissent I dare not publish such an Excommunication if commanded L. What is the 140th Canon M. Whosoever shall affirm that no manner of Person either of the Clergy or Laity not being then particularly assembled in the said sacred Synod are to be subject to tâ—e Decrees thereof in Causes Ecclesiastical made and ratifyed by the King's Majesty's Supream Authority as not having given their Voice to them Let him be Excommunicated and not restored c. Here craftily in a Parenthesis they put in the King's Authority and if they mean only his Obligation on us no one of us denieth it But because their disputing Doctors take that but as an Accident we may say that the Papists themselves are oft put to say that General Councils bind not the absent till they receive them And the French long received not the Council of Trent nor many Churches other Councils L. What is the last Canon M. The 141st for so many Church-Commandments we have God's Ten being but a little part of our Religion is Whoever shall affirm that the Sacred Synod assembled as aforesaid was a Company of such Persons as did conspire together against Godly and Religious Professors of the Gospel and that therefore both they and their Proceedings in making Canons and Constitutions in Causes Ecclesiastical by the King's Authority Let them be Excommunicated and not restored c. Here again we doubt not of the King 's obligatory Power But what the Persons and their Works were I think a Point that Christians may differ about and not deserve Excommunication It seems they could foresee what Men would judge of them and no wonder tho' they had not the Gift of Prophecy I am none of their Judge but leave God's Work to himself But I must say that this Book of Canons doth no whit increase my esteem of Council of Prelacy of Humane Canons or Clergies Laws nor of the particular Bishops and Clergy that made them And that I will neither publish such Excommunications nor promise or swear to do it Tho' I know that stretching pretences satisfie some Men like theirs that own the name of Sacred to that Synod because Sacrum quod sanctum simul execrabile signat A professed and relative Sanctity may be granted them Chap.
Plea for Peace declared my Political Principles which after all thoughts I stand to And no one hath given me a word of Exceptions against them to this day after so many years but some in meer Malice tell me of my Aphorisms revok't without taking notice of this I here repeat that I am ready to engage to the utmost that I renounce all Rebellion Treason and Sedition and all Principles tending thereto that I am for as much Power of Princes and Obedience of Subjects as any Text of Scripture speaks for or as is given or asserted by any General Council or the Confession of any Christian Church that I have seen except what is ascribed to the Pope and his Substitutes And I hold it unlawful to take Arms at all against the King that is against either his Authority Person Rights or Prerogative or against any lawfully Commissioned by him yea or unlawfully except in such Cases as God's Law of Nature or the King himself by Law or contrary Command shall bind Men to resist L. And so you will suppose that God's Law of Nature bindeth you in some Cases to resist And will not all Rebels plead that Law M. Dare you say that there is no such Case King Iames writeth that a King may not make War against his whole Kingdom If Ten Irishmen pretend a Commission to Kill all the Parliament and Protestants in the Land or to seize on the King's Garisons or if King Iohn give his Kingdom to the Pope ask Hooker Filson or Parliaments what the Law of Nature saith to these Cases Chap. XL. Point XXXVII Of Assenting and Consenting to the Damnatory Clauses of Athanasius's Creed L. I Hope you will not quarrel with the Creed M. I take the Creed called Athanasius's tho' the Author is unknown to be an excellent Explication of the Doctrine of the Trinity And could wish that it were more used and learnt of all But I am not so far to judge other Men as to conclude all Men certainly damned for ever that are not so well skilled in that Mystery as to believe every word there written L. I have heard Learned Men say That the Assent and Consent is not to be extended to the Damnatory Clauses but only the Doctrinal Articles M. They that can make Laws and Oaths speak or mean what they list need not stick at any thing Is not the Damnatory part a part of the Book of Common-Prayer and contained in it L. But they prove thus that it meaneth no such Consent or Approbation The Liturgy requireth you to read the Apocrypha and yet not to believe all things in it to be true For say they divers things in Tobit are evidently false And so tho' it bind you to use and read Athanasius's Creed it binds you not to believe all in it to be true M. This Cheat is too gross to deceive a School-Boy with Is Athanasius's Creed a real part of the Common-Prayer Book contain'd in it or not L. Yes no doubt we there find it both contained and prescribed Verbatim M. Is the Apocrypha any part of the Common-Prayer Book and contained in it or not L. If there be any Sentences out of it there inserted those are part else the Apocrypha is no part of the Book It is only the Order to read it that is a part M. Is not this a palpable Deceit to argue that we are not bound to Assent and Consent to that which is contained in the Book because we are not so bound to that which is not contained in it Chap XLI Point XXXVIII Of Saying Common-Prayer twice a day every day in the Year ordinarily L. IT is but that you shall every day say the Morning and Evening Service not being lett by Sickness or other urgent Cause And what have you against this M. I think when the Book was made to help the ignorant Vulgar out of Popery every day to use the Common-Prayer was a very good help to them But the Case is much altered and People now have more suitable Helps and Ministers have so much other Work to do in their Studies and with their Neighbours every day and some Prayers to use more suitable to their Families and Closets that it must needs be a sinful Impediment against other Duties to say Common-Prayer twice a day If they were commanded to Preach twice a day every day in the year it would cause a sinful Omission of other Duties how good soever Preaching be in it self L. But then you have urgent Cause of forbearance M. We are not for abusive dallying with Covenants about Sacred things It is evident by the instance of Sickness that the Authors of the Imposition meant only extraordinary Causes as urgent and not that we should take our ordinary Work for such an urgent Cause As if a Man that is bound to spend most of the day in his Shop should Covenant to go Thirty Miles every day if he be not lett by urgent Cause L. But you see that almost no Conformists do thus therefore it 's certain that they do not so understand it M. That 's a warning to take heed of promising that which we see so many that promised it not perform They are our Monitors to take heed of such a playing with Sacred Covenants and deceiving the Law instead of obeying it Chap. XLII Point XXXIX Of forcing the unwilling Parishioners to the Sacrament and Accusing and Excommunicating the Refusers L. HOw are you bound to this by Conformity M. 1. We must assent and consent to the Rubrick which commandeth That every Parishioner shall Communicate three times a year at least 2. The Oath of Canonical Obedience binds us to obey the 112 Canon as well as the rest which saith The Minister Churchwardens Questmen and Assistants of every Parish-Church and Chappel shall yearly within 40 days after Easter exhibit to the Bishop or his Chancellor the Names and Surnames of All the Parishioners as well Men as Women which being at the Age of 16 years received not the Communion at Easter before And then they are to be Excommunicated if they refuse and to lie in Jail till they die when taken by the Writ De Excommunicato Capiendo L. And why should not men be forced to their Duty and to their own good if they are backward to it M. The internal part is the first and chief part of their Duty without which the external is not their Duty but their great Sin. It is the Duty of Heathens to Believe and be baptized but not to be baptized till they believe It is the Duty of Candidates for the Ministry to get Ability and Ordination and to officiate But not to officiate before they get Ability and Ordination It is the Duty of every Man to believe the Truth of the Gospel and to profess that belief But to say he believeth when he doth not is Hypocrisie and Lying It is a sloathful Man's Duty to rise and dress him and go to his Work but not
live in Peace and Christian Piety if all yea all Bishops and Priests were but agreed at the Heart what it is to be a Christian and whether the Gospel be certainly true and whether Christ be the Son of God or a deceiver and whether there be a Life after this and a Judgment of all according to their works Yea were they but heartily agreed that there is a God who is the Rewarder of them that diligently seek him and a punisher of the wicked The dispute seems to me to be whether we shall be Christians indeed or worldly Hypocrites called Christians and whether we shall use the Name of God Christ and Religion for Christ and Holiness or for the Flesh against Christ. L. You are very severe in your Censure M. I doubt some will find Christ more severe and be less able to endure his Censure than mine when he shall call some men to account for turning sacred Names and Offices and Ordinances against him to banish Conscience and serious Godliness to say nothing of Veracity common Honesty and Humanity out of the Church and turn his House of Prayer into a place of Merchandise and a Den of Thieves and tempt Turks and Heathens to hate Christians for their wickedness and to fly from the Christian Church lest they should lose all Religion Trustiness and Honesty or the Reputation of them But I speak not now of our Governours whom I leave to God. Chap. XLIII Point XL. Of forsaking our Ministry and ceasing to Preach the Gospel and Banishment Five Miles from Corporations M. THE last part of Ministerial Conformity which I named to you is that if we cannot conform to all aforesaid for fear of Damnation we must cease our Ministry and must not Preach Christs Gospel to any more than four besides our Family nor perform any Worship of God with more but in their way and we must neither dwell nor come within Five Miles of any Burgess Corporation or any place where-ever we lived or travelled and preached since the Act of Oblivion Otherwise we must lye in the common Goal L. Doubtless they that made this Law against you thought you very wicked intolerable men and thought your Preaching very dangerous And indeed so they say of you in the Preface of the Oxford Act. M. They do so and I am glad to find that falseness and wickedness as such is yet disowned in the World and that men do not glory in the very names of them It is a notable evidence that there is a Life of retribution that naughtiness is disowned by all Mankind and the worst would be thought and called honest and true and good and that the World would not Crucifie Christ nor Persecute and Murder his Apostles under the name of righteous holy men but under the name of Malefactors Enemies to Caesar Breakers of the Law and Pestilent Fellows that troubled the Peace and turned the World upside down The Devil himself dare not own the name of Lying Malignity and Murder nor of Persecuting Men for Truth and Goodness and Gods Cause And verily it seemeth the Controversie of many in this Age whether they that scarce speak of God but in Swearing and Cursing nor of Religion but in scorning or threatning the serious practisers of it and that savour little but Eating and Drinking to the full and Playing and getting Riches and hateing all that are stricter than they or those that make Gods Law their rule and Obedience to him the work of their Lives and his serious Worship their delight and Heaven their hope and dare not wilfully sin against God nor be Perjured or Lie I say which of these be the honester Men L. Put you cannot deny that your party hath preached the Nation into Rebellion for the Parliament against the King and therefore are justly sâ—spected till they repent M. 1. What mean you by our party If you mean Nonconformists to the present Laws of Conformity you are easily confuted For the Rebellion was over and the King restored before the present Conformity was Enacted And when there was no such Law there were no Nonconformists to it nor any such Party in being If you mean the old Nonconformists I answer you 1. They were part for the Parliament part against their War and part Neuters 2. There was a multitude of Conformist Ministers for the Parliament for one Nonconformist I have oft proved that there was at the beginning of that Parliament not many more Nonconformist Ministers left in England than were Counties if so many In the Westminster Asâ—eâ—ly there were but seven or eight Englishmen Most of the Sermons before the Parliament which are now most blamed were Preached by Conformists 3. Such as kept in and obeyed the Parliament and Usurpers did most of them Conform of 9000 or 10000 Ministers there were but two thousand that Conformed not And did meer turning to Conformity manifest Repentance 4. But I have oft and oft said if they will silence all that had any hand in Wars except the Conformists and no more we will thank them with great joy For I do not think there are forty that I say not twenty silenced Ministers alive in all England that had any hand in the War against the King. And it 's an odd kind of Justice that should eject and accuse so great a number for other mens Actions 5. But if our Doctrine be Seditious why should not we be allowed rather to Preach openly where Witnesses may convict us and the Law take hold on us than in secret to four where none can convict us 6. And how comes it to pass that whilst so many hundred Ministers are hunted and ruined for Preaching we hear of none at all punished for any False or Seditious Doctrine Do those that watch accuse and ruin us want will to find out our false or ill Doctrine while I am writing this the common talk is two poor Fellows accused such a one and two Beggars or poor Women that stood at the doors took their Oaths against such and such and such many Warrants granted to distrain for Forty Pound or Sixty Pound a Sermon on Ministers and People the Citizens Goods seized and carryed away their Shops made bare many laid in Jayls and thousands waiting for utter ruin of all they have and all this on the account of their Preaching and Hearing as without the Common Prayer and not a word among all these of any False Doctrine spoken 7. And Gods great mercy having of late years opened the Press the Nonconformists have Printed abundance of their Sermons that the World may see what Doctrine they Preached There are two Volumes of Morning Lectures at one place and two at another and one Volume of Lectures against Popery There is a great Volume of Mr. Charnock's Sermons and a great one and maâ—y lesser of Dr. Manton's many Folioâ—s of Mr. Anth. Burgesses divers of Dr. Bates divers of Mr. Richard Alleine's Dr. Gilpin of Temptations and abundance more You
just occasion to seek it 3. They say that there is no Church without a Bishop and that the Diocesan-Church is the least true political Church And if so he separateth not from any Church that separateth not from the Diocesan 4. These foresaid persons do nothing to forfeit the Communion of neighbour Churches therefore it is a sin and wrong to deny it them If it were proved an errour to avoid that as a sin which they avoid all mankind hath errours and to be over-fearful of Fire or Water or Plague or Poyson is a tolerable safe weakness and not like the sins that swarm in multitudes of tolerated Parishioners L. That which is not so immoral as Fornication Drunkenness Cursing and Swearing may be more hurtful to the Church and so deserve greater severity from Governours M. The Church-Keys are to be used with due relation to Heaven and those are to be taken in or cast out that Christ will take in or cast out from Heaven And if you think he will damn an obedient godly Christian for fearing to partake of the sin of wicked Priests or for fearing to be poysoned with love-killing Doctrine or for fearing the vain Worship of mens traditions rather than a prophane derider of Conscience and a filthy Fornicator Drunkard or Blasphemer I shall not think it worth my labour to dispute with you But men that take the Churches welfare to lie in the wealth and domination of such as they more than in the Holy Obedience Conscience and Piety of the People will object the same that you now do CHAP. LIII POINT X. Of Swearing never to endeavour any alteration of Government in the Church M. HOW far this extendeth objectively I before proved X. by 1. The words of the Oaths 2. The consent of the Bishops 3. And the words of the seven Canons and the Et Caetera Canon in 1640. so that there is no doubt of it 2. How far it extendeth as to the persons obliged I before told you and you may read 1. In the Corporation Act which imposeth it on all Corporations 2. In the Vestry Act which imposeth it on all Church-Vestries 3. In the Act of Vniformity which imposeth the subscription on all the Clergy 4. In the Oxford Act of Banishment which imposeth the Oath on Non-conformists and more 5. In the Militia Act which imposeth it on all the Military Commanders and Souldiers in the Land so that you may well say that is a National Covenant or Oath 3. What is amiss in the Church-Government that needeth an amending alteration I have so often told you that I will not repeat it Judge then what this Oath importeth L. It could never be the meaning of the Parliament that no man shall endeavour to amend the faults of any Officers Courts or Actions for they often amend their own Acts of Parliament and they reserve a Power in King and Parliament to make alterations even in Church Governments But that belongs not to the People nor should they endeavour it M. 1. I hope you will not confound Stated Offices and Mens Exercise of them in Practice I grant that they do not bind us by Oath never to endeavour that Bishops and all the Officers of their Courts may be honest men and slander and injure no man against Law c. But it is the Offices as here stated that are made thus far unalterable named in the Canon Arch-Bishops Bishops Deans Arch-Deacons and the rest that bear Office therein 2. I grant that the Law is made to bind none but Subjects and that an altering power is reserved to King and Parliament But it doth not follow that all the Subjects be not bound by it Though They may change Laws yet We may not And as you say They suppose that it belongeth not to the People to endeavour it Which We grant as to any Rebellious Seditious or otherwise unlawful Endeavour But whether God bind not all men in their own Place and Calling by Prayer Conference Elections of Officers Petition c. to endeavour to amend all Crying Dangerous Common Sins is a farther Question L. They cannot mean to exclude Petitioning for that is the Subjects Right and is by them allowed with Restraints M. 1. It is meant in opposition to the Scots Covenant which tyed men to oppose Popery Prelacy and Schisme only in their several Places and Callings 2. It is expres'd in the most universal terms without the least Exception by men that knew how to speak 3. Reasons were given in Parliament against any Limitation and those Reasons carryed it 4. They were Men that were wholly for the Church of England whose Canon had before Excommunicated themselves and all men that accused any Office in the Church Government as sinful And they knew that should any of them when the Parliament is risen yea or there so say he is an Excommunicate Man. 5. It is most certain that they intended to bind all Subjects on whom these Oaths are imposed even from petitioning or any other Endeavour of Alteration though they allow petitioning in other Cases for they intended to fix and secure the Church-Government against all Alterations 6. Therefore as I said before they joined it with yea and set it before State-Government in all their Oaths and Covenants And do you think in Conscience they left men at liberty to petition against Monarchy or against the Life or Power or Honour of the King Far be it from us to think so ill of them I must profess to you that I do not think half so ill of well-order'd Monasteries of Men or Women as I do of our large Diocesses or our Lay-Excommunicators according to the Canons And yet even in the Times of Popery the Nation was not Sworn never to endeavour any alteration of Monasteries If you would have all Corporations Soldiers Vestries Ministers sworn never to endeavour to cure the Sick to relieve the Poor to seek more Wealth to reform all Play-houses Ale-houses and Taverns to Catechize their Families c. I would not join with you National Oaths and Covenants are Matters of great moment We have deeply suffered by rashness in such already And should any of them prove false and wicked and the Nation be stigmatized with Perjury you might more sadly write Lord have Mercy on us on the Land than on the Doors where the most dreadful Plague prevaileth CHAP. LIV. POINT XI Of Swearing an Abhorrence of taking Arms against any Commissionated by the KING M. THis also I have said enough of in the Case of the XI Ministers and told you that we are far from scrupling it in Disloyalty but in Loyalty only 1. Lest the Keepers of the Seals may by Commissions depose the King or deliver up the Kingdom to whom they please 2. Because the Authority of a Commission as above and against the King 's own Law is not a matter that Lawyers and Judges themselves are agreed of and therefore unfit for the unskilful Vulgar to determine by their
the young Clergy that can talk thus shew us by any good evidence that in other things they are so much Wiser Learneder than the Dissenters Are they all of greater Learning than Iohn Reignolds or better Hebricians than Hugh Broughton or better Logicians than Sadeel or Ramus or Sohnius or of greater Reading than Blondel c. 3. Do they know us better than we our selves We offer our Oaths that we hold what we do by the Cogency of appearing Evidence and are willing to know the truth 4. Have I here and elsewhere given no Reasons for our Dissent Have they answered my Treatise of Episcopacy my First and Second Plea for Peace my Apology my Treatise of the Terms of Church-Concord or any one thing that I have written for our Cause save two or three by disputes which when I have vindicated they have let fall the Disceptation What front have these men then that say we Dissent without giving Reason for it But you know how long the Press was shut against our Writings and yet then they that would not endure us to Speak accused us for being Silent L. Obj. IV. They say you are Non-Conformists meerly to make good your former Errours because you will not confess that you did amiss but will make the People justify you M. 1. What are those Errours If it be our dislike of any of the things before described I confess it is because we will not renounce them If it be an errour to be against their Church-corruptions and cruel Excommunications and denying Christendom to the Seed of the Faithful and Communion to faithful Christians I confess we will not recant these errours till they have better proved them such The Papists that swarm with Errours as a Beggar doth with Lice yet burn the Protestants as for Errour 2. I pray you wish those infallible men that in the ditch of dirt are delivered from all the uncleanness of errour to send only those those that are without errour to cast the first stone at us or those that have no worse errour than ours to silence excommunicate and destroy us 3. Have we given them no reasons of our dissent 4. Do they not know that the argument that hath brought us all into the case that we are in was thus given us 1664. and oft since in Print If we abate them any thing they will say that our Church was faulty and needed that Reformation who then is it that hath divided us to avoid confession of any former faultiness Tho' good Bishop Hall pronounceth a heavy Sentence on them that will justify the miscarriages of the Prelates L. Obj. V. They say that you took part with the Parliament against the King and involved the Land in Blood and have still the same rebellious principles M. 1. I confess there were some among us that were of the mind of Hooker Bilson Grotius Barclay and the common sort of Casuists Politicks c. and that thought that as in a doubt about Physick the College of Physicians were most to be trusted so in a doubt about Law the Parliament had been most credible And when the Irish had murdered two hundred thousand Protestants falsly pretending that they had the Kings Commission and threatning to finish their works in England there were many formerly tempted to fly in fear to the Parliament for safety being ignorant that the Kings bare word notwithstanding the Papists strength and interest was more to be trusted with our Laws Lives and Religion than all the Lawyers Courts and Pariament and that if all the Protestants in England had been used as those in Ireland they ought to have died patiently unless the killers would have given them time to send to the King to know whether he would have them live or die They were ignorant that a Lord Proprietor may do with his own as he list Who accuseth the owner for killing his own Sheep But the times of this ignorance are past The Long Parliament that made the Act of Vniformity cured it And shall not the Act of Oblivion be permitted to reconcile us and continue our peace 2. But Sir Who be they that were thus deceived I told you 1. That of near ten thousand that had Churches under the Parliament and Cromwel there was but two thousand that refused to Conform And is not seven thousand Conformists more than two thousand Dissenters 2. Many that were in the Parliament's Army Conformed and some that were for the Kings Death when the generality of those called Presbyterians abhorred it and the Engagement and brought in the King on reasons of meer Conscience 3. I have told you that we will take it thankfully if only those were silenced that had any hand in that War believing that it will not now be twenty Ministers in England And why are the rest that were Boys at School accused for other Mens opinions or actions For the time to come you need not fear them I heard some tell the Members of the Long Parliament that called them Rebels for saying that a Parliament may use defensive Arms against the Kings Commissioned Souldiers that if that would serve they would promise that if the King would but send a dozen Irish-men to kill them all in the house they would never be guilty of taking Arms to defend them nor perswading any else to do it L. Obj. VI. But they say that these Non-Conformists tho' they had no hand in the late War yet have the same Principles that caused it and that is Non-Conformity M. This is an argument a baculo ad angulum A man is against the Cross in Baptism or a Lay-Chancellor's excommunicating Men for a Ceremony c. ergo he is against the King and for Rebellion The other side say that the Irish Principles and the Popish were the cause and must we therefore conclude all Irish or Papists to be against the King They were Papists that raised the Wars on both sides in the aforesaid days of King William K. Stephen H. 1. and H. 3. and Ed. 2. and Rich. 2. and H. 6. and Rich. 3. and Ed. 4. c. Doth it follow that all rapists are rebels 2. But I have elsewhere fully proved that the Parliament when that War began were of the Church of England and Conformists and it 's strange that any should have the face to deny it while so many are yet living that know them Whitlocke tells us in his Memorials that they voted that every County should have a Bishop and his Presbytery And were those then against Episcopacy One would think that a County should be big enough to keep Episcopacy from dwindling to nothing every Bishop of old had but one City Many Counties have ten or near twenty Towns that were then called Cities But when Papists dare say that all are against Kings that are against the Pope who is the ruler and deposer of Kings it 's no wonder if every Bishop or Chancellor or Official c. will say If
Oxford-Oath in the Act of Confinement and the Subscription in the Act of Vniformity M. I have told you fully before Not because we differ in Doctrine but in expounding the words of that Oath and Subscription 2. Were neither Arch-bishop Abbot nor his Clergy nor the Parliaments of those times of the Church of England as well as Sâ—bthorp and Mainwaring Were not the Laws made by those Parliaments made by the Members if not Representatives of the Church of England You know that our late great Defenders of the Church describe the Church of England to be those that Worship God according to the Law And were the Parliaments that made those Laws none of the Church themselves Chillingworth would not Subscribe without a limitting Profession Was he therefore none of the Church Was Bishop Bilson none of the Church Was R. Hooker none of the Church The first dedicated his Book to Queen Elizabeth and the latter is Dedicated to our King Charles the second and Praised by his Father And yet the Author of the Holy Common-wealth hath larglier than any man confuted Hooker's Popular Principles When William Barclay a Lawyer defended the King of France his Temporal Power against the Popes Usurpation of a Power to depose and restrain him he is fain to profess that the contrary opinion was so common that he was taken to speak some strange and singular thing And yet none doubts but he was of the same Church of Rome I again challenge you to name that point in which we differ in this Doctrine from the true Church of England L. You hold that Kings may be resisted by Arms. M. Not so much as the aforesaid Bishop and Doctors of the Church of England did or the Parliaments that made church-Church-Laws Again See our second Plea for Peace how far we disclaim it I profess that I am acquainted with no meer Non-Conformist Ministers that hold it at all lawful for Subjects to resist the King or any Supream Power by a War except in case that he notoriously declareth that he will if he can destroy the Common-wealth or deliver it up to a foreigner or destroyer that hath no right L. Sure the cry would never be for Extirpating the Dissenters for this Plot and their disloyalty if they were not guilty M. Nay if that be your argument Strangers to them say they are disloyal and guilty ergo they are so I leave you to God's answer for I will not undertake to answer you But will you use Sobriety a little further 1. It is now twenty seven years since they were ejected and cast out of maintenance and countenance and left to beg or crave their bread Long have they been laid in Gaols and fined deeply the Law laying on them twenty and forty pound a Sermon Their Goods Beds Books taken from them and they left destitute How many in all these years have ever been accused and proved guilty of one disloyal or seditious Sermon or Word I know of none Certainly it was not for want of will in the Accusers Those that by Oaths have brought them under Convictions and Warrants for distress of five ten and much more forfeitures even divers hundred pounds at once before they were ever summoned to speak for themselves would sure have sworn some disloyal Words against them had they been able And can many hundred Ministers have a fuller proof of their innocency than that they had no such prosecution twenty seven years from such a sort of Adversaries in so great Sufferings 2. And now this Plot is detected It is divers Months since and many Countries and Corporations have accused the Dissenters of it and cry them down to Extirpation And to this day I cannot hear of any one English Minister or at most not of two that is either an Episcopal or Presbyterian Non-Conformist so much as accused or named as guilty The French and Dutch Churches in London are Dissenting Presbyterians Yet no man accuseth any of them for being in Plots and yet must they also be destroyed But Sir if any one or more of the Episcopal or Presbyterian Non-Conformists Ministers or People had been found guilty would you condemn thousands or any of the guiltless for their sakes On what account Is it for their Relation to them They are mostly strangers to one another Come and let us try your rule of Justice I. Is there any Relation nearer than that of Father and Son And can any Minister be supposed to have more interest in or influence on his Hearers than a Father hath on his Son And you know that the chief man accused is the Kings eldest Son I hope you will not for this charge the King as if he principled him for Treason against himself Nor as if he were to suffer for his Sons faults II. The Judges have oft declared that many Iesuits and Papists were Plotters and Traitors and they died for it I hope you will not make all Papists guilty of their crime nor extirpate them for it And yet the Papists are Conventicling Dissenters too III. The Lords and great Men accused of this Plot and Treason how justly God knoweth were of the Church of England and shall all the Church of England be destroyed for their sakes Dr. Whitby and others now blamed by the Oxford-Convocation and Bishop Bilson Mr. Hocker c. were of the Church of England and shall all the English Clergy be accused of their words IV. Many of the accused were Hobbists and Infidels and some common ill-living Protestants Shall all the Hobbists and Infidels and ill-living Protestants be extirpated for their faults V. Many Gentlemen of some late Parliaments are accused not yet tried and proved guilty Shall all the Parliament-men therefore be extirpated as guilty VI. Some Lawyers and Students at Law are accused Shall all Lawyers and Students therefore be extirpated VII Divers of the Nobility are accused Must all Noble-men be therefore reproached VIII Some that have been of the Kings Privy Council were accused Is his Council therefore to be disgraced or destroyed IX Formerly many Judges have been guilty Are Judges therefore to be dishonoured X. By this justice you may next conclude They were Englishmen that were accused therefore let all English-men be rooted out Or they were Protestants and Christians therefore away with all Protestants and Christians Whereas I think it an unjust conclusion that because they were Irish-men and Papists that murdered two hundred thousand in Ireland therefore root out all Irish-men and Papists unless you will inferr They are men that commit all sin therefore root out mankind If it had been men that hate serious Godliness and are the seed of the Serpent and of Cain that are at deadly enmity to the true fear of God and thirst for the blood of the innocent that are accused of this Plot and if People had petitioned to have all this sort of men rooted out for it it would have fallen on more than you and I are willing to name or
THE ENGLISH Nonconformity As under King Charles II. and King Iames II. TRULY STATED and ARGUED By RICHARD BAXTER Who earnestly beseecheth Rulers and Clergy not to Divide and Destroy the Land and cast their own Souls on the dreadful Guilt and Punishment of National PERJVRY Lying deliberate Covenanting to Sin against God corrupt his Church and not Amend nor by Laws or blind Malignity to reproach faithful Ministers of Christ and Judge them to Scorn and Beggery and to Lie and Die in Jails as Rogues and so to strengthen Profaneness Popery and Schism and all for want of WILLINGNESS and PATIENCE to READ and Hear their just Defence while they can spend much more time in Sin and Vanity The Author humbly begs that he and his Books of unconfutable Defence of a Mistaken persecuted Cause may not be Witnesses against them for such great and wilful Sin to their Condemnation Mat. 12. 25. Every Kingdom divided against it self is brought to Desolation Luk. 13. 3 5. Except ye Repent ye shall all likewise Perish LONDON Printed for Tho. Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns at the lower End of Cheapside 1689. The Preface IT is agreed on by all real Christians that Man being made an Intelligent Free Agent not under bruitish necessitating Determination by Objects is governed by God by the Moral way of Law that is by the Signification of his Ruler's Will making his Duty and not by meer natural or forcible Motion And it is agreed that GOD himself is his only absolute Universal Ruler and his Laws given in Nature and by Revelation are the only Universal Laws which no Humane Power can abrogate or dispense with And that Kings and Magistrates are his Ministers for Mens good and have no Power but from him and none against him or his Laws and that it is not Man but God by whom we must all be judged to everlasting Reward or Punishment And therefore that all men must obey God before Men and must not fear them that can but kill the Body but him who is able to cast both Soul and Body into Hell. And it is agreed on by all Sober Christians that therefore as Subjects must use their own Reason as discerning Self-Governours to Iudge who is their King and who is a Usurper and what Actions are commanded or forbidden by Man's Laws so must they first and chiefly use their own reason to judge discerningly what Actions are commanded or forbidden by God and must do accordingly whoever is against it This Iudgment is commonly called Conscience which if it err not must be followed but if it err it must be rectified for then it is not God indeed that is obeyed for God's Law changeth not as Conscience doth yet to go against such a Conscience is Sin because it iâ— interpretatively to go against God while the Man thought this had been God's Will. On Supposition of this certain truth all that ever I yet read that Condemn the Nonconformists and Preach for their Reproach and Ruine do confess that If any one thing required of us as necessary to our Ministry or Communion be Sin our Nonconformity is but our Duty and all the whole Ministry of England on whom this was imposed by the Act of Uniformity on Baâ—tholomew-Day 1662. were bound in Conscience to have been Nonconformists Whether also to bave all ceased to Preach the Gospel I leave to their Consideration This being the Confession of all that Silence us and send us to Gaols and call out for our utter Extirpation I know no shorter or likelier way to stop all this burning Wrath and end our Mischievous Dissentions than to try whether no one thing required of us be Sin. Forty of the things required of Ministers and Twelve of those required of the Laity in all Fifty two I have proposed to Examination not as accusing the Laws or the Conformists whatever I think of them but only rendering briefly the Reasons of our own refusals And Forty three Points in which many falsly suppose we Conform not and some may perhaps be found that do not Conform to them all I have first instanced in as being such as we oppose not nor are any Parts of our Nonconformity If all the Iustices and Ministers of England who censure us and prosecute us as intolerable Sinners for our fearing these as Sin have impartially tryed all these Points and Reasons or yet will do and can find no Sin in any one of the Fifty two and it prove so indeed I must say that all the Two Thousand Ministers that in 1662. were Silenced were as unhappy and strangely blinded Men as most in the World that are true Christians that after all their Study and Prayers they should affright themselves into so calamitous a State against all the reason of their Worldly Interests as well as against the welfare of the Church and their Duty to God 2. But I must say past doubt that the accusing Clergy are deeply guilty of it who these Twenty one years have no better answered the Reasons of our fear nor used more Wisdom and Charity for our just Conviction For our Consciences are of such a temper as will not be convinced with a Scorn or a Iail nor take all Writings or Words as satisfactory that are poured out with supercilious Confidence and called Satisfactory by the Self-esteeming Authors I am told by divers That I have written enough already on these Subjects were it only my first and second Plea for Peace my Treatise of Episcopacy and that of Concord and my Apology for our Preaching And they say You must expect to do no good nor so much as to be read by Adversaries much less with Diligence and impartial Willingness to know the Truth but contrarily to be hated and accused of some odious Crime and laid in Iail among Malefactors till you die and a Prison will be more grievous to one in your pain and languishing than to another On the other side I have been long importuned to give an account of the Reasons of our Nonconformity I have by Bishops been reproved for not doing it Lords and Persons of great Quality have been perswaded that we keep up a dangerous Schism in the Land to the cherishing of Discontents and Sedition only for things which we confess to be indifferent and no Sin the Laws accuse us The numerous Addresses of Counties Cities and Corporations revile us as the Nurses of Rebellion No small number of Preachers plead for our Ruine on the same Supposition and tell the People that it is no Sin that we stick at but Humour Pride and Faction make us disobedient Schismaticks without any reason for what we do The Iails are fill'd with Nonconformists Nine Ministers are now in Newgate and many more in other Places And almost all of them Mulct and Fined in far more than ever they were worth Their Goods and Books taken by Distress They are fain to fly or abscond that are not in Prison Their Wives and
Children in Distress and Want They are judged by the Iustices unworthy so much as to be summoned to Answer for themselves before they are judged or to be heard Plead their own Cause or to know and question their Accusers and Witnesses But as I my self was Distreined of all my Goods and Books on five Convictions before ever I heard of any Accusation or saw a Iudge so is it with many others and more In a word Lords Knights and Clergy-men take us for unsufferable Persons in the Land unfit for Humane Society Enemies to Monarchy Obedience and Peace and Corporations promise to choose such Parliament Men as are for our Extirpation And all this is for our Nonconformity which they all confess to be our Duty if it be any Sin that by the Impositions is required of us And if so small and easie a task as proving one or many such Sins required would recover the Charity and Iustice of all these Men and save themselves and the Land from the guilt of Prosecuting and Oppressing the Innocent and Condemning Men for Obedience to God and driving conscionable and loyal Persons out of the Land or overwhelming them with false Accusations because of other Mens Treasons or Sedition is not he that will forbear his Part and Duty in so dreadful a Case a greater Sinner than he that when the City is on fire will not do his best to quench it or that will not put out his hand to save a Friend or Child in fire or Water for fear of some trouble to himself I did in my first Plea for Peace only name the Matters which we dare not Conform to and durst not give the Reasons of our Fear and Nonconformity Whereupon many since have importuned me for those Reasons as without which I could not expect that Men should understand our Case Why should I deny this Is it through despair that Rulers and Clergymen will not regard Reason or will not bear it but answer it with Contempt or Prisons That is to accuse them of such Injustice Uncharitableness and Inhumanity as I must not accuse any of that do not by open practice accuse themselves Is it lest I should suffer by them My Life and Labours have been long Vowed to God He hath preserved my Life and succeeded my Labours above forty Years by a continued course of remarkable Providence beyond my own and other Mens expectations What he hath thus given me is doubly due to his Service which hath been still so good to me that it hath made even a painful life a continual pleasure He never failed or forsook me I dare not ask any longer life of him but for more and longer Service And if my Service be at an end why not my Life also If I refuse his Service I invite God to cut off my Life And what Service else can I now do I have neither leave nor strength to Preach I have these fourteen Months been disabled so much as to go to any Publick or Private Church or hear a Sermon My Body with pain and languid feebleness is a daily heavy load to me I suffer more by it every day than from all my Enemies in the World. And shall I be guilty of the heinous Sin of the Omission of my Duty in a time of such urgent and crying Necessity to save so calamitous a Life which I am still looking when it endeth Is not a Prison as near a Way to Heaven as my own House I will not do as those Christians that Cyprian writes to Comfort who were greatly troubled at Death because they died not by Martyrdom But I take a Death for so publick and pressing a Cause of Truth Love Innocency and Peace to be a more comfortable sort of Martyrdom than theirs that were Burnt in Smithfield for denying the Real Presence and such like and if God will so end such a painful Life when Sickness and Natural decay is ready to end it I hope he will teach me neither to repine nor to be utterly unthankful And as to the uncertainty of success He that observeth the Wind shall not sow God must be trusted to bless our Work while we Plant and Water It 's my part to do my Duty and God's part to give success I commend my self living and dying into the hands of my Creator and Redeemer and end this Preface in the words of St. Paul Act. 20. 23 24. Bonds and afflictions abide me But none of these things move me neither count I my life dear unto my self so that I might finish my course with Joy and the Ministry which I have received of the Lord Jesus to testifie the Gospel of the Grace of God. Richard Baxter London Sept. 28. 1683. An Instance of the ACCUSATIONS which call for our Defence besides those in the Act for Banishment from Corporations c. Devon ss Ad General Quarterial Session Pacis Dom. Regis tent apud Castr. Exon. in pro Comitat. praed Secundo die Octobris Anno Regni Dom. nostri Caroli Secundi Dei gratia Angliae Scotiae Franciae Hiberniae Regis Fidei Defensor c. Tricessimo quinto Annoque Dom. 1683. WE have been so abundantly convinced of the Seditious and Rebellious Practices of the Sectaries and Phanaticks who through the Course of above One hundred years since we were first infested with 'em have scarce afforded this unhappy Kingdom any interval of rest from their Horrid Treasons as that we must esteem 'em not only the open Enemies of our Established Government but to all the common Principles of Society and Humanity it self Wherefore that we may prevent their Horrid Conspiracies for the time to come and secure as much as in us lies our most Gracious KING and the GOVERNMENT from the Fury and Malice of 'em we resolve to put the Severest of the Laws which we find too Easie and Gentle unless enlivened by a vigorous Execution in force against ' em 1. We Agree and Resolve in every Division of this County to require sufficient Sureties for the good Abearing and Peaceable Behaviour of all such as we may justly suspect or that we can receive any credible Information against that they have been at any Conventicles and Unlawful Meetings or at any Factious or Seditious Clubs or that have by any Discourses discovered themselves to be disaffected to the present Established Government either in Church or State or that have been the Authors or Publishers of any Seditious Libels or that shall not in all things duely conform themselves to the present Established Government 2. Because we have a sort of False Men and more perfidious than professed Phanatiques who either wanting Courage to appear in their own shape or the better to bring about their Treasonable Designs privately Associate with and encourage the Seditious Clubs of the Sectaries and with them Plot heartily against the Government and yet that they may pass unsuspected sometime appear in the Church with a false shew of Conformity only
cost or danger We Pleaded we Wrote we Petitioned and Beg'd for Peace even for that which the King had granted And what could we do more Since then above twenty years we have laboured as we could sometime to few and sometime to more and have patiently lived upon Charity and suffered I need not tell you what L. But why could not you Conform to the Law as well as they M. 1. Can men believe what others list because they bid us Is there nothing that you or they would refuse if it be but commanded you What use have we for a Law of God then If we must disobey it as oft as we are bid that were to renounce God and all Religion and Salvation And we have not our own understandings at command we have offered them our Oaths these twenty years that we would obey them in all except at the rate of sinning and damnation 2. And if we had done as they did we must have profest our Assent and Consent to all things contained in and prescribed by a Book which we never saw For so did we suppose above seven thousand men the Book not coming out of the Press till about the day that they were so to Assent to it Aug. 24. so that no doubt they did it on an implicite trust in others except the few that were in or near London This fully shews that though almost all the nine thousand or more Ministers that were in possession when the King came in did before conform to the way of the Directory and not to the Common-Prayer Book yet there was a great latent difference between the seven thousand that conformed and the two thousand that did not L. But seeing all the stress lyeth upon the question Whether it be only things Lawful indifferent or good which you refuse or any thing which God forbiddeth I pray tell me plainly what it is that you take to be sinful in the Conformity required And what it is that you would have as necessary in its stead M. I will tell you on these Conditions 1. That you pardon me for repeating here what I have already written 2. That you bring not your self a Conscience so laxe as will take nothing for sin which men use to make light of though God forbid it and then think that our Consciences should be as wide as yours 3. That we may premise the things presupposed as agreed on CHAP. II. The things presupposed as agreed on L. WHat are the Agreements which you presuppose M. These following 1. That God is the Absolute Soveraign Ruler and hath made in Nature and in the Sacred Scripture Universal Laws for the whole Church and World And that Kings are His Subjects and Officers and have no Power but what He giveth them directly or indirectly and therefore none against Him no more than a Constable against the Sovereign Power and that he and all men are bound to obey Gods Lawes whoever are against it or forbid it L. I cannot deny this without denying God to be God and the Law of Nature and Scripture to be His Law and Word M. II. That next to his Government God in order of Nature and Time made Self-Government and Family-Government before the Government of Republicks Kingdoms or Cities And that publick Polity hath no Authority to abrogate Self-Government or Family-Government but only to over rule and use them for the common good and safety L. This is undenyable if you state the Governments presupposed 〈◊〉 M. III. That it belongs to Self-Government to discern by reason whether the Commands of Men be against the Commands of God or not which we call Iudicium discretionis by which all men must guide their actions L. Shall every man be a judge of the Law whether it be just and good How unfit are the vulgar to judge of Lawes M. They are no publick judges to decide the case for other men nor doth their judgment restrain or bind the Magistrate nor if they judge amiss will it justifie themselves or suspend the execution of the Law against them But if they must not have the foresaid discerning judgment to guide their actions it will follow 1. That they are not governed nor must obey as Men by Reason and Free-will but as Brutes 2. That Kings have Absolute Power against God and must be obeyed in all that they command e. g. if it be to curse or blaspheme or renouce God or Christ to command the Subject to live in Murder Adultery Perjury c. and so to abrogate the Law of Nature 3. It followeth that there is no God that is a Supream Ruler but the King. 4. And I pray you tell me what you will have the Subjects do in case of Usurpation or Competition for the Government as between the Houses of York and Lancaster Iane and Queen Mary c. when one saith fight for me and the other fight for me If the Subject have not a judgment of discretion to know which is his rightful Sovereign the King must be forsaken He that will stand to the command of another must judge who his Commander is L. And will you have Infants and Idiots judge of their Parents commands Or Children in their minority M. 1. Infants and Idiots have not the use of Reason and so far are to be ruled by force as Brutes And Children in that measure as they are short of reason But 2. If they come to reason and the King command them one thing e. g. what Church to go to and their Parents the contrary would you not have them judge which they must obey 3. Much more if Parents should command them to sin against God to Steal Lye Murder Blaspheme and Curse the King c. surely they must judge as far as they are able L. I cannot deny it proceed in your presuppositions M. IV. That no men have power to command us to damn our Souls or to do any thing that tendeth to it L. None will deny you that but perhaps some things may cease to be sin and dangerous if commanded M. None can dispense with the Laws of God but we grant that some things that are unlawful by some accident or circumstance may become a duty when commanded when the good of Obedience Order and Concord therein weighs down against the accident It may be a sin to go on Warfare before one is commanded and a duty when he is commanded It is a fault in a Servant to go before he is sent and a duty after V. We presuppose that deliberate Lying is a sin L. Is there any one doubts of that M. If they do not our Case will soon be decided But indeed many deny it The Iansenists name you many Jesuit Casuists And Grotiâ—â— de Iure Belli and Bishop Ier. Taylor deny that Lying is any sin when it is profitable and wrongeth none as in a Physician to fice down a Medicine L. And what have you to say to the contrary M. I must not stay
take on them to be necessary interpreters of its great difficulties If such men forbear that expounding which they forbid others till they will do it better the loss will be the less Scripture speaketh plainlier than this 2. But who giveth this exposition To expound the Law by a common obligatory Exposition is proper to the Law-makers He that maketh the words maketh not a Law if he make not the sense Judges make not the sense but decide particular Cases by it as they understand it The Canons are made by the Convocation which he that denyeth to be the Representative Church of England is Excommunicate The Pulpit Preachers nor the particular Bishops are not the Convocation and therefore have not power to expound their Canons by any Common obligatory exposition much less contrary to the express words Which way most of the Clergy went under Bishop Parker Grindal and Abbot is well known And yet now they are so far from being taken for the Expositors of the Churches sense that they are openly scorned as popular fautorer of Puritans and those of their mind called Grindalizers II. But it is the second that is the Trojan horse whose name is Legion I mean that hath many more evils in the belly of it viz. that we must profess that the three Books Articles Liturgy and Ordination are so utterly faultless that there is nothing in them Contrary to the word of God and that we Assent and Consent to all contained and prescribed in and by them L. What have you against this what is there in it that is contrary to God's word M. God's word is perfect and forbids the least faulty errour or defect If we had never seen the Book we know that men made it and that every one that made it had ignorance error and sin and can a perfect faultless volumn be made by such faulty men Operari sequitur esse They renounce all pretensions to Infallibility in the Articles of Religion L. You interpret the words rigorously By nothing contrary they meâ—n nothing so contrary as that one may not use the Books M. If by nothing they mean not nothing and if by contrary they mean not contrary we will better know what they mean before we subscribe else you may make it lawful to subscribe to any thing in the world and say that the Imposers mean better than they speak L. And Assent and Consent is expresly confined to the use M. 1. I shall prove that that is not true 2. That if it were true it no whit amends the matter nor maketh it lawful to us I. It is not true For. 1. The words of the declaration are as expresly universal as man can speak And the foregoing words to the use do speak but deâ—fine and the words of the Declaration de mediis And all Lawyers agree that when the title of a Law expresseth the End that limiteth not the sense of the words of the Law because the Means may be larger than the End. As the Oxford Act of Confinement is in the title to keep Nonconformists from Corporations And yet Lawyers resolve that it extendeth also to Conformists if one of them should but once preach in a Conventicle The Parliament and Prelates thought that the way to secure the Vse was to oblige them to Assent and Consent to all in the Book contained and prescribed 1. Therefore they ty all to declare in that same form of words and to add no other least they should make any exposition that limits them 2. And the word Assent signifieth an Act of the understanding which must have Truth for its object 3. And it is after exprest by the word Approbation whereas a man may use that which he doth not approve of 2. Oaths Covenants and Professions must be taken in the most usual proper sense unless another be exprest to be the Imposers meaning which is not here done and the words are most universal and without exception 3. And to put all out of doubt the Parliament expounded themselves 1. At the making of the Act this was debated and reasons given against the limited expressions which prevailed 2. Since then a new Act against Conventicles being made it was moved in the Lords House that seeing Non-conformists were thus far forbidden private worship they should be so far invited to Conformity as that a Proviso might be added to this Act that the Declaration in the Act of Uniformity should be understood to oblige men but to the Vse of the things required and the Commons rejecting that Proviso it came to a debate or conference between the two Houses where the Commons gave their reasons against that sense and proviso In which the Lords acquiesc't Though I was not present the Parliament-men that were reported this and I never met with man that contradicted it or questioned the truth of it II. But if it were otherwise it were to us never the better For 1. It were an ignorant reproach of the Church of England to say that they have put any thing in their Liturgy which is of no use This will Include every syllable They themselves tell you in their Prefaces what use the very Calender and every other part are of The use of the Articles of Faith and Doctrines is our understanding assent and belief of them in order to Love and Practice The use of the orders in the Rubrick is to oblige us to obedient practice and so of all the rest And to Assent approve and Consent to every thing contained and prescribed practically even to the use of them is more than a bare speculative assent L. Wherein lyeth the sin of such a Declaration M. 1. In general it is incredible as I said before in consideration of the matter and the Authors together The Book of Articles Liturgie and Ordination are a big Volumn and contain great variety of matter and that high and mysterious The Authors were every one of them men of imperfection that had ignorance error and sin And operation exceedeth not power Who dare say that any Sermon or Prayer that ever he maketh hath nothing in it but what he may assent and consent to Much less so great a Book 2. The Articles which must be subscribed as faultless say Art. 15. Christ alone is without sin But all we the rest though baptized and born again in Christ yet offend in many things and if we say that we have no sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us And Art. 21. General Councils For as much they be an Assembly of men whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and Word of God they may err and sometimes have erred even in things pertaining to God And are our Convocation more infallible than General Councils The Church must be exemplary in humility and is it humility to say we Bishops and Priests having written three Books he shall not preach Christ's Gospel that will not declare that there is not a word in them that is
time The Law refuseth them and it is in vain for the Parents to send them to a Minister who they know hath solemnly covenanted to reject them Hundreds have been baptized by Nonconformists because the Church refuseth them 2. And as to their compelling men to get Godfathers I answer 1. Those that think it a sin will not obey that compulsion but rather suffer 2. If any yield against conscience to escape suffering such compulsion doth but drive them towards damnation 3. But those that yield to it by compulsion do but seem to do it and do it not For they agree before hand with the Godfathers to represent them and speak in their names and to be themselves no undertakers Though all this is very hard shifting L. I confess this is a case so distant from things indifferent that were there but this one reason I will no more persuade any to Assent and Consent to all things contained and prescribed even to the use M. And what think you if the same men that made these Canons and subscribe to all this are the sharp condemners of Schism and Anabaptistry 1. What is Schism if this be not causelessly to keep out so many from the Church And have not the Anabaptists a far more excusable pretence to deny the baptizing of Infants than this in question is The case is of great difficulty to them and it is Christ's will that they doubt of But here is no difficulty And these men set the will and devise of man against Christ who said Forbid them not and was Angry with those that forbad them to come to him CHAP. XII Point IX Of the Cross in Baptism L. I Have oft wondred what any man can say against the use of the Cross in Baptism which signifieth our resolution to be true to a crucified Christ. M. I have oft thought many things absurd in you Lawyers to which I have been reconciled when I was well informed of the reason of them I ask you 1. Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the King and only universal Lawgiver to his Church L. Yes but men under him may make local Laws M. 2. Do you believe that he is the Author of the Christian Baptism L. Yes no doubt I find it Mat. 20. 19. M. 3. Do you believe that he did it so defectively that men may amend it L. No doubt but he did his own work perfectly M. 4. Do you not believe that it is his Prerogative to institute Sacraments of the covenant of Grace L. Yes no doubt for our Church holdeth that there are but two and disowneth the five Roman Sacraments And yet I think most of them may be called Sacraments especially Ordination and Matrimony and so may the Kings Coronation but not Sacraments of the Covenant of Grace M. Let us now enquire 1. What a Sacrament of the Covenant of Grace is 2. Whether our crossing be not such I. The Romans used the word Sacraments for an external obliging covenanting ceremony especially for the Act of soldiers ceremony by binding themselves to military relation and fidelity to their captains A Sacrament of the covenant of grace is an outward visible Act or ceremony by which we oblige our selves in covenant to Christ as our Saviour promising fidelity and by which we are told by Christs ministers that his Grace is signified which is given by his Covenant The Catechism indeed saith It is an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace given to us ordained by Christ himself as a means whereby we receive the same and a pledge to assure us thereof But it 's obvious to any man of reason that the words Ordained by Christ himself signifie not a Sacrament as such but as Divine distinct from humane Else it were impossible for man to be guilty of making false humane Sacraments If they should make more just such as Baptism and the Lords Supper they would be no sinful Sacraments if none be Sacraments but Christs If there be all these things there is a Sacrament of the Covenant of Grace falsely instituted by man. 1. If there be an outward visible sign 2. If both the purchased and conveyed Grace of the Covenant of Christ be signified by it 3. And so signified as to be an instituted means of conveying it 4. If it be a sign obliging the covenanting person to his Covenant duty 5. And if thus it be a symbol or badge of the Order professed I. The outward visible sign is crossing or the transient Image of a Cross made by one that acteth as a Minister of Christ by his pretended Commission and received in his forehead by the baptized II. The thing signified is both the work of Redemption purchasing grace and grace given by that purchase Both these are fully expressed Can. 30. The holy Ghost by the mouthes of the Apostle did honour the name of the Cross so far that under it he comprehended not only Christ crucified but the force effect and merits of his death and passion with all the comforts fruits and promises which we receive or expect thereby The Church of England hath retained still the sign of it in baptism following therein the Primitive and Apostolical Churches and accounting it a lawful outward ceremony and honourable badge whereby the Infant is dedicated to the Service of him that dyed on the Cross as by the words of the Common-Prayer book may appear which words are we receive this Child into the Congregation of Christ's Flock and do sign him with the Sign of the Cross in token that he shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified and manfully to fight under his banner against sin the world and the devil and to continue Christ's faithful Souldier and Servant to his lifes end Amen And in the Preface of Ceremonies They serve to a decent order and godly discipline and such as be apt to stir up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his duty to God by some notable and spiritual signification whereby he may be edified So that the thing signified is Christ crucified with the benefits of his Cross and the Grace of edification by stirring up our dull minds by the moral causality of the cause and binding us to constancy to Christ. L. But moral causing by objects works not on Infants M. True no more doth washing in water and yet this is used for the benefit of the Parents at present and of Infants when they are at the use of reason Indeed Christ by his own Sacrament giveth Right and Relative grace which he will not do by mens inventions III. But man plainly appointeth the Cross to work this grace by way of exciting signification IV. And it is expresly made man's covenanting sign by which he bindeth himself to covenant fidelity that he will not be ashamed to confess the Faith of Christ crucified and manfully to fight c. The whole duty of the covenant on man's part is promised hereby V. And the
XXXVII Point XXXIV Of renouncing all Obligations from the Covenant as on me or any other to endeavour any alteration of Church Government L. THis is now ceased at the end of twenty years what need you mention this M. 1. I thought you had desired to know why we conformed not for the twenty years past 2. I suppose that the like is still imposed on others in the Corporation Act the Vestry Act the Militia Act and the Marrow of it still imposed on us in the Oxford Oath L. And what have you against it M. First I 'll tell you what we have not against it because we are commonly here falsly accused 1. It is none of our Controversie whether this Oath or Covenant was unlawfully made and imposed both on the people and the King we deny none of this 2. It is none of our Controversie whether there be not some part of the Matter of it that is unlawful We deny not that 3. It is none of our Controversie whether it was not unlawfully taken We justifie not that as to our selves tho' we are not judges of the sin of King and Lords and others whom we have no Calling to condemn 4. It is none of our Controversie whether this or any other Covenant or Vow do bind us to Rebellion Sedition or any unlawful Act we renounce all such Obligation 5. Yea we hold that neither this nor any other Vows of our own can prevent any Obligation that the King hath Authority to impose upon us in things great or small else men might disable Magistrates to rule them and exempt themselves from Obedience by Vowing before hand not to obey 6. I add for my self that I hold my self bound by this Covenant to nothing which I had not been bound to if I had never taken it For I never thought that by Vows we may make new Religions or Laws to our selves but only bind our selves to that which God doth make our Duty L. Where then is the danger or sin that you fear M. I. As to the Obligation of the Vow on my self II. As to the Obligation of it on all others III. As to the Matter of altering Church Government 1. I am neither so blind wicked or singular as to deny the common Doctrine of Casuists Protestants and Papists that tho' a Vow be both sinfully imposed and sinfully taken yet it bindeth in materia necessaria licita Yea that if part of the matter be unlawful yet it bindeth to that part which is lawful Else a Knave might exempt himself from the performance of all his Vows by foisting in some unlawful matter or by making them in an unlawful manner Therefore if there be any thing that is necessary or lawful in that Vow I believe that I am thereto bound L. So Rebels that think it lawful to rebel will say that the Covenant binds them to it M. So he that thinks Gods Law doth bind him to Murder or Rebellion will plead Gods Law for it But doth it follow that Gods Law bindeth him to that or to nothing It is not mens false sayings that make or prove such Obligation He that will say that Gods Laws or the Kings or the Covenant binds him to sin must be punished for his Sin and Lie and yet all just Obligations stand L. But you are bound before by other Obligations to all that is good in it and not by the Covenant M. That 's an inference contrary to Reason and Christianity Can a Man of any Reason once dream that a Man may not have many Obligations to one and the same Duty or that the second Oath binds not to it because the first did you vowed your self to Christ in Baptism and you renew the same in the Lords Supper Are all the latter null because the first is valid What if you many times Swear Allegiance to the King Do none of these bind you but the first L. II. But do you think that endeavours to alter Church Government is any of your lawful or necessary Matter M. You know that there is a Law that maketh it a praemunire penalty to say that the Covenant bindeth one to endeavour any alteration of Church Government And why then will you put such a question to me All that I will say is this that as I say not that any one is bound to it by this Covenant so I am not so good a Casuist as to be able to justifie and acquit all other men from all such Obligations Let them look to themselves for my part I will be no voucher or surety for their indemnity L. III. This brings up to the other part of your Reasons and why may you not say that none is so bound M. 1. Because God never made me a Casuist to determine the case for all men in three Kingdoms 2. Because it is a new and monstrous thing for one private man yea many thousand private men to be forced to such an Office and Undertaking Every man must answer for himself before God and Man Noxa caput sequitur If I were commanded to be surety for everyman in England Scotland and Ireland but for the Peace or good Behaviour I should think it a piece of as palpable injustice as most ever the World knew But if I must undertake to answer for all their Souls in a case where thousands of Learned men have been of the contrary mind I 'll first think how to answer for my own Yet as to that part which I am certain of my self I do not scruple it I dare subscribe that the Covenant bindeth no man to be False or Rebellious against the King or to endeavour to alter our Monarchy or to deprive the King of any of his Rights nor to endeavour to change any part of Church Government which Christ hath instituted for continuance in his Church And is not this enough But whether our Diocesan frame as distinct from that which Arch-bishop Vsher called the Primitive Government be changeable or whether none of their Courts and Lay-mens power of the Keys be changeable or ought to be changed And whether no man may endeavour it in his place and calling I think a man may be saved without knowing And I think if you ask a man if King and Parliament should change the Office of an Official a Commissary a Chancellor c. or should set up a Bishop in every Market Town is it a sin against God or is it unlawful to obey them or if it be lawful to do it and any of them Swear to endeavour it in his place is he bound to perform that Oath If to all this a man say I cannot tell I am not Learned enough in Law and Divinity to resolve such cases but I am resolved my self to live in Loyalty and Peace I would ask any man that hath not put off humanity whether that man be fit to determine the case for all other men in three Kingdoms and to be a voucher for all their Souls in
which side is right were it not wiser to cast lots to determine it And have those Men Humanity and Conscience and do they believe there is a God that will Swear that of such Law Cases which Lawyers profess to be too hard for them and which they are disagreed in as a common Controversie in all Lands And I pray you why are Nations so sollicitous to have Laws for their Security if a Chancellor be above them all and by a Commission may cast them off at his pleasure L. We do not say the Chancellor may do it but the King. M. Doth not the Chancellor keep the Seal and must we not take them for the Kings Commissions which he sealeth L. If you know that the Commission be notoriously against Law you may suspect that the King consenteth not and may stay till you enquire of him whether it be his Act and Will M. But 1. If one come with a Commission to take possession of the King's Treasure Magazines Garisons Navy c. and attempt it by force may he be resisted by force till the King's Mind be enquired of If not he may depose the King and seize his Strengths before we can come to enquire of the King. All have not access to the King. If it were the Garison of New-Castile Berwick Carlisle c. it will be too late to send to the King. But if such Commissioners may so long be resisted then how can we Swear that upon no pretence whatsoever his Commissioners may be resisted by his own Authority 2. And if a Highway-man shew a Commission to take my Purse he will not stay till I know whether the King consent to his Commission L. You stretch the sence of the Subscription and Oath further than the Parliament intended it Do you think that if half a Dozen or more Irishmen had come into the Parliament House and shewed a Commission Real or Counterfeit to kill them all Lords and Commons that they would not have defended their Lives with their Swords And do you think then that ever they meant to bind all the Subjects against that which they would do themselves M. And do you think that we should all Swear to that which they never meant to bind us to Is there any limitation in the words Or can any words be devised more to exclude exceptions than not on any pretence whatsoever But self is near men and is not so concerned in other mens cases as their own For my part I believe that they meant plainly and universally as they speak tho' they might forget their own case My proof is from the express words of the Militia Act where they determine that neither the whole Parliament or part hath any Power of offensive or defensive Arms against the Kings Commissioners Much less have any single Persons L. Do you think that ever they intended to destroy all mens Property and defence of Life or Goods and to repeal all the Laws that bind Sheriffs by the Posse Comitatus to suppress Riots and to execute the decrees of the Courts of Iustice for Possessions or Dis-possessions tho' any should shew Commissions to the contrary and to overthrow the Iudges Oaths M. I can no way judge what they meant but by what they did I find they have absolutely denied all right of defensive Arms in the Subject or Parliament and that 's all that I speak of From whence I must needs suppose that their sence was that all men have Propriety in Estates Wives Children and Lives and that the King ought to Govern them by Law and wrong no Man and that Judges ought to do right by Sentence tho' the King forbid them And that Sheriffs and Justices must ordinarily execute the Law But if the King by force restrain them or give Commission to any Subject by force to violate any Law or Sentence or to take away any Mens Lives or Estates it is not lawful by defensive Arms for any Sheriff Justices or any others to resist This is plainly the sence of the Militia Act and of our Oaths L. I pray you let us end this tender Controversy M. I have yet a few more doubts to be resolved Politicks being the Foundation of Iuris-prudentia I doubt not but you have studied Politicks I pray you tell me why all Politicks placing a Republick in the predicament of Relation do make the bonum publicum to be its essential terminus in the definition L. Because it is so indeed it being no Civitas or Respublica that is not for the Common good and therefore they make it the difference between a King and a Tyrant that a King ruleth for the Common good and a Tyrant for his private Ends and Interests M. But by your leave I think that distinction ill and dangerously uttered For every man hath some culpable selfishness and also the Kings Self-interest is Lawfully intended For Commonwealths called Kingdoms being at first Constituted by Contract no doubt there was necessary the Consent of both the Contracting Parties None can be King against his Will. And do you think any Man would take a Crown only for the good of others without security for his own just Interest Honour and Prerogative without which he cannot well Govern Therefore I think that those Politicks too loosly describe Tyranny by self-interest and can prove no man a proper Tyrant in Exercitio distinct from an Usurper but him that seeks the destruction of the Commonwealth whose good he is bound to preserve But I further ask you Do you think the Law of Man or a Commission can abrogate the Law of Nature L. No Man ever affirmed it For the Law of Nature is Gods Law yea his first and most Fundamental Law. M. I will not deny it as to the stable Laws of Nature tho' I think that Nature it self hath some mutable Laws where the Nature of the matter is mutable But then I would further know whether to defend the Life of your self Wife or Children against injurious Assault be any part of the Law of Nature L. Experience resolveth that what Man will not defend his Life that can yea what Beast or Bird even the most harmless will not use such weapons as Nature hath given them Horns Feet Teeth c. M. But Man hath Reason to rule natural inclinations And sure a Malefactor if he could should not defend his Life against Justice I think not so much as by running away Nor many single innocent Persons defend their Lives by a publick War because a War is more hurtful to the Commonwealth than his death is And the Common good is better than a single Persons or a fews and to be prefer'd But I next ask whether the Body of a Kingdom have by Gods Law of Nature a self-defending power against its notorious assaulting Foes L. Do you think any man doubts of that May not the King and Kingdom defend themselves against Invaders If one man may defend his Purse or Life against another a King
and Kingdom is more worth than one man You can hardly name one principle in the Law of Nature more undoubted than that Kingdoms have a right to defend themselves if they can M. And may they not defend themselves against Usurpers and Rebels and Traytors at home as well as against Forreign Foes L. To deny that is Treason How else should we defend the King Was not Jack Straw and many a Rebellion lawfully resisted and did not the Lord Mayor of London Lawfully kill Wat. Tyler and so of any other in his case M. But what if the Irish took on them to rise by the Kings Commission and shew'd a Counterfeit of it was it lawful for the Protestants to have resisted them to save their Lives and Cities L. They should have sent to the King to know whether that Commission was Counterfeit or not M. But before they could do that Dublin had been lost and all their Lives and Estates And the two hundred thousand that were Murdered were not restored to Life again when it was notified that they belied the King and that they had not his Commission L. It was notorious by the nature of the case that they bâ—lied the King and had none of his Commission because it was so greatly ogainst his own Interest M. Will you allow any Countrey to resist an Army that shew the Kings Commission if they are confident or can prove that it is against his Interest L. He is the Iudge of his own Interest when the Case cometh before him Till then a doubtful or at least a certain Commission may not be resisted You would entangle the Case with difficulties that seldom fall out but are you against resisting all known Commissions M. You know that the Oaths and Subscriptions extend to all cases and against any pretence whatsoever not excepting rare Cases What I am for or against I 'll tell you more anon But I ask further tho' I am bound by the Fifth Commandment to believe that the Irish belied the King and that the Scots belied him who in their Book called Truths Manifest affirm that He Commissioned the Irish by the Scots broad Seal which was then in his possession in Scotland do you think if the Scots could have proved what they affirm that it had been lawful to have resisted the Irish and defended the Protestants Lives and Cities in Ireland L. I will not answer such dangerous questions M. But must all ignorant men then Subscribe and Swear to what you cannot or dare not answer But I further ask you about not resisting Commissions on any pretence whatsoever what was the sence of the old Greek Philosophers and Orators in that casâ— L. You know they were almost all bred up in Aristocratical or Democratical Republicks and therefore no wonder if they are against us in this and more M. What was the sence of the old Roman Orators Philosophers and Historians as to this point L. They also were hatcht under Popular Government and tho' the later sort magnifie such excellent Monarchs as Augustus Vespasian Titus Adrian Antoninus Pius and Anton. Philos. and Alexander Severus yet it is no wonder that they were too much for resisting and deposing such as opprest the Commonwealth M. What was the sence of the Ancient Bishops and Clergy herein L. They were long for patient suffering But it is no wonder that when they grew worldly and strong they not only resisted but deposed Emperors and Princes M. I pray which way go the Papist Casuists in this case of resistance L. You cannot doubt of that when you know their Councels Laws for deposing Kings on Excommunication And what wonder when they go on that false Supposition that the People give the Prince his Power for their own good and may take it from him if he turn it against them to the hurt of the Common-wealth M. I pray what say Politick Writers Papists and Protestants in this case I mean the Eminent ones such as Bodin Althusius Arnisaeus Tholofanus Besoldus Choquierius Menochius Liebenthalius Contzen Koningh Timplerus Willius Berekringer and such others L. They commonly run one way founding Power in the People as being the Majestas Realis and giving the King 's and States a derived Majestatem Personalem which being for the Common good they may resist when it would destroy it They took their Politicks by Learning from Aristotle Plato Cicero and such Ancients and no wonder if they follow them M. And I pray you which way go our famous Historians in this Point such as Commines Iovius Guicciardine Pontanus Sleidan Thuanus Besoldus Iohnston Fregius and our English Math. Paris Henry Huntington Mat. Westminster Malmsbury Hoveden c. L. You know they liv'd in times when Civil Wars were so frequent and Princes so bad and one pulling down another that it 's no wonder if they praise some resisters But if you read those of our Age that lived in quiet Times and under good Princes such as Cambden Speed and Baker you will find no such thing M. I pray which way go the famous Civilians herein such as Gothofred Hottoman Cujacius Wesenbcchius Pacius Duarenus and such others L. You know that the Civil Law is fetcht from the Romans and it 's no wonder if it run in their strein M. I pray which way go the Canonists L. You know they are Papists and set up the Pope's Laws above the King's But our English Canons do not so M. I pray which way go our late Protestant Lawyers such as Cook and Littleton and the like L. They are all for Loyalty and for the Preeminence of the Law and yet for the King's Prerogative M. I find some of the greatest Lawyers that have defended Monarchy such as William Barclay and Grotius do name many Cases in which it is lawful to resist What think you of their Writings L. I will be no judge of them M. I pray what think you of those great Prelatists that write as Bishop Bilson and Ri. Hooker and Ier. Taylor do and that joined with Abbot and the Parliament against Dr. Laud Sibthorpe and Mainwaring Which of them think you was in the right L. You put too many Questions I will answer no more M. And must we Ignorant Men swear that all these aforesaid were deceived and knew less than we Verily Sir It seems a bold Oath for so great a Number of unlearned Men as are put upon it and for us that are unlearned in the English Laws L. But I doubt all these hard Questions are but raised as dust to hide some Principles of Rebellion What is your own judgment and how will you give Security for your Loyalty M. They that think my Oath Security take me for so honest as that I will not be Perjured And if so I have already taken the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy and an Oath of Fidelity as the King's Chaplain in Ordinary tho' never called to exercise it And I have fully in a large Volume called A second
man should not play with Matters of this moment nor take God's dreadful Name in vain nor sport with the Consuming Fire And I hope you grant that Words in Caths and Impositions are to be taken in the properest usual sence unless the Authors otherwise expound them And you know that they have been so far from expounding them otherwise as that these twenty years they have refused it and in Scotland sentenc'd the Earl of Argyle to die for expounding them as some would have us do And what do Oaths or Covenants signify if the Takers may put what sence they will on them and if the most express Universals yea the express Exclusions of all Exceptions may be taken in a particular sence with Exceptions such Swearers and Subscribers give their Rules no security Is it not enough to tell you we will willingly stand to Bishop Sanderson's own Rules in his Excellent Prelections de Iuramento for expounding Oaths and Promises Such as these Expositions of stretchers make Oaths to be none viz. It 's unlawful that is against the King's Law but not against God's to take Arms against the King viz. As King but say the Papists when the Pope excommunicates and deposeth him he is no King on any pretence whatsoever that is any unjust pretence by his Authority against his Person viz. It is to be done by Gods Authority and not by his or against any Commissioned by him viz. Lawfully Commissioned of which we are discerning Iudges The same I may say of all the rest As Assenting and Consenting to all things except many things Swearing Canonical Obedience in Licitis Honestis when we judge ten or twenty Canons if not the very frame to be Illicita Inhonesta c. L. But as you have said that those Great Men Grotius and Bishop Jeremy Taylor were for profitable Lying so you know that Worthy Latitudinarian Dr. who was wont to say That if false Knaves would turn him out of his Ministry and Living by ensnaring Impositions he would take the Words in the best sence he could subdue them to whatever the Authors meant and it was as Lawful for him to defend himself against Knaves with his Tongue as with his Hands and Sword. M. He is newly gone to his Judge Nobis non licet I told you that in my Catechism on the Ninth Commandment I have given unanswerable Reasons against Lying for any Benefit whatever Some say that all our Articles of Religion are but Articles of Peace and we subscribe not to believe them true but not to preach against them At this rate men need not stick at any Oath and may shake off the Oath of Allegiance or any other when they have taken it And if we are thought worthy to be hated and ruined as Rogues for refusing self-saving prudential deliberate Lying and Perjury when Oaths and Veracity are so much of the security of the Estates Names and Lives of Kings and Subjects and so necessary to all humane Converse we patiently commit our Cause to Him that shortly and righteously will determine all CHAP. LVIII Whether Communion with so Faulty a Church be Lawful L. I Shewed what you said against Conformity to a Friend and when he had read it he said What a Self-contradictor is this Man to lay all this Charge on the Church of England and yet himself to hold Communion with it and perswade others so to do Can we touch Pitch and not be defiled And indeed if all this be as bad as you fear I cannot see how any Separatists are to be blamed or how any may Communicate with so bad a Church M. Sic stulti vitia vitant drunken men reel from side to side to keep one right tract or to cut by a thred seemeth impossible to them I. You must distinguish between the Diocesan Churchs as constituted by their Courts of Government and Canons and the Parish Churches II. Between those Parish-Churches which have godly or tolerable Pastors and those that have not III. Between Ministry and Lay-Communion IV. Between stated and occasional Communion V. Between preferring their Churches before better and not avoiding them as null or as unlawful to be Communicated with Understand these five distinctions well and I shall satisfy you L. Apply them and let us hear your judgment M. I. The Diocesan Churches as they depose all inferiour Bishops and Churches and Rule by their Lay-Civilians Church-Censures I disown and hold no Communion with in those errours but only in their Christianity But I peaceably submit to them and would live quietly under them if I might II. Those Parishes that have notoriously uncapable Priests either through utter insufficiency heresy or hurtfulness doing more harm than good I own not to be Organized Churches nor have Commmunion with their Ministers as Ministers not owning them for such III. I hold it utterly unlawful to be Ministers with them on the terms now required of us and therefore I have no such Ministerial Communion with them IV. I preferr them not before better V. I hold not fixed Communion as a fixed Member of their Churches with all that I hold occasional Communion with L. What Communion is it then that you hold with them M. I. With the Diocesans and their Officers I hold mental Communion as a Christian and a Protestant in all the essentials of Christianity and that Reformation which they own II. With the Parish-Churches that have true Ministers I hold mental Communion as true particular Churches of Christ tho' faulty and local Communion on just occasions III. With the Parish-Assemblies that have intolerable Ministers I hold mental Communion with the People as Christians and will not refuse on just occasion to join with them in any good exercise as Lay-men IV. With those Churches that have Ministers and Liturgy as ours that need reformation I profess to join with them as Christians and Protestants that own all the Scriptures and that promise to preach nothing as necessary to Salvation but what is contained in it or may be proved by it And when I Communicate with that Church it is as a Society so professing But if their Sermons Liturgy or Lives have any faults being not Idolatry Heresy Blasphemy or such as rendreth their whole Worship and assembling unacceptable to God I disown Communion in any of those faults tho' I be present V. When I can have better caeteris paribus without greater hurt than good I preferr it and only use occasional local Communion with the Liturgy-Churches as I would do with strangers were I in foreign lands VI. Where I can have no better without more hurt than good I Communicate constantly and only with the Parish-Church where I live as to Local-Communion L. But how can you do either of these without guilt when they are as bad as you have described M. 1. I have not charged the Parish-Churches with that which I have charged the Diocesans their Courts with many honest Ministers never troubled nor excommunicated a
forward to meddle with more publick Church matters without our Superiors invitation or consent but we may say that it is our judgment that these additions following would greatly strengthen the Interest of Religion Church and Concord I. That the Parish Churches be acknowledged True Churches and their Ministers such Overseers as are necessary to Essentiate True Churches that is That all Presbyters be Episcopi Gregis Overseers of the Flock and the Incumbent the President among his Curate Presbyters where there be such And that the Diocesan is not the sole Essentiating Church Pastors and the Diocesan Church the lowest particular Church and the Parish Assemblies but his Chapels or Parts of the lowest Church and the Parish Ministers his Curates and no true Pastors II. That no Lay-Elder Chancellour or Civilian have or use the Decretive Power of Excommunication or Absolution called the Keys III. That New and more Peaceable Canons be made instead of that Book which now obtaineth according to the Scripture Canons Or that there be no Canons but Scripture besides Statute Laws IV. That Bishops have no Forcing Power nor the Writ de Excommunicato Capiendo or any Force by the Sword be Annexed to Excommunication as such but that the Magistrates hear and judge before they punish and Obedience to Bishops be unconstrained and voluntary V. That Bishops judge Church-Causes in Session with their Presbyters and not alone nor with some few of their own Choice or with Lay-men but in regular Synods and Ordain there by their consent and after sufficient trial of them that seek Ordination And so of Institution VI. That Diocesses be not greater than the Diocesan is able to Oversee and that he forbid not the Parish Pastors their particular works but only use his general overcight and power on Appeals VII That Bishops oft visit the inferior Pastors and Churches and instruct the Juniors by direction and Example how to Preach and guide the Flock and rebuke the Erroneous Scandalous Unpeaceable and Negligent VIII That the Bishops be Chosen by the Diocesan Synod and Consented to freely without force by their City flocks where they reside and Invested by the King who hath the power of Temporal Privileges IX That the City and neighbour Pastors be the Cathedral Dean and Prebends at least where City Churches want maintenance or that they ambulatorily Preach abroad where there is most need X. If Arch-Bishop Usher's Form or Reduction of Government to the Primitive state or else King Charles the Second his Declaration about Ecclesiastical Affairs be but setled by Law it will be a Healing and Great Reformation inferior Synods not hurtfully fettered being allowed under the Diocesan Synods And whether the Diocesans be Called Bishops or Arch-Bishops as Successors to the Apostles and Evangelists in the ordinary parts of their Office a general care of many Churches the name is to be left to each mans free judgment As to the ignorant clamors for a real or seeming Re-ordination 1. I have said so much against it in my Treatise of Episcopacy and my Disputation of Ordination in my Dispute of Church-Government and my Christian Concord that while the objectors by contempt refuse to read and answer them it will be no cure of their pride and partiality to repeat the same again But I say that I have fully proved unanswered that they that were Ordained by Synods of Incumbent Pastors and specially those also then approved by the Westminster Assembly had a better Ordination and that by true Bishops than either Papists or meer English Diocesans that are not Arch-bishops can give And yet they Re-ordain not Papists 1. Either they take the Parish-Churches that is the Pastor and Communicants distinct from the meer Auditors and Catechumens and from the Aliens to be true proper Churches in political Sense or not If yea Then those Churches have Bishops For Ecclesia est plebs Episcopo adunata ubi Episcopus ibi Ecclesia Their own Principle is That it is no proper political Church without a Bishop There are three degrees of Bishops 1. All Presbyters are Episcopi Gregis by the consent of Papists and Protestants 2. The chief Incumbents that have Curates or may have are Episcopi Praesides The Ordination without Diocesans was by these two sorts of Bishops 3. True Diocesans are Arch-bishops Episcopi generales plurium Ecclesiarum We refuse not their Ordination but Men have true Episcopal Ordination without it But if they say that the Diocesan is the lowest Bishop of a particular Church and that the Parish-Incumbent Rectors are no true Bishops and their Assemblies no true political Churches formed of Bishops but only parts of one Diocesan Church infimi Ordinis we abhor such Tyrannical Schismatical Diocesans and their pretence of proper power to Ordain and the Primitive Church had never any such Ordaniers or Bishops And I advise all Ministers neither to be Re-ordained by such nor to yield to the appearance of such an evil by coming under their equivocating imposition of hands lest they take God's Name in vain and harden Papists and Church-Tyrants in their false condemnation of the Reformed Churches If it be want of a legal right in England that they pretend let the Magistrate give you a Licence or Legal right I write not this for my own interest for I was Ordained by a Diocesan and am past all hopes or fears of Man. CHAP. LX. The Reasons of these ten Articles L. YOV must give me leave to tell you what objections are like to be raised against your proposed Articles of Reconciliation And first your own party will be unsatisfied in them and so they will do no good because here is not a word against Arch-bishops Bishops Deans Arch-deacons and the rest that bear office in their Courts which yet is the thing that you your self seem most to dissent from and which the Covenant did renounce M. 1. We have so much swearing and unswearing and forswearing that I will meddle as little as I can in things that look like Perjury You know that as the last Generation was sworn against Prelacy this new Generation is sworn to it Yea in a manner the whole Land is sworn or covenanted never to endeavour any alteration of it And how much soever I am against that Oath yet I will meddle as little as I can in urging men to that which they take for Perjury And I have elsewhere told you that the Covenant renounced not all Episcopacy many of the Assembly of Divines declared their dissent from any such renunciation and had entred their protestation against it as Dr. Cornel. Burges told me had not the Explication been added which confineth the Renunciation to the English frame And that the present Non-Conformists would have thankfully received the Primitive Episcopacy they shewed by their motion 1660. 2. We offer this form on supposition that we may not have what we think best but what we can joyfully submit to for our Concord and the Churches safety 3. I have
they ought to be restrained and there are lower punishments than depriving them of their Toleration which are for lower faults 2. But if Rulers will oppress we cannot help that and must not therefore be ungoverned CHAP. LXI Whether the Extirpation of the Non-Conformists be not rather to be attempted than an Vnion with them by these means L. IT 's long since our former Conference and now there is discovered a Treasonable Plot against the King and his Brother and a multitude of Addresses tell us that it was the Plot of the Dissenters and the Product of Conventicles and therefore â—â—ave the extripation of them all and that they may no more be trusted as having Principles were concileable to Monarchy and Subjection and the loudest cry now runs that way M. What is the Treasonable Plot L. To Kill the King and Duke and raise an Army and to Change the Government or Governours at least M. Who do they mean by Dissenters or Conventiclers L. All that Conform not to the Church of England as it is now setled by the Law. M. The Law setleth the Essentials Integrals and Accidents of the Church Do you mean every one that disliketh any one Office as Lay-Chancellors use of the Keys or any Ceremony or Form If so I do doubt most that come to Church and Communicate with it dissent from some such Circumstances L. Well suppose it be those that separate from it M. There are now these following sorts of known Dissenters called by many Conventiclers I. Those that like the way of Episcopacy and Liturgy best as here setled but yet will also occasionally join with other Churches as the French Dutch Lutheran or some Non-Conformists II. The Pacifick Non-conformists who at the King's Return Petitioned for Arch-Bishop Vsher's Model of the Primitive Episcopal Government and thankfully accepted the King's Declaration III. The Presbyterians who are for Government only by Synods of equal Presbyters Teaching joined with meer Ruling ones IV. The Independants and Separatists V. The Anabaptists who are half Arminians and half not VI. The Fifth-Monarchy Party most of which are Anabaptists also VII The Quakers VIII The Papists IX The Infidels Iews Hobbists and Atheists Is the meaning that all these are the guilty Rebels to be destroyed or which of them is it L. If all I doubt the King would lose no small part of his Subjects But you know the Papists are not numbred with the Dissenters or Conventiclers M. Say you so Do those that differ but about a Ceremony or Lay-mans use of the Keys or the largeness and paucity of Bishops Churches dissent more from you than the Papists that would bring King and Kingdom under a foreign Jurisdiction and introduce all the Mass and doctrinal corruptions of their Church Read Bishop Downham's Catalogue of Popish Errours de Anti-Christo or Dr. Willet's Chamier's Iewell 's or any such and judge And do you think that the Mass is no Conventicle or more lawful than the forbidden assemblies of Protestants L. Well But it 's Protestant-Dissenters that I mean. M. So then You would have Protestant-Dissenters rooted out and not Papists or Infidels L. We would have those rooted out that were in the Plot which the Papists were not M. No doubt but such a Plot as you describe deserveth the extirpation of those that were guilty of it But I pray you compare not the innocency of Papists in their Principles with the Protestants Or read Bishop Barlow's and Hen. Fowlis's Books and Prin's History of Bishops Treasons and judge as you see cause But it 's none of my business now to accuse the Papists Do but grant that the innocent should not suffer for the crimes of the guilty and we are agreed L. But is it not justly supposed that the whole Party is guilty of those Principles which have caused particular mens rebellions and that it is their Preachers and Conventiclers that have caused all M. You that are a Lawyer should know somewhat of the Rules of Iustice or Humanity at least Come on and let you and I consider soberly of the case And first to your face I challenge you to name and prove any the least difference between the Non-conformists who sought for Concord at the King's Restoration or the party of meer Non-Conformists and the Protestants of the Church of England in their Principles about the Power of Princes and the Subjection and Patience of the People Name any difference if you can L. You would make one believe that great Numbers are inhumanely impudent that charge them with such heinous difference if there be none M. Why do you not name the difference if there be any Contrarily 1. We all take the same Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy 2. We Subscribe all the same Articles of Religion about the Power of Magistrates 3. We have often professed our consent to all that is written for Magistracy and Subjection in all the Scripture in any General Council save what is for the Papal Tyranny over Princes and People or in any Confession of any Christian Church Greek Papist or Protestant that ever we saw and for all that for the Power of Kings but not all against it which the generality of Fathers Historians Philosophers Politick-writers Lawyers Canonists or Divines are for And is not all this yet enough 4. I have oft told you where e.g. Bishop Andrews in Tortura Torti Sir Fran. Bacon Lord St. Albans and many others have vindicated the principles of the English Non-conformists as the same with the Church's in point of Loyalty against the Papists accusations L. But do not you know who wrote the Political Aphorisms or Holy Common-wealth condemned lately by the Oxford Convocation M. And do not you know 1. That the Author had never leave to confute his accusers about it 2. Do you not know that he hath divers years ago written a large Book called his Second Plea for Peace fully opening the Principles which he and his Consenters hold and no man hath writteâ— one word against any of them that I hear of to this day Is this fair dealing then to silence what at large he owneth and name only a writing 29 years ago which he never was heard about 3. Do you not know that the Famously Learned Tho. White a Papist wrote at the same time the like Doctrine and will you charge that on the Party of Papistâ— 4. The Historians Rule is Distingue de temporibus Do you know in what times that was written And know you not that few men then living wrote and spake more plainly against the Usurpation than he did 5. And you see that the Oxford Convocation condemn the writings and principles of the Doctors of the Church of England as well as others And as for Knox and Buchanan we are no more guilty of their words than of Iewell 's Bilson's Hooker's Laud's or any such L. But if you differ not from the Church of England in Principles of Loyalty why do you not take the
Laws that all the Kings Subjects shall be extirpated that will not subscribe There is not one word in all the Statute Book or the most Learned Law-Books contrary to the Word of God and that the London Dispensatory hath no errour in Medicine and that no Licensed Book hath any errour in Divinity Verily if the Bishops and Clergy of England cannot give us better proofs of their infallibility or that their publick imposed Books are as free from errours as Adam was before his fall than by making all subscribe or swear or declare in the Church that it is so cowards may say your Lordships and Reverences have never an erroneous word but few men will believe it ever the more yea it will be the less believed that needeth such a proof as this Even as men would take him to be never the more an unerring Philosopher Lawyer or Physician who could force all the apprentice boys and women in the Town to swear that he is such Try first to make all the Kings Subjects of one opinion in all points of Learning Law or Trading and of one degree of wit and of stature and complexion and then hope to make them all of one measure of understanding not only in the substance of Religion but in all the little things that Bishops call indifferent and do or may impose L. But you run upon the Errour that all must have so great knowledge according to our rules as to know the Lawfulness of all Lawful things We know no Church-men reach so high But the way to Concord must be by obeying the Church in all cases that are doubtful to the Subjects M. 1. It 's well that you limit it to doubtful cases But what if I am past all doubt e. g. that it is a sin to make our sort of God-fathers the vowing Covenanters in Baptism excluding the Parents to cast out all from Christian Communion that scruple kneeling in the reception to deny Christendom to all that refuse our God-fathers and Crossings to pronounce all in England at Burial saved except the unbaptized excommunicate and self-murderers to profess that It is certain by the word of God that Infants excepting none baptized and dying before actual sin are undoubtedly saved To assent to a false rule to know Easter-day with many such What must I do in such undoubted cases 2. Tell us plainly Is it all doubted cases or some only in which you say we must obey If not all till you tell us which and how to know them you talk in vain If all what if men doubt whether Polygamy Lying Fornication c. be lawful Or what if a Papist doubt whether King-killing be lawful and the Clergy command it must it therefore needs be done 3. And I pray you tell us where and when it is that men must obey this rule Was it a duty in England in the days of Thomas Becket Anselm Dunstan c. or in the Reign of all the Kings that were Papists Is it a duty now in France Spain Italy Bavaria Austria c. or in the Dominion of the Turks Persians Tartarians China c Must all Subjects every where do all commanded them If they have but ignorance enough to be in doubt themselves sure they are bound to receive God's Light to overcome those doubts and in errour it is not obedience in Evil but seeking truth till they find it that is their duty But If you limit this Rule to Christians is it to all Christians If to Orthodox Rulers are the Subjects any fitter to judge whether their Kings and Bishops are Orthodox or not than whether the things imposed be good or bad If you dare say That all Subjects are bound to be of the Religion which their Kings or Bishops say is right speak out and you will need no confutation It 's granted by all sober men that as Rulers have the judgment of publick decision so every reasonable man must judge by private discerning whether his Actions be agreeable to God's Commands or not It is not Brutes and Infants but Men that have the use of reason that Kings and Bishops rule 4. But if you are stiff in the contrary opinion that all men must implicitely believe the King and Prelates in all that ignorance can but make them doubtful of I hope you have more brains than once to dream that ever you shall bring all the Kingdom to unite in this opinion and to lay by their reason and confess themselves Ideots or Brutes that must not labour to know whether they keep or break God's Supream Law or if you must rule men on these terms you must keep them in fetters and not at liberty And I pray you dishonour not the King so much as to make him a King of Beasts and Ideots and not of Men or Christians or at least expose him not so much to the Power of Usurpers as to say that his Subjects are not the Discerning Iudges who is their True and Lawful Soveraign and who not and if they must judge whether all their actions be agreeable to the Kings Laws or not lest they be hang'd or punished allow them also to judge whether or no they be agreeable to God's Law lest they be damned If men once believe that God is not their Supream Governour no wonder if they believe that Kings have no Governing right nor any are bound in conscience to obey them for who can give Governing Authority or who can bind Conscience to obey it but the absolute Soveraign the Almighty God L. Experience confuteth all that you have said what Countries live in greater Vnity than those that have procured and kept it by violence and do endure no Dissenters as Spain and Italy M. It seems you know not what you say 1. The Pope and Spaniards and Italians allow greater differences by many degrees than those that you condemn Dissenters for their Iesuits and Dominicans Thomists Scotists Nominals Durandists c. differ so much from each others in Doctrinals about God and Grace and Free-will and Providence and the Cause of Sin and many other Points that the Volumes they have written for their several Opinions make up huge Libraries which employ the hard studies of the most Learned men in the World and are as far as ever from being ended 2. The Iansenists and Iesuits differ not only in such Doctrines about Predestination Redemption Grace Free-will Perseverance c. but also about abundance of Doctrines commonly called Moral as about Murder Perjury Fornication Stealing c. as you may see in the Books lately published by the Iansenists against the Iesuits And though approved general Councils have made the doctrine of Deposing Excommunicated Princes and Absolving their Subjects from their Allegiance and giving their Dominions to others to be a very part of their Religion yet are not the Papists agreed in it but the Germans in the days of the Emperours Frederick Otho Henry 4th and 5th c. and the French to this day are
Corn and Hay are all destroyed and the bloody War that is yet like to follow before the end I say do you think that all these are not a dear price to be paid for hindering men to Worship God only according to the Scripture Would leave to serve God only as Christ and his Apostles appointed and did themselves have cost the Emperour and People dearer than all this amounteth to 5. And the World knoweth that as Cromwel got his strength and usurpation in England by his Liberty of Conscience so the Turks won Constantinople and the Eastern Empire much by this For when their Emperours were become dissolute or cruel killing and deposing one another putting out their eyes and thrusting them into Monasteries forced Saints and when ambitious ungodly Bishops were still striving for superiority and persecuting Dissenters as not Orthodox and mutinous Souldiers pulling down Emperours and setting up others the poor Christians thought that to defend such a Government against the Turks that gave all men the Liberty of their own Religion would cost them dearer than it was worth and so were the more remiss in their resistance and the easilier yielded to the Conquerours Whereas had the Turks done as the Papists who make our extermination by our own Rulers a very part of their Religion the Greeks would have more resolutely resisted them in necessary self-defence And did not the Turks still give Liberty to Christians only restraining them from speaking against Mahometism do you think that the Greeks in all their Dominions would no more strive for their deliverance And that Transilvania Hungary Walachia Maldavia Croates and Cossacks Armenians Georgians Circassians Mengrelians Nestorians and Iacobites in so vast numbers would live so long quietly and patiently under them as they do All the great Conquerours of the World that are famous in History ever observed that sober policy to let Conquered Provinces enjoy their own Religion and mostly their own ancient Laws and inferiour Magistrates And then the People find the change so tolerable in the Supremacy as they the more easily yield with less resistance and continue their subjection with the greater quietness and peace The Iews in Christ's time and till they rebelled afterwards under Vespasian Titus and Adrian had so much of their own Religion and Law allowed them as was no small cause of their Crucifying Christ lest the name of a King sent from God such as they expected the Messiah to be should draw the People to such Insurrections as should provoke the Romans to deprive them of their Temples Religion and Laws and to destroy their place and nation And I hear by travellers that where the Turks yet allow their Provinces as in Transilvania their own Magistrates and Laws Religion prospereth almost as well as under Christian Sovereigns and far better than under the extirpating zeal or rather fury of persecuting Papist Princes I desire you therefore before you plead experience for your desolating way of Concord to study History better and be better informed of the case of the World. When I think but what men Bishop Wilkins and Judge Hale were that on my knowledge drew up an Act for the total cure of our English Church differences to which those called to it by the Lord Keeper Bridgman did on both sides consent I have thought it some defect of humility in some Clergy-men that took themselves to be so much wiser than these rare and excellent men as to judge that all our distractions sufferings and dangers by divisions are not so bad as the effect of these mens counsil would have been But I do with greater confidence ask you Whether those men seem to be serious and understanding Christians who think all the bloody Wars and tormenting Inquisition and the destruction of Love and Justice and good Works which are caused by Church-divisions in the World to be a less Mischief than it would be to ENDVRE CHRISTIANS TO SERVE GOD IVST AS CHRIST PRESCRIBED BY HIMSELF AND HIS APOSTLES AND TO VNITE ON THE TERMS ONLY WHICH HE AND THEY DID ORDAIN AND PRACTISE Shall we tell Turks and Heathens that it is no Wiser a Saviour that we trust in and no Wiser a Heavenly King that we obey And no Wiser Law and Gospel that He hath left us And is it any wonder then if they scorn both Him and us L. You are too hard for me I will talk with you no more M. It is Truth and Light that is too hard for you and woe to the foolish Enemies that are too hard for it and overcome themselves and their own happiness and hopes in overcoming it And woe to the World to Churches and Nations where such prevail L. But I advise you that you never think that all your Truth and Reason will do any great good on those that are against you For you cannot have while to say all this to many that you have said to me and if you should Print all this the contrary minded will scarcely Read the Title page or Contents but scorn it before they know what you have said and if they read it it will be all the way with a militant spirit of prejudice and hatred and only study what to say against it and Ignorance Passion Interest and Prejudice will answer all with Rage and confidence and only conclude that the Author is a Fool or Rogue or Rebel and it 's like enough answer you with an Excommunication or Iail where among Malefactors you shall lie and die If you speak for and not against their prâ—conceived Opinion and Interest they will hâ—ar you but if you speak agaiâ—st any of their worldly Wealth or Honour or Grandeâ—r you may almost as hopefully dispute an hungry Dog from his Carrion and you must not wonder if they snarl or fly upon you and tear you And though I confess that all your Proposals seem very consistent with your Aâ—tagonists wealth and greatness yet remember the truth of Seneca's words That Men that have a sore do not only start and complain when they are toucht but even when they think that they are toucht though it be not so There is no expectation of justice from suspicious Jealousie much less if it be animated by Interest and Malice M. My expectations are not much higher than your description But when my own life is so constantly a painful burden and I am so near the Grave I am utterly unexcusable if I think so short and painful a life too good to sacrifice by way of Obedience to the will of God who hath long and wonderfully preserved it and if I do not live and die with St. Paul's resolution Acts 20. 23 24. Bonds and Afflictions abide me but none of these things move me neither count I my life dear unto my self so that I might finish my Course with Ioy aâ—d the Ministry which I have received of the Lord Iesus to testifie the Gospel of the Grace of God. And indeed if all our bad Laws and Ceremonies