Informer in constant danger of Fines c. and of more miseries than I can with delight reherse However though there are considerations enough from the world to byas our minds in a seeking for the Truth to lean towards Conformity yet desiring to approve our selves sincere towards God we find That we cannot without sin conform we cannot without sinning deliberately and knowingly comply with the Episcopal Impositions and if we should notwithstanding conform to live and die Conformists we should knowingly and deliberately sin yea and die under the guilt thereof which is a thing so hazardous to the soul that we durst not touch with Conformity lest we die lest we die eternally We censure not such as do conform because they not lying under the same convictions of Conscience as we do may not by their Conformity run that hazard which we unavoidably must should we against the light of our Consciences comply There is a great difference between those that act according to the directions of their Consciences and such as act contrary thereunto For which reason I wonder that our great Church-men should say that Mr. Baxter represented all Conformists as a company of Perjured Villains meerly because he shew'd that if the Nonconformists should contrary to the Dictates of their Conscience conform they should be guilty of Perjury and several other great sins But though this be the truth yet there are some who will not believe it who say we do we what we can for their satisfaction will count us a pack of Hypocrites For which reason that I might anticipate the censure I laid down the Principle unto which Dissenters do most firmly adhere the discussing which is what they do most sincerely desire The Principle is this That the word of God contained in Scripture is the only Rule of the Whole and of every part of true Religion As for external circumstances as time and place c. being no part of though necessary appendages unto our Religion From this Principle I proceed to this Conclusion That whatever part of the Service of the Church of England is impos'd on us as so necessary a part of our Religion as to be a term of Communion if not agreeable to the word of God in Scripture that Imposition is sinful Our Adversary considers that such as live in England and yet are not of the Church of England do not belong unto the Catholick Church that is they are all in a state of damnation Hence 't is we must according unto him be a member of the Church of England or be damned We are willing with all our hearts to be members of the same Church with them i. e. to be members of the Catholick Church is what we desire But this say they we cannot be but by complying with their imposed terms To which we reply Let their terms be as Catholick as they pretend their Church is and we 'l comply i. e. Let them keep to a few certain and necessary things let them not impose as terms of Union any thing but what is according to the Word of God in Scripture we are satisfied the Controversie is at an end But if they will take on 'em to make that a part of true Religion yea so necessary a part as to make it a term of our communion with the Catholick Church 't is a sinful encroachment on the Prerogative of the Lord Jesus Christ with which we dare not complâ— If they expeâ—t our compliance why do they not shew the Scriptures that declare the things they impose to be so necessary a part of true Religion as to be a form of our communion with the Catholick Church They must not only shew that those things are aâ—reeable to true Religion but moreover that they are so necessary a part thereof that whoever conforms not to them when impos'd is â—pso â—â—sact cut off from the Catholick Church This they can never do and therefore can never clear themselves from being the Faulty dividers When we provoke 'em to shew us what Scriptures direct them to their Impositions we are turn'd off with Where is it forbidden as if they had acted exactly to the Rule * Si objiciant in sacris literis non haberi Invocandos esse Sanctos venerandas Imagines abstinendum à Carnibus in t aliquid ejâ—sâ—nodi non ergo ista esse facienda nos contra objiciamus quidem Efficacius Hâ—c Sacris Literis non Prohiberi atque sine piccato fieri posse quia â—â—hi non est Lex ibi nec prâ—evaricatio Cosâ— Irstit Chriâ—t l. 2. c. 1. Costerus the Jesuit gave his young Scholars If any object Where are those points viz. The Invocation of Saints The worshipping of Images The abstaining from flesh and the like found in Scripture and because not found in Scripture therefore to be rejected To which saith the Jesuit answer thus Ask where 't is forbidden in Scripture if not forbidden in Scripture 't is no sin to observe 'em for where there is no Law there is no transgression So far Costerus To whom we rejoyn That the holy Scriptures being the only Rule of the Whole and of Every part of true Religion if these things be not according to the Scripture 't is because there is no truth in ' em There must be an exact correspondency and agreeableness between the Rule and its Regulate The Regulate must be brought to the Rule and if it doth not agree with it 't is because the Regulate is not Right The word of God in Scripture is the Rule what Religion soever varies from the Rule 't is a false Religion Rectum est Index sui obliqui There are some Religions are larger than the Rule There are other Religions that fall short of the Rule They who embrace any Notion as a part of their Religion which is not to be found in Scripture is too large for the Scripture and such as reject what the Scripture injoins have a Religion too short The one puts the Scripture on the Rack to stretch it to their Religion but the other pares off a considerable part of Scripture that the Rule may not exceed their Religion But such as keep exactly to the word of God in Scripture who neither go beyond nor fall short of it are in the right To make that a part of our Religion which is not to be found in Scripture is to take that for a part of our Religion which God hath not made a part thereof which is sinful How much more so is the making it a term of communion That the things in controversie between the Church and the Dissenter are not to be found in Scripture and consequently are no part of true Religion is evident not only because we can't understand where 't is to be found nor because the Church-men cannot direct us where to find it but because they themselves look on 'em as indifferent i. e. as what is not injoin'd us in the word of God
belonging unto it from the Jurisdiction of the Archbishop and his Successors King Ina's Charter to the Abbey of Glassenbury exemps them from the Bishops Jurisdiction The like did King Offa concerning the Monastry of St. Albans An. 793. Kenulph King of Mercia that at Abington Anno 821. and Knut that at St. Edmvndbury An. 1020. Yea and there are several places at this very time exempt from Episcopal Jurisdiction Whatever our Princes in after Ages might lose as to the Exercise of their just Power 't is certain that Henry 8th reassumed it as appears by his dismembring some Diocesses and by his removing some Churches from one Jurisdiction to another For this Consult Dr. Burnets History of Reformation part 1. lib. 3. page 301. where you 'l find the Complaint of the Roman party beyond the Sea concerning the Kings encroaching on the Jurisdiction of the Church c. to which 't was answered That the Division of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction whether of Patriarchs Primates Metropolitanes or Bishops was according to the Roman Law Regulated by the Emperours Of which the Antient Councils always approv'd And in England when the Bishoprick of Lincoln being judg'd of too great an extent the Bishoprick of Ely was taken out of it it was done only by the King with the consent of his Clergy and Nobles 'T is also evident out of Dr. Burnets Hist of the Ref. part 1. l. 3 p. 267. That this great Prince gave cut such a Commission to Bonner and it may be to others also as makes it most manifest that Diocesan Bishops were not of God's but only of the Magistrate's Institution Hence Bonner in his Commission from the King most gratefully acknowledges that he received it only from the King's bounty and must deliver it up again when it should please his Majesty to call for it even as Justices of the Peace c. whose Commission is ad Pacitum Moreover Lay-men had Ecclesiastical Dignities The E. of Hartford six Prebends promissed him as the Lord Cromwal in H. 8. was made Dean of Wells A thing very ordinary at that time Dr. Burnets Hist of the Refor part 2. Thus a Diocesane Episcopacy at best was judg'd but an humane Creature owing to the Magistrate alone for it's Rise and Conservation Secondly This seems to be the sense of the Reformers in Edward the 6th time who were under the Influence of that great Divine and Blessed Martyr Archbishop Cranmer In Henry 8th days Cranmer did his Utmost for the promoting a Reformation the which he did withal the Speed and Prudence the Ilness of the times would permit further attempt to carry on under King Edward and what he did was so highly approv'd of by all who were hearty for a Reformation that whoever considers how Unanimous the truly Protestans Bishops were in Concurring with this great Prelate Cranmer cannot but encline to think That their Principles in most things about Church Discipline were the same i. e. they were for the Divine Right of Bishops or Presbyters even when they judg'd the Superiority of a Bishop to a Presbyter to be but Humane That this may appear to be the sense of Cranmer I will only beseech my Reader to compare what was done under King Edw. 6th by this great Prelate with his Judgment concerning a Diocesan Episcopacy under Henry the 8th In Henry 8ths time Cranmer in answer to that Question Whether Bishops or Priests were first did assert That the Bishops and Priest were at one time and were no two things but both One Office in the beginning of Christs Religion That in the New Testament he that is appointed to be a BISHOP or PRIEST needeth no Cousecration by the Scripture for ELECTION or APPOINTING thereto is sufficient This was then Cranmers Judgment and I cannot understand that he did at any time in the least vary from it for in the Necessary Erudition which he subscribed there is nothing asserted but what is either Consistent with or an approbation of what was the Archbishops Opinion about these points 'T is true Cranmer was so Zealous an Asserter to the Kings Supremacy that he seem'd to be of that Opinion which doth now appear by the name of Erastianisme for he held That a Bishop or Priest by the Scripture is neither commanded nor forbidden to Excommunicate but where the Laws of any Region give him Authority to Excommunicate there he ought to use the same c. But from this he must be considered to have received because he subscribed the Necessary Erudition where 't is exprest That a part of the Priests or Bishops Office is according to the Scriptures to Excommunicate c. as well as Teach and Administer the Sacraments To all this add the Progress Cranmer made under Edw. 6. in the Reformation how far he went and how much farther he would have gone had not the Iniquity of those times been so exceeding great and the Reign of this worthy Prince so very short 'T is well known that he went so far as to tempt Dr. Heylin to conclude King Edwards death no Infelicity to the Church of England and to provoke Queen Elizabeth to say That they had stript the Church too much of its external Splendour and Magnificence That t was requisite to make some alteration in the Articles to the end a Compliance of the Roman Catholicks might be more easie What I have insisted on in this place about Cranmer is taken out of Dr. Burnets History and a Record in him ex M.SS. D. Stillingfleet 3. Such is the present Prerogative of his Majesty in Ecclesiastical as well as Civil Affairs that the asserting the Divine Right of a Diocesane Episcopacy is inconsistent with it The King is the Supream Head of the Church as well as of the State for which Reason he hath Power to appoint Officers to look after the management of Affairs in the One as in the Other But if the Diocesan Bishops depend not so much on the Prince for their Superiority and Power in making an Authoritative Inspection into Ecclesiasticalal Affairs as the Civil Magistrate who is it that is his Majesties Commissionated Officer about Ecclesiastical affairs T is either the Diocesane or None But if the Diocesane as such receives his Commission from Jesus Christ even as the Apostles did then they are Gods Officers and not the Kings And if so seeing the King doth nothing but by his Officers that is by such as act by a Commission received from him the King hath in this respect lost at least the Ezercise of his Prerogative But if they are the Kings Officers and depend as much on the King as the Civil then their Diocesan Episcopacy is not of Divine 't is but of Humane Right We acknowledge that 't is the sense of the Church of England that Princes are Ordain'd of God to Govern Ecclesiastical as well as other Persons and that therefore if we consider such as are appointed by the King to govern under him Circa Sacra as the
thanks for The Doctor 's Substitute as hereafter I will from his own words prove doth sufficiently declare what his party would be at which is a point I 'm sure that will meet with opposition from such as are true Sons of the Church whereby the Controversie if closely followed must cease to be between Conformist and Noncormist it must be between Conformist and Conformist It looks as if there were among our Church-men some resolv'd to revive Laud's Design as 't is well known there are many others among them who highly value the Principles and Temper of that great Protestant Prelate Abbot Laud's Predecessor in the See of Canterbury between whom the Scussle must at last end That this may with the greater Conviction be evinc'd I will in this Reply to the Defence of the Dean c. confine my self to the Author 's own words as compared with what is more than suggested in the Writings of Bishop Bramhall and some other Sons of the Church of England the which with due clearness I shall not be able to compass if I follow our Author in his disorderly way of Writing For which reason I must keep to the Method I took in the Modest and Peaceable Enquiry and bring what calls for my observation into its proper place The whole then he hath offered in Answer to the Enquiry may be reduced to these Heads 1. His Reflections on the Title of the Enquiry 2. His Censure of the Author's Design 3. The Defence of the Dean I 'll begin with the First The Author reflects on the Title as if the Discourse notwithstanding the specious pretences of the Title had not been as Modest nor as Peaceable as suggested in doing which he spends one whole Chapter it may be not fâ—nding matter enough in the Discourse it self to enlarge so far as to write any thing that might deserve the name of an Answer or countenance the Title given his Great Book I could very easily therefore as one unconcern'd pass by this first Chapter if there had not been more in it than the representing me as a person who deserve not the Character of being either Modest or Peaceable But the Overt acts of Immodesty which are insisted on by this Author being such as cannot but be of an ill Tendency I must consider ' em The first instance of Immodesty is thus express'd He begins his Epistle to the Dean with observing how industrious the Papists have been ever since the Reformation to ruine England and the Churches of Christ in it which he sufficiently proves from their Rebellions and Insurrections in King Edward's days the Spanish Armado in Queen Elizabeths the Gun-Powder Treason in King James's c. and the late Hellish Conspiracy which was designed for the utter Extirpation of the Protestant Religion and the universal Destruction of all the Professors thereof whether Episcopal or Dissenter But this modest man saies our Author takes no notice That King and Kingdom Church and State have been once ruined already by such Modest Dissenters and may be in a fair way for it again if we suffer our selves to be Charmed and Lulled asleep by such modest Inquirers We are aware Sir what a Popish Zeal would do and what a Factious Zeal has done and think our selves concern'd as much as we can to countermine the Designs of both But however I confess it was very modestly done to pass over this that while men are zealous against Popery they may fear no danger from any other quarter Rep. Whether the mentioning the Rebellions and Insurrections of the Papists in King Edw. the 6th days the Spanish Armado in Queen Elizabeths the Gunpowder-Treason in King James's the Hellish Plot of late discovered be an extraordinary act of Immodesty or Unpeaceableness let any temperate man among the Church of England judge that please Is it an Act of Immodesty to relate such notorious Truths or of Unpeaceableness to mention the Dangers we are in on the account of Popish bloody Plots This it may be is not the Crime but what follows which is This modest man saith our Author takes no notice That King and Kingdom Church and State have been once ruin'd already by such modest Dissenters and may be in a fair way for it again if we suffer our selves to be Charm'd and Lull'd asleep by such Modest Inquirers Rep. Hereby we know what the Authour would be at 't is as if he had said This Modest Enquirer is very immodest and quarrelsome for not imitating the Jesuitical Clubs who are contrary to the Act of Oblivion raking in old sores calling us to the remembrance of 41. to make us look back on the actings of Archb. Laud and his Faction the steps they made towards Rome the bones of contention they cast in between a Protestant Prince and a Church of England Parliament the Civil War begun by the Episcâ—pal who were Chief in each Army 'T was this the Enquirer indeed past over in silence wishing with his very Soul that the Episcopal Clergy had been either so wise or honest as to have done their utmost to have prevented those Ruins which their own Divisions brought on these Nations For 't is well known to many hundreds now alive who they were that had an Influence on those Unnatural Broils and Intestine Quarrels and whoever will consult Mr. Baxter against Hinekley or rather Mr. Rushworth and Dr. Heylin will see That the Sons of the Church of England more on both sides the active persons concern'd in the very beginning of those Troubles But those things the Inquirer was loath to mention it being as Unnecessary as Unsuitable to his Peaceable Design However seeing our Author will not be satisfied unless some notice be taken of those that once already Ruin'd King and Kingdom c. I will out of Dr. Heylin's Life of Laud a good Record at least in the sense of the Dean's Defender shew who they were that did it In a perusal of which 't will appear That 't was the Papists who had a sole hand in the Plot no Protestant I verily believe ever design'd what was the unhappy product of the Hellish Conspiracies of the bloody Papist This hath been long ago discover'd by Dr. Du Moulm and since by Dr. Oates and here most exactly related by Dr. Heylin a Son of the Church in these words viz. A Confederacy was formed amongst them i. e. the Papists consisting of some of the most subtle heads in the whole fesuitical Party by whom it was concluded to foment the Broils began in Scotland and to heighten the Combustions there that the King being drawn into a War might give them the opportunity to effect their Enterprize for sending Him and the Archbishop to the other World Which being by one of the party on Compunction of Conscience made known to Andreas ab Habernsfield who had been Chaplain as some said to the Queen of Bohemia they both together gave intimation of it to Sir William Boswell his Majesties Resident at
known that they are Sons of the Church of England whose Loyalty to their Prince and Firmness to the Protestant Religion doth equalize the greatness of their Honour Methinks Sir 't is now high time to consider That as all Protestants whether Episcopal Presbyterian or Congregational c. are all in one bottom even so the One cannot be ruin'd with the preservation of the Other Ought we not then to entertain better thoughts of each other What shall we now quarrel with one another even when unless we joyn in putting our hand to the Pump the Ship sinks and we all must perish together But I must not enlarge on this subject lest I be thought too Immodest and Unpeaceable A Second Instance of Immodesty now succeeds 'T was modestly done saith the Author to charge the Dean with a Design of gratifying the Roman Faction c. And at the same time to laugh at the Jesuits and Coleman as great Fools for designing to bring in Popery by the Tolerating Fanaticks Rep. How is this that our Author treats the Dean so unmannerly as to joyn him thus with the Jesuits and Coleman Methinks a desending the Dean should be a distinct work from a vindicating the reputation of Jesuits and the Traitor Coleman And why Sir may I not laugh at the Counsels of some Jesuits without being immodest to the Doctor Have you such venerable thoughts of these men that a laughing at their Devices is a Crime that must not pass without Rebuke But the Dean is represented as a Reviler of Dissenters and that 's immodest Rep. What I suggested as to this was not without great reason as may appear from what I insisted on in the Enquiry but he goes on very pleasantly as if by Reviling Dissenters I meant Confuting Dissenters Really Sir if by Reviling Dissenters I meant a Confuting of them I fear I should have wronged the Doctor and the Truth also if I had but said there was any one Reviling passage in the whole Treatise but the fixing this sense on the words to the end you may give us an account of your admirable Faculty of Talking very little to the purpose is an excellency wherein you seem to delight for I 'm sure you are so modest as to fasten your own which is a foreign sense on my words and then run on triumphantly c. but after so easie a manner that it deserves not an Answer and therefore I 'll consider the great thing The Doctor is brought in you say as one designing to Gratifie the Roman Faction Rep. That I might prevent any just offence here I was express in distinguishing between the Deans own intent and tendency of his Treatise Take my words in the Enquiry I will propose the Design of the Dr's History i. e. of that account he had given of Dissenters c. being charitably dispos'd to distinguish between the Finis Operis and Operantis For though the End of the work it self cannot but in its tendency prove pernicious to the Protestant Religion yet I hope the Dr. design'd it not as such But though I thought my self oblig'd to be thus civil in my thoughts of the Reverend Dean I do not find any Reason to pass the same favourable Censure on you The Dr. I knew wrote against the Papists but whether you have not in some Treatises formerly done as much in some respects for 'em is best known to your self Whatever you have done either for or against the Papist formerly by what I find in your Defence of the Dean I do very much suspect you 'T is very evident you have in your Notions about the Nature of an Universal Church the Notion of Schism c. faln in with those that were not ashamed to own that they were for a going towards Rome in order to an accommodating the Differences between the Church of England and the Papist That this may appear to be so I will faithfully set down your notion of these things and then compare it with the Design of Archb. Laud and Archb. Bramhall and leave it to the judgment of the Candid and Impartial Reader whether you are not of those who ran the Cassandrian way You say § 1. That the Catholique Church consists of such Particular Churches as have all the Essentials of a Church as to Faith Government and Discipline It consists of all these as Similar parts which have the same Nature and make up one Body by a common Union This p. 139 140. § 2. That the Catholique Church though it consists of all Particular Churches contained in it yet 't is not a meer arbitrary combination and confederacy of particular Churches but is the Root and Fountain of Unity and in order of nature antecedent to particular Churches as the Sun is before its Beams and the Root before its Branches So that all Particular Churches received their denomination of Catholique Church from the Catholique Church p. 144 c. Here you assert That the Universal Church is in order of nature antecedent to Particular Churches as the Sun is before its Beams and the Root before its Branches c. But your Allusion is not ad rem for you should have given us some instance of some one Universal that was in order of nature antecedent to its Particulars which is impossible it being in the sense of most evident That Universale is unum in multis that is in many particulars which Universal hath no real Existence but in Particulars for abstracted from all Particulars 't is only an Ens raticnis having its being in the Eutopian Commonwealth whence we distinguish between the consideration of an Universal as Formal and as Fundamental Fundamentally and 't is quid singulare but Formally and so 't is abstracted from all Singulars the Particulars being the foundation of the Universal the Root from which the Universal doth proceed Now if it be the Particulars that are the foundation of the Universal How can the Universal be the Root of the Particulars This is the more remarkable in our Author because he falls in with an old exploded part of Independency viz. That what person soever is not a Member of a Particular Church is not so of the Universal Church Which being so I would fain know Where this Universal Church should be when Antecedent to any Particular Church If he had said That by a Particular Church he meant only such as were Organiz'd and faln into some compleat order and that there were many who not having arriv'd to that degree of being compleat Church-members of any Particular Church who yet were Members of the Church Universal he would have had ground for his Assertion for there must be Particular Christians before Particular Churches but to adhere to his Hypothesis which seems to be but a step to the asserting Diocesan Churches to be in order of nature antecedent to particular Congregations is ridiculous especially seeing he asserts That the Universal Church is an Organiz'd or Political Body the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all Instituted Worship and Discipline as if there could be Church-Members under Government antecedent to the being of Particular Churches even when no one that is not a Member of a Particular Church is a Member of the Universal As if a City that consists of many particular Houses were in order of nature antecedent to every particular House § 3. That the Unity of the Christian Church consists in one Communion Catholique Unity signifies Catholique Communion To have a Right to be a Member of the Christian Church to communicate in all the several Duties and Offices of Religion with all Christians all the World over and to partake in all the Priviledges of Christians and to be admitted to the freedom of their conversation to eat and drink and discourse and trade together So that such as are not Church-Members have no right to trade among Christians A pleasant Insinuation § 4. The Unity of the Christian Sacraments viz. Baptism and the Lords-Supper prove the Unity of Christian Communion This is from p. 193. to p. 208. § 5. Unity of Church-Power and Government doth also prove the Unity of Christian Communion Under this head he maintains 1. That every Bishop Presbyter or Deacon by his Ordination is made a Minister of the Catholique Church though for the better edification of the Church the exercise of his Office is more peculiarly confin'd to some particular place 2. Every Bishop and Presbyter receives into the Catholique Church by Baptism and shuts out of the Catholique Church by Excommunication 3. That the Catholique Church is united and coupled by the cement of Bishops who stick close together for which you produce Cyprian 4. That the Unity and Peace of the Episcopacy is maintained by their governing their Churches by mutual Consent Whence you mention the Collegium Episcopale the Episcopal Colledge which I take to be a Council of Bishops which Bishops have an Original Right and Power in relation to the whole Church i.e. the foreign Bishops as those of Alexandria and Rome c. have an Original Power and Right in relation to the whole Church even a Right and Power in relation to England 5. That every part of the Universal Church is under the Government of the Universal Bishops assembled in their Colledge or in Council and what Bishop soever abuse his Power he shall be accountable to those assembled in Council 6. That there is no such thing as the Independency of Bishops their Independency being almost as inconsistent with Ecclesiastical Unity as the Indpendency of single Congregations Whence the Church of England called either Archi-Episcopal National or Patriarchal is not Independent but accountable unto Foreign Bishops if at any time they abuse their Power 7. That this Council of Forreign Bishops unto which they are accountable must look on the Bishop of Rome as their Primate the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome being acknowledged it seems by our Author himself as well as by Bramhall The Primacy he saith out of Cyprian being given to Peter that it might appear that the Church of Christ was One and the Chair that is the Apostolical Office and Power is One. Thus Cyprian on whom lay all the care of the Churches dispatches Letters to Rome from whence they were sent through all the Catholique Churches All this is to be found from p. 208 to the end of the Chapter Thus you agree with Bramhall though you express not the Notion so well as he doth and should learn it better Before I proceed therefore I cannot but desire you to consider what is become of your Protestant Episcopacy I beseech you Sir consider Is the French Episcopacy a Protestant Episcopacy If not seeing the English Episcopacy as described by you is the same with the French Why call you the one a Popish and the other a Protestant Episcopacy Whether you agree not in these respects with the Papists let the world judge But you go on to assert § 6. That to be in Commuion with any Church is to be a Member of it every Member having equal Right and equal Obligation to all parts of Christian Communion even that Communion which is External and Visible p. 132 c. § 7. All Christians being bound to communicate with that part of the Catholique Church wherein they live are guilty of Schism if they separate whoever separate from such particular Churches as are members of the Catholick Church do separate from the Universal Catholick Church which is Schism For to divide from any part of the Catholick Church is to break Catholick communion i. e. to be a Schismatick Whence 't is concluded 1. That Schism is a separating from the Catholick Church which notion taken singly will stand the Dissenters and all true Christians who must be acknowledged to be members of the Catholick Church in great stead freeing them from the odious sin of Schism The Dissenters divide not themselves from the communion of the Universal Church Ergo not Schismaticks But the mischief is that as this notion of Schism which our Author adheres unto is the same with that of the Papists as is to be seen in Filiucius Azorius c. but in an especial manner in Charity maintain'd by Catholicks even so he closes with the same Popish Faction in asserting 2. That separating from the Church of England is a separating from the Catholick Church as if the Catholick Church had been as much confin'd within the bounds of the Church of England as the Papists says within the limits of Rome Whence whoever separates from the Church of England cuts himself from the Catholick Church puts himself out of a state of salvation He is extra Ecclesiam extra quam nulla salus they are all while Schismaticks in a state of damnation But surely if these men believed so much methinks they should not be at rest until all their unscriptural impositions were removed unless they have greater kindness for such trifles than they have for such immortal souls for whom Christ dyed By this Doctrine we may understand why 't is that some of our Clergy shew greater tenderness towards Drunkards Swearers Papists than towards poor Dissenters The former may hold communion with the Church of England and consequently with the Catholick Church when the others are undoubtedly in a state of damnation as if we were all in the same state with Hereticks I 'le not as easily I might now enlarge in shewing the weakness which the Dean's Substitute hath discovered in the management of this Grotian or Cassandrian Design but only tell him That if he had consulted that excellent Treatise The Grotian Religion discovered by Mr. Baxter he might have seen an unanswerable confutation of a great part of his Book or if he had rather applied himself unto that great Prelate Bishop Bramhall a man of extraordinary worth for his Learning he might have better digested his Notion For there he would have been furnished with such distinctions about Communion that would
if it he rightly placed I am persuaded will repel all those batteries which you threaten shall be so furious To use the words of Mr. Chil. And for this reason I will now shew the Reader That the Model the Deans Substitu â—â—aâ—h given us is what is not only in it self admirably adjusted to accommodate the difference between one Faction of the Church of England and the Church not the Court of Rome for that is their Distinction but moreover 't is very like that of Archb. Laud for which he was censur'd as a Favourer of Popery This I will attempt to perform by giving you an account of the Charge that was brought in against Laud in the House of Commons by the Lord Faulkland a true Son of the Church and the Reply is made thereunto by Dr. Heylin whereby 't will appear that as there is an agreement between Laud's Design and our Authors even so this as well as that was to bring the Church of Rome and England together § 1. Take My Lord Fauklkland's Speech made in the House of Commons as represented by Dr. Heylin in the Life of Archbishop Laud p. 383. A little search saith he will find them to have been the Destruction of Unity under pretence of Uniformity To have brought in Superstition and Scandal under titles of Reverence and Decency to have defiled our Church by adorning our Churches to have slackned the strictness of that Union which was formerly between us and those of our Religion beyond the Seas an Action as unpolitick as ungodly Or we shall find them to have resembled the Dog in the Manger to have neither Preached themselves nor suffered those that would to have brought in Catechising only to thrust out Preaching and cried down Lecturers by the names of Factions either because their Industry in that Duty appeared a reproof to their neglect of it or with intention to have brought in Darkness that they might the easier sow their Tares while it was Night And by that introduction of Ignorance introduce the better that Religion which accounts it the Mother of Devotion In which saith he they have abused his Majesty as well as his people For when he had with great wisdom silenced on both parts those Opinions which have often tormented the Church and have and always will trouble the Schools they made use of this Declaration to tye up one side and to let the other loose Whereas they ought either in discretion to have been equally restrained or in Justice to have been equally tolerated And 't is observable that the party to which they gave this Licence was that whose Doctrine though it was not contrary to Law was contrary to Custom and for a long time in this Kingdom was no oftner Preached than recanted c. We find them introducing such Doctrines as admitting them to be true the truth could not recompence the Scandal or such as were so far false as Sir Thomas Moore says of the Casuists their business was not to keep men from sinning but to inform them Quà propè ad peccatum sine peccato liceat accedere So it seemed their work was to try how much of a Papist might be brought in without Popery and to destroy as much of the Gospel without bringing themselves into danger of being destroyed by Law To go yet further some of them have so industriously laboured to deduce themseves from Rome that they have given great suspicion that in Gratitude they desire to return thither or at least to meet it half way Some have evidently laboured to bring in an English though not a Roman Popery I mean not only the out side and dress of it but equally absolute a blind dependence of the People upon the Clergy and of the Clergy upon themselves And have opposed the Papacy beyond the Seas that they might settle one beyond the Water § 2. I 'll now proceed to the Reply Dr. Heylin makes to this Speech of the Lord Faulkland 1. He produces the several Protestations of the Archbishop made in the Starchamber p. 389 390 c. and at his Tryal before the Lords and on the Scaffold just before his going out of this world of his Innocency as to this Besides Dr. Heylin doth insist on his Conference with Fisher the Jesuit the enlarging that Conference as an Argument that the Archbishop was no Papist 2. Touching the Design of working a Reconciliation betwixt us and Rome 't is acknowledged by Heylin and the Design applauded Take his own words I thought when our Saviour said Beati Pacifici it had been sufficient warrant to any man to endeavour Peace to build up the Breaches in the Church and to make Jerusalem like a City which is at Unity in it self especially where it may be done not only Salvâ Charitate without breach of Charity but Salvâ Fide too without wrong to Faith The greatest part of the Controversies between us and the Church of Rome not being in the Fundamentals or in any Essential point in the Christian Religion I cannot but look upon it as a most pious work to endeavour an Attonement in the Superstructures So far Heylin goes to shew both the Lawfulness of the endeavours of a Reconciliation and then the Possibility of obtaining of it The which Dr. Heylin no sooner evinces but he admits that such a Reconciliation was endeavoured betwixt the Agents for both Churches and gives an hint upon what terms the Agreement was to have been made and how far they proceeded on it 3. As to Reconciliation saith he out of a Book entituled the Pope's Nuncio affirmed to have been written by a Venetian Ambassador at his being in England between the Churches of England and Rome there were made some General Propositions and Overtures by the Archbishops Agents they assuring that his Grace was very much disposed thereunto And that if it was not accomplish'd in his Life-time it would prove a work of more difficulty after his Death That in very truth for the last three years the Archbishop had introduced some Innovations approaching near the Rites and Forms of Rome That the Bishop of Chichester a great Confident of his Grace the Lord Treasurer and eight other Bishops of his Grace's party did most passionately desire a Reconciliation with the Church of Rome that they did day by day recede from their antient Tenents to accommodate with the Church of Rome that therefore the Pope ought on his part to make some steps to meet them and the Court of Rome remit something of its Rigour in Doctrine or otherwise no accord will be The Composition on both sides was in so good a forwardness before Panzany left the Kingdom that the Archbishop and Bishop of Chichester had often said That there were but two sorts of people likely to impede and hinder the Reconciliation to wit the Puritans amongst the Protestants and the Jesuits amongst the Catholiques Let us next see the judgment and relation of another Author in a Gloss or
Church of England detected His notion about the Government of the Catholick Church the same with that of the French Papist THAT our Author entertains notions about the nature of the Visible Church and of the Schismatical very different from what the old Queen Elizabeth Protestants did will appear with the greatest conviction to such as will but consult the famous Mr. Hooker and Dr. Field who do most expresly contradict what is asserted in the Dean's Defence The Dean's Defender doth extremely insist on the Unity of the Universal Church as what doth consist in more than in the Unity of the Faith though in combination of those other graces of Love and Charity and Peace to wit in an external communion Take his own words in answer to a supposed objection P. 183. But though Faith alone is not sufficient to Christian Unity yet Faith in combination with those other graces of Love and Charity and Peace make a firm and lasting union This I readily grant saith he but yet must add this one thing That Christian love and charity and peace in the language of the New Testament and of the ancient Fathers when they signifie Christian Unity signifie also one communion that is the unity of a Body and Society which is external and visible and doth not only signifie the union of souls and affections but the union of an external and visible communion P. 184. By the union of an external and visible communion he means the living in Christian communion and fellowship with each other that is a worshipping God together after one and the same external and visible manner P. 248. Moreover he adds That such as separate themselves from the external communion of any particular Church that is part of the Universal do separate themselves from the Universal visible Church All Schismaticks in his opinion cut themselves off from the visible Catholick Church even as all such as are excommunicated are cut off This is the notion of the Deans Substitute which is as agreeable to the sense of the Papist as 't is in it self grosly absurd and different from the doctrine of sound Church of England Protestants That 't is agreeable to the sense of the Papists you 'l find in a Conference between Dr. Peter Gunning and Dr. Pierson with two Disputants of the Romish Profession All Schismaticks say the Romish Disputants are out of the Church and quite separate from it as a part cut off is separate from the body Schismatick is a term contradistinct to Catholick No Schismaticks can be true members of the Catholick church for Schism as they define it is a voluntary separation of one part from the whole true visible church of Christ The correspondency that there is between the Author of the Deans Defence and those Papists about the formal reason of Schism is as much as if the Defender had fetcht his Definitition of Schism out of their Writings which notion as embrac'd by one that professes himself a Protestant is as grosly absurd as 't is contrary unto Protestant principles I say such a notion entertain'd by a professed Protestant is grosly absurd for it exposeth him to the triumph of the Roman-catholicks it being impossible that the Papists notwithstanding their Schismatical Impositions should be esteemed Schismatical by our Author For all such as are Schismatical are saith he cut off from the visible Catholick Church of which the Church of Rome is acknowledged to be a true part although from it these men as they are Protestants separate and so cut themselves off from the Catholick visible Church for such as separate from any true part of the Catholick church according unto him do cut themselves off from the Catholick church and are Schismaticks Take a view then of the admirable abilities of our Auther who must be considered to assert either that the Church of Rome is Schismatical or not If not Schismatical the church of England must be so or otherwise there may be a separation from the external communion of a particular Church that is a part of the Universal without being guilty of Schism or of separating from the Catholick church But if the Church of Rome be Schismatical 't is either cut off from the visible Catholick church or not if not then Schism consists not in a separating from the visible Catholick church that is a man may be a Schismatick and yet a member of the catholick church a thing that our Author denies But if the church of Rome be cut off from the visible Catholick church then the distressed Papist is in as sad a condition as the Dissenter he is cut off from the church of Christ and must be either damn'd or saved by another Name than that of Jesus Christ If the latter then farewell Christian Religion If the former Where shall we find any part of the Universal Church beside the Church of England All the Protestants beyond the Sea are in the same state with the Dissenter at home The Church of Rome and all such as are in Subjection to that See are cut off from the Visible Catholick Church and it may be all the Eastern Churches in the World too that is the Catholick Visible Church is confin'd within the Pale of the Church of England Pure Prelatical Donatism with a witness Where will not Considence when the attendant of Ignorance lead men Moreover This Notion as 't is grosly absurd in like manner 't is most contrary to the old Protestant Principles Consult Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity lib. 3. and you 'll find nothing more fully asserted than That the Visible Church of Jesus Christ is therefore One in outward Profession of those things which supernaturally appertain to the very essence of Christianity and are necessarily required in every particular Christian man But we speak now of the Visible Church whose Children are signed with this mark One Lord one Faith one Baptifm In whomsoever these things are the Church doth acknowledg them for her Children So far Hooker But you will it may be object That such as are Schismatical or Excommunicate may acknowledge One Lord hold One Faith and receive One Baptism And shall such be consider'd as Members of the Visible Church Take Mr. Hooker's own words for an Answer If by external Profession they be Christians then are they of the Visible Church of Christ and Christians by external Profession are they all whose mark of Recognizance hath in it those things which we have mentioned yea although they be impious Idolaters wicked Hereticks Persons Excommunicable yea and cast out for notorious Improbity Thus 't is evident that Mr. Hooker entertain'd apprehensions quite contrary to those of our Author yea and Mr. Hooker doth consider the very Notion asserted by our Author to be Popish which he doth as such most excellently expose As for the Act of Excommunication saith he it neither shuts out from the Mystical nor clean from the Visible but only from the Fellowship with the Visible in holy Duties
In contradiction to which the Dean's Substitute's Assertion is p. 226. That Excommunication casts a man out of the visible Society of Christ's Church not of this or that particular Church only but of the Whole Christian Church He that is cast out of one Church is thereby cast out of all and separated from the Body of Christ which is but One. And therefore such are out of a state of Salvation As if it had been said in opposition to Mr. Hooker Such as are Excommunicate are shut out clean from the Visible Church yea and from the Mystical Church A Notion that Mr. Hooker considers as held by none but Papists for he immediatly addresseth himself to the Church of Rome thus With what congruity then saith he doth the Church of Rome deny that her enemies whom she holds always for Hereticks do at all appertain to the Church of Christ How exclude they us from being any part of the Church of Christ under the colour and pretence of Heresie when they cannot but grant it possible even for him i. e. the Pope to be as touching his own personal perswasion Heretical who in their opinion not only is of the Church but holdeth the chief place of Authority over the same The like may be said by way of Answer unto our Author Moreover the Learned and Judicious Dr. Field Son of the Church is as full in contradicting what is asserted by our Author For this Dr. of the Church discoursing about the Schismatick says lib. 1. c. 13. That their departure is not such but that notwithstanding their Schisme they are and remain parts of the Church of God Schismaticks notwithstanding their Separation remain still conjoyn'd with the rest of God's people in respect of the profession of the whole saving Truth of God all outward acts of Religion and Divine Worship Power of Order and Holy Sacraments which they by vertue thereof administer and so still are and remain parts of the Church of God The like is asserted of such as are cast out by Excommunication c. 15. But I 'll not enlarge any further having sufficiently evinc'd that the Opinions of this man who treats the Dissenters with so much scorn and contempt are such as were antiently by Queen Elizabeths Protestants exploded as Popish and at this very time I verily believe rejected by the greatest part of the Episcopal Clergy and that the Contest now is not so much between Dissenters and the Church of England as between a few under the name of the Church of England on the one part and the greater number of the Church of England with the Dissenter on the other The former under the notion of running down Dissenters are preparing materials to meet the Papist The other to the end they may the more effectually prevent the Designs of Rome have sent forth their Plea for the Nonconformist finding themselves concern'd to check the Insolence of those who in this day of common Calamity would ruine the conscientious Protestant Dissenter This being so I must beseech the Reader not to misapprehend me in what follows as if I had been speaking reproachfully of the Church of England because I cannot but discover how agreeable the Sentunents of the Deans Substitute about Church-Government are unto those embrac'd by the French Papist That I may the more clearly shew what are the mischievous Tendencies of our Author's Notion about Church-Government I will give in short the most distinct and truest state of the Controversie I can shewing what is granted by sound Protestants and what not What are the Doctrines of the Papists How far the French and Italian Papist agree and wherein they differ and in what respects the Dean's Substitute concurs with the French § 1. All are so far agreed as to conclude That God hath had a Church at all times in every Age of the World We might be very particular in considering the divers Denominations under which the Church falls answerable to the divers capacities of the Members thereof and the divers states in which it is and hath been which I shall at this time pass by § 2. That the Church is but One one Body united to one Head § 3. That this One Church must be considered as the Members thereof are scattered up and down the World c. and as they are joyned together in particular Societies The former is call'd the Church Universal the other a Particular Church The Papists themselves do acknowledge That the Church must be considered as Universal and as Particular though they look'd on the Universal to be such whose whole existence was in Particulars as Universale est unum in multis singularibus Whence it follows That such as are not members of a Particular Church they belong not unto the Catholick Visible Church This very Notion hath been embrac'd by some to wit the Old Independents but of late it hath been generally exploded by Divines of that name they leaving it to entertain such as the Dean's Substitute § 4. That the Church of Christ is under Government There is such a thing as Church-Government Jure divino The Papists both French and Italian The Protestants whether Episcopal Presbyterian Congregational or Anabaptist heartily agree in Thesi about this § 5. The great difference is concerning what that Church-Government is which is of Divine Institution Where 't is seated whether in a Particular or in the Universal Church and whether it be Monarchical Aristocratical or Democratical or mixt § 6. The Papists with whom the Doctor 's Substitute doth agree assert That the Universal Church is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Church-Government That all Church-Officers belong to the Universal Church and have an Original Right to govern the whole Universal Church Take the notion as found in the Defence We must saith he consider that all the Apostles had relation to the whole Church and therefore though being finite creatures they could not be every where at a time but betook themselves to different places and planted Churches in several Countreys and did more peculiarly apply themselves to the government of those Churches which they themselves had planted and ordained Bishops to succeed them in their care and charge yet their Original Right and Power in relation to the whole Church did still remain which they might re-assume when they saw occasion for it and which did oblige them to take care as far as possibly they could that the Church of Christ suffer'd no injury by the heresie or evil practises of any of their Colleagues P. 212. § 7. The Protestants excepting some obscure Writers assert particular Churches to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Church-Government among whom there are these differences 1. The Episcopal and Presbyterian differ from the Congregational and Anabaptistical about the extent of particular Churches e. g. the latter concluding that their number must be no more than are capable of personal communion the former contrarily judg That a company of a greater extent may be
and favourable a Disposition towards the PAPISTS They were grown strangely MODERATE towards these OLD ENEMIES of our Church and State New PROJECTS of RECONCILING of us were set on foot and Books were written to distinguish the Church of Rome from the Court of Rome One of those Books which was Printed the year before the Discovery of the Plot pretends That there ought to be a Difference made between Papists of LOYAL and DISLOYAL Principles This Book as it was written more ARTIFICIALLY than the rest and Published in so Critical and Dangerous a Juncture deserves and I doubt not in time will have a particular Consideration 'T is easie to believe how great Encouragement this must give to the ROMANISTS to see how very willing men were to meet them and how freely the Pen was drawn in their Favour By this time the Reader may easily see who 't is that is subservient to the Popish Design and without any further help clearly perceive what is the Tendency of our Author's Discourse There remaineth only one objection which calls for our observation the which can be no sooner remov'd but the Reader may be fully satisfied in this viz. That 't is not impossible for one who Assents and Consents to the Thirty nine Articles the Book of Common-prayer and of Homilies to drive on a French not to say a Popish Design The Objection that occurs to a common capacity is How can such that give in Assent and Consent to all that is said of the excellency of the present Establishment do any thing that tends to its subversion The Answer is easie You must distinguish between the sayings and the things assented and consented unto For you do not Assent unto the Sayings though about the excellency of the present Establishment but the Things for saith he p. 105. We do not give our Assent to every saying in the Common-prayer-book but to every thing which is contained in and prescrib'd by it that is what we are bound to use Whence observe That seeing a Papist can comply with all the Ceremonies in use even when he cannot Assent to all the Sayings in the Common-prayer-book he may give in his Assent and Consent and be as true a Son of the Church of England as our Author is SECT III. A Third Overt-act of the Enquirers pretended Immodesty examined The aversness of the Dean and his Substitute to a Protestant Union proved Their falling in with the Dissenters about conscience considered Some Remarks on the Author's modest treatment of others THE Enquirer charges the Dean and some of the Episcopal to be against any compliances with the Dissenter as if they set a greater value on the Honour and Reputation of men than on Union or the relieving tender consciences which is said to be a malicious and impudent charge Words very modest as they drop from our Author's pen To this I 'le reply if possibly modestly without passing any further censure on the heat with which the Deans Defender expresseth himself 'T is true I did charge the Dean and some others of the Episcopal as persons who would not condescend to part with the least Iota for Union for these Reasons 1. The Dissenters have used all just means but without success for the obtaining of it 2. Some of the Episcopal Clergy have for these last Twenty years made it their business to stir up Authority to a severe execution of such Laws as were made against Dissenters 3. They were not ashamed to expose His Majesty to the great contempt of His people when he began to shew pity and compassion to the oppressed Dissenters What Invectives came out after it What Satyrical Declamations against it 4. The Dr. himself judg'd a severe execution of Laws against Dissenters to be the most effectual means for the obtaining a firm and a lasting Union And therefore 1. Preached that Sermon which has been the shameful occasion of our late contests Thus they press for a Comformity as the only way to Union as if there can be no Union among Christians without such Uniformity 2. He so states the case between Relief and no Relief to Dissenters as to incline more for no Relief He hath but Three Arguments for Relief and Six against it Dr. Stil Preface p. 53 54. 3. He inveighs against a boundless Toleration as the Mother of all confusion and then tells us That the suspension of Penal Laws against Protestant Dissenters is to open the Flood-gates to such a boundless Toleration and yet they are for great Abatements In fine 't is remarkable That notwithstanding the many Protestations made of a propension toward a real union between Conformist and Nonconformist nothing is more notoriously evident than that those among the Dissenters who are mostly disposed to some compliances with the Episcopal are above all others hated and contemned by such as our Author There are some among Dissenters namely the Reverend Mr. Baxter and Mr. Humphrey whose Moderation in these things hath been ever since their ejection for their Nonconformity practically discover'd to the whole Kingdom They frequently attend on the Conformists Ministry not scrupling to be present at their prayers nor at the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Yea they shew with the greatest evidence desirable That their disposition toward the accommodating the matters in difference between Conformist and Nonconformist is such that nothing but apparent sin should hinder their conformity But yet none more expos'd to contempt by the Dean and his Substitute than these men 'T is Mr. Baxter who writes in a continued fit of anger 'T is he is the man to be pitied and no wonder for his Substitute gives great reason for it viz. Mr. B. is the Judas the most dangerous Enemy that lodges in the bosome of the Church a Cataline a Protean Religionist who transforms himself into all shapes and differs from the Hobbist only in this That the Hobbist is for being always of his Prince's Religion but he is always for being against it P. 234. This is the character which the Dean's Defender gives of that Reverend and Peaceable Divine Mr. Baxter and that principally because he is so much inclin'd to unite with the Conformist as if the Gentleman and such as are of his Gang were afraid of a Protestant Union But Sir is this the way to Union Is this the way to peace What to let out all your wrath and rage and fury against such as are most peaceable and ready to unite with you What thinking and unbiassed mind can be persuaded to conclude That those very men who after such an unclean and indecent manner revile the peace-maker are in love with peace Is it possible that he who considers so complying a person as Mr. Baxter is to be for that reason a Judas a Cataline a Protean Religionist should be pleased with his compliances This certainly doth but discover That if the Nonconformists could conscientiously conform to more than really they can it would not conduce to their
days the very same with that of the first Reformation from Popery beginning in Henry the 8th's time and Sealed after with the Blood of our Martyrs THE Deans Substitute doth at last apply himself to the Defence of the Doctor in doing which he considers the Reasons I collected out of the Dean's Preface which the Dean urges to engage the Reader to believe that the Dissenters are a people carrying on the Popish Designs 1. The Dissenters have embraced the Jesuits Principles about Spiritual Prayer and a more pure way of Worship This is what I observ'd out of Dr. Still But our Author who hath read over the Doctors Preface very carefully can find no such thing urged against the Dissenters and adds All that Mr. Lobb founds this Accusation on is That the Dean says It is not improbable that the Jesuits were the first setters up of Spiritual Prayer in England And then goes on to a very decent Censure saying That this is mighty falsely and imperfectly represented Sir If I had insisted on no more than what you here mention as the foundation of my Charge I must acknowledg that 't would not only be imperfectly but impertinently related For what connexion is there between the Jesuits Practises and their Principles Is it not well known that the Principles they profess the Doctrines they embrace concerning many a point in Divinity are one thing even when their Practice is another May they not then in order to the carrying on a further Design set on Practices contrary to their Doctrines Yea surely they may and this is the whole Defence you make in behalf of the Dean with which after an unnecessary Harangue you dismiss the Subject But is this fair to misrepresent an Adversary and then confute what needs no Confutation Doth this redound to the Honour of a Presbyter of the Church of England Was this all on which Mr. Lobb founded his Accusation Did he not add somewhat more than what you relate You say all that Mr. Lobb founds this accusation on is that the Dean says It is not improbable that the Jesuits were the first setters up of Spiritual Prayer in England which is mighty falsely and imperfectly repesented p. 6. Yet whoever will consult the Enguiry will find that I do out of the Dean add That there is no improbality of the thing if we consider the Dissenters pretences about Spiritual Prayer to the Doctrine and Practice of the Jesuits The Dean suggests that Spiritual and Free Prayer even that Spiritual and Free Prayer about which there is such a Pother is suited to the Doctrines of the Jesuits to the Doctrine that is to their Principles What difference is there between the Doctrine and the Principles of the Church of England In like manner I Query What difference is there between the Doctrines and Principles of the Jesuits Doth the Dean then assert such an Agreement to be between the Pretences of the Dissenter about Spiritual Prayer and the Doctrines or Principles of the Jesuits not only the Practices but Doctrines of the Jesuits Who then is the impersect or mistaken Reporter The Dean's Charge against Dissenters is That the Dissenters pretences about Spiritual Prayer are suited with the Doctrines of the Jesuits And 't is our concern to enquire after the truth of this Charge I say of this charge to wit about the Agreeableness that is between our Pretences and their Doctrines For it is no way momentous to enquire after the practice of a company of Villains who can transform themselves into a thousand shapes whenever their Interest obliges them to do so Was it never known that a Papist crept into some great Preferment in the Church of England at which time they did both Assent and Consent to the doctrines of the Church of England What think you of a quondam Bishop of Glocester to mention no more did he not speak well of the Church of England yea even of the Protestant Religion Is it therefore Popery For this Reafon it concerns me not to enquire after those Stories insisted on by the Doctor or to be found in that Pamphlet called Foxes and Firebrands The great Enquiry must be after the Doctrines of the Jesuit whether there is any suitableness between the Dissenters pretences and the Jesuits Doctrines For which Reason the Jesuits Writings were consulted and the Doctor 's Charge found untrue the Dr. being mistaken as to matter of fact He represented the Jesuits Doctrines to be other than indeed they are which to speak softly was a Mistake If the Deans Defender would have spoke to the purpose He should have searched those places I insisted on in Azorius Filiucius and Bellarmine and have shewed wherein I had either made a false report of their sayings or misinterpreted ' em But this was impossible There being nothing else of moment in the Reply to what I offered against the Dean about Spiritual Prayer I might fairly without saying any thing more proceed to the next particular But seeing some have spoken contemptibly of the Spirit of prayer which is said to assist such as use free or extempore prayer as if those who spake of receiv'd help from the Spirit in prayer were Enthusiastical c. and because our Author talks as if the Jesuits had the first hand in the Separation of the old Nonconformists from the Church of England crying down the Common-prayers as a dull formal superstitious Worship and the setting up free prayer in the room of it I will shew 1. The sense of the first Reformers about the aid of the Spirit And 2. What was the great and chief ground of the First Separation § 1. Concerning the Aid of the Holy Spirit by which many are enabled to pray freely or spiritually it hath been by some of the conforming Ministers asserted That such as pretend to receive the aid of the Spirit may as well pretend to inspiration c. That then they 'l believe that persons can pray by the Spirit when they hear the unlearned can pray in Latin Greek or in some other unknown language as if the aids the Spirit affords unto such as pray freely had been extraordinary c. This I cannot but consider as what doth very much reflect on the Dispensation of the Spirit to the great dishonour of true Christian Religion For such is the present state of true Religion that whoever speaks contemptibly of the Spirits Aid must be esteemed not only a Despiser of the first Reformers but of that part of the present Constitution to which our Clergy on their entrance into their Function are principally concern'd 1. T is well known that what the first Reformers did in the Reforming the Liturgy was by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons assembled in Parliament recorded to have been done by the Aid of the Holy Ghost The Parliament in K. Edward's days passing an Act for the confirmation of the Publick Liturgy in the preamble thereof declare That those who drew up that Order
this Extrinsecal Consideration sufficient to occasion a Difference that is Intrinsecal Moreover to return to his French Monarch Hath not the Experience of many a year assured us That when Monarchs design not the enlarging their own Monarchies they have done all they could to preserve other Monarchies An Aristocracy or a Democracy being things detestable in their eye 7. His answering the Letter of the Council by transcribing part of Sir Francis Walsingham's Letter as recorded in Dr. Burnet bing little to the purpose might have escaped my Consideration had it not been very necessary to suggest How prudently he overlook'd the great Principles on which the Queen grounded her proceedings the one being That Consciences cannot be forced but to be won and reduced by force of Truth with the aid of time and use of all good means of Instruction and Perswasion A Principle unto which if our Clergy would adhere it might have conduced very much to the Peace of the Church This I suppose is a sufficient Reply to the Dean's Substitute The Dissenters oppose Episcopacy and Ceremonies notwithstanding their Antiquity c. The Doctor 's Argument was here set forth to the greatest advantage of his Cause in his own words To which I reply'd That our not embracing Episcopacy c. does not advantage the Papist neither doth our rejecting it even when it pretends to so much Antiquity I having shewn that there was no such strength in their Argument of Antiquity if it fell short of an Absolutely Primitive or an Apostolical Antiquity as theirs really doth they not being able to shew in what part of the Scriptures their Dioâ—san Episcopacy is found it being consider'd as a Creature of Human make by many a Son of the Church yea and once by our great Doctor himself and it hath been prov'd by other hands unanswerably That there is no evidence for such an Episcopacy in the Church the first two hundred years for which reason Mr. Chillingworth's Argument shewing the vanity of such mens pretences about Antiquity that can ascend no higher than the fifth or fourth or third or second Age is it may be as pertinently urg'd as the little intimation of Mr. Ch's sense of the Antiquity of Episcopacy 'T is pleasant then to see with what pertness our Author hopes that our Enquirer will now grow so modest as not to cite Mr. Chil. any more against an Argument from Antiquity The other part of his Reply is as little to the purpose unless a declaiming against Protestant Arguments such as are too strong to receive an Answer be the most effectual way to ruine Popery 'T is true we reject the Popish pretences about Antiquity as futilous many Protestants in the number of which some Nonconformists may be listed having unanswerably proved Popery to be a Novelty However If Popery or Episcopacy be not agreeable to the Scriptures whatever their pretences are to Antiquity they will be found unworthy the consideration of a solid Divine and therefore because he sends me to Bishop Jâ—wel Part 1. p. mihi 539 c. I 'll give the Reader an account of his sense against Harding The Truth of God saith the Bishop is neither further'd by the Face of Antiquity nor hinder'd by the Opinion of Novelty For oftentimes the thing that is New is condemned as Old and the thing that is indeed Old is condemned as New If Newness in Religion in all respects and every way were ill Christ would not have resembled his Doctrine to New Wine c. Arnobius saith The Authority of Religion must be weighed by God and not by Time It behoveth us to consider not upon what day but what things we begin to Worship The thing that is true is never too late Saint Augustine saies The Heathen say The Religion that was First cannot be False as if Antiquity and old Custom could prevail against the Truth The old Learned Father Tertullian saies Whatsoever thing savoureth against the Truth the same is an Heresie yea although it be a Custom never so Old c. This surely is the Protestant Doctrine whence to talk of Antiquity in order to the countenancing that in Religion which finds no favour from the Scriptures is but to advance the Papal Interest who have but little beside the pretence of Antiquity to support their Abominations SECT III. A search for the Schismatick A true state of the Difference between the Church of England and the Protestant Dissenter The Dissenter according to our Author's Notion clear'd from Schisme The Church of England found Guilty Some Remarks on several other passages in the Dean's Defence An Account of some of the Dean's Mistakes The Dissenter no friend to Popery The Conclusion 1. THAT our Divisions advance the Popish Designs is acknowledged But the 2. Enquiry is Who is the Faulty Divider It being the Faulty Divider alone who gives the Papist the advantage The great Enquiry then must be after the Faulty Divider Whether the Conformist or the Nonconformist be the Divider The state of the Case was given in the Enquiry p. 23. where the Principle on which the Dissenters proceed was laid down and improv'd this should have been consider'd by our Author but he was so prudent as to pass it by For which Reason without any Reflections on my Learned Adversary I must mind him of the state of the Controversie and shew wherein he hath exercised his Wisdom in leaping over what he could not handsomly remove out of the way In the Enquiry after the Faulty Divider I shewed wherein the Parties at variance agreed and wherein they differ'd 1. They agreed in those Points commonly called Docirinal or Substantial in contradistinction to lesser things about Worship and Church-Discipline c. They differ'd about what was in the Judgment of the Dissenter Sinful but in the Opinion of the Episcopal only Indifferent 'T is true the Episcopal represent us as a weak People whose Consciences as to those particulars are Erreneous that therefore we must cast off these erring Consciences and submit Our Reply is We seek Heaven for Counsel we study hard for the Truth read with the greatest Impartiality and Freedom the Discourses the Episcopal have written For we can solemnly and with much sincerity declare as in the presence of an Heart-searching God We would with the greatest chearfulness Conform to all the Impositions if we thought we could do it without sin That we are so peevish as to lose the Comforts of a good Benefice merely to gratifie an obstinate Humour if we are in danger of being biass'd one way more than another by carnal considerations 't is towards Conformity For if we conform we are freed from the reproaches and contempt of many from the continued fear of Imprisonment and other uncomfortable severities and in a fair way of abounding with the good things of this life for the supporting our selves and Families But if we conform not we are represented as Factious and Seditious expos'd to the Rage of every vile
and renders sincere Obedience to the known Will of God he shall be saved All which may be even with those who being verily perswaded that their compliances with the present Impositions are sinful durst not Conform that is The Promise of Salvation is made by Christ to many who do not conform to the Impâ—sitions of the Church of England But Salvation by our Author is denied unto such their Non-compliance is enough to make 'em Schismatical to cut them off from Christ and the hopes of Salvation which being no ways justifiable in the Conscience of any sober man the Dissenters are unjustly Excommunicated and he that so Excommunicates is Schismatical 'T is most certain That many good Christians cannot conform to the imposed terms of Communion with the Church and that for this single Reason they are Excommunicable if not actually Excommunicated from the Church that is put out of a state of Salvation The which being so 't will unavoidably follow That either the Excommunication is unjust or That the Church hath greater Power than he that is the Lord of it to open and shut the gates of Heaven If the latter then the Church sets itself up above all that is called God in this world and Christ in the other For whereas Repentance towards God and Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ is sufficient for our Salvation these add somwhat more to wit an Obedience to new Impositions threatning the neglect with Damnation But if the former if the Excommunication is unjust then according to Dr. Gunning with the addition of our Author Our Ecclesiastical Governours are the Schismaticks The Argument here in short is this He that doth unjustly Excommunicate any out of the Catholick Church is a Schismatick This is Dr. Gunning's But the Church of England shutting those out of Salvation to whom Christ hath promised it Excommunicates unjustly This is our Authors Therefore the Church of England according to the Position of our Author is the Schismatick Hereby we may easily perceive what an admirable Defender the Church of England hath in the Defender of the Dean and how little the true Protestant Clergy of the Church are beholding to this man who insists on such Notions as do necessarily lead judicious men to conclude the Church of England Schismatical But to return to our Author who leaping over all the difficulties though but hinted in the Enquiry runs unto another Question viz. From Ceremonies to Circumstances form the Parts of their Religion to the external Appendages thereunto confounding the one with the other and then runs triumphantly assuring his Reader That 't is impossible to worship God or exercise any act of Religion but it must be in some time or in some place it must be done in some circumstances therefore we may make some things a part of our Religion which God has not At this rate he fills up a great part of his Second Chapter Insisting on nothing but what had its answer in that Enquiry he attempted to confute Therefore if I should say no more than what I have in giving the true state of the Controversie it would be sufficient For it lies on him either to prove to our Conviction that We may without sin comply with their Impositions i. e. He must so far effectually enlighten our Conscience as to help us to see that the Impositions are not sinful and that we may lawfully Conform or shew That we must Conform contrary to the Convictions of our Consciences and render a blind Obedience unto their Commands Believing as the Church believes or they ought to remove the Impositions or acknowledge that our Compliances are not sinful One of these must be done Let him do either and the Controversie will be ended and the Dissenters freed from Schisme But if he cannot enlighten us to see the Lawfulness of their Impositions nor perswade us to render a blind Obedience nor remove the Impositions but plead for their continuance 't will appear That they by imposing what in their Judgments is but Indifferent as things necessary to our Salvation are the Schismaticks This might suffice as a full Answer But that nothing may escape consideration that our Author may think deserves it I le reflect a little on his main strength If there be any force in this Argument says he it consists in these two things First That all things which are in their own nature indifferent may without sin be parted with And secondly That the Opinion of Dissenters That indifferent things are unlawful in the worship of God is a just reason for parting with them For if it be not lawful to part with every thing that is indifferent those who retain the use of some indifferent things cannot meerly upon that account be called Dividers or Schismaticks and if the opinion of Dissenters that all indifferent things are unlawful be not a sufficient reason for parting with them then there may be no fault in the Episcopals will not nor a sufficient justification or excuse in the Dissenters cannot p. 9. First saith he If there be any force in this Argument it consists in two things First That all things which are in their own nature indifferent may without sin be parted with This is his mistake he should have said That if there be any strength in the Enquiry it lyes in this viz. No one indifferent Ceremony must be made so necessary a part of Religion as to be a term of Communion 'T is this he should have considered For you sin by insisting on any one or more indifferent things so zealously as to make 'em terms of Communion with your Church and consequently with the Church Catholick so as to deny us a right to Christ and Salvation for a mere non-compliance You can part with your indifferent Ceremonies without sin and open the door of Salvation to the wretched Dissenter if you will even when they cannot without sin comply with your intolerable Impositions The indifferent things you impose you impose as terms of our Communion with you which you make to be the same with Catholick Communion that is of Salvation 2. You add the second thing viz. That the Opinion of Dissenters That Indifferent things are unlawful is a just reason for parting with them For if it be not say you lawful to part with every thing that is indifferent those who retain the use of Indifferent things cannot merely upon that account be called Dividers or Schismaticks c. You should remember that I distinguished between Ceremonies and Circumstances between what is a part of Religion and Intrinsecal thereunto and what is Extrinsecal only But you run to external Circumstances that are necessary in Thesi which is off from the point in hand You run from what is Indifferent to what is Necessary as if we called you to part with any necessary thing whereas there is never any indifferent Ceremony that is grievous to our Consciences but you may part with or cease to impose 'em and yet
as a proof of what he affirmed produces some few passages from a Book written tho' not printed by Mr. H. in the year 1675. and reprinted with some alterations 1680. Mr. Humfrey gives the reasons of those alterations but withal affirms that he altered not his opinion At which our Author makes some exceptions pag. 26. of his Preface and seems to suspect the truth of what Mr. H. had said concerning the alteration of some lines in his Book without altering his judgment in that case These are his words He will not own that he hath altered his judgment in the second Impression of his book from what it was in the first but people know not mens judgments but by their words and the words of his first and second Edition contain a very different and contrary sense which should suppose some alteration What a spiteful malignant insinuation were this if Mr. H. were not known to be one that does not lye He persists upon the words like toleration which after Mr. H. hath explained is nothing but cavil and I need no more than to repeat Mr. H's own words for the reproof of this Gentleman who would not have omitted these when he cites others if he had dealt honestly by him The Dr. thinks or speaks as if the Author in reprinting the Book had changed his opinion wherein I account he is most of all out and most to blame He who drew up the Book is not one of that humour as to turn with the times but rather against them The opinion he offered in the year 75. is the same that he holds now in the year 80. Here is an alteration indeed as to more words or some other words but the same opinion or solution with the difference only of a further explication of it and nothing therein besides avoiding offence intended The Author had been wary in declaring the Toleration he proposed to be a limited one and provided against the Jesuit upon reason of State and shewed his dread of Popery in dominion but had omitted the distinction of a toleration in regard to publick Assemblies and the private exercise of a mans Religion He explains himself therefore by way of supply signifying that what he said at first should be taken in regard to the tolerating the Papist only privately as his meaning really was then and is now but fuller expressed This is the opinion he recedes not from whether peculiar to himself or not that no man should be persecuted meerly for his conscience if there be no other reason Whether he be a Dissenter of one kind or other the common rule of Christianity must be remembred he says still that we do by all men as we would be done by and that with what measure we mete to others it shall be measured to us again These words are in all the Impressions And to this purpose I cannot but note what I find in Mr. B's 2 l Def. p. 16 who after he hath spoken of Mr. H. upon this account as a man of known Latitude and Universal Charity and discountenancing Cruelty adds concerning himself And I so little fear the noise of the Censorious that even now while tht Plot doth render them most odious I freely say 1. That I would have Papists used like men and no worse than our own Defence requireth 2. That I would have no man put to death for being a Priest 3. I would not have them by any Law compelled to our Communion and Sacraments Nor can a man think but the Reverend Dean of St. Pauls himself had also some Compassion Pity and Kindness for them when he condemns such Heats as transport men beyond the just bounds of Prudence Decency and Humanity towards their greatest Enemies Pref. pag. 34. And whereas this Gentleman objects That the alteration was not made in Mr. H's Book till five years after I hope there is a good reason for it because it was so many years before the second Impression and I know not by what means it could be altered till the Book was Printed a second time I return now to the Countrey Conformist The Doctor had said in his Pref. pag. 78. upon the Principles of some of our Dissenting Brethren Let the Constitution be made never so easie to themselves yet others may make use of their grounds and carry on their differences as high as ever To which the Conformist had said There was no doubt but insufferable Hereticks might pretend Conscience and many other things for Indulgence as well as modest and tolerable Dissenters but that he thought there was no reason that they should have the same Concessions and that he hoped our Governours would be able to distinguish between those that erre in small things and those that subvert the Christian Religion This Answer doth not satisfie our Author who enquires pag. 8. But in the mean time how doth he answer the Deans Argument that it is not the way to Peace and Union and to silence Differences If I should reply to this Gentleman in other words and give him another Answer peradventure he may be unsatisfied and ask the same Question again However I 'll venture this once Many of the Dissenters from the Church of England are sound in their Judgments and agree with us in all the great Essentials of the Christian Religion and in most of the Integrals also these would gladly incorporate with us but that there are some Impositions that they cannot submit unto now certainly if these things which are the reason and cause of the Difference between them and their Brethren were removed the difference were at an end Others there are that are men of sound Judgments in the main Articles of the Christian Religion but cannot incorporate with us in the National Church if these were Legally indulged they would be free from fear their minds would be at rest amidst variety of Judgments and Practices we might live together in Love and Peace And thus I think I have told this Gentleman how many of our differences may be ended and how those that cannot be ended may yet be laid to sleep and persons made amicable and friendly As for intolerable Hereticks I shall not be their Patron only I would have them used like men and that nothing be done to them that is unworthy of the Christian Religion which is made up in great part of Love Kindness and Compassion And if thus much Union and Peace will not satisfie this Author I suppose he may look for it in Heaven but I doubt that he will hardly find it in this world I am of opinion that a cessation of Differences among Christians and Churches and a total cessation of sin will appear at the same instant I do somtimes admire that those that never expect to see the one upon Earth but are very calm and patient without it should so passionately desire the other that they can be content to move Heaven and Earth for the obtaining of it What Seneca
said of particular persons I say of Churches Optimus est qui minimis urgetur vitiis He is the best man that hath least faults and there are none without them Those are the best Churches which have the least of defects and imperfections such as are without fault are not to be found out of Heaven And as among men the strong must bear the Infirmities of the weak so among Churches the strongest and most perfect must bear the Weakness and Infirmities of those that are more defective and imperfect If our Author should say that those that I plead for and call Churches are no Churches but acompany of Schismatical Conventicles I answer I am of opinion that they are as truly Churches and parts of this National Church or may be easily so made as the Churches of France Holland Geneva Switzerland c. are of the Universal But if our Author shall please to cut them off from the Catholique as I think according to his own Doctrine he must do I shall permit him the liberty for I know not how to hinder it to cut off these from the National Church having no mind at this time to debate the Justice of his Sentence Only I will beg leave to tell him that I can by no means believe that what he doth on Earth will be ratified in Heaven or that God will damn all that he gives up to the Devil If what hath been said doth not satisfie our Gentleman give me leave to suppose him a Minister of the Reformed Church in France be it at Charenton Caen Saumur or where you please and let me suppose that some Gentlemen of the Roman Catholick Religion address themselves to him after this manner Sir We pity your state and condition and have a kindness for you for though you be an Heretick you are one of human race the King our Master will have but one Religion in his Kingdom and you must comply with him or else you are undone your Estate your Liberty and peradventure your Life must all be sacrificed to him for he is resolved and peremptory in that resolution all must serve God the same way or they must bear the punishment of refusing it Here are the Subscriptions that are made by the Catholick Clergy do but set your hand to them and you 're safe and may share with them in the Preferments of the Church To this our Author answers Gentlemen I bear an honour to our Puissant and Invincible Monarch and am very ready to obey all his just commands but in this particular I pray you have me excused God is a King superiour to our Prince and must be obeyed before him I fear His Majesties Displeasure and Vengeance but I am much more afraid of that of God the one may hang or break me upon the wheel but the other will damn me for evermore I beseech you therefore interpose with his Majesty on the behalf of me and my Brethren that we may have the same liberty of worshipping God as for many years past we have enjoyed under him and his Royal Predecessors We vow all Duty and Allegiance to his Person and Government we will defend them with our Lives and Fortunes and we have nothing so dear to us unless it be our Consciences which we are not willing to sacrifice for his just Honour and Advantage The Subscription you propose I cannot make without the offence of God and my Conscience And I must beg his Majesties Pardon if I chuse to obey the God of Heaven before his Vicegerent here on earth The Catholick Gentlemen replies His Majesty is willing and resolved to put an end to all Differences and Controversies in Religion he is weary of those eternal Squabbles that are managed by Divines of different perswasions The Temple of Janus shall be shut he will have no more Religious Wars among his Subjects To grant you the Liberty of serving God after your own Way is not a method of ending Differences but of perpetuating them For when you are pleased others may succeed to you and under pretence of Conscience carry on Differences as high as ever Let our Author answer the Argument of these Catholick Messieurs and I do humbly conceive I may be able from his own words to answer that of the Doctor if it be not sufficiently done already but let him not misunderstand or pervert my words I do not affirm that the Impositions in the Church of England and those of the Church of Rome are equally wicked burdensome and offensive all that I say is they are both unlawful in the judgment of those that do refuse them and the Arguments against relaxing those Impositions or granting Liberty to those that do refuse them are the same and must receive the same Answers Pag. 9. The Conformist had said That he hoped our Governours would distinguish between those that subvert the Christian Faith and those that err in small things Our Gentleman answers Thus our Governours have distinguished already and yet it hath not put an end to our Controversies nor is he the Conformist sure that once more distinguishing will do it To which I reply That when and where our Governours have made this distinction I confess the Countrey Conformist is as ignorant as our Author will needs have him in the Constitution of our Church p. 10. What particular persons may have done I do not enquire but what the Governours of our Church have done They have determined the conditions of Communion and upon what terms the Clergy may minister at the Altar but where by any publick act they have distinguished between the great essentials of the Christian Religion which must be believed and lesser errors that may be tolerated I do not know and cannot find If this Gentleman thinks that all things imposed as conditions of Communion either upon Laity or Clergy in England are of the essence of Christianity and that all who have other apprehensions concerning them are damnable Hereticks let him enjoy his Faith to himself I am not like to become his proselyte nor I think many others P. 10. Our Author proceeds Will not the excluded parties cry as loud for Liberty of Conscience and complain of persecution as they do now Either these are good arguments or they are not If they be they will hold good in all cases that men must not suffer for their consciences but be allowed the free exercise of their Religion according to their own persuasions If they be not let them leave off the pretences of scruples and tender consciences with that liberty and freedom in exercising their Religion which they challenge as their natural birthright and demand no more of that than what the merit of their Cause requires In this discourse there are more strange things than one 1. He declares that if those arguments that are brought for free exercise of Religion from scruple and tenderness of Conscience be good they must be good in all cases The meaning is this One