of ordaining Elders and other matters relating to the better regulation of Church affairs And he was not chosen to this Office by the people but appointed unto it by St Paul and when he had thus received this Authority from him we cannot think that he was to depend upon the People in the exercise of it For he alone is commissioned to ordain Elders without any mention of the suffrages of the multitude And there cannot be the least shadow of a conjecture framed to the contrary from the nice consideration of the word For that which is here translated Ordain is not the same with that which is used in the other place for it signifies plainly to constitute place or set up without any intimation of lifting up of hands or any way of popular Election whatsoever So that we have neither precept not Example in the Scripture for the Peoples right to the choice of their Pastors But if it should be still urged against us that the Church of England is to be condemned for want of such a free choice as may be always pretended but I believe will never be proved necessary then to this we do reply that this freedom of choice is in some sort retained in our Church for all the Ministers in it are appointed according to the known Laws of this Land and to these every one of us by our representatives have at least virtually given our consent and a virtual consent in this case is allowed to be sufficient by some of the ablest Patrons of the People's right of Election SECT VI. But it is objected farther that the want of Discipline in our parochial Churches is a very great and unsufferable defect But there is no cause given for such an exception for every Minister has the approbation of those that are to be admitted and is impowered to reject scandalous offenders from the Holy Communion And these are certainly parts of Discipline which with the other acts of the Ministerial office shew that there is some order and Government in our parochial Assemblies If this should not be esteemed enough because in them we cannot inflict the highest kind of Ecclesiastical censures we do not conceive that there is any necessity that such a power should be granted unto them since it is abundantly supplyed by the Authority of the Diocesan which reaches every particular Church in the whole Jurisdiction And it would be as unreasonable to think that there is no Discipline in a Parish because there are some acts of it which cannot be there performed as it would be for the inhabitants of a village or hamlet to complain that they were under no Government because they had not the Power of life and death amongst themselves for the defects of the one are made up by the power of the Diocesan Church and those of the other by that of the Commonwealth whereof they are respective parts I do not find that our Saviour or his Apostles have made it necessary that all offences should be finally censured by the sole Power of that Congregation where they were committed This were to set up an uncontroulable Authority in every private Assembly and every twenty or thirty men or it may be fewer that should be pleased to enter into Covenant together and call themselves a Church as some contend they may would be ipso facto invested with a Power of determining all matters of Ecclesiastical cognizance without Appeal which is more than most Papists will allow to the Bishop of Rome What foundation there is for the erecting such a boundless power I cannot tell neither can I guess what good use is ever like to be made of it if it should be granted but this I know that the Church of England which is a society of Christians imbodied under certain Laws and Governours cannot be accused for want of Discipline if she does not permit the full exercise of it in our parochial Churches For in all Communities every member is influenced and directed by the good Constitution of the whole Body and what cannot be legally judged in a lower may be reserved for the decision of a superiour Court SECT VII But some are still dissatisfied with the Church of England because they imagine it is not a pure Church and if they have an opportunity of joining with another which they can suppose to be purer they think themselves obliged to do it For the resolution of this doubt these few things may be considered What it is that makes a pure Church Whether the Church of England be such a one Whether we are always bound to join with that Church which we conceive to be the most pure Now that Church questionless may be said to be pure whose doctrine is consonant to the word of God where the Sacraments are duly administred where all the fundamental Articles of our Faith are publickly imbraced where men are not required to profess or to do any thing that is contrary to the Rule of the Holy Gospel Such a Church cannot be denyed to be Pure For here is not the mixture of any unclean thing that can taint it with the least imaginable impurity or impress any blot or stain upon it Then that the Church of England is thus pure it will not be difficult to shew before any impartial Judge For what Doctrine does she teach that is not to be found in the Holy Scriptures What Sacrament does she deprive the people of either in the whole or in part What Article of our Belief is it that she rejects What is it that is repugnant to the Laws of Christ which she obliges us either to believe or practise Does she tell us that the Elements in the Holy Encharist are transubstantiated by a few Syllables pronounced by him that Officiates Does she teach us to adore Saints and Images and to pray for the Dead Does she cheat the people with forged Miracles and impose upon their credulity with foppish Legends Does she kindle an imaginary Purgatory fire in the other world that she may set up a thriving trade for Indulgences in this Can she be accused of these corruptions or a hundred more that might be named Is not her Doctrine confessed to be pure And is not her Discipline such at least as is not forbidden And if she be sound in both these I do not discern from what other fountains any Impurity can be derived upon Her And for what has been commonly excepted concerning the use of some external and Indifferent things she cannot possibly contract any thing of pollution from these for if they do not defile a man much less will they be able to corrupt a Church But though the Church of England should be proved and granted to be a pure Church yet we are still to inquire Whether if we can find some other which we esteem to be more pure we are not bound to join with that And to this it may be answered that when a Church is so
whereof Antioch was the chief City and therefore he cannot be denyed to have had many Presbyters under him and it may be several Diocesan Bishops which very probably were then established in so large a Country as that was The last example that I shall bring is that of Polycarpus of Smyrna He was one that had conversed with St John and other Apostles and as some say was made Bishop of Smyrna by St John whose scholar he was But Irenaeus who knew him and had heard him with great attention when he discoursed of many things that he had heard from St Johns own mouth and from others that had seen the Lord he tells us that he was made Bishop of Smyrna by the Apostles and if so then this Polycarpus must be that Angel of the Church of Smyrna to whom St John writes one of his Epistles in the Revelation for that Book of holy Scripture was not written till after the death of the other Apostles And if he were made Bishop by them for which we have the undoubted testimony of one that knew him then he must be confessed to have been the Angel of that Church whom St John does so highly commend And that he had Authority over many Presbyters cannot be questioned because he collected the forementioned Epistles of Ignatius and amongst the rest that to his own Church of Smyrna and sent them to the Philippians in all which this power is most fully and evidently asserted I have made choice of these few Examples out of many more because they seem to me to be very clear and were all of them unquestionably within the times that the Apostles lived and therefore it may appear from hence that the Episcopal Government in the Church was a Constitution that was allowed and established by them But if this could not be proved yet it must be confessed that soon after it was universally received all over the Christian World for from about the middle of the second Century and so downwards there is not an instance of any Church that had not a Bishop under whose Government it was The Churches in the Roman Empire and those without it did most unanimously agree in this that they all owned the Episcopal superiority And this is a very strong argument that it was a matter of Apostolical institution For it is not otherwise conceiveable how it could be brought into such general use throughout the whole Catholick Church in so short a time If any should think that it might be determined in a General Council soon after the decease of the Apostles this were a good testimony that it were still Apostolical For else it would never have been decreed by those some of which in all probability must have seen and conversed with some of the Apostles and who were wont constantly to contend for such things as they had heard from them and to reject all other as illegal innovations But that there was never any such Council seems to be beyond dispute For it could not be assembled in a time when the Church was often in a state of persecution and always looked upon with a jealous eye by the Civil power which would not have suffered so great a number of Christian Ministers to meet together without giving them some great disturbance Or if we should suppose they might have been permitted to meet quietly yet that they did so there is not the least mention or intimation in any Ecclesiastical Writer and it cannot be conceived that they could have been silent in a matter so considerable as this when they have punctually recorded so many of far less importance But if any can be inclined to believe that the Episcopal superiority was a meer usurpation of one Presbyter in a Diocess over the rest without the decree of any Council it is exceeding strange that all the World should be imposed upon about the same time in the same manner without ever consulting one with another And who can imagine that the primitive Bishops who are acknowledged to have been such pious mortified and self-denying men could be guilty of an ambition to advance themselves above their brethren contrary to the rule of the Apostles especially when they were like to get nothing by their aspiring but to be the first that should burn at a stake in the market-place or be torn in pieces in the Amphitheater Or if we could suppose them to have been so wicked and foolish too it is not possible that they could have gained this new power without some considerable opposition Men are naturally very jealous of any incroachment that can be made upon their Rights And the Presbyters of those times may well be thought to have had as great a care of preserving their Liberty as we have now of ours It is not therefore at all credible that they should as it were with one consent put their necks quietly under this new invented Yoke and submit without struggling to the usurped power of one of their Equals and that this defection should be so universal that the antient Parity if there had been any such should not keep its possession in one Church in all Christendom And from hence it seems very plain that the Episcopal Government that was exercised by the Apostles and by others in their time and received in all Churches must be instituted by them and they certainly did not act in a Case of that high concernment to the perpetual peace and order of the Church without the particular command of our blessed Lord or the immediate inspiration of the Holy Ghost I have drawn together in as clear and plain a method as I could the substance of the Argument that may be made for the Power of the Bishop over many Presbyters And if to all this and whatever else may be alledged it should be thought reply enough to say that the Mystery of iniquity began to work in the Apostles days and that therefore we are not to be obliged by any Examples though never so old If this should be pleaded as I think it has been sometimes it may be answered thus That Episcopacy may be proved upon good grounds out of the Scripture it self I am sure far better than any other form of Government can pretend unto But then being explained by the practice of that and all following Ages it will put the thing beyond all controversy if the sacred Text alone should not be clear enough to convince us of it But if the Mystery of Iniquity should be still insisted on this can be no prejudice to our Cause unless it can be proved that such an Episcopacy as we plead for is that Mystery of Iniquity which is spoken of That it is not seems to me very evident Because I cannot think that the Mystery of Iniquity though it did work very early should so mightily prevail that in a very short time there should not be any Church any where that can be heard of that
which God had not given them and the rest which had no suffrages in the Case willingly obeyed and esteemed themselves bound to submit to their injunctions And when any controversie happened to arise in such matters the question was not whether the Church had any such Authority to command but whether the thing commanded were really indifferent or not So it was in that famous dispute about the time of keeping of Easter which caused so much dissention in the first ages of Christianity they did not contend against the Power of the Church to determine things indifferent but both sides supposed themselves to be obliged by an Apostolical tradition from which they thought it unlawful to depart But where they judged the matter not to be contrary to some unalterable rule they never opposed the commands of their Governours And the Protestant Churches have been all of the same opinion They have all made some Ecclesiastical Laws for external order and discipline to which they require obedience from all of their own Communion though these particular Laws are not expressed in the word of God provided they be not repugnant unto it And I think our dissenting Brethren themselves do all of them make use of such a Power and indeed I do not see how it can be otherwise For they will all severally acknowledge that there must be some Power amongst them to which every person that joins with their Assemblies ought to be subject in all acts of Discipline and these not being particularly determined in the Scriptures must be determined by this Power or else their Discipline cannot be put into practice And if it may be thus determined once it may be so again and again and so as often as the like cases shall occur and therefore it may be passed into a Law or Rule by which all matters of the same nature may be constantly decided for the future And a collection of many such Laws would be so far equivalent to a Book of Canons that it would contain divers Rules and determinations of things which the Scripture had not particularly determined If this be not granted that some such Rules may be established then all determinations not made in Scripture which will be very many must be left to the discretion of those that have the Church Authority in their hands And then the only difference in this matter betwixt them and us will be this that we shall be governed by known and standing Laws and they by an uncertain Arbitrary Power But since where any Power is allowed some such determinations must be made in the one way or the other it seems clear that they which do blame the Church of England for admitting Ecclesiastical Laws do not only condemn the Apostolical practice and all Churches both antient and modern but themselves too Besides this Power we are now discoursing of seems to have so clear a foundation in Scripture that it cannot well be disputed The Apostle writing to the Hebrews exhorts them thus Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves If they were bound to obey and submit then certainly their Guides or Rulers had Authority to command And if they might command in any thing without doubt they might do it in things that are not forbidden in the Word of God For these are not sinful in themselves neither can they be made so by being injoined by our Superiors unless obedience must be esteemed a Sin But how can that be when we are here expresly commanded to obey Another place there is which has been always urged to this purpose and never yet I think received any full and satisfactory answer Let all things be done decently and in order This is spoken upon occasion of some irregular proceedings there had been in their Religious assemblies at Corinth and it is laid down as a rule and expedient whereby they might avoid the like inconveniencies for the future And that it was to be universally obliging may appear from the grand reason of it which we find mentioned a little before in the same chapter God is not the Author of Confusion but of Peace and that not in this or the other particular Church not for this or that time but in all Churches of the Saints in all places and all ages of the World whatsoever And then the precept it self is to be extended to all things whatever they be that are done in the Church they must be done decently and in order But it is not any where particularly expressed what is orderly and decent and if it may not now or at any time be determined what is so then this great Rule in which all Churches of the Saints are concerned would be wholly void and of no effect as to any use that could possibly be made of it For though we should acknowledge our selves obliged to do all things decently and in order as we must yet if it should be supposed that we may not presume to determine of this where the Scripture is silent as here it is we could never make any practical application of this Apostolical command to our own circumstances and so it would be all one unto us as if we had never received it But if it may be determined then it must be done either by publick Authority or else according to every mans private judgement If the former be granted it is that which we contend for that Ecclesiastical Laws may be made for the decent and orderly administration of all things in the Church If the latter be allowed then every one may determine for himself and then considering the strange variety of fancies that there are especially in matters of decency we should scarce find two it may be in a thousand that would be brought to agree in the same opinion and by consequence this general Canon of the Apostles that was intended for the preservation of good order among Christians would occasion the most absolute confusion that can be imagined And for the avoiding of this the determining what is decent and orderly must be left to our Governours and it will be our duty to submit to what they shall injoin in such matters as these I shall name one passage more which may give some farther light and confirmation unto this it is some chapters before where St Paul tells the Corinthians thus The rest will I set in order when I come Here it is very obvious to be taken notice of that there were some things to be regulated which he should leave undecided in this Epistle but designed to take care about them at his being at Corinth whither he intended to go the first convenient opportunity Now these things 't is very probable he did set in order afterwards as he had promised to do but we do not know either what they were or in what manner he disposed them but whatever they were or however he determined them thus much may be reasonably gathered from
it that there may some things happen in the Church which may lawfully be set in order that are not expresly determined in Scripture For such are those here mentioned which if they are any where determined it must be in the second Epistle to the Corinthians but there it cannot be for besides that it would be difficult to shew the place where it is done that second Epistle was written not long after the first before the holy Pen-man of it had gotten any leisure to come amongst them but these cases were reserved till then when I come He forbore to write any thing of them because he intended to decide them when he should be personally present But what he did then we have nothing in the sacred writings that acquaints us and therefore it seems that some things may be determined which are not entred into those holy records This is a matter that has been always esteemed so very plain that it was never made a controvesie in former ages But of late some have been exceeding jealous of it because as they conceive it seems to derogate from the great Protestant Doctrine of the fulness and sufficiency of the Scriptures If I could see any argument to perswade me that it did so indeed I should be easily induced to reject it with as much indignation as any of those that do contend the most zealously against it But we do readily acknowledge that the Holy Scripture does contain all things necessary to Salvation that nothing is to be received as an article of Faith that is not there clearly revealed that nothing is to be imposed as a duty in it self acceptable unto God which may not be manifestly proved from thence that nothing is to be accounted an essential part of divine Worship which is not there expresly commanded All that we attribute to our Governours is only a Power of determining about Indifferent things which the word of God has not determined and these we hold to have no other influence upon our future happiness or misery but only as we take obedience to superiours to be our duty and that we ought not obstinately to oppose them in such things as we might have innocently done if they had not been prescribed by their Authority Where the Scripture has forbidden or commanded any thing as it has whatever is necessary there all the Powers upon earth are bound to submit Where the Scripture is silent as it is in many matters of lesser moment there we are obliged to comply with the injunctions of a lawful Power So that the sufficiency of the Scripture may be very consistent with the making of certain Rules for external order and decency But some have thought that if we should allow any Power in the Church of imposing such things we might by degrees have so many of them imposed as might be extreamly prejudicial to the state of Religion and that true Piety might be stifled and buried as it were under the rubbish of a huge number of needless Ceremonies And therefore they think that no such Power ought to be admitted But all that can be proved by this way of reasoning will amount but to thus much that such a Power may possibly be abused but it is not well argued from the abuse of a Power to the nullity of it It has been always supposed that Parliaments had a Power of granting mony upon the Subject But if any should say they cannot tell but that they may in time grant away their whole Estates and therefore should conceive that they could not grant any thing at all such a fond surmize would never be thought to have force enough to deprive them of their undoubted right But in Church Power as it is now bounded there cannot be any just apprehensions of such an excess as is pretended for besides the restraint that common prudence must lay upon those that have the management of it it is limited on the one hand by the Scripture that it cannot command any thing contrary unto that and on the other by the Civil Authority whose approbation will be requisite to give a validity to every order of the Church And here then is a sufficient check to prevent all exorbitancies that can be feared If any thing be imposed that is not confirmed by the Civil Power it will not be thought obliging if any thing be prescribed that is contrary to Scripture it most not be obeyed But if any Constitutions should be made which are only esteemed Burdensome by reason of their number but are not otherwise unlawful the fault will be in those that imposed them and not in those that submit unto them This is a thing that has been antiently complained of but neither those that made the complaint did separate from the Church themselves nor perswade others to do it upon that account For where the Imposition is really Burdensome they are to be blamed that laid it on but they that quietly bear it will make their obedience the more acceptable by adding patience and humility unto it But this objection cannot be made in our particular Case the injunctions of the Church of England are for their nature innocent and for their number not many And if they should be judged to be unlawfully imposed because they may be excessively multiplied I think there is no occasion now for such a fear However it will be time enough to apply the remedy when we feel the distemper growing upon us but it is always dangerous tampering with Physick when we find our selves in perfect health Every extravagant jealousie of what may happen hereafter ought not to shake what is well established at the present For if the contrary principle should be allowed it were impossible for any Church or State in the World ever to injoy one minutes repose Our Church then is so far very blameless that has admitted of a Power of making some Laws for the more orderly conduct of Ecclesiastical affairs since it is a thing very reasonable in it self very agreeable to the practice of all ages and very consonant to the rules of Scripture from whose fulness it does not detract neither can the possibility of its being abused make it wholly null I have hitherto indeavoured to lay together the summ of what I conceive may not be impertinently urged in defence of the Church of England as to the three principal parts of her Constitution Episcopacy Liturgy and Ecclesiastical Laws All which as they are here established are agreeable to the practice of the best Churches consonant to the holy Scriptures and may therefore be conformed unto with a good Conscience SECT V. I shall now give some answer to several objections that have been made against her especially those that I have observed to be the most popular and which have raised the strongest prejudice in the minds of such as do not approve of our present establishment And these are of two sorts some that are made against the Constitution
it self and others against the Clergy that conform unto it I will a little examine a few of either kind And for those of the first kind one is that in our Church the People are denyed the liberty of choosing their own Pastors to which some of our dissenting Brethren do conceive that they have always had an inherent Right And besides an example or two they think they can find in the Scripture they suppose they have evident testimonies out of Antiquity to confirm this practice of popular Election And it is true the Peoples approbation has been always thought so far necessary that when hands were to be laid upon any for their admission into any sacred function if they knew them to be of a loose and scandalous conversation they might object it and by that means hinder their promotion And so much is still retained amongst us But farther it will not be denyed but that in some places very antiently the Bishop of the Diocess was chosen or nominated by the people of the City where he commonly resided But it does not appear that the several Presbyters that might be appointed to certain Cures equivalent to our Parochial Churches were ever wont to be chosen by the particular Congregations upon which they did attend They were appointed by the Bishop whose office it was to take care of the whole Diocess and to see that these Presbyters were not negligent in discharging the trust that was reposed in them They were the Diocesan Bishops that were sometimes chosen by the people and they that insist stiffly upon this priviledge must acknowledge the Antiquity of these or else they must declare themselves to be very partial whilst they make use of so much of the testimony only as they think makes for them in the matter of choice and reject or overlook the rest that is clearly against them in the question about such an Episcopacy But however it cannot be proved that this custom of the peoples choice was ever universally received and where it was it often created such disturbances that the secular Power was quickly forced to interpose and nominate the Bishop for the preservation of the publick Peace And it was not long before this liberty of choice was wholly laid aside by the Imperial and Canon Laws Which is a clear proof that whatever it were it was looked upon then but as a voluntary concession of their Governours and not any inherent and unalterable Right And therefore there can be no necessity either that it should be set up where it never was or restored again where it has been discontinued for so many ages And there is no doubt but that if it were generally practised in this nation it would infalliby produce such animosities and confusion that the People would soon grow weary of it themselves and desire to be devested of such an uneasie Power and that things might be let alone to run quietly in the old channel But because those that have been pleased to use this argument against our Church are not at all to be prevailed upon by the most pregnant Examples of antient times in other cases they ought not if they could to make any advantage of them in this Let us see then what grounds they have in the Scripture for the Peoples choice which is the only rule by which all sides must confess themselves to be equally bound And here I cannot tell that there is any positive command that was ever urged and I know but of two Examples that have been alledged for it and I will briefly consider them both The one is in the Peoples choice of the seven Deacons And supposing that they had an original Right of choosing these this will not amount to a sufficient proof that they had therefore a right of choosing their Pastors The admitting them to name the persons that were to serve in an inferiour Office does not imply that they are therefore intrusted with the choice of those that are to be advanced to a greater And there was particular reason why the Deacons should be chosen by them they were to be the dispensers of the mony that was collected for the use of the poor and the people might be incouraged to give more liberally and all occasion of murmuring for the future might be taken away when the publick charity was distributed by persons of known integrity and such as they themselves had chosen So that this instance does not seem fully to reach the purpose I shall therefore inquire into the other It is where Paul and Barnabas are said to have Ordained them Elders in every Church A man would wonder how the Peoples Power of choosing their Pastors should ever be proved from this place But it is attempted to be done by a Critical observation upon the Greek word which is here rendered ordained For it did first signify a popular way of election by majority of voices which was discerned by lifting up of hands And therefore some have imagined that these Elders were ordained in the Churches by their election and suffrage But this is more than can be manifestly proved from the word For though the original signification of it were what I mentioned but now yet afterwards it began to be used promiscuously for the appointing of any one to an office whether it were by a popular choice or by the Authority of a single person And therefore since this act of Ordination or appointment to office denoted by the Greek word here used is many times applyed to the Authoritative proceedings of particular men without any regard to the suffrages of the People and since it is here attributed to Paul and Barnabas and not to the multitude of believers it does not appear from this place that the whole Community had or rather it is evident that they had not any hand in the appointment of these Elders For I do not believe that one passage can be produced out of any good Author where the Magistrate or other Superiour issaid 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or thus to ordain when the choice or appointment of the Officer was in the People and therefore when Paul and Barnabas are here said to have ordained if we should suppose that the voices of the multitude are implyed in this expression it would be an acception of the word for which we have not any example But if we should yield that by an unheard of straining of the Phrase here we might possibly find some little colour for the Peoples choice of their Pastors it could yet be no more than a favourable concession made unto them upon that occasion For that the suffrages of the multitude were not always necessary to the constituting of Elders seems very plain from those words of St Paul For this cause left I thee in Crete that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting and ordain Elders in every City as I had appointed thee Here Titus is intrusted with a power
succeed the other does directly cross the end it pretends to aim at as will appear if we consider them singly By Comprehension is usually understood some kind of Relaxation to be made by Law that some things which are the most scrupled being taken away some of those that now separate from us may be satisfied and join themselves to the established Church This is a thing that has been much discoursed of and some thing has been attempted in it by men of several perswasions and it has been variously censured or approved as the Parties have been differently affected And it is confessed that those things that have been appointed meerly for external Order and decency may be altered when it shall seem good to the same Power that first injoined them But then those that have submitted and subscribed unto it cannot believe that any such alteration is necessary to be made in our present Constitution and if it should be made they are afraid that it would bring but very few Dissenters into the Church because they that scruple what is already in use may upon the same grounds except against any thing else that can be prescribed But yet if the wisdom of our Governours being as is reasonable before hand informed what will give satisfaction should judge it expedient to make any concessions of this nature I know no man that is not ready to join his hearty prayers that it may succeed to the putting an end to all our Divisions and the lasting peace and security of the Protestant Religion But it is justly feared that this would not produce that happy effect which is so much desired by all good men because most of those that differ from us seem now to be resolved against all manner of impositions though it should be of things otherwise never so innocent and then terms may be altered and inlarged if it be thought fit but whatever is done they that will be true to this Principle cannot be Comprehended by any thing but their own pleasure Some therefore understanding well how ineffectual this is like to prove have thought the only way to Vnite us must be by a Toleration and that either with some Restrictions or without An unlimited Toleration without any Restrictions is condemned by most that pretend to any degree of sobriety and if every man as some have thought have a natural Right to the choice and exercise of his own way of Worship then a Toleration must be granted to all and it cannot be limited without the manifest injury of those that are or shall be excluded from the benefit of it by such limitation But however it be desired whether limited or unlimited which I think will never be perfectly agreed amongst those that are for it the Conformists out of the kindness they have for many well disposed people that may be mislead would be very much inclined to a Toleration if besides the other great inconveniencies that would follow they had not these exceptions against it It does not seem to be equal dealing that our Dissenters should lay claim to such an Indulgence which all sorts of them have most rigorously denyed to others whereever they have had the Power to do it and divers of them now will not allow their Children and Servants that liberty which they expect themselves in the exercise of their Religion And it is observable that whereas the best Emperours have made the severest Laws against all manner of Sectaries Julian the Apostate the most subtile and bitter enemy that Christianity ever had was the man that set up this way of toleration For he sent for the Prelates and some others of the several Sects of Christians and when they were come into the Palace he advises them very kindly as it might seem to lay aside their differences and that every one should attend upon his own Religion and never fear because no body should hinder any of them of that freedom Here was as much liberty and as readily granted as any man could wish but he did not intend any advantage to Christianity by it No he hoped by the licence he gave them to increase their dissentions that so he might have the less reason to fear their unanimous opposing of his grand Design which was to restore Paganism and Idolatry again This is hinted in some Ecclesiastical Historians but no where so fully laid open as it is done by Ammianus Marcellinus who was most likely to know the whole secret of the business for he had been a Souldier in Julian's Army and was a Heathen too though not so great a Zealot as his Master But by this any one may see that the most implacable cunning and dangerous Adversary that the Devil ever raised up to oppose the Gospel of Christ did of his own accord devise and procure a Toleration as the most likely means utterly to destroy the Christian Faith and to revive a most gross obsolete Superstitious Idolatrous Religion Which is enough to shew that this fair and plausible invention may be designed for very bad purposes And we have reason to suspect it the more because is it well known that the Papists have always indeavoured to widen our differences and when they had been pretty successful in that they were of late become earnest Sollicitours for the Indulging of Protestant Dissenters but sure no man will believe that this could proceed from any particular kindness they owed them more than us But only they hoped that by this means our Divisions might be easily multiplied and the Church of England by consequence exceedingly weakened and then they knew they should have the most promising opportunity of working their ends upon us all For when this is done they may freely send abroad their Emissaries in the likeness of Anabaptists Quakers Fifth-Monarchy men or what other shape they please to assume And when they have broken us into several scattered independant troops that are not agreed among themselves in what manner to resist the Enemy they may overcome us with less difficulty than if we were joined in one regular intire well disciplined Body And that this has been their grand design is not a meer conjecture of ours we have evidence and witnesses of it which cannot be questioned Therefore many Conformists that take no delight in seeing the Laws severely executed are yet very apprehensive of the danger of a Toleration for they are much afraid that if it were once granted the effect of it would rather be what has been hoped for by the Popish Agents than what was intended by those at whose immediate instance it might be procured But whatever the issue should be it is certain it would be any thing sooner than an Vnion for it would be a plain settlement and incouraging of our divisions by giving them the countenance and protection of the Law And if such a thing should ever chance to pass into an Act that when it was done would only take away the penalty laid