being the divinely inspired Law of the Church which they are to interpret and apply but seeing interpretation and application of the Scriptures is their work and every ordinance doth imply this more or less they ought not to be tyed generally and strictly to certain forms of words wherein to express themselves unless they were of divine inspiration and if all that Ministers were to say to the people was prescribed them as it might be in all as well as in those things wherein the Liturgy doth prescribe to them then the Ministry might be a calling as others are that men might in a common way take up to read all divine service but certainly there would need no solemn ordination or consecration to this office with Fasting Prayer and imposition of hands more then to any other calling 2. They object against our Liturgy that the matter of it and words also are generally taken out of the Service Books of Rome viz the Mass-book Ceremoniale Pontificale Romanum and that the form of it viz. the manner and order of the service is too much conformed to yea little different from the Popish Mass or Service now they say God in the Law refused to be served with any of the Forms Modes Ceremonies Customs Vessels or Utensils wherewith Idols had been served yea though the things were some indifferent Rites and Customs and which the idolatrous thought founded upon reason and nature and the vessels were of Materials of his own making It is true what is Scripture and from Scripture must be used though it was abused by Papists whatsoever is founded-upon divine institution comes from the word not from the Church of Rome but to keep to their Words Order Method c. seems too great respect to that Church and that service They knew very well there was no legal pollution upon the Words or Ceremonies because they had been used by the Papists as there was upon the Idols Utensils under the Law wherefore they might not be converted to mens private use but must be destroyed but to translate their service into our Church in things wherein we have the same liberty of composing forms and methods for our selves as any others have this seems too great a respect to that idolatrous Church from whence they came too easy a passing by all the Pollutions and Tyranny with which they had defiled and tormented the Church of Christ too great an acknowledgement of her as a worthy or eminent Church from whom we should take a pattern of our worship all which were certainly displeasing to God and by this symbolizing with Rome in our worship we harden the Papists as if we differed from them but in circumstantial things we keep in mind there ways and worship and so continually expose the people to the danger of returning to Popery and also reflect upon the reformed Churches chusing Rome for our Pattern keeping so near to her whereas they have all utterly cast her of and composed new forms of worship for themselves out of the Scripture nor can there be any other reason given why England above all other reformed Churches is so much sollicited to and in danger of relapsing into Popery from age to age but that her publick service and Church Government is so much like to that of Rome that the Papists think they may easily perswade us to receive all the rest seeing we are so zealous to retain so much of their Religion 3. They thought our Liturgy very defective in the publick Prayers partly in that there are very few things mentioned in them and those very generally either in the confessions of sinsor petitions for Mercies especially Spiritual and the Letany which is something more large and particular yet comes not near the secret wants of mens Souls mentioneth things so briefly and suddenly passeth over to others of a different nature that there is no time for mens thoughts to reflect on them or their Hearts to be affected with them which is one special end of Prayer and partly because of the abrupt breaking off and dividing one Petition from another into several Prayers most of the Collects containing but one single Petition or two at most this breaks off intention and affection neither is there any order among the Prayers or coherence of Petitions and some Petitions are repeated often in the same service yea some whole Prayers especially when the Letany is read there is a very needless repetition of almost all the Prayers for if that be comprehensive of all necessary things what need other Prayers be used at that time these defects viz confusedness incoherence tautologies in words or sence going backwards and forwards c. are objected as intolerable in the Prayers of particular Ministers who yet may out-grow such weakness and pray with better method and to better edification they are not then to be excused in the Church Liturgy where no man hath power to correct or alter any thing and Rulers are very unwilling to yield to amendments for fear of confessing something to have been amiss before 4. They were not satisfied with the Responses that the people should audibly speak after the Minister or alternately with him this lesseneth the gravity and seriousness of the Service hindreth the exercise of Thoughts and Affections in the people and makes the worship more like a Dramatick Action wherein every one acts their part and must wait for their Q. or time of speaking and silence rather then like the solemn service of God 5. They dislike the frequent repetitions of the Lord's Prayer which in every Morning and Evening service is twice used and once for every office that is added to them as when the Letany is read or the Communion Service or a woman Churched or a Child Baptized or a Marriage Solemnized or a Person buryed so that it is not unusual to rehearse the Lords Prayer five or six times before the Liturgy service be finished and yet the Minister must use it in the Pulpit after all They could not conceive any reason or excuse to be given for this custome but a superstitious conceit of that form of words almost turning them into the Nature of a Charm as if they could not be used too often and the very use of them made all other service the more acceptable 6. The corrupt Translations of the Scripture used in the Liturgy that there may and ever will be impersections in and doubts about Translation of Scripture whilst mens Knowledge is imperperfect and their Judgments diverse is granted by all but the Translations in the Liturgy in the Psalms Epistles and Gospels are grosly corrupt some contrary to the sence of the Text and in some places whole Verses omitted and the Titles of all Psalms are left out which in the Hebrew are the first verse of the Psalms and very necessary for the understanding of them therefore to oblige men to read these Translations only in the Church Service even when we have
the Sacraments and no other The Bishop knew that the Non-Conformists thought the Cross in Baptism prescribed in the Common Prayer Book unlawfull and against the Word of God and that some of them thought the order of Bishops unlawfull also and all of them the order of Deacons as prescribed by that Book and yet here they must subscribe not only that they will use the book and no other form in publick but that it contains nothing contrary to the Word of God This subscription was not only imposed on those that should hereafter be ordained but it is also decreed that no man shall be suffered to Preach or Catechize or be a Lecturer or read any Lecture in Divinity in the Universities Cathedral or Colligiate Churches or in City Market Town Church or Chappel whatsoever within this Realm unless he first subscribed to this Article with two others contained in this Cannon and by means hereof many worthy Ministers were quickly turned out of their Livings though the Lawyers generally declared that it was against the Laws of the Land that any man should be turned out of his Free-hold such as Ministers Livings are without an Act of Parliament and to make all sure they ordained Cannon 55 that Preachers before all Sermons Lectures or Homilies should only invite the people to pray naming a few heads of Prayer which respect the publick only and none concerning the people in particular so that now no other Prayer must be used in publick but those in the Service Book which made the Burthen more intolerable Moreover in this Book of Canons they ordain that Ministers shall admit none to the Lords Supper that will not kneel or that come not to the Prayers or that speak against the Book of Common Prayer or Ceremonies or the book of Consecration of Bishops Can. 27. c. Till they acknowledge their Fault in word or writing if they can That Fathers shall not be God-Fathers to their own Children nor so much as urged to be present at their Baptism In a word all that the Bishops knew that the Non-Conformists were dissatisfied with Can. 29. in the Service Book were established by these Cannons and they rigorously prosecuted upon them from that time viz 1603 to 1640. For the Government of the Church by Bishops and administration of that Government by Lay-Chancellours Commissaries c. in Q. Eliz. time the Governours were contented with a peaceable submission from the Non-Conformists but under K. James the Cannons fore-named enjoyned all Ministers to subscribe that there was nothing in the Book of Consecration of Bishops Priests and Deacons contrary to the Word of God And now B. Billson and B. Andrews pleaded for the Divine Right of Episcopacy and B. Laud imposed an Oath commonly called the Oath Caetera upon the Clergy whereby they should promise not to endeavour to alter the Government of the Church as it was established by Arch-bishops Bishops Deans c. And thus all the moderation that had been used by the former Bishops in pressing things scrupled was turned into the most rigorious imposition of them yea and of additions to them also as if Rohoboam's success should terrify no man from acting according to his answer to the People that he would add to their burthens and change their Whips into Scorpions and this leads to the next reason of the Dissent of those former Non-Conformists Rea. 6. The Tyrannical Imposition of the Lyturgy and all that belonged to it was a great means to increase their dissatisfaction There had been a passage in the Preface of the Common Prayer book that the first Reformers had gone as farr as they could in reforming the Church considering the times they lived in and they hoped those that came after them would as they better might do more And indeed this was the Ground of the submission and patience of the Non-Conformists viz a perswasion that the first Reformers at least the best of them did not intend their moddle as a ne plus ultra and therefore they still hoped that by Patience and peaceable endeavours things might by begrees be brought to a better pass accordingly they presented an admonition to the Parliament Anno 1570. And again a Petition to K. James called the Millinary Petition for ease and redress but alas as that passage of the Reformers is left out of the Preface to the service book so the expungers of it fixed a just contrary mark to themselves which they aim at to this day in all their proceedings viz that there was no necessity of any farther Reformation then what was established by Q. Eliz. and that all must be compelled to approve of that as sufficient and to submit to the Rules of it The better to prosecute this design they have ever laboured to set the Princes against the Non-conformists and themselves have used the Spiritual Sword chiefly against them they did what they could to prejudice that Excellent Princess Q. Eliz. against them so that in her Reign especially when Whitgift was Arch-Bishop the Non-Conformists were turned out of Universities as Dr Sampson Dean of Christs-Church in Oxford Mr Cartwright Margarite Professour at Cambridge and many others many were turned out of Livings some worthy men imprisoned and Mr John Vdall Minister of Kingston upon Thames was sentenced to dye for high Treason against the Queen in Defaming her Government which saith Dr Fuller was somewhat hard being but a remote consequence for all that was alledged against him was that in a Preface to a certain book he had sharply taxed the Remissness of the Bishops Government And now such was the Rigour of Prosecutions against the Non-Conformists and the remisness of Discipline toward the ignorant and scandalous both Ministers and People that it gave occasion to many to separate from and renounce the Church of England as no true Church who were then called Brownists when K. James came to the Crown the Bishops so quickly incensed him against the Dissenters that in the conference at Hampton-Court appointed on purpose to hear their exceptions he would scarce give them leave to speak he sent them away with taunts and threats and often declared that were men never so able and pious yet the Church had better want their labours then have her Orders broken by their Non-Conformity which maxime I am sorry to find Dr Stillingfleet to espouse Under K. Charles the 1st the Bishops had so wholly engaged the civil power in their cause that it was almost the only concern of the Government how to bring all the Non-Conformists in England to submit or to leave the Land and to bring Ireland to the same plat-form with England and to set up Bishops Lyturgies and Ceremonies in Scotland and now Ministers and People were driven many thousands into New-England Holland and other Forreign Parts they were suspended silenced deprived of their Livings imprisoned fined set in the Pillory stigmatized had their ears cut off banished into remote Islands and many
of men appointed by David by Divine inspiration for this work and so the manner and method also was appointed by God and Art and rules of Musick were then acceptable and part of the Ceremonial worship But there being such Offices nor such service appointed in the Christian Church this is no warrant for our Responses Neither do the Scriptures give any warrant or example for observing dayes as sacred in the honour of Saints Or of instituting new Offices in the Church or new Ceremonies of worship but on the contrary our Saviour declares that men worship in vain that teach for Doctriens the Commandements of men Matth. 15.9 It seems then That Decency and Order which men purposely devise to add significancy or comliness to gods worship is abominable in his sight he hath no need of mans service and therefore will accept of nothing but what is appointed and carried on by his own Spirit Neither do the Scriptures appoint or warrant any superiority of Bishops above ordinary Ministers at least not such as that they should have sole power of governing the Church The high Priests of old had no such power of the Priests as this Learned Doctor hath proved in his Irenicum They had some peculiar things appropriated to their office but were themselves subject to the Sanhedrim The Apostles were all of one Order and had no authority over each other and governed the Church only by consent Gal. 2.9 Nor is there any distinction made betwixt ordinary Ministers except what they see needful to make amongst themselves for the good of the Church This all our old Bishops acknowledged and therefore pleaded for Episcopacy only as an humane constitution And those who of late wrote for its Divine-right do yet the most learned of them acknowledge that it cannot be proved from Scripture unless perhaps from the angels of the Church of Asia which this Dr. hath solidly confuted It was alwaies objected to the Non-conformists that the Scriptures do not forbid those things though they do not command them But they replyed that the Non-command of any thing in Gods worship and Church is a prohibition except of those things only that occasionally become necessary or that are naturally necessary circumstances of such actions as are commanded for it would argue great imperfection in the Law if it should omit things that are constantly or generally necessary for the good of the Church And as Moses closed his Law with this command that none should adde or diminish it so Christ having given his Law to his Church and appointed Officers with power to make govern and cast members out of it as there was need without giving them liberty to adde or alter He also did virtually prohibit such additions or alterations till he shall come again and their Commission being only to teach baptize and to teach all that Christ commands to the end of the world Mat. 28.18.19 This doth sufficiently restrain them from making or teaching cammands of their own all their authority being grounded on that Commission 2. From Antiquity the Non-Conformists alledge that the primitive Churches for many hundred years had no stated Liturgies prescribing the words as well as method of worship Justin Martyr in his second Apoligy designedly gives an account of the Christian worship viz the order and method of praying preaching admitting of Members administring both Sacraments but hath no word of a prescribed form but he saith the Minister prayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he was able Tertullian giving the same account in his Apol. Cap. 39. saith likewise sine monitore quia de pectore oramus they prayed by heart and therefore had no prompter much less a book We read that Constantine the great Euseb de vit constant l. 4. cap 19.20 having abolished idolatry composed a form of Prayer for his Heathen Souldiers wherein t hey should pray to one God the Creatour of all things but we read of no form imposed on Christians There are indeed Lyturgies that goe under the names of the Apostle James Basil Chrysostome and Ambrose but they convince themselves to be forged by later men and so are an argument that there were no such things in the primitive times but when the Church was over-run with errours and superstitions it was appointed in Africa that the Ministers should either receive a form of Prayer from their Bishops Cansil Milevet 2 dum Can. 12. or shew their own Prayer to them for their approbation but this was above 400 years after Christ the usurpation of Bishops Lazines and ambition of Ministers ignorance and superstition in the people bred Liturgies and they grew up together Nor is their any mention of Responses in the Antient Church a superstitions story of a vision of Angels singing an Hymn in that manner by turns is pretended to be seen by Ignatius dead long before nor had the antient Church days holy to Saints for 300 years and upward we find only mention amongst them of Easter-day and yet that caused such division and contentions that it might have been a warning to after ages for contending about things that God hath not commanded The Apocryphal Books were indeed read in the Christian Church very antiently though they never were amongst the Jews but it was more excusable in them then in us because it was long e're the books of the Scripture especially the books of the New Testament were gathered into one Volumn or it was agreed among the Churches which were Canonical and which Apocryphal for some of the Apocryphal were read in some Churches as Canonical and some of the Canonical were by some Churches rejected The Cross in Baptism was so long unknown to the Church that it is hard to say when it came in though the sign of the Cross was commonly used amongst them upon their Cloaths in their Hats to distinguish them from Heathens and as a token that they were Christians the Montanists began to make a superstititious use of the Cross and so did many others soon after Constantine himself can scarce be excused if Eusebius be credited but that it was annexed to Baptism and made a symbole of mens embracing Christianity there is no record Kneeling at the Lords Supper was not enjoyned till transubstantion was established above 1200 years after Christ nor is any general example for it pretneded in former ages The Surplice was much Elder then the Cross in Baptism or kneeling at the Supper yet for 200 years and upwards there is no mention of it nor is it known when or how it came in many Rites Customs and Ceremonies were used in the Primitive Churches some being derived from the Jews some from the Heathens by the converts of both sorts yet not imposed upon others the Apostles Rule being yet observed that no man should judge another in meats or drinks Col. 2.16 Rom. 14. or in respect of an holy day i. e. the Jewish Festivals which were once of divine institution Nor did the
just liberty is on the Non-Conformists side in these points 3. Whether the Non-Conformists both Ministers and People are not greatly strengthened both in their Non-Conformity to the Lyturgy and also in their practise of holding Communion together for self preservation by what hath followed in an un-interrupted course ever since the ejection of Ministers viz the horrible and general contempt of Religion general corruption of manners great neglect of preaching to the people most Dignitaries having many Parishes in their hands which they supply by ignorant boys the great growth of Popery with a certain and manifest design of bringing it into the Land again if his Majesty who now letteth were taken out of the way the great corruption of Doctrine as well as manners in our own Clergy neither of which are minded by the Rulers of our Church so as man be conformable that it is now in the Church of England as in that of Rome men may be of any opinion live in any vice or be of no Religion so they own the Pope and his Church and be no Protestants so here men may be Arminian Socinian Papists Atheists and what they will so they externally conform to the Lyturgy and be no Presbyterians so that it is now manifest that nothing was intended by the contrivers of the Act of Uniformity but to cast out of the Ministry those whom they knew could not then conform and for ever to keep out and intangle the most understanding and conscientious men and to let none into the Church who should scruple any of her commands or practises Are such things any motives to the Non-Conformists after 18 years suffering all the indignities and injuries that Julian's wit and malice thought fit to lay upon the Christians of his time and supposed them more intollerable to them then present death which would have been both honourable and an end of their miseries I say are these things motives that at last they should condemn their former practise and without any relaxation quietly take all the Burthen on their Shoulders no they are satisfied that whereas the Church of England hath given her self a mortal wound by her Act of Uniformity and hath layn bleeding of it ever since almost to death that they ought not to hasten her death by putting their hands and adding their helps to it 5. The Dr. thinks that Ministers are not now so indispensibly bound preach as the Apostes were who were immediately sent by God and Authorized by Miracles and therefore they must cease preaching if forbidden by the Magistrate justly or unjustly Answ There is the same necessity of the Ministry to preserve build up and continue the Church by adding new Members through the preaching of the word as there was of the Apostles to lay the foundation of the Church and therefore there lay's the same necessity upon every Minister to preach to his flock within his Compass as did on the Apostles in their Compass May Civil Magistrates be resisted or deposed by the people upon any pretence and they not seek redress because they are not anointed and immediately sent by God as Saul and David c. were if the standing order of Magistracy hath its immutable warrant and unalterable priviledges to enable it for the the discharge of that office surely the standing and ordinary Ministry hath as much warrant and provision for the execution of their office without expecting Miracles to give them new Authority Serm. p. 36. 6. The Dr. saith the Assembly of Divines gave many weighty Reasons against Toleration and were for Uniformity as much as the Church of England So that that Church is justified by them from all Tyranny in exacting Uniformity and the question is not whether there shall be a Uiniformity but who shall have the ordering of it Answ The present Non-conformists have opposed Toleration of all Sects and Opinions as much as the Assembly but this charge is a great injury both to the Assembly and to the Nonconformists now living for the Assembly never desired Uniformity in the same words of Prayer and all Divine Offices or in Rites and Ceremonies devised by men that might occasion scruple to any nor do their reasons tend to any such thing but only that men should not have liberty to withdraw from their Parishes upon every pretence and to constitute new Congregations The present Non-conformists desire no Uniformity but in Doctrine and the substantials of worship Discipline and Government leaving the wording and methoding of worship to particular mens prudence and the necessities of their people and leaving all Congregations to their liberties in Rites and Ceremonies not instituted by Christ supposing that Physitians may as well be tied to the same rules in administring Physick to all bodies as Ministers and people be obliged to the same words and things universally for their souls Let the late Act of Uniformity be abolished the Apocryphal books and Holidayes be left out of the Lyturgy and the Psalms read in the new Translation let the Cross and Surplice be taken away and kneeling at the Sacrament be left indifferent according to the discretion of Ministers and the desires of the people also let Parents stipulate for their own children and some few things in the Prayers be altered or so explained that they may give no offence let the book of Consecration of Bishops c be restored as it was in Queen Elizabeths dayes and Ministers be bound only in general words to a peaceable submission to the Lyturgy let them subscribe to the 39 Articles only in Doctrines of faith and Sacraments according to the Statute Eliz. 13. and this will make much more for Union then any thing the Dr. or his brethren have yet said Serm. p. 11 12. But the Dr. saith Phil. 3.16 Commands all to walk by the same Rule viz. the Rule of Uniformity formerly given them when the Apostle was with them as they were wont to do in all the Churches Be it so but did the Apostle intend any more then that they should be content with the same substantials of worship which were for common edification wherein all might and ought to agree without contending about the Ceremonies of the Law or particular opinions which some out of weakness might be zealous for and others that were more perfect knew were abolished This seems to be the plain meaning of the Text for both the perfect and the imperfect and otherwise minded were all to agree in the practise of this Rule which therefore could not be the imposition or limitation of disputable Doctrines or questionable Rites and Ceremonies but he would prove that this Uniformity was in Rites and Ceremonies from 1 Cor. 7.17 because some things the Apostle ordained in all Churches but the Text speaks only of the Co-habitation of Husbands and wives when one was an Infidel ver 15 16. Was this a Ceremony In 1 Cor. 11.34 The Apostle abolisheth the custom of Love-feasts before the Lords Supper because it was
things 1. All particular Churches being but integral homogenious or equal parts of the Catholick Church they have all an equal intrinsecal power of forming themselves into Congregations or lesser bodies for their own spiritual edification according to the Laws which Christ hath prescribed to that purpose for being all Brethren equally and immediately related to Christ and the division betwixt them being meerly accidental and external from the place of their dwelling or other circumstances they must all have an equal right to all the ordinances and priviledges of a Church and equal authority to dispose of themselves for their own good 2. That the only end of Christians combining into several lesser societies is that they may serve Christ together and help each other in their Spiritual concerns for they are a spiritual Common-Wealth associated for Spiritual ends only when they are considered as one body under Christ therefore if they divide themselves into lesser bodies it must be only that they may more easily and conveniently attain the ends of the Whole Body and generall Association 3. And that the designs of civil governours Laws and interest with the conveniances of civil bodies greater or smaller ought to have no influence or concern upon the constitution of these particular Churches for if they imbody themselves in lesser companies only to serve Christ and edify each other with the best advantage to their Souls then they are still in such incorporating only to respect the honour of Christ their own edification and the best execution of Christs Laws among them leaving other governours to prosecute the ends of their Laws and Government in ways proper to themselves and distinct from theirs and therefore if civil Governours model these Churches in subserviency to their civil ends they do really alter the nature of Churches and take them out of their immediate subordination to Christ and his Spiritual Government or else they make Christ and his Government and Common-Wealth subservient to theirs and the concerns of Mens Souls to be not other ways regarded then as they may promote worldly and temporary designs But further that part of the Church which is on earth being absent from their King and Lord and in a state of imperfection hath therefore need of guides and helps that it may understand the Law of Christ and yield obedience to it though all are equally Members of Christ yet all are not able to guide and help themselves from whence ariseth the necessity of Guides and Governours in the Church whence it is called an Organical Church as a body consisting of different organs for different uses thus the Church is made up of governours and governed but 't is still the same Church under the same Head Christ and his word as its Law only the interpretation and application of this Law of Christ is committed to some for the better edification of all viz the preserving and perfecting those that are present Members and the continuing of the Church by bringing in more that shall be saved Church Governours therefore are in no wise supream Christ being still the immediate head both of power and influence both to make Laws and to make them effectual upon the hearts of men they are appointed only to expound and apply Christs Laws for the good of his People for his Glory only and to leave both the success and the account to Christ of themselves and of the people Hence ariseth a Fourth Division of the Church in respect of the Government and order of it into Oecumenical National Provincial Diocesan Classical Parochial or Congregational but all these and each one alike are taken in a double sence singularly or collectively singularly for one individual Church or Body under one Government whether of one or more persons and thus the Oecumenical or Vniversal Church on Earth must be but one great body of Christians associated with the same Governours for the edification of each other as Israel of old being one Family multiplyed into a People and these gathered into a great Assembly at Mount Sinai was there framed into one spiritual society under the Guidance and Government of the Tribe of Levi so that when they were afterwards dispersed over all Canaan they were yet but one polity and accordingly thrice a year at least all met to worship God together to testify their Unity this the Pope claimeth viz that the whole Church is one Congregation committed to him as the only Pastour or Head of all In like manner a National Church thus singularly understood is all the Christians of that Nation making up but one Congregation and Polity all immediately under the same Governour Also the Provincial Church is all the Christians of one Province the Diocesan of one Diocess or small circuit and the Parochial or Congregational the Christians of one small Neighbour-hood or that without respect of Neighbour-hood voluntarily gather into one small Assembly under the same Guides or Governours respectively The Church collectively taken if Oecumenical is the association of all Churches in all Nations under one general Head and Government the National Church is made by the Union of all the Churches of several lesser Divisions under the general National Officers the Diocesan is all the Churches of a Diocess or smaller circuit as the Provincial is those of a larger circuit under one Common Head or Bishop A Classis is the same thing with a Diocess saving that by common use the Diocess is appropriated to one Head or Bishop and a Classis to those Churches that are govern'd by the common Consent and Councell of the Ministers of the several Congregations And a Parochiall or Congregationall Church is a society of so many Christians as living in one Neighbour-hood or in some convenient nearness may ordinarily meet together for the worship of God and all other offices of a Church Here we must observe that if the Church be taken for one individual Congregation immediately under the same Governours then 1. The Oecumenical Church was never instituted by Christ he never gathered them into one Congregation as he did Israel nor ever appointed one Governour or Colledge of Governours over them For seeing the Church was to be called and gathered out of all Nations and that successively some at one time and in one place and some at another one Colledge of Governours much less one single person could not take charge of it to teach it or rule it nor could Christians so dispersed perform the duty of Fellow Members to each other 2. Nor did Christ ever constitute a National or Provincial Church Henever called a Nation or Province at one time to the Profession of his Gospel nor can one person or society of Governours teach such a body or administer the Sacraments to them or know their cases nor can the people know and help one another or come to their Governours upon every necessary occasion especially not in times of persecution which for the most part hath been the lot of
becomes unfit to live among them the two great parts of the Catholick Church that in Heaven and this on Earth have a Communion in that they are both United to Christ both worship and serve him in those particular ways that are proper for the state they are in and both wait for that compleat Salvation which they shall have at their general meeting besides this we know of no Communion betwixt them viz that either part can be serviceable to each other at present only we that live on earth enjoy the benefit of the Prayers and Examples which they left us who are now in Heaven and of their endeavours to continue the Gospel to us and so we succeed them in the same offices and endeavour to transmit the Knowledge of Christ his Gospel and Ordinances to those that shall succeed us nor can here be any Separation of one of these parts from another without breaking of Christian Religion which is impossible to them that are in Heaven and if any on earth thus separate it is to their own damnation The Catholick Militant Church on Earth hath a Communion in some more particulars for besides their common acknowledgement of Christ and his Gospel and the common love they are to bear to all Christians on earth as their Brethren they are to perform all offices of love which in this their imperfect militant state they are able and may need from one another such as to pray for all to rejoyce in each others welfare to sympathize in each others afflictions to assist by councell charitable relief hospitallity c. and when ever there is occasion to receive each other to their worship as brethren leaving to every one the liberty of their particular rites or opinions and this is so indispensable a duty that no Separation can be lawfull or tolerable in those who separate from the Catholick Church who relinquish the profession of Christ or cast of all love to their Brethren or that will not joyn with them in the worship of God or concern themselves in their common concerns Now for Organized Churches that are associated for the exercise of their Religion and their edification under Government o Pastours and Guides their Communion must be that the Members of every such Church joyn with each other ordinarily and peaceably in the same Acts of Worship and perform all offices of love to each other in some tolerable measure that they be subject to their Governours and that their Governours do conscionably endeavour the edification of the people committed to their charge according to the Laws of Christ which are the general rules of these societies and according to any other particular rules which they shall agree on amongst themselves for their own edification as Circumstances may require and so that both parts Governours and Governed do joyntly promote the edification of the whole Body in Holiness and Peace Separation therefore from these Organized Churches is a Breach of this Political Communion and Order among themselves which is done either by breaking off from the Body to which they belonged as Members which is Separation properly so called or by disturbing the Communion of it or withdrawing from some parts or acts of that Communion though they do not wholly break off from the body such Seperation is in many cases Lawfull in some necessary and a duty and therefore must not be Universally Condemned but the causes of it be inquired into For though all Christians must be Members of Christ and of the Catholick Church under him for the general ends of their Salvation it doth not appear yet that they must be Members of the same Organized Society or that they may not upon just occasions leave those societies they were joyned with and go to others already in being or constitute new ones for their own edification even as in civil government men may not only compose divers Polities or Common-Wealths but may also make new confederacies or divide their Polities into lesser and particular persons may depart from them to others or constitute new ones yea may deny their concurrence with many things done in the society they joyn with and all this without the Crime of Sedition or defection till the causes and ends of such practise prove it so Now to descend to the particular forms of Organized Churches by what hath been said we may easily judge of their Communion and Separation from them And First For the Oecumenicall Church the Political Communion thereof must be that all Christians in the World be subject to the same Governours under Christ and live as Members of the same individual society either as a single Congregation or as of many united into one Separation from this Communion must therefore be either to interrupt the peace and order of this Communion or wholly to forbear joyning with them but such a Catholick unity of the Church under one Government being impracticable and inconsistent with the edification of the Church since it is inlarged and dispersed throughout the world it is needless to dispute about Communion with it or Separation from it All other Churches that exceed the bounds of a single Congregation and must be constituted of many are of the same nature with the Oecumenicall Church though not of the same latitude as to the matter of Communion which must therefore consist in the performance of all offices mutually betwixt Governours and Governed as Members of the same society whether it consists of several Nations as Patriarchial Churches or of the people of one Nation as National Churches or of the people of one Province one Diocess or Classis as Provincial Diocesan or Classical Churches Separation here must be either a disturbing of the peace and order of these Churches or a withdrawing from them as to the political duties due to them such Separation must often be lawfull and warrantable seeing no command of Christs binds men to particular Provinces or Diocesses nor always to continue in the same Finally The Communion of a Parish or Congregation consists in this that Pastours and People mutually perform their respective duties to each other and amongst themselves for their dayly edification Separation from such Congregations is either to interrupt their Government or Concord or to withdraw from them now seeing no man is immutably bound to one Congregation nor any Congregation to one Diocess or any larger combination and all these Churches are subject to corruptions which the Members must oppose and contend against separation from them must not be censured till it be known whether the cause be just or unjust And thus we are come at the last to enquire What are just causes of Separation whereby we may judge also what are not And that we may not speak too generally and confusedly we distinguish betwixt Separation of one Church from another and of particular Members from that Church whereto they did belong As all Churches are bound to Communion among themselves being all Members of the
a better and publickly authorized Translation they judg'd it a matter of no small Offence 7. The Reading of the Apochryphal Scriptures as parts of the publick worship and that without any distinction from the Canonical They accounted it an intolerable thing that Fables and Fictions should be solemnly Read to the People with the same Reverence as the Word of God and such are many of the Apocryphal Books and the rest being only of Humane Authority the reading of them ought not to be made a Solemn part of Divine Worship The Conformists say that Reading the Scripture is Preaching and the Non-conformists say it is not fit meer Humane or Fabulous writings should be preached to God's People when they meet to Worship him by hearing his word Above all they were offended that a great deal of the Holy Scriptures is left out of the Liturgy and so never to be Read in the Congregation and Apocryphal Chapters put in their Room 8. Holy-days or Festivals in the honour of Saints They would not deny but if the Church thought fit they might observe the days of Our Saviours Nativity Passion Resurrection Ascension and sending the Holy Ghost as other Protestant Churches do provided they might be kept seriously and not made of the same necessity with the Sabbath but when all divine worship of the Creatures is Idolatrous and the keeping of days in Honour of them as well as Building Temples to them was ever reckoned a part of Divine Honour and to be sure is more Honour then ever God commanded or allowed to any of his Servants They knew not how to excuse this practice that it should be a part of a Churches Liturgy 9. Nor could they approve the Doctrines of the certain Regeneration of all in Baptism and that Infants dying after Baptism before the Commission of actual sin are undoubtedly saved which are laid down in the Liturgies as undoubted Articles of Faith whereas there is no Scripture that clearly proveth either of them and at best they are points disputed on by Learned men on both sides Nor could they excuse the practice of refusing Parents to promise for their own Children in Baptism seeing it is upon their Account only and Gods Covenant with them that the Children are admitted to be Baptized and they are thereby engaged to breed them up in Faith and Obedience much less that Strangers should receive the charge of the Baptized who have no authority over them who neither care what they promise nor are ever called to account how they perform their promise for if they should few would undertake the charge and so this custom would fall to the ground 10. They excepted against the Ordination of Deacons to read Divine Service Baptize and Bury and to preach with special License this they say was to create a new fort of office in the Church which Christ never appointed nor gave his Ministers Authority to appoint it Deacons were to look after the poor and that was all their work and though the Primitive Christians sometimes used them to read the Scriptures in the Congregation yet they never ordained them to this as an office yea though they should be admitted to read Prayers to Marry or Bury yet this is no sacred office appointed by Christ that should constitute a distinct order of Ministers and if as grave and prudent persons they might be admitted to do these offices either for want of Ministers or to assist them yet may they by no means be suffered to Baptize it being as peculiar to the Ministry as to administer the Lords Supper and the admission of Members into the Church as sacred and solemn a work as to confirm and Build up the Members of it These were the principal objections of the Non-conformists against the Liturgy which were some of them at least exemplified and confirmed by many particulars of lesser moment in themselves but all tending to make their desire of a Reformation of the Service Book to seem reasonable and the work necessary Rea. 2. The Second thing the Old Non-conformists disliked in the Church of England was the Government of it by Prelates i. e. Bishops with sole power of Jurisdiction Many of the Old Non-conformists thought Episcopacy utterly unlawfull and an usurpation not to be born but the rest who looking upon it as a humane constitution as our Law doth thought it Lawfull and that it might be submitted to did yet dislike our Episcopacy partly because of the secular grandure power and imployments our Bishops were invested with which made them unable and unwilling to discharge the office of a Pastour in the Church partly because the Church hath nothing to do in their election except an empty shew and therefore persons were most commonly prefer'd not for true Episcopal Qualifications but because they could make interest with Superiours but principally because the Bishops arrogated to themselves the whole power of governing the Church and excluded all the Ministers from any share therein a thing most unexcusable in them who acknowledge themselves to be of the same order with the Presbyters and only in a degree of honour above them and that by the Authority of the Civil Magistrate Whereas even those that with any probability or sobriety maintain the Divine Right of Episcopacy do nevertheless acknowledge that he may neither ordain nor govern without the advice and consent of his Presbyters This was look'd upon as intollerable that the power of governing the Church which was committed by Christ to all his Ministers should be wrested from them generally by a few of their Brethren And that they who are thought fit to dispense the Word and Sacraments the cheif keys of the Kingdom of Heaven whereby men are brought to the Faith admitted into the Church and bnilt up in it should not have power to censure offenders and to receive the Penitent again to Communion which are things of lesser moment and depending on the former and yet without which the former could not be managed in a fit manner for Edification By this means Ministers are deprived of one half of their Office and Power and are both discouraged and hindered in the other half For who will regard their Preaching who have not Liberty to judge what persons are fit to be admitted into the Church or who in it deserves censure or to be cast out of it And the Bishops themselves in undertaking the whole work of Governing the Church took that upon them which they never could nor did manage for the Churches Edification R. 3d. The Non-Conformists were much dissatisfied about the Discipline of the Church both in respect of the Rule of it and the Officers that manage it The Rule they say is not taken out of the Scripture which is the only Rule and Law of Christ's Church but it is the Roman Civil and Canon Law which at best were suited to their own times and People in many things very defective and in others erroneous and superstitious There
were indeed some appointed by K. Edward to collect a body of good and useful Rules out of the Canon Law to be the Rule of Discipline for this Church but he dying that work was never finished so that the Rule now is the whole Canon-Law or so much as every Bishop pleaseth to use in his own Diocess The Bishops made a few Canons of their own 1603. but they are such as only strengthen their own power in imposing and enforcing those things which the Non-Conformists had long desired might be amended As to the Officers that Administer the Discipline They are Chancellors and Commissaries and Civilians by Profession no Ecclesiastical Officers yet these Rule over the Ministers of Christ Admonish Suspend Deprive them of their places and Excommunicate both them and the People when they please This they have no power to do nor can the Bishop delegate his pewer of Governing to them any more then his power to Preach the Word and Administer the Sacraments both being parts of the Ministerial Office This they thought was to change the Constitution of Christs Church at pleasure They were also offended at the Administration or use of the Discipline That being such as the Officers were because the Church in its Constitution and frame kept so near the Roman model Therefore the Bishops have ever found it necessary to exercise Church Discipline mostly against those that disliked or dissented from the Liturgy and Government and to connive at the loose and prophane to hold them in some external obedience to them Hence it came to pass where one Minister hath been admonished suspended deprived for Heresie in Doctrine or Un-godliness of Life ten have been so dealt with for Non-Conformity and where one of the People have been censured for scandalous sins an hundred have been troubled and punished for going to hear a good Minister out of their own Parish when they had an ignorant drunkard at home for not having their Children Crossed in Baptism for scrupling to kneel at the Sacrament and such other great Crimes against the Liturgy What was this but to alienate the Church of Christ to the Governours and to make it to serve them more then him and only to use his Name and Authority to press their own Laws and maintain their own power R. 4. They were dissatisfied at the Ceremonies imposed in the Liturgy In the general they acknowledge that it was lawful for any Church to consent to and lay upon her self necessary Rites and Customs such as Circumstances of time and place and other emergencies might make necessary for the present time but that such Ceremonies should be such whose necessity was apparent to all and whose lawfulness might be scrupled justly by none of common understanding and that should be taken up by the general Consent of the People as well as commanded by Rulers as the Feast of Purim was by the Jews Esther 9.23.27 And those necessary things enjoyned Acts 15 23.25.28 And that when the necessity ceaseth those Customes should cease also But they thought it utterly unlawful to devise Rites or Ceremonies for which there was neither apparent necessity nor usefulness or to impose those upon the people which from the beginning were doubtful and offensive especially to make them parts of Divine Worship or additions to it as it were to render it more edifying beyond the natural and common Civil circumstances of Order Method or Decorum and such they thought it manifest our imposed Ceremonies were which are declared to be retained some because they served for decent order in the Church for which they were at first devised others for edification Pref. to the Common Prayer Book And again that the imposers were content with those Ceremonies which do 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 special signification whereby he might be edified Three Ceremonies were at first imposed The Cross in Baptism The Surplice in Reading the Service And Kneeling in Receiving the Lords Supper Against these they excepted severally 1. Against the Crosse that it was abused to great superstition and Idolatry in the Church of Rome and particularly when it was used in Baptism having Divine power ascribed to it of driving away the Devils giving grace c. Therefore being neither commanded of God nor used in this manner in the primitive Church viz. To admit Members into the Church by it it ought to be rejected Also that it did reflect very dishonourably on Baptism it self as if that were not full and plain enough to set forth the blood of Christ and Remission of sins by it or our engagement to Christ and therefore it was needful to adde a more plain and direct sign of his death and suffering for us and of what we must be willing to suffer for him above all that the Cross was made and here used as a Sacrament being declared to be a token of the Childrens owning the Faith of Christ Obedience to him and perseverance to the end Is not this the nature and end of Receiving Baptism it self Why is not that sufficient but the Cross is presently added without any note of distinction as it were to signifie the same things more plainly and fully and to lay a greater obligation on the Child then what was laid on it in Baptism and this is a Sacrament as much as man can make Indeed it wanteth the promise of Divine Grace but this also is presumed upon forasmuch as this seems cheifly to be intended in those words of some of the Ceremonies being apt to stir up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his duty by some notable and special signification whereby hemight be edified 2. Against the Surplice they object that was a Ceremony on purpose devised to add decency and splendour to the Worship of God and therefore it must be used in that Worship only and such Ceremonies are unlawful additions to Gods Worship And those circumstances or accidents of the Service in their absolute nature yet relatively in as much as they better the Worship and increase Edification they are made moral parts of Worship even as it was a part of Worship for the Preists of old to put on their Sacred vestments to sacrifice in though the vestments themselves absolutely and naturally considered were but circumstances of the Worship Also that the Surplice seemed to be taken from the Ceremonial-Law and to be at least an imitation of those Preists Garments As many other Ceremonies used in the ancient Church were either taken from the Jews or devised to imitate and be like them Now our Saviour having abolished the old Ceremonies gave no leave to his Church to devise new ones neither did he abolish them as Types and Shadows of himself only but also as Yokes and Burthens as carnal Ordinances and servile Customs wherein his People were kept in great Bondage
that our nearness to Rome would endanger our returning to her again and seeing Conformity it self to Law and Canons would signify little unless a man would go beyond both in obedience to his Superiours to promote the new design This was the case of the old Non-Conformists till the long Parliament stopped the stream upon the whole we may observe the case betwixt our former Non-Conformists and the Church of England was the same in substance as betwixt the Brethren of Bohemiah and the Calixtines the Calvinists and Lutherans in Germany the Bohemian Calextines if the Pope would grant them the Cup in the Sacrament and three or four more reformations of abuses in the Roman Church they thought it reformation enough and that they need go no farther and they would compell the brethren who were for a total desertion of Rome to be of the same mind and practise with them and that by force of Arms. The Lutherans in Germany having only reformed the Doctrine of the Church and the Idolatry of the Mass and cast off the Popes Tyranny and some other corruptions of Rome yet retained Adoration of the Sacrament kneeling to it Surplices Images Holy days and could not be content to do this themselves unless they could perswade and inforce all Protestants to do so likewise Hence they will not own the Calvinists as brethren nor hold any Communion with them nor receed from any thing they had taken up but rather proceed to take in more of the Popish Doctrines as those we call Arminianism and have often treated seriously some of them about reconciliation with the Papists but always frustrated yea detested any endeavours of it with the Calvinists Thus the Conformists of England have contended so much for their Liturgy and Service and Government c. That they would compell all to be content with the same moddle with themselves and would not suffer any to be Ministers or Members of the Church that would desire any further reformation and at last come to this pitch that they would rather take in more of Rome yea reconcile with her upon some terms than abate any thing to their brethren Nor were these the actions of a few particular men but of all the Heads of the Church Arch-Bishops and Bishops generally age after age The worst of their principle and practises were never condemned by the Church but made the way to the highest preferments so that the moderation of a few amongst them will no more excuse the Church of England then a few sober Papists may excuse the Church of Rome CHAP. IV. The Non-conformists instified in their Principles by Scripture Antiquity and the Example of all Reformed Churches THe Non-conformists as they gave the forenamed reasons why they could not approve of or subscribe to the Constitutions of the Church of England so they supposed that this their dissent was not grounded upon meer scruples and weakness of judgement though their Opposites love to impute it to such Causes but they alleadged for themselves the Authority of Scripture and the Examples both of the Primitive and the late Reformed Churches 1. From the Scriptures they pleaded that there was neither command example nor shadow of any Liturgy i. e. prescript form of words wherein all the publick worship of God should be administred either in the Old or New Testament under the Law the externals and circumstances of Gods worship were much more prescribed and limitted than under the Gospel as the place the Tabernacle or Temple time Morning and Evening yet was it never commanded that all the Priests and People should use the same form of words in prayer when and where ever they met There is indeed a form of blessing the people when the Assembly was to be dismissed but that consisted in but a few words nor can it be proved that they used always those very words or that it was so intended in the command Num. 6.22 to the end the same words are often used in Scripture to signifie the same sence or to that purpose not the same Syllables and so it is in all Authors nor is there any form of words prescribed wherein men should confess their sins over the Sacrifices or wherein Circumcision or the Passover should be administred but on the contrary we find David Solomon Jehosaphat Hazekiah Ezra the Levites in Nehemiah's time and others prayed pro re nata according to the occasion as their own hearts directed them And therefore it seems as God did not command so neither did the Jewish Church make and enjoyn any stated Liturgie unless any shall unhappily take the Superstious and ridiculous Liturgy of the present Jews to have been used amongst them from the beginning Certainly there is no footsteps of any such thing in our Saviours time who duly kept to the rules of Gods worship and broke no good orders of the Church The Apostles also as long as they could frequented the Jewish Temple and Synagogues but of any Platforms of Prayer or Service other then the institutions of the Law we find no memorial Now if the Jewish Priesthood were able to discharge their Office without prescript forms of words and that people might be safely committed to their Priests in the exercise of each mans own gifts how much better may it be done and such liberty granted both to Ministers and People under the Gospel where the Spirit of God and the means of knowledge are given much more abundantly Nor are there more evidences of any Liturgy in the New Testament then their was in the old either prescribed by Christ or his Apostles or used by them or commanded to future Churches Nor any rule laid down whereupon Churches might ground their practise of framing and imposing such Lyturgies But we read that when our Lord Jesus ascended into Heaven he gave gifts to men Eph. 4.16 c. viz. Apostles Prophets and Evangelists to lay the foundation of his Church and Pastors and Teachers for the perfecting the Saints for the work of the Ministry till we all come in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man unto the measure of the stature in Jesus Christ ver 12 13. from whence it seemeth plain that our Lord Jesus Christ thought it sufficient to appoint a standing Ministry to take care of his Church to the end of the world and to furnish them with the gifts of his Spirit to edifie the people and to keep the unity of the faith with out requiring or authorizing them to make Lyturgies whereby to fetter themselves or others Moreover the Scriptures give neither command example nor countenance to the peoples answering in Publick worship more then Amen only at the close of Publick Prayer It is probable that the Singers in the Temple standing Ward against Ward did sing alternately i. e. one rank one sentence and another rank another as they do in our Cathedrals but this was not the people and they were an Order
of peace which the Dr. now magnifies after their Death but was in their life time as little accounted of as ours at this day they being alwaies charged with breaking the peace of the Church I say all their desire of peace did not oblige them to comply with those things which they thought unlawful either in themselves or at least in their time and Circumstances 3. I infer That when they were rejected for Non-Conformity they still reckoned themselves the rightful Pastors of their Congregations and that their Right or Relation was not taken away only that they were forcibly kept from the enjoyment of their right and the discharge of the Duties of their Relation And thus much appears from Mr. Bradshaw's Letter cited by the Dr. giving the Reason why they must leave their People and not Preach to them when deprived because this were to run upon the Sword of the Civil Magistrate who would not suffer himself to be so despised as that they whom he commanded to be silent should yet publickly preach in contradiction to his Command there is nothing of fear of Schism in the case but a prudent yielding to the times and of two evils chosing the less i. e. to do what good they could privately to their People and Neighbours as their own words cited do shew rather then by Preaching publickly to hazzard the bringing an open Persecution upon themselves and their people p. 1. Sec. Sect. 16 17. All that the Dr. hath quoted let it be considered it proves no more then this that they did not think it prudence in their Time and Circumstances to Preach publickly when silenced for fear of provoking the Magistrate against them and giving occasion to those that used to slander them especially to King James as Enemies to the Kings Supremacy They also modestly added that the word might be Preached as well yea perhaps better by others then by them though their Parishes seldom found it so All this was but a prudential Reason proves no difference betwixt their Principles and Ours Let us next consider their practice The Dr. tells us Ibid. That the Old Non-Conformists thought it unlawful for private Persons to endeavour Reformation of the Church contrary to the will of the civil Magistrate this he thinks condemns the practice of the present Non-Conformists But Bishop Bancroft giveth another account of this matter viz. That it was resolved amongst the Non-Conformists after many years waiting Dang posit book 3. chap. 3. and chap. 8. and when they saw their admonitions to the Parliament 1570 had no effect that then they should endeavour to reform each one in their own places yet so as by all means to preserve the peace of the Kingdom which accordingly they did pursue in their several Synods Classical Provincial and National from the year 1572 and forward having at length composed a Book of Discipline Ann. 1583 which was revised by several Synods and at length perfected and according to it they did order themselves and frame their Congregations till all was discovered and stopt by Arch Bishop Whitgift let us hear their own words Protest pos 30. We hold it utterly unlawful for any Christian Churches whatsoever by any armed force or power against the will of the civil Magistracy and State under which they live to erect and set up in publick the true Worship and Service of God or to beat down or suppress any Superstition or Idolatry that shall be countenanced or maintained by the same only every man is to look to himself that he communicate not with the evils of the times enduring what it shall please the State to inflict and seeking by all honest and peaceable means all Reformation of publick abuses only at the hands of civil publick persons Vid. 3B ch 1. chap. 10. and all practises contrary to these we condemn as Seditious and sinful Bishop Bancroft makes it the design of his whole 3d. Book to shew that the English Non-conformist did after the example of the Scots endeavour Reformation contrary to or without the will of the civil Magistrate By this it is manifest that the attempts for Reformation which they condemned were 1. Such as were by force and Armes Do we defend any such The Gospel was planted and must be propagated by Preaching the VVord and bearing the Cross 2. Attempts for publick reformation either throughout the Nation or in other Churches besides their own or to bring their practise and way of worship into the publick view contrary to the will of the Magistrate especially if he were a Christian And this is all that the example of the Primitive Churches under Heathen Emperours doth prove for they did keep their Assemblies and Worships in private and maintain them to the death against the Laws and will of those Princes but they did not ordinarily bring them into publick to affront the Magistrates to their faces yet when they lived under mild Princes and had a kind of tacite connivance they met publickly as appears by the question brought to Alexander Severus by the Cooks in Rome who laid claim to a publick Hall which the Christians used for their Worship and the Mild Emperour assigned it to the Christians saying it was better that any God should be worshipped there then that it should be a place devoted to Excess and Riot Euseb eccl hist Lib. 1. Cap. 1.2 and by degrees the Christians had many Beautifull Churches which Dioclesian caused to be demolished and the Christians much bewailed it yea Mr. Mead contends that even from Nero's time the Christians had Churches or publick places appointed for their Worship And Mr. Nich. Fuller maintains the same opinion in his Miscellanies grounding it on the fore-quoted place of Eusebius Tract an 1 Cor. Ch. 11. ver 22. They who maintained every Congregation to be a distinct Church having full power within themselves and their Ministers to be compleat Pastours must needs allow that every Congregation must have an intrinsick power of reforming and regulating themselves though it should be managed with all reverence and respect to the Magistrate and publick order But the Non-Conformists judgment in this will better appear by their practise under the restraints that were laid upon them by Laws and Canons in the beginning of Q. Eliz. about 5 years Conformity was not pressed the Liturgy seemed to be put as a bound to extravagant humors as many Civil Laws be but not as a Snare to the Conscientious But when it was perceived that the Non-Conformists encreased in number and power with the people subscription to the 39 Artic. without any limitation was urged 1562 and many who had been Sufferers and Exiles in Q. Maries Days refused to subscribe amongst whom was the pious Mr. Fox as saith Dr. Fuller and from this time Mr. Ball dates the Miseries of our Church Ball agst Can. saying whilst they walked in peace God blessed them with peace there was no division Papists came to our
help their People and in the mean while Popery Arminianism Atheism and prophaness break in like a torrent now whether there is as much reason that the present Non-Conformists should keep as private as the former did the Reader must judge Obj. But the Dr. saith the old Non-Conformists earnestly opposed the Brownists Answ And so do many of the present Non-Conformists also the Brownists had two dangerous Positions or Principles peculiar to themselves 1. That there was no true Church in England nor indeed in the whole world but that all Churches in respect of their Doctrine Worship Ceremonies Constitution and Order or some of these were Idolatrous and Antichristian and that therefore no man that minded his Salvation ought to continue a member of them or to hold Communion with them as Churches though they might Communicate with particular Members or with the Society as a Company of private men Praying or otherwise Worshipping God together provided nothing was then used or done which they disliked 2. The Brownists taught that the people had the whole power of Government of the Church and that the Ministers were but the Peoples Deputies in Preaching the Word Administring the Sacraments or exercising of Discipline and must be accountable to them These Principles destructive of all Churches the Non-Conformists earnestly opposed especially the first sc separation from all the Reformed Churches as Antichristian For by preventing of this they would prevent the other mischiefs but in maintaining the Churches of England to be true Churches did they the Prelaticall Nationall Church in respect of the Established constitution which themselves had so often called Antichristian It is manifest by their Books and what is forequoted of their opinions that they meant it of the several Parishes or Congregations in England that they were true Churches both in respect of their Constitution and also in respect of their Doctrine and Worship and that there was in them no such intolerable corruptions as that all Christians should fly from them nevertheless when the Ministers in particular Parishes were more then ordinary defective and unprofitable they allowed and encouraged the people to resort to Neighbour Parishes for better means of edification which Mr. Hildersham defends to be Lawful Lect. upon John Page 227. All this is the sence of the present Non-Conformists and I do verily believe there are no more Brownists among the present Non-Conformists Ministers then there were amongst them in those days for some there were then that went further then the rest in Principles of Separation and so it is in all times and all matters of controversie and what considerable difference is there betwixt their allowing people to go to other Parishes or Gentlemens Chappels and our allowing them to go to private Meetings seeing one takes them off from their own Pastor and Church as much as the other The Dr. saith they still kept the same Liturgy and so they held Communion with the National Church nay but many times they did not that for some the Old Puritan Preachers used it not in their Parishes or Chappels others but little of it others would Baptize without the Cross give the Sacrament without kneeling Marry without the Ring c. which made people resort to them who could not have such Liberty at home and so they varified from if not omitted the Liturgy of the Church but can a man be a Member of the National Church of England and hold Communion with it without being a Member of a particular Parish and if they be allowed to continue members of their own Parishes and not to make a Schism who did in cases of necessity and pro tempore mostly Communicate with Neighbour Parishes why may not the same be said now yea it is said and beleived by most of the Non-Conformists that the Parishes are true Churches of Christ and they do not separate from them or break off Membership though pro tempere and for the present necessity they do ordinarily Communicate in private Meetings where the same Doctrine and Worship is used only some circumstances and ceremonies omitted but no contrary or new ones used in their room or in opposition to those in the Parishes and thus much for the Old Non-Conformists from whom I do not conceive those that are now living do considerably differ in judgment or practise but only as time and circumstances do direct them only they that are dead are out of the way and so best spoken of and they that are living crossing the humours or interests of their opposites are always ill spoken of Obj. 2. The Dr. next objects that we contradict the Principles of the Assembly of Divines who did disapprove and gave reasons against the toleration desired by the Congregational Brethren as tending to endless Separation Answ The Toleration desired was that all men should have liberty to joyn with what Congregation and Pastor they pleased without respect to Parish or place of abode or any other civil distribution or settlement of men amongst us Their chief reasons was that Christians being not originally bound to Nations places or any other Civil Distribution but left free to joyn with those Congregations that they should find most convenient and edifying and now Episcopal Government in England being dissolved and no other set up in its room the People were again free and therefore might make what Congregations or Societies they found most for their own edification see Dr. Owen of Schism This the Assembly thought not reasonable that things should be unravelled into their first Principles and that we should begin to lay the Foundation of Churches again seeing our Parishes at least those that have good Ministers have all things necessary to a Church and it is most convenient for Christians Living in a Vicinity and under the same Civil Officers to make the same Congregation for Worship nor did they think the former Relation of Parishes to be dissolved by the dissolution of the Hierarchy who were no essential parts of the Parishes but general Supervisors or Visitors over them of the same mind are the most part of the Non-Conformists still and all the Congregational men went not that way some allowing all those Parishes that had good Ministers and some Christians fit for all acts of Church Communion to be true Churches Mr. Cotten adds way of the Churches of New-England that it is great presumption to say that the Church of England was faulty in its first Constitution and therefore to be pull'd to pieces and new-built seeing all Histories agree that some of the Apostles or Apostolical men were the first Planters of the Gospel in England who did certainly constitute the Churches in a right manner But where is the Consequence to our purpose that because the Assembly and we as well as they maintain that the Parishes of England are true Churches and not to be subverted therefore when Thousands of their Ministers are violently thrust out from them without any cause given and if they had
meet within the City the people assisted in carrying the Materials and setting up the Church in the Suburbs yea saith Socrates the people would have been admitted into their Communion if the Novatians had been willing and we may observe in History the Novatians never ceased till the clamours against them as dangerous and intollerable persons were at end and little or no notice were taken of them Indeed could it be proved that any particular Church under the Gospel whether National Diocesan or Parochial was of the same constitution with the Church of the Jews that all Christians were bound to be Members of it or all that live within their Precinct or at least all that once have been Members are indispensably bound to continue so then it were a damning sin to separate from them But when it is Originally as free for every Christian to choose his Church as to choose the place of his abode and nothing but the convenience of his own edification in the first place and next the edification of the Neighbourhood obligeth him to joyn with and to continue in this or that particular Church it can be no sin of so high a nature though it be blame-worthy for him to withdraw without just reason 3. Say that all Separation is as great a sin as our Author would insinuate what means doth he prescribe to prevent it why he saith all men are bound to do and submit to all things that are lawfull to preserve the peace and to prevent the dividing of the Church True all things that are really Lawfull but not to all that the imposers say are lawfull if men must judge for themselves what is Lawfull absolutely and what not and what is Lawfull or not in their circumstances will not this open a door for Separation as much as any thing his opposites have said he blames them for allowing people to separate upon pretence of their Ministers insufficiency or scandal or interruption on them againist their wills for doubtfull ceremonies for modes of Worship for want of Discipline or right Constitution of the Church and saith which is his most plausible arguments that some of these the Papists might have retorted upon our first Reformers and all such pretences would justifie the Ancient Schismes and make way to endless Separation for the future But he wrongs these Authors which is a common shift almost to all that write on this subject when he intimates that they allow Separation upon any pretence of such causes Is there no difference betwixt pretending and really proving the gross insufficiency errours or scandals of a Minister or gross usurpations over mens Consciences and Liberty do any prudent men allow Separation without good cause full proof all endeavours of amendment patient waiting and mature advice and consideration of all circumstances what then is there no preventing endless Separation but Tyranny over mens Consciences that they shall be compell'd to approve and do whatsoever their Rulers please as the Papists teach yes the Dr's final determination is Page 208. A prudent and due submission in Lawfull things is a medium betwixt Tyranny over Mens Consciences and endless Separation what is here more then any Brownist will grant that understands himself viz. that as Rulers must not Tyrannize over Mens Consciences so the people must not be given to endless Separation and that the way to prevent both is that the Rulers rule with due and prudent Discipline and that the people yield prudent and due submission and that this Government and submission be exercised only in Lawfull things But still must not the people in submitting as well as the Governours in Ruling judge whether things be Lawfull or not whether submission be due and how farr and in what cases it is prudent to yield or to deny it if the people must not judge then you establish a Tyranny over their Consciences that they must approve what ever their Rulers command or Hobbisme that they must do what ever their Rulers command though they beleive it to be sinfull or inconvenient if the people must judge for themselves in the things that concern them then they must judge of the insufficiency of their Minister the Legallity of his call and the like but how then hath the Dr. put a stop to Separation more then they may not men pretend things required to be unlawfull submission not to be due nor prudent and so without end Their Arguments therefore are but Sophismes like those that plead against all certainty of sense or reason because many men are certain i. e. confident when they are mistaken that a man cannot be sure he seeth heareth or feeleth because he hath many times thought he did so in his dream when it was no such thing as there is a certain way of proving that men are awake and use their sences so there is as certain a way to prove by plain Scripture when Ministers are insufficient when impositions are unlawfull when it is necessary to withstand usurpation on the Churches Priviledges c. what ever Sophisters will cavil against it and if men will pretend cause of Separation when there is none or manifestly insufficient or but dubious they may be convicted and if they separate bear their blame but whilst men are subject to mistake to passion and partiallity which will be till our Lord come what shall put a stop to Separation but necessary moderation in Rulers in imposing one reverence in the people in submitting and meekness towards those who notwithstanding all care weakly or peevishly may dissent in things that are tolerable This Learned man hath not shewed us nor the experience of Fifteen Hundred Years the Popish Cruelty could not prevent Separations Episcopal Authority could not prevent them The Donatists and Novatians had their Bishops imposing Uniformity in Ceremonies could not the First Division in the Christian Church rose about the keeping of Easter-day if people offend against the plain Rule of Scripture or the plain Rule of good Government and Order let them be punished according to their Offences but not for things doubtfull in Scripture or burthensome in Government if men offend in lesser matters and cannot be convinced let them be born with till inconvenience be seen to arise from such Clemency and then it is time enough to retract or retrench it if this were not dayly done in Nations and Families no Civil Society could stand how then shall the contrary severity establish the Church Obj The Dr. objects the Reformers taught that where there is soundness in Doctrine and Worship people ought not to separate from a Church for lesser defects real or apparent and that they insisted on the corruption of Doctrine and Worship as the only cause of their Separation from Rome Answ 1. Doctrine and Worship are indeed the chief things in a Church for if God be truly worshipped and his knowledge be truly taught mens lives will be bettered and their Souls saved by it but then it must not
lye dead in the Confession of Faith and in the Lyturgy while men preach false Doctrine and bring Superstitions into the publick worship or else neither Preach nor Worship God in the Congregation at all or so seldom that the people can be little profited by them the Reformers never thought of this mystery 2. It is not true that they separated from Rome only for the Corruptions of Doctrine and Worship it was for such Corruptions hat they counted her Antichristian a Rotten and Apostate Church with whom they might have no Church Communion but her usurpation and Tyranny over all other Churches was used also as an argument for our withdrawing from her for if the Church of Rome have no Authority over all or any other Churches and if the exercise of such power be an insufferable oppression and prejudice to the Churches then they might justly upon this account cast off her Yoak though for this alone they should not reject Communion with her as a Neighbour Church Dr. Hammond Dr. Bramhal and others of late insist upon this as the chief defence of our departure from Rome viz. because the Church of England was for the first 600 years independent on her never Subject to her but Dr. Reynolds conference with Hart and all other of the Reformers who wrote against the Popes Supremacy made this one Argument to justifie their secession and so it will be in lesser cases even a just ground of departure from constant Communion though not a ground of refusing Brotherly and occasional Communion unless there be corruptions in Doctrines and Worship allowed also 3. The first Reformers generally except Calvin were too negligent both of Worship and Discipline being wholly intent upon reforming the Doctrine of the Church gross Idolatry indeed in Worshiping the Mass Saints and Angels they did quickly espy but Images in Churches with other Superstitions Rites and Ceremonies they took little notice of to cause them to be reformed and hence the Lutherans to this day retain them as if they were approved of by Luther and his Companions perhaps they waited that the Princes should reform these things or it may be they thought if they could have liberty to Preach sound Doctrine that would of it self purge out these disorders in worship and ceremonies they also might think the people and especially the Princes would yet scarce bear strict Discipline but in time might be brought to it but they found they were mistaken and some of them saw their errour while they lived Bucer Oelochampadius and others complained as Comconius hath cited them in his Exhortation that they had not set up Discipline at first for now the people had got Knowledge and Notions and were used to Liberty they would not bear the Yoak of Discipline Bucer with Tears said to some Bohemians when he had read their Confession and former Discipline vos soli habetis regnum Christi interris none but you have the Kingdom of Christ on Earth In like manner do the best Helvetians and Germans complain in every Age of want of Discipline and Power in their Churches Obj. But we must not seperate for Ceremonies and for this the Synod of Sendomer in Poland is quoted Answ That same Synod also declares that Ceremonies ought not to be imposed and when they had recommended kneeling at the Sacrament to their People to distinguish them from the Socinians that lived amongst them they add that they would not enjoyn it for if they should then they might be necessitated to use the Ecclesiastical Censures against those who would not submit which ought not to be used for Rites and Ceremonies Vid. Consens Eccl. Polon in Corp. Confes Ceremonies many times pollute the Worship of Christ and he forbad Israel all the Rites and Customes of the Heathen as well as their Idols and their Worship but if the Ceremonies themselves be really inoffensive yet the usurpation of them that impose them without Authority may be a greater offence then the Ceremonies imposed and justly to be resisted and if they will maintain their Impositions to a division this breach must be upon them Obj. Amyraldus is quoted who saith Ceremonies are not a ground of Separation from a Church unless they be such as import false Doctrine or false Worship or are likely to introduce it Answ And are not these things objected against the Ceremonies of the Church of England even by the Old Non-Conformists viz. That the Surplice is a sign or badge of a Mass Priest that the Cross was a Popish Idol and the use of it Idolothisme i. e. like the meats offered to Idols very offensive and scandalous to the weak that kneeling at the Sacrament was a badge of Adoration of it and was never imposed nor generally practised in the Church till Transubstantiation was established and for the danger of bringing back Popery by these Ceremonies the Experience of this and the last Age since Bishop Laud new modled the Church is abundant proof I will only instance in kneeling at the Supper which turned the Table to an Altar set it at the East end of the Church railed it in made it Sacred and to be bowed to and that for this Reason as the Aoch Bishop delivered it in his Speech in the Star-Chamber because there it is hoc est Corpus meum this is my body whereas in the Pulpit it is but hoc est verbum meum this is my word And then Dr. Heylin writes a Book to prove that there was some kind of Sacrifice of Christ in the Eucharist which was answered by Dr. Hackwell and now how far were these Men from the Mass Obj. But this will hinder all Vnion with Protestants if we should break for Ceremonies and Modes of Worship Answ He means the Lutherans for whom our Arminian Church men have some kindness but little for other Protestants yet this will not follow for a Christian may submit to those Rights and Ceremonies in another Church where he occasionally is and communicates with them but as Brethren which he may not do in his own Church where he is a constant member and so is guilty of the Corruptions which according to his place he doth not oppose even as every prudent man complies with the Orders and Customes of places and Families he goes in abroad though he will not suffer the same to be practised in his own house but alas what hope of Union with Protestant Churches when we teach that where there are no Diocesan Bishops there are no Churches no Ministry no Sacraments some of his Majesties Chaplains when they were with him in Paris did hold no Communion with the French Churches as they complained in publick Letters to say nothing of many at home that kept their own houses 12 years or more during the late troubles going to no Church for want of Bishops and the Common-Prayer finally our Act of Uniformity decrees That no man shall Preach or Administer the Lords Supper much less have any Ecclesiastical
whole Religion and will do so long as they are continued The Nation will not forget the alteration of Doctrine and of the Lyturgie innovations in Worship and additions of Ceremonies that were brought in by Bishop Laud under the pretence of Uniformity decency and opposing the Puritanes till matters were brought to that pass that the Papists wanted nothing to encourage their hopes of swallowing us up but the prospect of a Popish Successor to the Crown and his own Chaplains and dependents were not ashamed to profess that there was a design of Reconciliation with Rome and whether the present growth of Popery and Confidence that the Papists are arrived to had not its Rise from the Act of Uniformity its turning out so many Ministers and making so great a breach amongst our selves and whether it be not still fomented chiefly by our division and under pretence of zeal against Dissenters let unprejudiced men judge 5. A great part of the Nation both Ministers and People have ingaged themselves and their posterity to the long desired Reformation and that not without authority though not with full authority 6. So great a number of Ministers and Students were cast out by the Act of Uniformity that cannot but for one age at least greatly endanger the Church which must needs be supplied with young ignorant and unlearned persons or be unprovided the Universities being not able in many years to furnish out such a number of tolerable Ministers as were ejected and the visible effects do confirm this 7. The Terms of Uniformity are most rigorous and intolerable for not only all was enjoyned that had been complained of 100 years and upwards but also others added so manifestly contrived to insnare and offend those that were concerned that nothing could be more 8. There was no hope left either of alteration of this Uniformity or of relaxation in the execution of it it being established by Law and the Bishops made the Overseers of the execution It was also corroborated by two other subsequent acts which hindred Ministers from being of any use yea from living amongst or near their people And to this against the Ministers was added that none of the same snares were put upon the people all that bore office civil or military that so there might be no relief for the present and no hope of redress for the future Now should all this be quietly submitted to there would be no end of imposition on the Church seeing Rulers might when ever they pleased throw out both their Magistrates and Ministers and they must all quietly suffer whatever they will impose on them We may add there had been as patient forbearance and as peaceable means for redress during a 100 years as ever was in any Church insomuch as we are now upbraided with it but nothing was obtained at last but adding to their Burthens and that not without scorn and indignity and that the blame may not be cast on our Princes on whom our adversaries injuriously as well as ungratefully for the most part cast it 't is not to be forgot what attempts and endeavours his Majesty made at his entrance on his Kingdoms to moderate and accommodate things in the Church both by his declarations and granting a Commission to a fit number on both sides to review the Liturgy and to endeavour a composure but the Commissioners for the Church would never vouchsafe a personal conference and debate with the Non-Conformists about the things they desired to be amended and the Answers they returned in writing were scarce with common Civility but once in all their replies giving them the Title of Brethren and at last yielding to amend nothing considerable Upon these accounts the Non-Conformists judge it their duty to help the distressed and oppressed people what they can whilst they live praying and waiting that peace and order may at length be restored to these Churches and verily believing that if these impositions be continued they will unhinge and divide the people that scarce any time or means will reduce them to due order and then even we may be counted honest men when we are dead and moderate in respect of those that come after FINIS