r ^ COLLECTION OF PURITAN AND ENGLISH THEOLOGICAL LITERATURE LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY A DON.ATION F^ i^. ^/V^i^^ift^ ; !if; ^ /T//^/f/^^/v"^. /"'/^r^p ^^■~^^^J •aii^-amm^^:^ ^^- ^ f>^ rt^ :2.^ 2"b r 4 i--^ i'> .<; The Vnreafonablenefs of Separation ; O R, An Impartial Account OF THE Hijlory y J'^ure^ and Tie as O F THE ^^efent Reparation FROM THE Communion of the Church o^ E J^ L A OXT>. To which,SeveraI late LETTE R S are Annexed, of Eminent Protejiant Divines Abroad, concerning the Nature of our Differences^ and the Way to Compofe thenti -V By EDWAKt) STILLING FLEET, D. D. Dean oiSx.Pauls^ and Chaplain in Ordinary j? ^ to HIS MAJESTY. Clje S^econn <£nitioa Cojcyjtet?. LONDON, Printed by T. N, for He^^rj Mortlockj at the Vhi^mx in .St. Paulh Churcb^yard. M D C L X X X I. ^^ i . n^ Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2013 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library --Mpj//archive.org/details/unr^asQOQ§til i THE PREFACE. ,T is reported by Perfons of unqnefiionable credit^ that after all the Service B. Jewel had done a-^ gainji the Papifts, upon his Preaching a Sermon at St. Paurx-Crofs, in Defence of the Orders of this Church, a^d of Obedience to them^ he was fo Ungratefully and Spitefully ufed by the Diffenters of that Ttme^ that for his orvn Vindication he made a Solemn Prote^ation on his Death J)ed , That what he then faid , was ndther to pleafe fome^ nor to difpleafe other^^ but to Pro- mote Peace and Unity among Breithren. I am far from the vanity of thwk^n^!^ any ^hing I have been able to clo^in the fame C^iuCc^fit to be compared with the Excellent Labors of that Great Light ^ and Ornamcfrt of this Chnrch ^ ( wl^ofe Memory is preferved to this day^ with A L due ^rch-SiJhop Whitgift'jl?e-. fence of the Anfwer to the Admonition,!?,' 4i^ Life of Bifhop Jewel before hit Works^ », 34. nt.i Juelli pe^ Humfrcd. J^ n The i^R£FACE, due Veneration in all the Protcftant Cliurches ) but the hard ^fage I have met jviih^ upon the like occafion^ hath made fuch an Example more obferz^able to me\ especially vphen lean make the fame Froteftation^ with the fame fwcerity as he did^ For^ho'we'ver it hath been Mdltciohfly Oiggejied by fomcy and too eafdy beUeyed by othersy that I was put upon that Work, xvith a deftgv to inflame onr Differences . andtoraife & frefl) perfecHtion againft Diflenting Prote- Jftants 5 i rvas fo far from any thought tending that rray^that the ofily Motive 1 haa to under- take it^rras^ myjufi Apprehenfion ^ that the De^ ^ruU^on of the Church (?/ England, under a Prefenc^ of Zeal againji Popery, r^as one of the ktofl likely rvays to bring it w. Andlha*ve hitherto feen no caufe (^and lbclie*ve I pall not) to alter my opinion in this matter ; which was not rajhly taken up^but formed in my Mind from ptany years Obfer^z/ation of the Proceedings of that Reliefs Pzrty^Imean the Papifts) among us i which hath always Aimed at the Ruine of this Ghurchjrfx one of the Mojl Probable Means'^ if others failed^ tocompafs their Endsi As to their Secret and more Compendious ways of doing Mfchiefy they lie too far out of our VieWy till the Providence ^/Gdd, at the fame time^ dif- c^o'vers and difappoints them^ but this was -- more.^ The P K E F A G E. ffiOYC open and ^iftble , and although it fcewed the farther rvay about ^ yet they promifed them-^ fehes nofmallfuccefs by it. Many hjlruments and Engines they made nfe of in this Deftgn j many rvays and times theyfet about ity and al- though they met with federal difappointmentSy yet they ne^ver ga^e it over ; buty Would it not be veryfirange^ that when they can appear no longer in ity others^ out ofmeer Xeal againfi Popery, (hould carry on the Worh^for them ? Thtsfeemsto be a great Paradox to unthinJ^^ ing People , who are carried away with meer Noife and Pretences^ and hope thofe willfecurs them moji againfi the Fears of Popery, who talk tpith moJiPajpony and with leaji Zander- fianding againfi it ; whereas no perfons do re- aUy give them greater advantages than thefe do. For^ where they meet only with intempe* rale Railings ^ andgrofs Mifunderjiandings of the State of the Controverfies between then^ and us (^ which commonly go together ) ths more fubtle Priejis let fuch alone tofpendtheif Kage and Fury -^ and when the heat is over ^ they will calmly endevour to let themfee^ hor» grojly they haye been deceived in fome things ,, and fo will more eafily mah^ them believe.^ they are as much deceived in all the rejl. And thus t}K Eafl andWcfkmay meet at la^) and the itt IV The Preface. ftiojl fnrioHs Antagonifts may become fome of the eafieji Converts. This I do really fear rvill be the cafe of many Tboufands among hs ^ who novp pafs for moji zealous Proteftants , if eyery which God forbid, that Religion Ihonld come to be Z^ppermoji //; England. I^ is there- fore of mighty confequence for pre^venting the Return of Fope^iy ^that Men rightly underjiand what it is, For^ when they are as much afraid of an innocent Ceremony,^/ o realldola- try^ and thinly they can Worfliip mages, and Adore the Hoft on the fame gronndr^ that they may ufe the Sign of the Crofs, ot Kneel at the Communion i when they are bronght to fee their mifiake in one cafe , they will fuf-^ peSlthemfelves deceived in the other alfo. For they who toohjhat to be Popery which is not , will be apt to think^Fopety itfelfnotfo bad as it was reprefented , and fo from want of right nnderftanding the Differences between us^ may he eafily carried f orn om Extreme to the other. F:>r^ when the^ find the undoHbtedPudiiccsof th: Ancient Church condemned as Popifli and Antichriftian by their Teachers , they mufi conclnde Popery to be of mnch greater Anti- quity than really it is -^ and when they can Trace it fo "very near the Apoftles ximes^ they "Will Joon believe it fetled by the Apoftles themfelves] The P R E F A C E» themfelves. For^it will he z^ery hard to perfwade •'♦ any conftdering Men that the Chriftian Church (Jjould degenerate fo joon^ fo unanimonjly^ fo uniiperfaUy ^ as it mufi do^ //^ Epifcopal Go- vernment, and the ufe of feme fignificant Ce- remonies were any parts of that Apoftacy, ^ Will it not feem firange to them , that when ••• fome Unman Polities have preferred their Firft Conftitution /^ /(?//^5 without any cor fide-' table Alteration^ that the Government itifiti:^ ted by ChtiRyandJetled by his Apoftles, /honld fo foon after be changed into another kjnd^ and that fo eaftly^o infenfibly ^ that all the Chri- ftian Churches belie Ceremonies, as a ground for the ^leccfpty oj Separation jr(7/;; oar Churches Communion. But if we trace the FootUeps of this Sepa- ration as far as we can^ we may find fi^ong priibabi^ities^ that the Jefuitical Party had a great rt\\dence on the tery firjt bigrnnings of it F" which^ rve mafi confider ^ that when th': Church fEn^hnd}vas rejiored in Qjieen El zabeth*i Re wi^ there was no open Separa* - tion pom the Communion of it^ i'^r Jey' ral years J neither by FapiRs^ nor Non-confor- l^w. miftso:. Xil The Preface. mifts. At Ijft^ths more Zealous TcSrty of the Foreign Priefts and Jefuits, finding this Com^ pliance woiud m the end utterly dejiroy the Popifh Interefl: /;/ England, ihey began io dr<^w ijf tt;e j^cret Papifts from all QoiX^ox- mity with our Church , whidJ the old Queen MaryV Frkjis allowed them in : this railed Jome heat among themjel^es^ but at laft the way of Separation preqjailcd^ as the more pure and perfeft way. Bnt this was not thought juffi- cient by thefe bitfie FaSiors for the Churcb of Rome, ti^nlefs they could under tl>efame prc^ teftce of purity apJ pcT(c£iiony draw off Pro- teftants from the Communion of this Church too. To this pkrpoje Ferfons w re tmp!.:y'-d under the difguife of more Zealous Prote- ftants, to fet up th^ way of more Spiritual Prayer, ^/2^/j^re^/^r Purity (?/ Worfliip than was objerz^ed in the Church oi England : that fo the People , under thefe Pretences^ might foxes and be drawn into Separate Meetings. Of this we ha'Vf a Confderable E'vidence lately offered to the World ^ in the Examination of a Priefl: p iniploydat r/.-e Council-Table, A.D i^6j. ei'tg the gth o ' ^Elizabeth , which is pnl" lifhedfrom the Lord Burleighs Papers^ which were in the hands of Arch-Bifhop Uflber , and from him came to Sir James Ware^ whoje Son brought Firebra-nds 1680. The Preface. Xlll brought them ifJto Enghndy and lately catfed them to be Frintcd. Two years after one ^ Heath a Jefuit rvas SHmnion d before the Bi- fliop oj Rocheftcr on a lil^e account , for df parading the Prayers of the Church, and Jet- ting up Spiritual Prayers aboz^e them , and h: declared to the B^fhop , That he had been fix years in England^ and that he had la- boured to refine the Proteftants^ and to take off all fmacks of Ceremonies , and to make the Church purer. When he n>:U jei'x.ixl on , a Letter ^a^ found about him front a Jefuit in Spain, xvhere7rt-he takes noticc^hovr^^fz was admired by his Flock- a) d uiU hnn ^ tjjey hoiked on this way oj dividing Proteftants as the nioft c^eSinat to bring tuem all hack^ to the Church of Ro r*e ; and m his Chamber , they jonn-^ a Bull //(?/;; Pius V. to follorp the In- ^ ftruftions of the Society for dividing the Proteftants in England^ and the Licenfe from his Fraternity. There is one thing in the Jcfuits Letter defer^es our farther conf' deration^ n^hich thePubhfher (fit did not un^ derUand : which isy that HaHingham, Cole- man, and Benfon are there mentioned ^ as Per^ fans iwployed to fow a Fafliion among the German Hereticks , xvhich he tah^s to be fpo- \eu of the Seds in Germany i but by the German; XIV The Preface. German Hereticks the Englifh Proteftants are meant ^ i.e. Lutherans : and iheje yery Men are mentioned by our H/jiorians ^ rptth" out k^icnvnig o///:i> Letter^ as the woji aSliDc dnd bujie in the beginning of the Separationo Church Hiflo' Ofthefe ( faith Fuller ) Coleman, Button, mflory of Hallingham and Benfon were the chief. p.T^zr* ^^* At which time {[.nth Heylin ) Benfon , Button, Hallingham , and Coleman , and others taking upon them to be of more ar- dent Zeal than others, i^c. T^hat time is 1568, xfhich agrees exactly with the Date of that Letter at Madrid, Oftober 26. 1568. And both thefe had it from a much better izhQthxfA.D. Apithor than either of them ; Camden I mean ; ,ij^8. who faith , That while Harding , Sanders, and others attacked our Church on one fide; Coleman, Button , Hallingham, Benfon^ and others were as bufie on the other j who, under pretence of a purer Reformation, op- pofed the Difcipline, Liturgy, ar:d Calling of our Bifliops. as approaching too near to the Church of Rome. And he mah^s thefe tht Beginners of thoje Quarrels whic j af- tenvards brak^ out with great z^iokncc* Now^ that there is no improbability in the things will appear by the fuitablenefs of theje fretences about Spiritual Prayer^ to the Doifl^rine and Prafiices The Preface. xv Praftices of the Jefiiirs. For they are p^off - fed defpifers of the Cathedral Service, and arc excHJcdfrom their attendance on it by the Con- ftitiitioas of their Order ^ and are as great admirers ()/ Spiritual Prayer^ and an Enthu- fiaftick way ^/^Preaching, as appears by the Hijioryofthejirfl bfjlitution of their Order ^ by Orlandinus and Maffeius. They who are ac- ♦ ^ quaint ed nith their Doflrine of Spiritual Prayer, null find th.it which is admired and fet up here^as fo much above Set Forms, to be one of the loweft of three forts among them. That Gift of Prayer rvh/ch Men have, but re- quires the Excrcife of their own Gifts to ftir it up 5 they call Oratio acquifita , acquired Prayer; although they fa\^ the Principle of h is infufed. The fecond is^ by a fpecial im- mediate influence of the Holy Ghofi: upon the Mind, with the concurrence of infufed habits. The Third is far above either of thefe^ which they call the Prayer (?/ Contemplation, and is neyer given by way of habit to auy :, but It s in immediate and unexpreflible unions, Alltbefe I could enfily fhetp to he the Do^rine received and magmfedin the Roman Churchy ^I!'^"^' de nd' efpecially bythofc r^^ho pretend to greater Puri- ^^ii divine ty and SpirituaHty than others. But this is Inefficient tomypurpofe^ topro^e^ that there is c no XYt The P R E F A e E. 'fio improbability that they fhould be the firji fetters itp of this xf^ay in. England. And it is obfer^vablcy that it was mri/er i^ioipn hert-W in any other Reformed Church before this ^ tiwe: and therefore the beginning of it is ttn^ jptftly fathered by j owe on T. G. Bat by whom^ joe'ver it was begun^ it met with fuch great fuccefs in the "x^eal and warmth of dei/otion which appeared in it^fhat no Ch^rm hath been more effeBitaly to draw injudicious People i/z- to a contempt of our Liturgy, and admiring x/je Way 6>y Separation^. When by fuch Ar.s the People were poffiffed with an Opinion of a wore pure and Spiritual Way of Worfliip than was ufed in our Church, they were eafi'- ly drawn into the admiration ofthofe^who found fault with the Liturgy and Ceremo- nies that were nfed among us \ and fo the Divifions. wonderfully increafed in a iiery fhort time. And the Papifts could not but pleafe themfel'ves to fee that other Men did their Worh^foeffe^ually for them. For the Authors of the Admonition 14 Elizab, <^e. c/^re^5 They would have neither Papifts, nor others conftrained to Communicate : ^ vefmceofthe which although , as Arch-Bilhop Whitgift ^^j^^r,f.6os. j^-^f^^ they intended as a Plea for their own Separation from the Churchy yet, faith he y^ ^ ^ ^ Jht Preface. xvii die Papifts could not have met with bette*^" Proftors. Aiid eljewbere he tells tben'^ 1 ha^ they did the Pope very good fervice , and rags ^^ that he would not mifs them lor any thiup'. For what is his defire but to have this Church of England ( which he hath Acculcd ) ut- terly defaced and difcredited, to have it by any means overthrown, if not by Forrein Enemies , yet by Domeftical DiiTention? And, What fitter and apter Inftruments could he have had for that purpofe than you, who under pretence of zeal, overthrow that which other Men have builded, under co- lor of Purity feek to bring in Deformity j and under the Cloke of Equality and Hu- mility, would ufurp as great Tyranny and lofty Lordlinefs over your Pariflies, as ever the Pope did over the whole Church ? Jnd in another ptace^ he faith^ They were made the Engines of the Roman Conclave^where- by they intend to overthrow this Church by our own Folly, which they cannot compafs by all their Policy. Ard^Bifljop Gxmdzl^^irwiming (^as 1 find III a Letter of his ) expreifed his rrhtd byn, great fear of two things, Atheifm and Pope- ^^^''^'' '^^^" ry , and both arifing out of our needlefs Divifions and Differences, fomented, he doubts not by Satan the Enciny of Man- c 1 kind. xviu The Preface. kind, and the Pope the Enemy of Chri^ Aendom. By thefe differences , the Ene* mics of our Religion gain this y That no- thing can be eftabUflied by Law in the Pro- tcftant Religion, whofe every part is oppo- fed by one or other of her own Profellbrs , io that things continuing loofe and confu- fcd, the Papifts have their opportunity''' to urge their way, which is attended with Or- der and Government, and our Religion con- tinuing thus difi:ra(9:ed and divided, fome yile wretches lay hold of the Arguments on one fide to confute the other, and fo hope at laft to deftroy all . Dr. Sutchffe /aid lon^ ago y That Wife Men apprehended thefe unhappy Queftions about Indifferent things to be managed by the fubtle Jefuits, there- by to difturb the Peace and Settlement of our Church , until at laft they enjoy their long expelled opportunity to fet up them- felves, and reftore the exploded Tyranny and Idolatry of the Church of Komc.^ A- mong Mr. Selden'j MSS there is ;;;e////^/;V( an odd Prophecy, That Popery fliould de- cay about i«5o"^5 and be reftored about 170O5 which is there faid to be moft like- ly by means of our Divifions , which threaten the Reformation^ upon the late*- The Preface, XIX 6. rcll: of Pveligioa and open advantages to the Enemies of it, and nothing is there faid to be fo likely to prevent it as a firm eftablifhmcnt of found Doftrine, Difcipline^and Worfliip ill this Church. Among the J^fnit Contzens direiiions for uTiZ^at' ' reducing Popery into a Country, 7/^e tnojl^'^^' cofifiderahle are^ (^i ) That it be done under a pretence of eafe to tender Confciences , which will gain a reputation to the Prince and not ieem to be done from his own Inclination ^ but out of kindnefs to his People. (7.) That when Liberty is granted^then; the Parties be forbid to contend with each other 5 for that will make way the m.ore eafily for one die to prevail, and the Prince will be commended for his Love of Peace. ('3.) That thofe, who fufpe£l: the De- jfign and Prea h againfl: it, be traduced as^ Men that Preach very unfeafonable Do- ftrine, that they are Proud, S^lf-opiniators 3,. and Enemies to Peace and llnii)nr. Bwfc XX The Pre f a m. Bnt^ the fpuial A dyke he gwes to a Ca^ tholick Prince^ is^ ^es. ^ C4.) To make as much ufe of the Divifi- ons of his Enemies, as of the Agreement of his Friends, Hoi^ much the Popifli Party here hathfollorv^d thefe Connfels^ vPtUeafily ap^ pear by refli[iion iipoiz their behaz^ioiir thefe laH Tn^enty years. Bnt that which more particularly reaches to our own caje^ is^ the Letter e?^ Advice gi^ ^en to F. Young, by Seignior Ballarini, con* ^ cerning the beft way of managing the Popifh Intereft in England, upon His Majefties Re- ftauration, n^/:?^rei;; are feveral zfery remarka^^ hie things, Thi5 Letter was found in F.Young'/ Study ^ after his death ^ and was tranjlated out (Tjfltalian, and printed in the Colk^iion before mention d'-i The Firfi Advice //, To make the Ob- ftru5:ion of Settlement their great defign , efpedally upon the Fundamental Conftitu- tions of the Kingdom, whereunto if things fliould fall, they would be more firm than ever. (2.) The The Preface- xxi (2.) The next thing is ^ To remove tfie jealoufies raifedby Prin, Baxter, e^'"* of their defign upon the late Faftions , and to fet up the profperous way of Fears andjealoufies of the King and Bifliops. (3 ) To make it appear under-hand How near the Do6l:rioe, Worfliip, and Difciphnc of the Church of England comes to us : a£ how little diftance their Common-Prayer is from our Mafs , and that the wifeft and a- blefl: Men of that way are fo moderate, that they would willingly come over to us^ or at leaft meet us half wayj hereby the more flayed Men will become more odious, and o- thers will run out of all Religion for fear of Popery. f 4 ) Let there be an Indulgence promo- ted by the Fadious ^ and feconded by you* (c; ) That the Trade and Treafure of thie Nation may be engrofled between then>^ fdves and other difcontented Parties.^ {6.)i:hai. XXH The, P R..E F AM'W, ■ J. >- 5 »•, (6.) That the Biniops and Miniftcrs of the Church oiErjgland be A fperfed^as either Worldly and Carelefs on the one hand ; or fo Fadious on the other^ that it were well they were removed. Thefe are fame of thofe excellent Advices ihen given ^ and iow rpell ihey have hecnfol- lorded rpe all h^ow. . For^ according to thk C ounf el ^ when they could not hinder the Settlement then , The great thing ihey aimed at for many years^ i^aSy the breaking in pieces the Conftitution cfthis Church by a General Toleration. Coicman*j 'J'his Coleman owned at his Trial, and after Sentence^ Declared^ That pofflbly he might be of an Opinion, that Popery might come in^if Liberty of Corifcience had beeri grant- ed. The Author of the Two Conferences be- tween VCbefe and the Four Jefuits , owns the Declaration of Indulgence,! 67^ to be of the Papifts procuring ; bnt he faith ^ the Pres- byterians prefently fufpefted the Kindnefs, and hke wife Men clofed with the Confor- mifts 5 and refufed the Bait, however fpe- xious it feemed, when they fgw the Hook that Tryal, p. lor, The P R E ^F ACE. - xxiii that lay under it. // rvas fo fir from thk , that Iff hen one of ihe fntioHS Diffenters^ftijfeSi-^ ed the kjndnefs^ and made Queries upon the Declaration , wherein he reprefented it as a Stratagem to introduce Popery , and Arbi- trary Government ; oneof the more moderate Party among them^ Wrote a Puhlich^V indica- tion of their accepting the Licences^r^/^cTei/i n^dicu n- he declared to the IVorld^ in their Naive, That J'JJ/f ^^''^- they were not concerned what the Secret ^.^^fyfltficA- Defign might be, lo long as the thmg was pre/tnt indui- ^ood. And why, ^aith he, do you infinuate fepuncTo/ll Jealoufies ? Have not we publick, and the \'^^"»-'^7''^p^ Papifts only Private Allowance? In fine, we are thankful for the Honor put upon us j^ to be Publick in our Meetings. fVas this the fnjpicion they had of thu KindncCs ^ and their Wifdom in joyning rpitb the Confor- mifts? If fuch bold and notorious Z)ntruths dre puhlifhed now , when eyiery one that can remember but 8 years back^ard^ can difproi/e them , What account may we expeCi will be gi'ven to Pojierity of the P^jf^g^s of thcje Times , if others do not take care 10 fet them right ? And I am fofar from beliewng that they then clofed with the Conformifts,'/^^^ . I date the Presbyterian Separation chiefly^ from that time, i^or^ did they not take out d iidiil^ XXIV The •? R E F ACE. Indulgences Build Meetrng Places, and keep up Separate Cangreations ez^er fincc ? And did not thofe^ i^ho bejore jeern*d moji indmii- blc to hold Communion with our Churches jhen sjcrikgious. undertake in Print to defend the lavvfulnefs of tlVlVrt fibe/e Separate Meetings /ipr;;; //^^/j Principles t^n2fcl ^s will jnjhfie any Separation ? Vpon tbk, ^<^n> many ofthoje rvh^ frequented our Churches be- for ey withdrew thenfjel^es \and fince theybat^e formed and continued Sepzvgite Bodies j and: upon the death of one Minifter haz^e chofen another in his room. Andy What is a For* mal Separation tf this be not ? Then the E- jecied Minifters repr^e^ io Cities ^//^ Corpo- rations , not to l^ippfy ^^^^ neceffities of thofe who wanted' thenfybfit to gather Churches a* . 'Ar,fmY to mong them^ For a *very credible Ferfon in- fX'^i^u P^^'^ ^'^r That in the City he lived in, ¥7i-. where there were not above 50 or 40 that ordinarily refufed the Publick, and met Pri- vately before the ludulgence 5 there were Ten Non-conformift Minifters that came in-- to their City. And^ Wh/a could this be for^ but to draw People from their Churches , to waks up Separate Congregations ? And ece that timCythey ba leratjon. I gra^n Jome of ihem didriot^ ^- thQHgh Ijhall produce the Teftimony of ^ very considerable V^rfon among thetn^ who nnderjiood thofe af-- fairs as well as any Man^/2/i%. Mr. Ph. Nye. fVho^ not long before his Death , forejeeing •^ the Mifchie'vous Confequence of thofe Extra- *vagant He at s^ the People nere running into^ ^ Wrofe ^ Difcourfe on purpofe ^ to prove it, kwful to hear the Gonforming Minifters , and Anfwers all the Common ObjeSiions againfl it '-y towards the Conclnfwn he wonders^ how the differing Parties came to be fo agreed , in thinking it unlawful to hear us Preach ; p^g^j ^^^ but he faith ^ He is perfwaded it is one con- ftant defign of Satan in the variety of ways 3^ of Religion he hath fet on foot by Jefuits among us. Let us therefore be more aware of whatfoever tends that way^ Here we ha'z/e a plaits Confeffion of a L'^adinfi Man a- mong /fce Diflenters 5 T/p^r /fee Jefuits jr^r^ very hufte among them^ and that They and the > Devil ^oyned together in fet ting them at the . greateji dijiance pofihle from the Church of, England i . XXVllI The P R E F A c i:. England ; a^d that thofe rvho would C0Ht> i ermine the Devil and the Jefuits^ mufi ayoid ivbatever tends to that height of Separation the People rpere run into. And Mr, Baxter, in thofe days^Vvi but a little before the In- dulgence came oat^was fofenjible of the Mif- PteUce to the chief oi Separation,f/?^t he faith. Our Divifi- c«r^,p. 17. on gratiheth the PapiItS) and greatly hazard- eth the Proteftant Religion, and that more than moft of you fecm to believe, . or to re- gard. Where he fpeakj to the Separating People. And among other great inconz^enien^ cies of Separation, vohich he mentions^ this is one J That Popery will get by it fo great ad* cufcif Divl vantage as may hazard us all, and we may ^^TjJTt lofe that, which thefeveral Parties do con- tend about. Two ways efpecially Popery will grow out of our Divifions* ( I.) By the odium and fcorn of our difagreements^ inconfiftency, and multiplied Scfts : they will perfwade People, that we muft come for Unity to them , or elfe run Mad and crumble into duftand individu- als Thoufands have been drawn to Pope- ry, or confirmed in it by this Argument al- ready The Preface. xxix. T€2idyi and I am perfwadcd , that all the Arguments elfe in BcllarwifK and all other Books that ever were Written^have not done fo much to make Papifts in Enghvd^ as the Multitude of Se6ls among our felves. Yea, fome ProfeiTors of Religious (Iridnefs, of great efleem for Godlinefs, have turned Pa- pifts themfelves when they w^re giddy and wearied with turnings ; and when they had run from Sed toSeft, and found no confift- ency in any. {2.) Either the Papifts by increafing the Divifions, would make them be accounted Seditious, Rebellious^dangerous to the Pub- lick Peace ; or elfe when fo many Parties are conftrained to beg and wait for liberty, the Papifts may not be (but out alone, but have Toleration with the reft. And, jaith ht\ Shall they ufe our hands to do their Works, and pull their Freedom out of the Fire ? We have ah'eady unfpeakably ferved rhem^both in this and in abating the Odium of the Gun- powder Plot,and their other Treafonsjnfur- regions, an J Spanifli Invafion^ T^hus frcdy did Mr. Baxter JVrite ^i that: |/^;;^4 ,^^r/ ^,W/r^f^r the Indulgence^ he huth Xb$3 ibef^i XXX . The Preface. tbefe p^ff^gef, concernwg the Separating arid Dividing Humor of their People^ It fha- meth, it grieveth us to fee and hear from England^ and from New? England this com- ^sicrikgms mon cry. We are endangered by Divifi- loifio^^* ons, principally becaufe the Self-conceited part of the Religious People , will not be ruled by their Paftors, but muft have their way 5 and will needs be Rulers of the Church and them. Andjoon after he faith to them ^ You have made more Papifts than ever you or we are like to recover. Nothing is any whit confiderable that a Papift hath to fay , till he Cometh to your cafe, and faith, Doth not experience tell you , that without Pa- pal Unity and Force, thefe People will ne- ver be ruled, or united ? It is you that tempt them to ufe Fire and Faggot, that will not be ruled nor kept in concord by the Wifeft, and Holyeft, and moft Self-denying Mini- fters upon Earth. ( Are not thefe k^nd words for themjel'ves ^ ccnftdering what he gives to others ? ) And muft you, even you , that fliould be our comfort^ become our fliame , and break our hearts, and make Men Pa- pifts by your Temptation? Wo to the World becaufe of offences, and wo to fome by whom they come. Let The P R E F A c E. xxxi Let vow any impartial ^adcr Jnclge ^ who did mojl cffechtally fer^e the Papifts DcfTgns, thofe vpho h^pt to the Communion of the Church of England , or thofe who fell into the Courfe c?/" Separation ? I will a'ow^ what Mr. Baxter/^/^/?, That they might ufe their ^^^^^^'/^^^^ endeavors to exafperate the feveral Parties againfl: each other, and might fometimes prefs the more rigorous execution of Laws againji thenr-^ but then it wm tofet them at the greater diftance from m , and to make them more pli- able to a General Toleration. And they fome-- , times complained^ that thofe who were moft ad^ ^erfe to this^ found themfel^es urider the feve- rity of the Law^ when more traSrable Men ef- caped i which they haz^e weakly imputed to the implacable temper of the BiHiops, when they might eafdy underjiand the true Caufe of fuch a difcrimination : 'But from the whole it ap- pears^ that the grand Defign of the Papifls for many years , Wii6 to hreah^ in pieces the Conftitution of the Church of England ; which being clone , they flatter d themfelz^es with the hopes of great Acceffions to their Strength and Tarty , and in order to this ^ they inflamed the differences ammig tps to the utmofl: bjighthy on purpofe to mak^ all f/?^ Diffent- mg xxxii Tlie . P R E F A c eJ ing Parties to jo)n rvith them for a General Toleration 5 which they did not qitcflion would dejiroy this Church, and advance their Inte- reft. Whether they did judge truly in this^ I am not to determine , it u f efficient that they went upon the greafeji Probabilities. But is it pofpble to imagine fuch sh^lfnl Engineers fjonld ufe fo much. Art and Induftry to nnder-^ tnine and blow tip a Bulwark, unlefs they ho- ped to gain the place^ or at leaft fome very confiderable advantage to themfelves by it ? And it is a moji unfortunate condition our Church is in^ if thofe who defign to bring in Popery , and thofe who defign to h^ep it out jhould both confpire towards its deftruSlion. This J which I have reprefented, w.ts the po- fiure of our Church- Affairs, when the late hor- rible Plot of the Papifts, for Deftruftion of the Kings Perfon^ and Subverfion^/^f^/zr Re- ligion came to be difcoverd. It feems^ they found the other methods tedious and uncertain^ a?td they met with many crofs accidents^ many rubs and difappointments in their way , and therefore they refolved upon a ^ummary way of Proceeding, and to do their bufrnefs by one Slow. Which ^ in regard of the circumfiances of our Affairs^ is fo far from being incredible^ that Tlie Preface. that if they had ^o fuch defigiz^ it is rather a IVonder^ they had not \ efpecially confidcrir7g the allorved Principles and TraBices in the Church of^ovciQ. Upon the difcovery of the Plot, and the Means t'he Papifts ufed to con- firm the Truth ofit^ (knor^ing our great pro^tc- nefs to Infidelity ) by the Mnrther of a rror- thy Gentleman who received the Depoficions, the Nation was extreamly Alarntd with the Jpprehenfwns of Popery, and provoh^d to the jitmofl deteflation of it. Thofe who had been long apprehenftve of their refllefs defigns^ ivere olad to fee others awaken d ; but they feemed lih^ Men routed out of a deep fleep^ being ama- %edand confounded^ fearful of every things and apt to mijiruft all perfons who were not in fuch ^.Confternation as themfelves. During this heat^fome ofus^ both in Private^ and Fublick^^ endeavor d to bring the Diffentcrs to the fenfe of the necejpty of Union among Protcftants, hoping the apprehe^ifwn ofprefent danger^ com- mon to t^ all^ would have difpofed them to a better inclination to the things which belong to our Peace, ^ut finding the Illation thus vehemently bent againH Popery, thofe who had formerly carried it fo fmoothly and fairly ' towards the common and innocent Papifts, ({tsjhey then filed them) and thought them e 2 equally XXXIU xxxiv The Preface. equally capable of Toleratioa with them- fclvcs, mrv they fly out into the utmoji rage againfl them ; and others were apt^ by fly in- finuations, to reprefent thofe of the Church of -England (fome of v^hom had ap[^eared with 'vigor and ; efolution againft Popery, when they Tvere trncl^ing underhand forTolcrsLtion with them ) as Papift& in Mafquerade. . (But now they tac^ about ^ and flrih^ in with the ^violent Rage of the People, and none fo ferce again ft Popery as they. What influence it hath had upon others I l^iow ?wt, hut I confefs it did not leffen my efleem of the Integrity of thofe of the Church ^f England, that they were not fo much tr a nf ported by fudden heats ^ beyond the jufi bounds of Prudence, and Decency, and Hu- manity, towards their greateft Enemies, ha^ "ving learnt from the Apoftle , that , The wrath of Man worketh not the righteoufnels of God. T^hey expeBed as little favour from them as any^ if they had pre^vailed^ and I doubt not but fome of them ha^d been made the frfi Examples of their Cruelty. However^ this TPas i?2terpret^dto bewantofZeal^ by thofe who thinly there is no Fire in the f^oufe^ unlefs it I flame out at the Windows j and this ad'vaH" tage was taken by the in'veterate Enemies of our Church, to reprefent us all as fecret friends to The P R E F A c e: xxxv to the Papifts, (fo improbable a LyCy that the De'vil himfelf ivonid Slufh at the Telling of it^ jjot for the Malice^ but the Folly and III Con- tri'vatjce of it) and thofe who were fnore mo- derate, were content to alloiv three or four a- mong the Bifhops to be Proteftants, and about four or ji've among the Clergy of London. To feed this humor (which wonderfully fpread a- mong more of the People than we could ha^ve heliez^ed to hai/e been fo w^ahj ^jioji of the Ma- licious Libels againji the Church of England rvere Reprinted and dijperfed ^ and new ones^ added to them. Among the reft^ one Tranflated * out of French, to proz^e the Advances of the Church of England towards Popery , bptt fa unhappily managed^that thofe Terfons are chiefly mention dy who had appear d with moji Zeal againji Popery. Yet^ fo much^ had the Arts of fome Men pre'vailed o^er the Judgments of others^ that e^ven this Difcourfe was greedily fwallowed by them. But I muji do the Au- thor of it that ^ight^ to declare^ that before his Death^ he was "very fenfible of the Injury he had done to fome Worthy Divines of our Church therein 5 and begged God and them Pardon for it. Wherein^ as he followed the Example of fome others^ who were great Ene^ mies to our Church while they lived^ but re- Rented xxxvi The Preface. fe?2ted of it , rvhen they came to die ; fo^ I hope J others^ upon belter confideration^ will fee reafon to follow his. (But this rvas but an inconjiderable trifle in comparifon of what ' foL lows. We were ft ill in hopes ^ that Men fo Wife , fo Sdf-dcnying oi the Non-confor- mifi: Minifters reprefent themfel^es to the World^ 7rouId^ info Critical a time ^ hazre made fo me fteps or adz^ances towards an Urri- on with tis 5 at least to haz^e let jm known their Senfe of the Trefent State of things j and their Readinefs to joyn with us-^ as far as they coitldj a^ainfi the Affaidts of a Common E- nemy. In fiead of this ^ thofe we Difcourfed rviih ^ feemed farther off* than before , and ' %vhcn we leaji expeSied fnch a !BloWj under the Na?ne of A Pica for Peace, out comes a Book, which far better deferred the Title of A Plea for Diforder and Separation , not without frequent^ fbarp^ and bitter ^efleSiions on the Conflitution of our Church, and the Conformity required by Law ; as though it had been defigned on furpofs'^ to Reprefent the Clergy of our Church as a Company of Noto-- rioH^ Lying and Perjured Villains, f.r Con- forming to the Laws of the Land, and Orders Efiablifhed among us , for there are no fewer than Thirty Tremendous Aggravations of the The Preface. xxxvii the ^in of Conformity fet dorpn in it. And all this dotie^ without the leaji ^roz'ocation {t/- 'vcn on our fide ; when all our Difcouries that touched them^ tended only to UrAon^ and the Dciirablcnefs of Accommodation. If this had been the Single lVor\ of one Man^ his Paffion and Injjrniities might ha^e been fome tolerable excufe for the indifcretion of it j but he If^rites in the Name of a Whole Party of Men^ and deli'vers the Senfe of all his Ac- quaintance 5 and if thofe Principles be orpn^ • cdy and allowed by them^ there can hardly be expeSied any fuch thing as a National Settle- ment, but all Churches muft be heaps of Sandy ivhich may lie together till a pujff^of IVind dif" perfes ihem , haz'ing no jirmer Bond of Z^ni^ on^ than the prefent humour ad good will of the People, ^ut of the principles of that Bookj / have Difcourfed at large^ as far as concerns the bufinefs of Sepatation in the Second and Third Parts of the follorping Treatifco ^utj as though this had not been enough^ to (l:>ew what Enemies to Peace Men may be under a Pretence of it ; not long after ^ the fame Author fets forth another Book^ with this Title. The true and on-ly Way of Con- cord xxxviii The Preface. V? gnu cord of all the Chriftian Churches As ^though he had hcenX^niiS Plenipotentiary upon Earth , and were to fet the Terms of Peace atid War amom all Chriftians , Imt c±> -^ I rvifh he hadjherved himfelffnch a^ at tern of Meeh^efs^ Humility^ ^atkrice^ a??d a Teaceable T>ifpofitioft^ that we ?night not ha^ve fo much ^afon to Vifpnte his Credentials. 'But this is likervife Fraught with fuch impraSiicahle 2^otions^ ani diz^iding Principles'^ as though his whole Gefigft had been ^ to proz^e ^ That there is No True Way of Concord among Chriftians: for if there be m other than what he allows^ all the Chriftian Churches this day in the World^ are in a mighty miftak^. When I looked into thefe Books^ and faw the Defign €f them^ I was mightily comerned , and inf- nitely furprii^ed^ that a Terfon of his ^puta- lion for^Tiety^ of his Age and Experience m the J For Id ^ and juch a Lover of Peace ,' as h£ had always profeffed himfelf , and one who tells theyVoxldfo often ^/hisDying^and of the Day of Judgment^ ffjould thinly of leaving two fuch Firebrands behind him^ as both thefe Books will appear to anyone who duly cmifiders them. Which ha've been fwce follow^ ed by four or fiz^e more to the fame pur pofe^ fo .that he jeenis refolz^ed to leaz^e his Life and Sting The Preface* xxxix 'Sting together in the Wounds of this Church, ) And it made me extreamly pity the cafe of this poor Church , when eruen thofe who pretend to Plead for Peace, and to bring Wsitcr to quench her Flames^rtfo but add more Fuel to them. This ga^e the firfi occafion to thofe thought Sy which I afterwards deliz^ered in my Sermon 5 forftnce by th.' means of fuch Books, the%ealoffo ma* ny Pec pie W(vs turned off from the Papifts ^• gainft Wofe of our Churchy I faw a plain ne- ceffity^ that either tve mujl be run down by the Impetuous Violence of an Enraged^ but "Vnpro^ ^oked Company of Men , or we miifi venture our felves to try^ tvhether we could fiem that Tzde^ which we faw coming upon us. And it falling to my Lot to breach in the mojipub^ lick^ Auditory of the City, at a more than ufual Appearance y being the Firfi Sunday in the Term , I conftdered the Relation I flood in u?7der our Honored DiocQ^kiiy to the Clergy of the City^ and therefore thought my felf more obliged to tah^ notice of what concerned the Peace and Welfare of the Churches therein. Z)pon thefe Confiderations^ 1 thought fit to take that opportunity , to lay open the due f^nfi I had of the Unreafonableners and Mifchief of the Trefcnt "-eparacion. Wherein I was fo far from intending to refleSi on Mr. B. as f Preaching Tlie P R E F A c e; "O,. lag in the Neighborhood of my Pa- riib, that to my hji remembrance , 1 ne^ver Sjra thought of it , cither in the maj^ng or '^reaching of that Sermon., And yet throuyh- out hhs AnRvcr he would infmuaic^ That I' had fcarce any one in my eye biuhimrclf Mis Bocks indeed had made, too great an Im- prejpon on my Mind for me eafily to forget them : 'But it rvds the Great ^ the Vanoerom^ the Z^naccountahle^ Separation^ which I h^.ew to be in and about the City, without regard to the Greatnefs or Smallnefs of TariJJjeSy to the Abilities or Tiety of their Minijiers^ or to the Teace and Order of the Church we li^e in ; which made me fix upon that SubjeSi ; al- though I knew it to be fo fore a place^ that the Parties m oft concerned^ could hardly endure to, ha've it toiLhed ^ though with a Soft and Gentle Hand. Howezfer^ I confidercd the Duty which I owe to God, and this Churchy, abo've the ejleem and good words of Tee^ijh and partial Men , as I had before done in my dealing with the Papifts , and 1 nfolved to giz>e them no Juft ^^ro^ocation by ^^ej^^roach- ful Language^ or F eyfonal^fleBions 5 bui if Truth and Reafoa would Anger them^ I did not^ hold my felf obliged to fiudy to j^leafe them. But The Preface. xlt Bnt againji ihk rvhoh Z^ndertah^ng^ there ha*ve been trpo common ObjeSlions. Firjl^ That it was Unfcafonable. Secondly y That it was too Sharp and Se\ere. To both thefe I fball Anfwer ; Firfl:, As to the Unfeafonablenefs of 4t. What I Was it LInfeafonable to perfwade pfOteflants to Peace and Unity ? That fnrely is "very feafonable at any time^ and much more then. And I appeal to any one that Reads it^ whether this rvere not the chief and only Defign of my Sermon. And to fay ^ This was Unlealbnablc^ isjuji as if a Garifonwere be^ fiegd by an Enemy ^ and in great danger of being fv.rpri%cd , and although they had fre- quent notice ofitgk^en them^ yet many of the Soldiers were refolved not to joyn in a common body^ under Command of their Ojjicers^b'nt would run into Corners^ a ferv in^a Company ^ and do Tvhat they l/ft^ and one fjould undertake to ^er- fivade them to relHrn to their due obedience^and to mind the Common Interefi^ and fame Graz^e f 2 3y- xlii The P R E F A c E* By-jianders (hould fay^ It is true, this is good Counfel at another time, but at thi prefent it is very Unfeafonable. When could it h more Teafonable, than when the fence of their danger is greateji ubon them ? At another time it might have been lefs neceffary j hut when the common danger is apparent to ally Men of Senfe^ or common Ingenuity ^ could not but take fuch ad<2>ice mojl kindly at fuch a fea- fon. But this advice was not given to them- felves, but to the Magiftrates and Judges, and that made it look like a defign to ftir them up to a perfecution of them. 'There had been fome colour for this^ if there had been the leaji word tending that way through the whole Sermon. ^But this ObjeBion is general^ ly made by thofe who ne'ver read the Sermon, and never intend to read it ^ and juch I have found have fpoken with the greatefi bitternefs againfl it. They refolved to condemn it^ and therefore would fee nothing that might have alter d their Sentence It is enough^ it was Preached before the Magiftrates and Judges^ and therefore it mufl: be for Perfecution of Diffenters. Tsione are fo incapable of Convi-- Siion^ as thofe who prefent ly determine what a thing muft be^ without confidcring what it is. Js it not poffible for a Man to fpea^ of Peace before The Preface. xliii before Hannibal, or ^/Obedience to Govern- ment before Julius Cxfar } Mujl one fpea\ ef nothing but Drums and Trumpets before great Generals ? Which is jnji as reafonabk as to ffippofe^ that a Man cannot breach a- bout Diffenters before Judges and Magiftrates^ bnt he mnji defign to jlir them up to the fe^ere Execution of I aws ? But it is to no purpofe for me to thinly to con'vijice thofe by any Vin- dication, who will not be at the pains to read the Sermon it felf for their own fati6faSiion. But the Diflenters themfelves were not there to hear it And muji ive ne, faith Mr A. How can they be moft Godly, who cannot bear reproof of their Faujts^which is a main part of God- Imefs. / am really forry^jowc offny Anfwerers haz^e fo vmch wade good the Truth of that Saying in its plaineji SenCe. But there needs no wore to clear wy hnention in it^^> but to cor.'- fider^ ofriphow it isfpol^n , viz. of thofe^ rvho will not bear being told of the Sill of Separa* tion by their own Teachers, For my Words arc^ " Is it that they Fear the Reproaches of ' ^^ the People s^ which fowe jerv of the woft E- ^^ minent Perfons among them ^ ha^ve found ^^ they wuji undergo , if they touch upon this ^^ SubjeSl (^for I l^noiv not how it comes to '^ t^P^ ^^^^^ ^^-^^ ^^^fi G^^/y People among them ^^ can the leji endure to be told of their Faults,^ In all which words I had a particular refpeEi to the Cafe of Mr. Baxter^ who^ after he had ^ with great hone^y^ publijhed his Cure of Di- vifions, and therein fharply rebuked the Sepa* rating, Dividing Humor of the People^ who pretended woft to Religious Striftnefs, he met with bitter Reproaches from them for the jah^ g 2 of I The Preface. of this Freedom^ that he was forced to PnhliPj a Defence of his Cure in Vindicatio?7 of hi ft" f elf from them , wherein he fa/th ^ He was Treface,^,iu judged by them tG betoo Cenforious of *' them and too fharp in telling them of that which he did not doubt to be their Sin : And again. If I be miftaken , Should- you be fo inpatient) as not to bear with one, that in fuch an Opinion differeth from you ? And why fhould not you bear with my DiiTent , i^ge. i5. ^s well as I do with yours ? Again. ^ Why fliould not you bear with lefler contradidi- on^ when others muft bear w^idi far greater from you? Will you proclaim your felves to be the more impatient ? You will then make Men think you are the mofr guilty.™ And a litter after ^ And yet you that fliould be mod; patient, take it for a heinous crime and injury , to be told , that you wrong them, and that you judge too hardly of them; and that their Communion is not unlawful. And when we joy n to this nhat he faith elfewhere , /I)^^ they are the moft Self-conceited ProfefTors who will not be ruled by their Minifters^ but are moft given to Diyifion and Separation : m a paffage ' hfore mentioned ; there needs no more to Zfin- dicate the truth of this fni^g^ 'than to.jloew ^^ that The Preface. the done ^ who talked more fharfly again ft the 5in, and Mifchief e?/ Separation, than I have done? as may he feen in the Firft Part of the following Trea- tife. ^ h 2 ^nt ' Iviii Tiie P R E F A c e, (Bnt as if they had been f/^ePapifts Itfjlni" vients 5 to execute the fury of their Wrath and Difpleafnre againft me , they Summon in the Forrer of their Tarty ^ and refol^e^ rvith their full mighty to fall upon me. Andy as if it had not been enough to deal with me by open Force , which is more Manly ^ and Genervus i • they made uje 0f mean and bafe Arts , by Scurrilous Rimes ^ by Virulent and Malici- ous Libels fent t0 me without TSlames i by Idle Stories , and Falfe Suggejiions , to rob me at once , of my Reputations and the Tran^ quillity of my 'Mind, But I thanh^ God , I defpiftd fuch pittiful Artifices , and fuch • Unmanly and Barbarous UJage i which made 720 other Imprejpon on my mind^ btU to maJ^ 7m underjtandj that other Men could ufe me^ as !B'ad ^ or Worfe , than the Papifts. ^ut jrch'Bifhop this brought to my Mind a Taffage of Arch'- vcfncl%. Bifliop Whitgift , concerning their fredecef p-4»3- fois nfage ofEllhop Jewel , after he had fo Jioutly defended this Church agai^ift the Pa- / pifts. But y faith he^ it is their manner, ex- cept you pleafe their hVimor in all things^ though you otherwife deferve never fo well, all is nothing with them , but they will Deprave von, Rail on you, Backbite you, Invent Lies of you , and fpread Falfe Ru- mors, The Preface. Jix mors 5 as though you were the Vileft Per- fons upon Earthy / could hardly harue be^ licked fo ill a CharaSier of Men j^retendii^g to any Iqnd of Religion, had I no^t found fo juji aj^arallelj abating 0)ily the due allorvan- CCS that mufl be made as to my Cafe ^ with refpeB to the far greater deferts of that in- comparable Bifhop. But notrvithflanding all - their hard Cenfures of me^ I do ajfure them^ 1 am as firm a Protcftant as ever Iwas^and fhould be fill as ready to Tromote the Iritcreft of the Proteftant Religion , yea^ and to do any ^al KJndnefs to the Diflenters them^ fehes^ that may be confjient with the Natio* nal Settlement of our Churchy and the Ho- nor of our Reformation. After a rvhile^ they thought ft to draw their Strength into open Field and the Fir ft who ap- peared againfl me^wasDr. Owcn^who treated me with that Civility ^ and Decent Language ^ that I cannot but Return him Thanks for it ^ however y I was far from being fatisfied with his Reafoning, as will appear in the Book it felf The next was Mr. Baxter , who appeared • tt^ith fo much Anger .^ and unbecoming Tajpon'y that I truly pittied him ^ and was fo far from being tranfported by it ^ that it was enough to cure an inclination to an in4ecc?2f p^Jpon^ to fes 1 X The Pre face. fee^horv ill it hccanic a Man of his Agc^ Prc- f(^^ion , dnd KepHtatiof?. At frji he jcnt me jome Captious Qjtejiiofis for a Trial of S\ill ^ / Returfied hvn Anjrver ^ They were not to the bufinefs , but if he intended to An- fwer my Sermon (as I perceived by his Letter he was put upon it ^ and I l^nexp hoiv hardly he could ab^ain from IVnting however) I defired him not to make too hafty a Re- .• ply, Bht he^rvho feldom tal^es the Advice of his Frief?dsy was^ 1 f^pp^f^-) ^^'^ ^^^^^ prove- l^ed by this Good Connjel'^ and feews to haye IVritten his whole Book in ove contwHedfit of Anger '^ and by fome Rules of dviXity pc^ \ €nliar to himfelf he pnbliped my Private Let- ter, withoHi jo much as letting we k^orv that he intended it. Whatever Injitrious and Spiteful Reflexions he hath made upon me through his Book, I can more eajily forgive him J than he can forgive hiwfelfy when he lool\s them over again with a better mincL . And therefore Ipajs over the Scurrility of his Preface, wherein^ after he hath in ao Particu- lars defcriled , the moft Unskilful, Proud, Partial, Obftinate, Cruel, Impertinent Ad- verfaries he could thinly of places of Scrip- ture , or Similitudes for^ he then concludes ^ But although all this be not the cafe of the Reverend The P R E r A c e. Reverend Doilor. What a walicious rt^ay cf Reproaching is this ? To name jo many rucry til things^ and to lea've it to the Reader to apply as witch as hepleafes-, and rvhen hi is'charged tvith any one to fay^ h^ weant not that^ [or he addcd^ although all this be not the cafe of the R. Dr. If this be the Juftice, the Charity, and Ingenuity of M . B. and his Brethren^ who put him upon Writing , they nwji gi've me leave to ihinh^^ there are [owe Non-conformift Minifters, that are not the Wifeft, the Meekeft, nor the moft Self- denying Men upon Earth. He feems much concerned about my being likely to have the laft Word : which I am 'very willing to let him hazfc^ hoping he may cotne to himfelf be- fore he Dies ; a^d may live to Repent of the Injuries he hith done to his Brethren, and the Mifchiefs he hath done to the Church of God, by fo indujirioufly expcftng the Gover- nors ofit^ and laying the Foundation for Endlefs Separation^ as will appear in the fol- lowing Difcourfe. . - TheThird who entred the Li^s^ was one^ who feezed to Write more lik^ aVVell-difpofed Gentleman, than lil^e a Divine, he- v, ilhes pery well to the Caufe he undertakes ; he dif- €OHrfes Grayely and Fioujly^ witlont Bttternefs and XI Ixii The Preface. andKancor^or anyjharp KefieSlions^ afidfome- times with a great mixture of Kindnefs towards we i for which ^ and his Prayers for me, I do heartily Thanh^hiw. What If /id Material to the btiftnefs in his Book, I ha^ve confider*d in its due place. 'the Fourth comes forth with a more than ordinary brisknefs i andfeems tofet up rather for a fort oj Wit, than a Grave Divine. His Bookrefembled the Bird of Athens, for it feems to be made up of Face and Feathers : For^ fet* ting aftde his Bold Sayings^ his Impertinent J riflings y his hunting up and down for any oc^ cafion of renting his little Stories and Simili* tudes^there is yery little ofSubR^ncc left in him^ hut what he hath borrowed from Dr. O or Mr. B. Methinh^^ fuch a light ^ 'vain^ fcurrl* Ions Way of Writings doth not become fuch a Tendernefs of Confcience as our Diffenting Brethren pretend to. Inhere is a fort of plea- fantiiefs of IV it which fer'ves to entertain the Reader in the rough and deep Way of ContrO'^ ^erfies ; but certainly there is a difference bc< twcen the Raillery and Good Humor of Cent le^ men^andthe Jefls of Porters and Watermen. But this Author feems to be Ambitions cfthe /w- nor of a Second M^ittm^whofe way he imitates^ and whafe Withe^^uals* Tetthis is not his greatejl The P R E F A c E. Ixiii gnateji Faulty for he deals with me as a Man that xpasby atiy weans iobe run down^ xpithont regard to common Ingenuity. For^ f^PP^fi I had miftaken the Senfe of my Text, which I am certain I did not , yet 1 am not the only Perfon in the World that Tall{S Impertinently^ Suppofe there had been a Fault in my Rea- foning, methink^ the jenje oj Humane Frailty fhould mah^ Men not grorp Infolent upon fuch a Difco^very : and yet I do not knorv one thing which he hath made it in y as will appear here- after. But^ Will nothing ferz^e but to Kepre- jent nie to the World as a kind of Atheiflical Hypocrite, i e, as afecret undernuner of the proof of a Deity , under the pretence of pro- *z/ing it ? Yetythis he doth more than once : which was fo remote from his Buftnefs^that nothing but a Wretched^ Mai cious D^ftgn ofExpofing me ^ could mah^ him draw it in : He gives a gen- tie Touch at it in Im Preface, to prepare the Re.:ders Appetite ; but p. -c. he charges me with ] roceeding upon fuch Principles , as plainly render it impofllble by any certain Argument to prove the exiftenceof aDeity. M . B. h id unha^?ily faid^and without the leaji ground^ that my Principles overthrow all Re- ligion i and Mr. A. vouches it ^and under tah^s to prove it for him. Mr. B. begins hk Flea ^^ 'i • i for IxiV The -J2 R E F ACE. tor peace vpith a fayitig of St. Auguftin , (he wcant St. Hicroin ) that no Man ought to be patient under the accufation of Herefy : What (hould a Man i. .:n he under the accnja^ ijo24 I,; b ring guilty of overthrowing all Re- ligion , and rcndring it impofllble, by any certain Argument^ to prove that there is a God ? According to all Rules of Jujike , a Charge of Jo high a nature ought not to be brought agahiji anyMan^rv>ithoHt juch e^vidence^ as appears clear and con^vincing to him that brings it. But I n in their Bjpothcjtf Phyfical Certainty as to the being of things 5 bnt ^ Is there //^certainty but what is Phyfical ? What thinkj he of Ma- thematical , or Metaphyfical Certainty ? fo that there might be a Mathematical or Me- taphyfical Certainty of the Being of God , though this Principle were allotped. How then doth this proipe ^ that I renderitimpof- fible , by any Certain Argument, to prove the Exiftence of a Deity ? a. That I wake it a Principle of my own, whereas 1 only juppofe it as following from a Principle of others. To char this^ it will be necefary to lay down the fcope of thai Dif- courfe , which was to pro/, on the account of the Grounds of Sepa- ration, it is only this ^ The Sub^Committce q£ the Affembly arguing againft the Diffent- ing Brethren, jaith he^ fay , That fuch ten- dernefs of Confcience, as arifeth out of an Opinion (cui poteft fubeffe falfumj which may be falfe, is not a fufficient ground, d^r. to juftifie Separation* tut here is a dangc^ roHS &c. in the middle of a Sentence ^ which viacle me look again into the Pap^rs^and there I fnd fuch words left ont^ as fully explain ai^d determine the fen^e j for the whole Sentence runs thus* We much doubt, whether fuch papers for a^- tendernefs of Confcience^ as arifeth out of ^^^i^/^^^''' an Opinion, Cui potest fur ffe faljum , when the Confcience is fo tender, as that it may be withal an cning Confcience, can be a fuf- ficient ground to juftifie fuch a material Se- paration as our Brethren plead for- Wbere we fee ^ the force is not lakl upon the bare poilibility of Deception (^for then no Sepa- ration Ixx The Preface. ration cotild he allorved in any cafe^ ftnce all Men arc fallible ) but upon the fuppofidon of an adual deception, tphich an Erroneous Conihiencc J Hppojes. For it is f neb a decep- tion as' doth JHppoje Tendernefs of Confci- encCj nhich doth not arife from ^ pofllbility {^jf being deceived, but from ^/; Error of Con- fcience. The Flea is^ Tendernefs of Con- fcienee ^ the Qnejitcn is , Whether this Plea be fufficient to juftifie Separation ? We much doubt it, fay they. Why fo ? the other Reply. Our Reafon is^ Becaufe this Tender- nefs may arife from an Erroneous Confci- ence. Bnt why fhonld you jujpeti an Errone^ oiis Confcience in the Cafe ? Becaufe Perfons are liable to be deceived in the Dictates of Confcience : efpecially when they go meer- ly upon their own apprehenfions, without producing Arguments ex Natura rei. For all the debate between them about Tendernefs of Confcience proceeded upon this. So that their meaning is not here to be tak^n as to the bare poflibiHty of deception, but of fnch an Opinion^ as carried a great probability along with it^ that they were aftually deceived. Jnd what coherence is there now between this^ and the F roof that I bring for the Exiftence of a Deity? fo thaty it is a^parenty that this was an The Preface. Ixxi an occafion fcugot after^ to fay as much loadnp^ on me as he could. And by this taji let the Rea- der Judge , Tvhat Iiigeniiity / am to expeH from this Man, ^ The Laji rvho appeared againji my Sermon is called^ the Author of the Chriftian Tem- per i I i^ci4 glad to jind an Adverfary pretend- ing to that -, halving found fo little of it in the Anfwers ofMr.B. andMr.K. His bufinefs is^ To commit the Reftor of Sutton with the Dean of St. Paul's : which n^M enough to make the Common People imagine ^ this wm fomebu- fie Juftice ojf Peace who had taken them both at a Conventicle. Theivhole Defgn of that Book doth not feem ^ery agreeable to the Chriftian Temper which the Author pretends to. For it is to pic\ up all the Tajfagcs he could meet with {in a 'Book^ written twenty years fince ) with great tendernefs towards the Diftenters, before the Law's were EftabliHi'd. As though^ as Mr Cotton once anfwered in a like cafe^thcvc . were no weighty Argument to befound,but "^ what might be gathered from the weaknefs or unwarinefs of my Expreffions. And.^ Have ^^r^^^ ^^ . you not 'very well requited the Author of that R. vviiiiaTis, Book for the tendernefs and pit ty he had for ' ^' yoH^ and the concernnwit he then exprejjed^ to Lave brought yon ii ^ uponcdifiQr terms than k were Jxxii The Preface. mere fine e required ? And^ Hath he mrv dejkr^v^ ed this at your hands ^ to haz^e them all thrown in his face, and to he thm upbraided ivith his former l^ndnefs ? Is this your Ingenuity, ^(?wr Gratitude, your Chriftian Temper ? Are yon afraid of halving too many Friends, that yon thus iife thofe , rphom yon once tooh^ to be fuch ? Methinks herein you appear "very Self-deny- ing , but 1 cannot take yon to be any of the Wifeft Men upon Earth. When you thin\ it reafanable^ that upon longer time^ and far- ther confideration^ thofe Ty'ivinQS of the Aflem- bly, who then ^p^^^y^r/ Separation, fbould change their Opinions ; fVrll you not allow one fingle Perfon, who happen d to Write about thefe mat'' t^rs when he was very young ; in twenty years time ofthemojibufie and thoughtful part \ of his life^ io f^ reafon to alter his Judgment ? . But after all this^ wherein is it that he hath thus contradiSied himfelf? Is it in the Toint of Separation, which is the prefent bufinefs ? Noy * y^ far from it^ that in that "very Book Jjefpea^s as fully concerning the Unlawfulnefs of Sepa- ration,^/ in this Sermon. Which will appear by- thefe particulars in it. irsnk^iiif, C'O That it is unlawful to fet up new- Churches 5 becaufe they cannot conform to fuch The Preface. Ixxiii fuch pradifes which they fufpe^i: to be un- lawful. (2.) Thofe are New Churches when Men ?fe6l: diftmft Societies for Worfhip, under diftinfl: and pecuHar Officers, governing by Laws, and Cliurch Rules^ d;fferent from that form they feparate from. (g.) As to things in the Judgment of t?ie ^-^s^ 1-4- Primitive and Reformed Churches left unde- termin'd by the Law of God^and in matters of meer order and decency, and wholly as to the Form of Government, every one , not- wichftanding what his private judgment may be of them, is bound for the Peace of the Church of God, to fubmit to the determina- tion of the lawful Governors of the Church. AHorp but thefe Three Conclufions, and defend the prejent Separation if you can. Why then do you make fuch ajiir about other paffages in that Book,^;;<^ takefo little notice ofthefe^ivhich are moft pertinent and material ? Was it not poffihle for yon to efpy them^ when yon ranfacl^d every Corner of that Book, to find out fome thing rvhich might feem to make to your pnr- pofe? And yet the very fir ft paffagejy^/f quote page y. is within twoLeaves of thefe'-) and Two paffages more yon foon after quote ^ are within a Page of^^^^ ^> 7-1 them i and another in the very fame Page ; p^^^ g. k 2 and ixxiv The P R E F A C E. and fo many up a?td down fo 'very mar them^ that it is impojfibte youjhould not fee and con- fider them ? Yes he hath at laft found fomc- thing very near them , for he quotes the z>^ Tages wJme they are. And, he faith ^ he will do me no wrong^for I do difi:inguifli,he con- feifes, between Non-communion in unlawful or fufpe^ied Rites or Pradifes in a Church , and entering into diftind Societies for Wor- fliip 1 his is doing mefome right howezfer^al" though he doth not fully fet down my meaning. But he urges another paffage in the fame placCy ^/x. That if others caft them wholly out of Communion, their Separation is neceifary — Jhat is no more^ than hath been always f aid by our Divines/// refpeSi to the Church ofKotnc. But, Will not this equally hold againft our Church 5 if it Excommunicates thofe who cannot conform? I Anfwer^ (i.)) pn to Diflenting Protcftants^ will foon bring Qowiw^xow among us^ and in the end Popery,^ oo I hai^eJJjcwed already j and a Snfpenfion of all the penal Laws that relate to Diffentcrs is the fame thing with a boundlefs Toleration. Secondly^ If any prefent Fa'voiirs be granted to fich^ in Consideration of our Circitntfiances^ and to pre^vent their Conjunction with the Pa- pifts, for a general Toleration, (for if ezfir the Papifts obtain it , it muft he under their Name } if 1 f^J-, f^ch faz/our be thought jit to be Jhewed them^ it ought to be with fuch rcfiriStions and limitations , as may prez/ent the Mifchief which may eafily follow upon it : For all fuch Meetings are a perpetual ^preach * to our Churches^ by their declaring^ That pur Churches are no true Churches , that our Manner of Worfliip is unlawful, and that our Church-Government is Antichriftian ; and that on thefe accounts they feparate from us, and worfliip God by themfelves. But if fuch an Indulgence be thought ft to * be granted^ 1 humbly offer thefe things to Conr federation. I. That none be permitted to enjoy the pri- 'viledge of it^ who do not declare^ That they do . Ixxxvi The Preface. do hold Communion with our Churches to be unlawful. For it feems nnreajonahle to allow it to others 5 and will gi've countenance to endlefs and caufelefs Separations. a. Ibat all who enjoy it ^ he fides taking the Tefl: againji Popery^ do fnhfcribe the Thirty Six Articles of our Faith J becaufe the ^pretence of this Liberty is joyning with m in Points of Fairly ; and this may more probably fre^vent Pa- i pifrs getting in among fl them %3, That all fuch as enjoy it^ wnfi declare the particular Congregations they re of^ and enter their TSlames before fptch Commiilioners as fjall be amhorifed for that pnrpofe ; that Jo this may be no pretence for idle^ loofe^ and profane perfons^ nei^er going to any Church at all. 4.. That both preachers and Congregations be liable to fa^ere penalties 5 if they ufe any bitter or reproachful words^ either in Sermons or Writings^ againfl the ejtablifhed Conjli- tut ion of our Churches '-^ becaufe they defire only the freedom of their o^vn Confidences ''^ and the ufiing this liberty will difico^er^ it is not Confidence^ but a turbulent faBioiiS humour^ which makes them fieparate from our CommU' nion. 5^ That all indulged Perfions he particularly obliged The P R 1E F A c iL. Ixxxvii ohl'md to pay all leg^l Duties to the Tarochial Churches^ (lejl mcer cq^vetoafnefs tempt Men to run among thent^ and no perfons fo indul- ged be capable of any Tublick^Office. It ??ot • being reajoi.able that fuch fhould be trnjied with C>i'vernment , n^ho looh^ upon the Wor- /hip efial'l^JJed by I .v -r as unlawful. 6. That no other penalty be laid on fuch indulged Perfons^ but that ofTw^lvQ Pence a vS nday for their abfence from f/^^ Parochial Churches 5 which aught to be duly colleBed for the Ufe of the Toor , and cannot be com-- pi.inedof 06 any hea^y Burthen^ confidering the Liberty they do enjoy by it. 7. That the Bidiops, cis ViCitors appointed by Laip^ hai^e an exaSt Account gizfen to them^ of the ^ile of their Worfliip and Difci- pline^ and of all the perfons belon^ring to the ifidulged Congrega!iof7S y with their Qttalities and places of Abode 5 and that none be ad- mitted a Member of any fuch Congregation without acquainting their Vifjtor with ity that fo means may be ujed toprez^ent their halving our Communion, by giving fatvsfaBion to their females. This Povver of the Bifhops cannot be fcrnpled by thcm^ fmce herein they are cohfidered as Comtnifijoners appointed by Law. m S. That Ixxxviu Tlie Preface, 8* That no indidged per fans prefame undtr fe'vcre -penalties to breed up Sc\\o\2.vb ^ ^w>to teach Gentlefn^fis Sons Univcrflty-Learning; becanfe this may be jujlly looked- oh ds a deft^n to pro[yagate Sdndxi to Fofterity, and to lay a^ Foendation for the dijiurhance^ of future Generations, ^ 11. JstotheC^koftbe cjc&cdMm'iiiQrs^ I haZ'-e thefe thijtgs to oj^er : ' I. That bare Stibfcription^ of the Thirty Six Articles concerning Dodrinal Points, be 7iot allowed as fvtfji<:i^nt to qualijie any Man , for a Living, or any Ghurch-preFerment , for thefe Reafons. Fir ft, Any hzy-mzn upon thefe Terms n/ay not only be capable of a Living, but may take upon him to AdminifteF the Sacramentsj^^T^/V/j WiU ne^uer allowed in any well'ConJiituied Church in the Chriftian World. And fuch 4n allormnce among us^ in flead offetlingand ' uniting us^ will immediately bring things into great coafufion, and give mighty Ad^f ant age to the Papifts again fl our Church. And we hai^e reafon to fear^ a Dejign of this Nature^ under a pretence of Union oiVrott^^nts^tends to the Subverjion of thi^ Churchy and thrown - ing all things into confufion, which atlafl will md in Popery*, Secondly^ ( ^ The Preface. Ixxx t>V'.?econdly>, This will hrwg a Faction into the Churchy r^hich mil more endanger ^t than Exter?ial Oppofition For fitch Men mil come in Triumphantly^ having beaten down Three of the Thirty Nine Articles , and being in Legal Tojfejpon of their Tlaces^ mil be ready to defie and contemn ihofe who fubmitted ta the refi^ and to glory in their Conquejls^ and draw Followers after them^ as the ViSlorious Confcffors againft Prelacy and Ccremoiiies. And can they imagine thofe of the Church of England will fee the ^putalion of the Churchy or their awn, to fnffei^ fo much^ and not ap- pear in their own Vindication ? Things are not come to that pafs ^ nor will they fudden^ ly be 5 that the Friends o'^ the Church of England will be either afraid^ or afjamed to own her Caufe. lie do heartily and fincere- ly dtfire Union with our 'Brethren^ if it may be had on pifi and reafonable Terms ; but they mnft not thinh^^ that we will give up the CauifC of the Church for it ^ fo as to coyidemn its Con fii tut ion , or mah^ the Ce- •remonics unlawful, which have -been hither^ to objerved and praSUfed in it. If any Ex- fed lent cOrn he found out for the eafe of other Mens Confciences , without rejieciing on our cxpu'-i if they can be taken in , wiihont re- IX .tK m 2 proach -^^^c Tlie P R Er F A ee. froach or dijhonoHr to ^/^e Reformation of the Church J I hope no true Son of the Church af England will oppofe it. But iftlM'Dvfign 'be to brins^ the^m in 0 a Vdidaon to bridle and contrail the Epifcopal Power ^ by felting up forty BiOiops in a Viocefs againji one y if it be for them to trample upon the Ghureh 0/ Englp.ndj and not to fabmit to its Order ana Governinent npon fair and moderate terms^ let them not call this a Veftgn of Union, but the gi'ving haw to a Party to oppofe the Church of Enghnd. And tvhat the fuccefs of this will be^ let wife^Men judge . Thirdly-, // a Subfcription to Thirty fix Articles were fuffcient by the Statute 13 Eliz. c.i 2.1 do not underjland how by virtue of that Statute a Man is bound publickly to read the Thirty nine Articles in the Church, and the Teftimonial of his vSubfcription, on pain of being deprived ipfo faSio , if he do not. Co, Hji 4. For theL. Ch. J. Coke /^i/^. That Subfcripti- ^r.s^soM- ^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^ Articles is required by force of the Aft of Parliament i g Eliz. c. 12. Jnd m adds ^ That the Delinquent is difabled an^^ deprived ipfo faBo -^ and that a condi- tion^ Subfcription to them was not fuffici- ent, Was refolved by all the Judges in Eng- 'iMd.' Wit how a Man fbeuld be deprived ipfo Tiie Preface, xci ipfo fa £1-0^ for not fnhfcrihing^ and 'fading the 5 p Articles^ ^ appears by the Cafes men^ rjioiied in Coke, and yet he required only to fub-^ fcribe to 0^6^ by the fame St^ntQ^ is a thin(r too hard for me to concei've. 2 . ©«t notwithflanding this , if any tern- per can be found outy as to the manner of Sub- icription, that may giz^e eafe to the fcruples of our ^rethreny and fecure the Peace of the Church 5 the defired Union may be attained rt>ithoHt that apparent danger of increafing the F anions among us. And this I f:ppofe may be done^ by an ab- - folute Snbfcription to all thofe Articles rphich concern the Dodlrine of the true Chriftian Faith, and the life of the Sacraments , and a folemn Promife under their hand, or Sul> fcription of Pca(?eable Submiffion, as to the reft , fo cis not to oppofe or contradiSl them^ either in Preaching or Writing ; upon the fame penalty as if they had not fubfcribed to the 5 6. IVhich tnay be a more probable means to keep the Church in quiet^ than forceing a more rigorous Snbfcription /ij7^?2 them j orlea^ "ving them at their full liberty. ^. Js to the other Subfcription rf^wrVe^, I Jae to the 5 Articles. The jirji is pro- ^ widedfor by the Oaths of Allegiance and Su- u, ' ' premacy; ■■^■^f-. '^11 The P R^E F A't-E. premacy. 'The third -i^ fJoe fame' -mik- the -Stibfcri prion to 'the 39 Articles. Jnt^-a^fo ihe fccond , about the Book of 'Common- Prayer, &c. It ought to be conjidered ^ (i.) Whether^ for the fatisfaSiion of the fcmptilom , fame more doubtful and obfcure "pajfages may not yet be explained or amended ? * Whether the New Tranflation of the Pfalms were not fitter to he itfed] at leafl in Parochial Churches > JVhether portions of Canonical Scripture ivere not better put in jiead of Ape- crypha Leflbns ? Whether the Kubrick about Salvation of Infants , might not be rejiored to its former place^ in the Office of Confir- mation^ and fo the prefent exceptions againji it be removed? Whether thofe exprejpons ivhich -fuppofe theJiriSi exercife of GKcipl'mc^ />/ Bu- rying the Dead, 7vere not better left at liberty • in our prefent Cafe ? Such a Review made 'by Wife and Peaceable Men^ not given to ^ Wrath and Difputing, may be fo far from 3 being a difljonour to thi^ Churchy that it may add to the Glory of it. (^^yVpon juch a Review, whether it be not great reafon that all Terfons who Officiate in the Church Jje not only tied to a conflant Life of it in all publick Offices \ (as often as they admini^ fier them)which they ought in ^ erf on frequ en Hy to The P R EF A c E^ xciii fa do^ but to declare at their jirft entrance up- on a Parochial Charge, their approbation of the Ulc ofit^ after their own Reading of it^ that fo the People may not fnfpeSl them to car- ry on a faSiioiis Dejign^ under an outward pre- tence (?/ Conformity to the Rules of the Church they lizie ini (3.} Whether fuch a folemn Uilng the Li- '^ turgy, and approbation and promile of the life of it^ may not he fufficient ^ in flead of the. ^ ate Form of declaring thtnhi^Qntznd Confentj which hath been fo much (cruplcd hy^ our brethren ? l^e/e are all the thifjgs which appear to me > reafonable to be allowed in order to an Union, ajid which I fuppofe may be granted without .detrime?it or di /honour to our Ghmch. There * are other things 'very deftrable towards the * happinefs and flouridiing^^^ this Church, as the exercife of Difcipline i« Parochial • .j^ChurchcSyin a due fiibordination to the Bidiop; the Reforming the Ecclcfiaftical Courts as to Excommunication^ without prejudice to the excellent Profeffion of the Civil Law ^ the building of more Churches in great Pariflies, efpecially about the City of London ; the retrenching Pluralities ; the flriSinefs and fo- M^inity of Ordinations i the mal^ng a Book \, • j^ /^ ) XCIY The Preface. of Ojinons fuit able to this Age^ for the better Vegulating the Converfations of the CIcrgrv. Such things as thefe s ntight facilhateoHrlJ^ moUy and mah^ our Church in flight of all its Enemies become a Praife in the whole Earth. The Xeal I ha^e for the True Proteftant Religion , for the Honour of this Church and for a firm Union among Brethren, hath Tr an/ported me beyond the bounds of a Pre- face ; Which I do now conchide with my hearty Trayers to Almighty God^ That He, who is the God of Peace, and the Fountain of Wifdom 5 would fo direB the Counfels of thofe in Authority^ and incline the Hearts of the Teople , that we may neither run into a. Wildernefs of Confufion, 7ior be dri *ir> p\To egi dga cga c\^ ■>2 aSa fi52« e2>a iiidS BH>a i^Ei v^ B3e^ CSdi ii£^ ^'SSa 4^ «^ T51T <^ ♦fX «4^ «^ C^k* «^ ♦^ *^ *^ <^ «?*> «^^«» The Contents. PART I. An Hiftorical Account of the Rife and Progrefs of Separation. SEft. I. No Separation in the beginning of the Reformation^ although there were then the fame Reafons which are now pleaded. Seft. 2. Our Terms of Communion being the fame which were required by the Martyrs in ^ Maries days. Seft. 5. A true account of the Troubles (?/Francford. Mr. B'i* mifiake about them. Seft. 4. The firfl cmfes of the dijlike of our Ceremonies. Seft. j. The Reafons of retaining them at the time of Reformation. Seft* 6. The Tendencies to Separation checked by Beza and other Reformed Divines abroad. Seft. 7. J he Heats of the Nonconformijis gave occafton to Separation. Seft. 8. Th^ir zeal againfi it notwithfianding 5 their ^ O reprejefiting Tlie Contents, rep^efef2t'i77g the (lf7fMhefs andmifcliefofit, Sed.p^ lo. The trite (late of the Co^troverfie between the Sepiratifls andlSoncot^formJjis, Se(S. II. Their An- jzvers tm the Scparatijis Re 'Jons. Scdt. 12. The pro- grefs of SepMratio^, The Schifms and Divijions amo^^g the Separatijis the occajion of Independency, Th. it makes Separation the more inexcufable^ by own- itjg.jowe of our Churches to he true Churches, Seft. 13. The mifihiefs which fcllovped Independency both a- broad^ a?7d Sedl 1 4 h:ther into England. Seft. 1 5. The Controvcrfle fated between the Divines of the Af frilly and the D/ffenting Brethren. Sed:,.i6. The 'Caufe of the Affemhlj/ given up by theprefent Dijjenters. Scdt 17. The old Nonconformifts Judgment of the tndarvfnlnefs of Mens Preaching here^ when forbid- dm by Lms ^ fully cleared from fome late Obje^i- 0':s, PAR T ir. Of the Nature of the Prefcnr Seprati :: SECi. I. The different Principt s of Separation^ laid down. The thwgs afited on with refpe^ to our Church. Stdl:. 2. The largenejs of Parifjes a mere Colour ana Prcten^^si j f jewed, from Mr.B'son>^> ivords. SlCX. 3. T^he Alyficrj!- cf the Presbyterian Scpataiion (pcned. Sect, 4 The Principles of it as tpjhe People, Of occafonl Communion^ how far owned i The ContentsT cvp>ied^ at7d of what force in this m^ttcr^fljevc^ecl frcf^ par^il/ei cafes, Sttt. ^. Thereafofis for this occafto- val Ccmmtwion extihstr.ed. Seft 6. Of the pre- tencc ef greater Edificaticn in jcpjrate Meetings ^ne- ver dlloived by the Separatijis or hidependcKts as a. reafon for Separatibh, ISo reafon for this prete.-vce Jher^'cd from Mr, BV words. ScCt.Y.T/S^ Prir/ copies of Separation as to the Minifiry of vitr Ckurches, Of joyniifg with our churches as Ontories, Sect. 8. Of the r^opUs judging of the nrorthrejs and co?npetencj of their Minijiers, Mr, BV d'^rachr of the Perple, The Ijnpertinency of this Plea as to the London Sepa- ration. Seel. 9. The abfurdi' of billowing this liberty tofeparatefroin Alr.BV own ivords.^cdi. 10 The aUovc-^ ance he gives for Separation on the acrvanf • Zonfor'^ mity, Vvh.tt pnhlickjVorfldip may be forbidden. Scd. T I. The MinijiryofonrChnrch ch'irged :v7lh'Ufir(AttGn in many cafes ^ and Separation allowed en that icc' J{r?t. Seft. 1 2 ,0f Separation fro.vt hhicim rrelaijisS:& 1 3 . jhat the Schifm doth not ahviys fie on t'. t Impofers (ide^ where the terms of Commnjuon are tho'ghi ^n- fnL Seft. 14. i he Principles of the indepcnJeiit Sepa- ration, or of thrfe who hold all Communion with our Church unlawful, Sefl*. i j The n dure 'f Separation fiutedandexplained, Seft. 1 6. The ck.rrge of:^ eparation made good again ji thofe xvLo hold Occa lonallCommuni'' onlavpfnl Seft. 17. The obligution to confiant Comma^ Tiion^ where Occasional Commnfiion is allowed to be law- fnl^at large proved. Seft. 1 8. The Objection from our Saviours praSice anfwered. Seft. 1 9, The Text^'tix],:^, 1 6. cleared from all Obje&ions, Seft. 20 A new Expo- (ition of that text fiewed to be impertinerd. Seel", 2 1. The charge of reparation proved againji thufe who hold all Communiori with ffs wilawpd. Seft.22323. Then/if n 2 chief The Contents. chief brought upon the Caufe of the Reformation by it The tejiimotiies offorein Protejiant Divides to that fnrpofe. Seft. 24. NofolftbilityofUmonamong the Protejiant Churches upon their grourids ^ tip hjch hath been much rvified for and defired by the heji Protc fici?tts. Sea. 1^. All the ancient Sckifms juftifiabk on the fame pretences. Sedt. 26. There can he no end of Separation on the like grounds, Mr, A's Plea for Schifm at large confldered. S eft. 27. The Obliga- tion on Chrijiiarjs to preferve the Peace and Z)nity ef the church. The Cafes mentioned vcherein Separati- en is allowed by the Scripture. In all others it rspro' ved to be a great fin. PART III. Of the Picas for the prefent Separation. SEa. I. The. Vlea for Separation from the Conjii- tution of the Parochial Churches confidered. Seft. 2. Jujiice HobartV Tejiimony for Congregation nal Churches anfwered, Seft. 3. No Evidence in An* tiquity for Independent Congregations, Seft. 4, The church of CdiXXhdigt governed by Epifcopal Power^and mt Democratical in S, Cyprian'/ time, Sefl:. 5, 6, No evidence in Scripture of more Churches than one in a City , though there be of more Congregations. Seft, 7. No Rule in Scripture to limit Church-povper to a fngle Congregation 5 but the General Rules ex- tend The Contents^ Wtd it fnrther. Sed. 8. 0/Dlocefan Epifcopacy $ the ^e^ion about it fluted. But one Bijfjop in a Ci- ty in the ^eji Churches^ though many Affembltes, StOi, 9. Diocefan Epifcopacy clearly proved in the African Churches, The extent of St, AuftinV Dio- cdfs. Sedt. 10. Diocefan Epifcopicy of Alexan- dria. The largeneff of Theodoret j Diocefe : the Tefiimony of his Epijile cleared from all Mr. BV late (yhjeSions, Seft. ir. Diocefan Epifcopacy not re* pugnant to any Injiitution of Chrifi , proved from Mr.h.himfelf Se£i:.i2. The Power of Pttsbytcis in our Church. Sedt, i j. The Epifcopal Power fuc- ceeds the Apoftolical , proved from many TeUimo- vies. Sed. 14. What Power of Difcipline is left to Parochial Churches , as to Admijfion, Sed. 1 5'. Whether the power of Sufpenjion be no part of Church Difcipline. Seft. 16,17. Of the defeS of Difci- pline 5 and whether it overthrows the being of our Parochial Churches. Seft.18. 0/National Churches, and the grounds on which they are built. Se61:. 19. The advantages of National Churches above Inde- pendent Congregations. Seft. 20. Mr. BV Que- ries about National Churches anfwered. The No- tion of the Church of England explained. Seft. 2 lo What necejjtty of one Conjiitutive Regent part of a National Church. Seft. 52. What Confent is necef fary to the Union of a National Church. Seft. 23. Other ObjeSions anfwered. Seft. 24. Of the Peo- ples power of choofing their own Paftors. Not founded in Scripture. Seft, 25'. The tefiimony of Antiquity concerning it fully inquired into. The great difiurbances of popular EleUions : the Canons agalnfi them. The Chriftian Princes interposing. 'TbQ The Contents. T/^e dficie>?t Rights of Nomination ar:d PrefmtaH^ on. The praffice of foreign Protcjicijit Chnrches. No reafon to taJ^e away the Rights of Patronage t& pit the choice into the peoples hands. )ojrMtons anfwcreci. Seft. 26. No unUwpilncjs rr t.e Terms ofour CoOimunion. Of fihjtantial p ^us of Wor- pip. The things agreed on both fides. Stct. 27 The ivaj offi?tding the difference between mere Ce- ren:onies and parts of Divine WorJI?ip cleayed. St ft. 28. The difference of the PopiJIi oMrine from ours^ oi to Ceremonies. Seft. 29. l je Sign of the ■Crofs a Right of Admiffion into our church , and no part of Divine Worfhip. Seel". 50. No new Set' crament. Mr. BV. Ohje&ions anfwered, Seft. 5 1. Hir great mifiukes about the Pap/ffs DoHrine con^ cerning the Moral Caufalitj of Sacraments, Seft.52. Of the Ciffloms obferved m our Church , though not firiUly required. Seft. 33. Of the Cenfures of the Church againji Oppofers of Ceremonies ^ and the force of Excommunication ipfo fafto. Seft. 34. Of the flea of an erroneot^ Confeience in the cafe of Separation. Sedl. 35'. Of fcruples of Confei- ence ft il/ remaining. Seft. 36. Of the nfe of God- fathers and Godmothers in B.iptijm. Scft. 37. A^^ ground of Separation becaufe more Ceremonies may be introduced. Seft. 38 No Parity of Reafon as to the Diffcfiters Pleas for feptraiing from our churchy ar^d our Separation from the Church of Rome. An Appendix containing fever al Letters ofEmi- nent Prcief'Wt Divines already (Ijewing the unrea* Jonablencfs yfthe prefent Separation from the Church of Englr.ud* Letter The Caiitents. Letter of Mofifiettr le Moyn, i. —p. 595'. ' i^^f Mofjjleur le Angle, p.4i2- OfMofifienr Claude, ,.p. 42 /• AN 1^ CO A N Hiftorical Account OF THE %ISE and 9%gg'RESS OF THE CONTROVERSIE ABOUT eparation. Se^. I PART I. Or our better underftand- ing Kht State of.thisC(7«* ^(i^ trover^ Things. I. Th.it although the pre- \ fint Reafof^s for sepjration re mid have held from thehcgir7mfjg of our Reforr/tithfty jet , r7Q fnch thwg was then pra&ifed^ or al/owed ^ by thofc who were then mofl zealous for Reformation. ^ B 2.That (TO 2, That when Separation began , H was moji vehe- mently oppofed by thofe Non-conformijis who difliked many things in our Chfirch^ and wifiedfor a farther Re* formation. And from a true Account of the State <)€ the C on tr over (leihcn^ it will appear, that the fr/^c^'- ples owned by them, do overthrow the prefentpra- ftice of separation among us. In the making out of thcfe^ ! (hall give a full ac- count ofthe iJ/yeand rrcgrefs. o( this Controverfie 2^-- bout Separation £iom the Commumon of our Church, I. That although the prefect Keafons for Separation would have heldfromthe \eginning of the Reformation^ jiet nofuch thing was then pra^fifed^ or allowed iy thofe who were then moft zealous for Reformatio?:. By ^e- paration we mean nothing elfe, but ?i;///)^r^25?7>^y;'tf;!^ the confiant Communion cf our Churchy and Joyning with Separate Congregations for greater Purity of IVor* Jhip^ and better means of Edification. > By the prefent Reafons for Separation WQ midi:rii2ind fuch as are at this day infilled on^by thofe who pretend to juftifie thefe Praftifes 5 and thofe are fuch ., as make the Terms oi Communion with our Church to be unlawful. And not one of all thofe, which ray Adverfaries at this time hope to Juftifie the prefe^/t separation by , but would have had as much force in the beginning of the Reformation. For our cA//r^A ftands on the lame Grounds 5 ufeth the fame Ceremonies fonly fewer 5 ) prefcribes the fame Liturgy (only more cor- refted 5)hatb the fame conftitution and frame of Go- vernment 5 the fame defeftof Difcipline^ thefame manner of appointing Parochial Minifters^ and at leaft as effeSual means of ftiification, as there were when the Reformation was firft eftablifhed. And what advantage there is^ in our prefent circumftan- €e% ces, as to the Number, Diligence and Learning of our Allowed Preachers 5 as to the Retrenching of fome Ceremonies, and the Explication of the mean- ing of others 5 as to the Mifchiefs we have feen follow the praftice of Separation^ do all make it much more unreafonable now, than it had been then. Sedi, II. It cannot be denied, that there were different apprehenfions concerning fome few things required by our Church in the beginning of the Re- formation:^ but they were fuch things, as are the Jeaft (crupled now. Rogers refufed the wearing of^ ^^s and Square Cap, andTtppet^ &c. utilefs a Difference were ^^«- Voi.j. made between the Popijh Priejis and ours. Hooper at firfk fcrupled the Epifcopal Habits^ but he (ubmitted afterwards to the ufe of them. Bhcer^ and fome o- thers,diniked fome things in the fii ft Common-Prajer- BooksiiEdward the Sixth, which were Correfted in the Second : So that upon the Review of the Litur* £j/ there feemed to belittle or no diffatisfadtion left in the Members of our Churchy at leatt, as to thofe things which are now made the gromds oi Separati- on. For we read of none, who refufed theconjlant ^ ufe of the Liturgy^ or to comply with thofe very few Ceremonies which were retained, as the Crofs in Bap* tjfm^ and Kneeling at the Communion ^ which are now thought fuch Bitghears to fcare People from our Communion, -^Xidi make them cry out in fuch a dread- ful manner of the Mijlhief of Imposition s^^ as though the Churchmufl: unavoidably bebrokenin pieces by theweight and burden of two or thiee k.'ch in up* portable Cci emonies. Now we are tojd, Thnt it is Mifchkf of unreafonable that any fhonld create a nccejfity of Septra- ^'^pofnions tion^ and then compl.iin of an Impoffibiltty ofVmon By ^^ '^^^" B 2 Whom? Wbom? At what Time? In what Manner wzi this necejjity of Sep traiion created .hofocver were Mmiflers then of the Prelates Ordina- tion^ they never renounced it^ though they died Mar* fyrs, Johnfon indeed quotes fime paflages o(Brad- ^ohnfon's ford. Hooper, and Bale againft the Hierarchy':, But he J^^^^nth^^ notorioufly mifapplies the wordsof Bradford^which Rcafoiu are, The time was when the Pope was out of England , hut not all Popery '-i which he would have underftood of the times ot Reformation , under Edward VL whereas he fpeaks them exprefly of King Henrys days. Audit is not credible. Hooper (hould think the Hierarchy unlawful, who (as it is generally be- lieved) had the Adminiftration of two Biftiopricks at \jA BradMs at once. Bales words were fpoken in He^;rji VIII. Confer. his tinie^ and cov^ld not be meauc ot a Proteftarit y^"^' Hieraiclvy, tor he' was after a Bifiop himfelf. But Mon, Vol. H.Jacob anfwe 'b to them di^A^h at fup poking thefe Men g. p 19?. di Hiked the titer arckyjt made the iirofiQer aQaind the twcr, p.'bz, Pr7r^c7plcs oj o paration : Jee7f?g jor all that^ thej did notrefuje to tommumcate and partake wtih them then as true Chrijitans, And that not only occasionally and at cert iin Jeafons^ but they maintained co^Jiant and fixed Communion with our Church as the Members of It. SeU, 5. Thus matters flood as toC then the Minifier, after a (hort Prayer for Divine Affiftance, (according to Calvin s Chjiorfi) was to proceed to the Sermon --y which be- mg ended, then followed a General Prayer for aUF- fiat'^^. particularly fjr England, ending with the Lords Priyer '-i and fo repeating th^ Articles of the Creed^ and another Pfalm Sung, the People were tliUniffed with the Blefling. By which we fee, : u'e V ?r not the leaft contfiverfie, whether a Liturgy or not-y out whether thv^ Order of Service was not to be accomra ^dated, as much as might be, to the French Model. Howeverj wihen the v (bnt to the Enghjh in C other (10 ) other places to refort thither, by reafon of the great Conveniencies they enjoy'd , and acquainted them * with what they had done 3 it gave great offence to them^ which they exprefled in their Letters. Thofe cf Z;/rir4. Tent them word, They determined to nfe r70 oiler Order ^ tha^jthat rvhich w.is lajl ejiahhjjjcd hi E^g- land 5 and in another Letter, They defieto he ajfured from them jhat if they re moved thither^ they JI)Giild all. joyn in the fume Order of Service concerning Religion^ rvhich was in England la^ fet -forth by King Edwards To this thQCongregat ion of Frank ford tet\x:nQd An- Aver, That they could not ^ in all feints^ warrant the full Ufe of the Boo l^of Service^ which they impute to their prefent Circumjiances^ in which they fiippofe fuch Alter rations would he allowed 3 but they intended not hereby, to deface the worthy Laws and Ordinances of King Edward, Thefe Learned Men oi Stra^burg^ under- ftanding their refolutions, fend Grindal to them with a Letter fublcribed by 1 65 wherein they intreat them. To reduce the Englifh Church there^ 06 much a-s poffthle^ to the Order lately fet forth in England, /^i?, fay they, by much altering of the fame^ they Jhouldfeem to con- demn the chief Authors thereof who^ as they nowfuf^er^ fo are they mofl ready to confirm thatfai^ with the pric^ of their Bloods 5 and Jljould alfo both give occafion ta cur Adver furies to accufe our Do&rine of Imperfe&ion^ and us of Mitt ability 3 and the Godly to Doubt of that Truth wherein before they were perfaaded^ and to hin* der their comingthithtr^which before they hadpurpofed. And to obtain their defire, they tell them. They had fent Perfons for that end to Negotiate this Affair with the Magijirates^ and^ in cafe they obtaimd their Re- ^uell^ they pro mi fed to come and joyn with them*^ and they did not quejiion the Englijb m other places would do do theftme. Notwithftanding the weight of thefe Reafons, and the defireablenefs of their Brethrens company in that time of Exile, they perfifc in their former refohitions, not to have the Entire ErgliJI) Li- turgy-^ for by this time Knox was come from Geneva^ being chofen Minijier of the Congregation: However, they returned this Anfvver to Stro'sburg^ That they made as little Alteration as was pofsible 3 for^ certain pj^^ j^. Ceremonies the Country rconld not hear 3 and they did not djffevt from thofe which lie at the Ranfom of their Bloods for the DoUrine^ whereof they have made a mofi worthy Confepon. About this time, fome fuggefted, PJg^i^. that they (houid take the Order of Geneva^ as far- theft from Suferfiition 3 but Knox declined this, till thuy had advifed with the Learned Men at Stras- bitrg^ Zurick^^ Embden^ &c. knowing that the Odi* nm of it would be thrown upon him. But finding their Zeal and Concernment for the Englifl) Liturgy^ he, with Whittingham^ and fome others, drew up an AbjiraB of it, and fent it to C^foi;;,defiring his Judg- Caivin, Ef, ment of it. Who, upon perufalofit, being through- ^<^4. ly heated in a Caufe, that fo nearly concerned him, writes a very (harp Letter, direfted to the Brethren at Frankford 5 gently Rebuking them for their un-- feafonable Cortetjtions about theje matters^hut (everely Reproving the Engliflo Divines who flood up for the Englifh Liturgy^ when the Model of Geneva ftood in Competition with it. And yet afcer all hi^ Cen- furesofit, he confeffes , The things he thought m.ft unjit^ were ToUrable:^ but he blames them j- if they did not choofe a better^ when they might chooft 3 but he gives not thelcaft incouragement to Separa- tion if it v>^ere continued^ and he declares for his own pa; t, how ea'lc he was to yields in all indifferefit thi?7gs^ C 2 fuch SP: 16) ■fi/cb r.s Exteniul R/lcs are. And he was To h.'\ in h's Judgment, fiom being for Free Pmjier^ or making the cor?jiui;t vfe of a Liturgy- a GroHf7d cf Sepstralhf/^i asDr. 0, clorh, that when he delivered his Opinion, with the greajeft Freeciom, to the then Proteciary about the bc^ method oi Reformation?^ he decbres^ -^ Tbiit he did mgktily approve it Cert tin borm^ fiom> Tvhkh Me'fi ought net to zary^ both to prevef^t the in^ convenkncies vohichfome Me?7s folly woidd betray them to^ in the free way of Pxaying '^ and. to mmifeji tke^ General Confent of the C birches in their Prayers^ and to flop the vain afjc3ation offome who love to be JJjew- ing ^gme new things. Let Mr. B. now judge, Whether it were likely that the Controverfe then at Frankford v/as, as he faith, between them that were for the Eng- iiJJj Liturgy^ and others that were for a free way of praying y when C^fo/;^, to whom the D/Jf.nters ap^ pealed, was fo much, in his Judgment, againft the latter. And it appears by Calvin^s Letter to Cox and his Brethren^ that the State of the Cafe at Frankford had not been truly reprefented tohim^ which made him Write with greater fharpnefi thanotherwife he v/ould have done 5 and he exprefles his fatisfaftion, that the matter v/as fo compofed among them, when by Dx.Cox his means,the EngliJIj Liturgy was brought into ufe at Frankford. And to excufe himfelf for his liberal cenfures before, he mentions Lights^ as required by the Book, which were not in the fecond Liturgy of Edxvard the Sixth, So that either they deceived him, who fent him the AbBraS -^ or he was put to this miferable (liifc to defend himfelf 5 the matter being ended contrary tohisexpeftation. For although upon the receipt ofC^fo/Vs Letter, the Or- d.^r g( Geneva had like to have been prefently voted in,. ('3). in, yet there being dill fome Faft Fiieads to the /> ofFr^, Er;ghjh Service^ they were fain to compiomife the ^^• maitcr,and to make ufeof a Mixt Form for the pre- fent. But, Dr. Cox^ and others, coming thithet hem • Er?gli?id^2LX\(\ raiiliking thefe Alterations, declared, That they vv€ie foa having the Face of an Engbfa ^^^^^ 2^0 Cl^firch ihci'Cyand ib they began the Letar^j ntxiSun- r/<^/5 which put iO;^;t into fo great a Rage, that in • (tead oF purfuin^^ his Text (^wfiich was direfiiy con- trary ^ he made it his bufincfs, to Uy open the nailed- ftefs of our Churchy as far as his Wit anc ill Will v/ouid carry him. He charged xht Service'Bcok,vy\t\\ Super- iiitio??^ Impurity, :[niA ImperfeS-ion'-^ and t lie Governors of our Church with Jluknefs in Reformation^ want of Difcipline^ with the bulinefs of Hooper^ allowing Pluralities 3 all the ill things he could think on. When Cox and his Party (with whom, at this time^ was our excellent Jewel) were admitted among them, they preftntly forbad Knox having any thing, - farther to do in that Congregation^ who being com- plained of foon after for Trc^fon againft the Emperor^ in a Book by him Publifned, he was forced to leave the City, and to retire to Geneva 5 whither moftof his Party followed him. And thus faith Grindal^ in • his Letter to Bifhop Ridley^ The Church at Frank- ford Wi^ well quieted by the Prudence of Mr, Cox, and others^ which met there for that purpofe. Seel. 4, It is obferved by the J///^^r of the L//J ofBiJhop Jewel (bt'ore his Works) that this Contro- verfie was not carrad with them out of England, hut ■ they received New I //prejjions from the places whither they went. For as thoie who were Exiles in Henry the Eighth's time, (as particularly Hooper^who lived many ^ many years in 6'ii?//zer/^;?d)brought home with them a great liking of the Churches Model, where they had lived5(wliich being fuch as their Country would . bear, thev Cippofcd lo be nearer Apojiolical Simplii' city Jo^vng far enough f^om any thing o^Pomp^ oxCe^ remony) which created in them an averfion to the Ornaments and Vefimmts here ufed : So now, upon this new Perfecution, thofe who had Friendfhip at Geneva^ ?is Knox^ and fFAv^//;;^^^/;^, or were other- wife much obliged by thofe of that way,as the other EngliJI) were,who came firftto Frank^ford^ were foon pofleifed with a greater liking of their Model of Z)/- vwc Service^ than of our own. And when Men are once engaged in Parties, and (everal Interefcs, it is a very hard matter to remove the rejudices which they have taken in, efpecially when they have great Abettors, and (iich, whofe Authority goes beyond any F^ceafon with them. This is the 1 rue Fcnjnda- tion of theife Unhappy Ditferences, which have fo long continued among us, about the Orders and Ceremonies of our Church. For when Cilvin and iome others found, that their Counfel was not like to be followed tn our Reformation.^ our BiJl?ops pro- ceeding more out of Reverence to the Ancient Churchy than meer oppojition to Popery^ Cwhich f:me other Reformers made'their Rules)they did not ceafe by Letters, and other w^a, s, to infinuate, that our Reformation was imperfeft , as long as any ot the Dregs of Popery remained. So they called the ZJfeoi' thole Ceren^oniis.Vvhich they could not deny to have been far more Ancient than the great Apojiaftc of the Roman Church, Calvin^ in his Letter to the ProfeSor^ Avows this to be thebeft Rule oi Reformation^o go ^ far from Popery as-tf:ey conld -^ and therefore what Habits { Tfahji} and Ceref^iomes had been ahufcd in the time of ropery were to be removed^ leji others were hardncd in thcirS:iperjiitio?t thereby: tut at laft he yields to ihis. . moderation in the cafe 5 That fiichCercmomes might be- retdned as were eag, but either 5//- comLfJllT iing^ as It was irl Bcmaventures time 3 or after the fa- summi vomi- fhion of Sittings or a Utile Leanirg upon his Throne^ ri/c^.p. 3 5,3 8. as he doth at.this day) therefore our church taking away the Ador-tion at the Elevation^ left it thould fecm to rcceds. fiom the Prafcice oi Antiquity^ which « recLiV'-d the Fuchaviji in the Tojiure o? Adoration then ufcd, hatl^ ar •'^^inted Kneeling to be obferved oi all Communii:i7n5. In ftead of the great number of « (i6) oi Cofffccrrited Vejiments in the Roman Churchy it on- ly retained a fUtn Li^mn Qdrment^ which was un- qutftionably ufed m thetimes of St. Bietames^* znd St. Aufiin. And laftly, As to the Epifcopal Habits^ they are retained only ss a Mark ot Diftindion of a certain Order of Men * the Colour of the Chimere being changed from scnrlet to BUck, Thefe are now the CerernQnies^ about which all the Noife and Stir hath been made in our Church 5 and any fober, conficeringMan, free fromPadion, and Prejudice^ would ftand amszed at, tte Glamour and Diftur- bance which hath bten made in this Church,^ and is at this day, about the intolerable Mifchiefoi thefe If^pofitjons, Se&.^, But the moft Material Queftion they ever Ask, is. Why were thefe few retained by j'/r Refor* mers^ which were then dijiajicfid to jow- r' ^fejiards^ and were lik§ to prove the occjfton ofptmrc Conten- tions^ I will here give a Juft and True Account of the Reafons which induced our Reformers cnh^x to Re- tain, or to Appoint thefe Ceremonies^ and then pro- ceed. " ' -■'-.•. I. Out of a due Reverence to Antiquity. They would hereby convince the Papifis they did put a difference betv/een the Grofs ai:d Intolerable Super- fiitions of Popery^ and the Innocent Rites and Pra- 3ifes which were obferved in the Church before. And what could more harden the Papifis^ than to fee Men put no dijfterence between thefe? It is an un- Ipeakable Advantage which thofe do give to the Papifis^ ('7) P/aif/f//, whoare for PvCiorming 1600 years back- ward, and vvht?n they arc pinch 'd wiih a Tejiimovy o?Af2tfqH7ty^ prefently cry out of th^ Aljjierj/ of Ln- qtiity ivorkirfgjnihe JpoftkstiK^es: as though every thing which they difliked, were apart of it. Nexc to tketal^JTJg lip Arms for Religion^ which made Men look on it as a Fadion and Defig^^ there Was fcarcc any thing gave (o great check to the Progreft of the Reformutioi2\n Fr^;?cc,erpecially among Learned and Moderate Men,as the putting no difference between the Corrupt jo^js ofPoperj^^nd the innocent Cnjioms of the Anncknt Churchy For the time was when many Great men there, were very inchnable to a Refor^ matjon 5 but when they law the Refor/^ers op- pofe the undoubted Pradices of ^////^///Y/, equally with the Modern Corri^ptioris^ they calt them off, as Men guilty ofanunreafonablc humour of /;;;?(?z^.7f/>;i'5 as may beieenin Tlmanm^ znd Fran, Baldw^/is Ec* €lcfijjiical Cof7:mentarks^ and his Anfwers to Calvin and Dez^^ Bat our Reformers,although they made t\\t:Scrjpiure the only Rule^ofFaith^ and rejefted all things reppignunt thereto ^ yet they defigned not to make a Transformation of a Churchy but a Reformati- on ot it 5 by reducing it as near as they could,to that (late it was in, under thefirft chrijiian Emperors^thit were found in Religion 5 and therefore they retain- c' ' i- kw Ceremonies ^s Badges oi^th^KQC^c^ihcy L. -^ . A\t Ancjcnt Church* 1 1. 1^0 manifcfi the Jftfiice and Equity of the Refor- r. /:> by letting their Enemies [ee, they did not i ,..,,. Com.m^ifjioi; mih, t:;em for mcer indifferent thu;^.. For fomeor the Topijl) Bifhcps of that time were fubiJe^ nnd learned Men, zs Gardiner ^ Heathy Ty:^xMy &c. and nothing would have re- jCv :v; 1 them more, than to havefeen om Reformers D ' boggle boggle at fuch Ceremonies z^ theie, and they would have made mighty advantage of it among the Peo- ple. Of which we have a clear inftance in the cafe of Bijhop Hoopers (crupling the Ep/fcopal VeHments. : > Peter M^/r(;/r tells him ph'mly^That fnch needlefs fcrn- pklofity would he a great hindrance to the Reformation, For^iaith he, (ince the People are with difficulty enough brought to things necejfiry^ if we once declare things in- different to be unlawful^ they will have no patience to hear us any longer. And^ withal^ hereby we condemn other Reformed churches^ and thofe Ar.cient Churches^ Mich have hitherto been in great elieem, III. To JI)ew their Confcnt with other Proiejlant Churches^ which did allow and praftife the fame, or more Ceremonies, as the Lutheran Churches general- . Calvin. ly did. And even Calvin himftlf, in his Epijile to Vltleu Sadolet, declared, That he was for Rejioring the Face • DexeriEccl, ofthe Antient Church '-) Sind'mhisBook^of the true way ) Reformatio' of Reformation^ he faith, He would not contend about ^^' '^ ' Ceremonies^ not only thofe which are for Decency^ hut Oecolamp. thofe that are Symbolical. Oecolampadius looked an Mpjjhf.177' the Gefture at the Sacrament^ as indifierent. Bucer ^sTrlp^.Ml thought the ufe oftheSignoftheCrofs after B apt ifm p. 47c>. neither indecent nor unprofitable. Si nee t heretore, fo great a number of Protejiant Churches u(ed the fame Ceremonies ^ and the chief Leaders of other Reform- ed Churches thought them not unlawful^ our fiift Re- formers for this, and the foregoing Reafons^ thought it fit to retain them, as long as they were fofew, fo eafie both to be pradifed and underftood. SeiJ.6. But the Impreffions which had been made on fome of our Divines abroad, did not wear off, at their Return home, in the beginning of Quern E//- zabeths Reign. For they reteined a fecrct diflike of many rip) many things in our Church ^ but the AB of Vrnfir- wjty being paffed, and theZ;/e of the Liturgy ftriftly enjoy ned, I do not find any separation made then on the account of it , no, not by the DiJJentif7g Bre- thren^ik^t withdrew from Fratjkford to Gemva, Knox was forbidden to Preach here.becaufe of fome Perfonal Refleftions on the ^^een 5 but Whitting- ham, SampfoK, Gilby^ and others, accepted of Pre- ferment and Imployment in the Church. The Bi- 0 - {hops, ar firft, (hewed kindnels to them, on the ac- count of their forward. and zealous Preachings which at that time was very needful 3 and therefore many of them were placed in London, Where, having • gained the People by their zeal and diligence in Preaching, they tookoccafion to let fall at firft their Dialogue he- difiike of the Ceremonies^ and a dcfire of farther Re- tween asoi- formution of our Liturgy: but finding that they had ^-ctt^^* gained ground, they never ceafed, till by inveigh- EnguSb ingagainft//je Livery of Antichrifi^ as they called the ^^'^pi^^i^*' Vejlmcnts and Ceremonies^ they had enflaraed the ^' ^' * People to that degree, that G/Z^j/himfelf infinuates, That if they had been let alone a little longer^ they would have Jl)aken the Conjiitution of this Church, This was the firft occafion of preffing Uniformity with any ri- gor 3 and therefore fome examples were thought fit to be made for the warning of others. But as kind- refs made them prefumptuous, fo this feverity made them clamorous^ and they fent bitter complaints to Geneva, ^ez^^jafter much importunity, undertook to give an Anfweifc:) them^ which being of great con- fequence to our prefent bufinefi, I Ihall here give a fuller account of it. We are then to underftand , that about this time, the Dijfenting Party being Ex- a(perated, by the 5//e;;aV;^ fome of their moftbufie D 2 Preachers^ (20) ':^tzzEpjU^.. Preachers, began tohzvt Seperate Meetirrgs^ This Beza takes notice of in his Epiftle to Gri^idal Bifliop oi Lofidon'-y and it appears^by an Examinaticr: Xs]^^^ before him, 20th of June 1567. of certain perfons, Tm of a, ic- ^ho 'were accufednot ofilyfor ahf^ntrng the mf^ts from %i^xiTy p,2 3. , th^ir PariJJo Churches '-i hut for gathenrg together a^d mal{i^}g AJfemhlies^ tsfi^^g Prayers ar.d Preachings ^arid MimJirir/gSacraments amfj-ngthemfelves :^ and hiring ii HuUin London under Pretence of a Wedding^for that Pfr/pofe, The Bij7jop of London fiiCt Pvebuked-them for their Lying Pretences, and then told them, That in this Severing them felves from the Society of of her Chrijiims^ they not only Condemned them^ h^t alfo the vphole State oft he church Reformed in King Ed vvardV dayes^whub was well Reformed according to^ the Word ofGod'-^ yea^ and many Good Men have fl)ed their Blood for the fame^which your doings Condemn, Have ye «^i^/aith he, the Gofpet truly Preached^and the Sacraments Mi* viUred accordingly^ and good order kept^ although noe diferfrom other Churches in Ceremonies, and in indif^ ferent things^ which lie in the Princes Power to Co^/2*- * mand^ for Order fake? To which one of them An- fwered. That as long as they might have the Word freely Preached. , and. the Sacraments Adminifired 5 without the preferring of Idolatrous Gear about it^they never Affembled together in Houfes : hut their Preachers, being difplaced by Larv for their Non- conformity^ they bethought themfelves what was ■ beft for them to do 5 and calling to mind that there "jms a Congregation therein the days of ^e en Mavy^ which followed the Order of Geneva, /y^ej/ tookjip that^andthis Boo^and Order^ {z\th he^ we ho Id^ Another Anfvvered, That they did not refiife Communion for Preaching thejford^ but bcc^mfithtyhad tied the Ceremo^:iej ofAfitichriflto it ^ and fet ther/t r/p before it ^ fe that no hi in may. Preach , or Minijier . the Sacraments ivithoitt thera^ Things being come to this height, and sepirationbG- ginning to bieak out, the Wifer Biethren thought not fit to proceed any fluther^till they had Confulc- ed the'u Oracle at Geneva. Be^x being often folxited by them, veith doleful Complaints of their hard nfige^ and the different Opinions ar/ior?g ihemfelves^what ihey were to ^(?,atlaft rcfolves to Anrwer5 but fii ft he de- clares, How nnwiliing he re {is to interpofe in the Difc.-- rences of another Churchy efpecially ivhen hut one Party woi heard'-y and he "was afraid^ this vpos only the way to exafperatc andprov&kc more^ rather than Cure this Evil^ vphich he tho^ight was not otherwife to he Cf/red^, but Precibud d^ Patientia^ by Prayers and Patience. After this General Advice, JB^2s- when St. Antholins^ St. Peters^ St. BurtLolormws^ at which 0/% faith their great Preaching then was, were like to be l^ft deftitute of fuch Men ? Would Bez4i^ even Beza^- at fuch a time, as that, be for 5i- lencing fo many Pcachers^ \, e. for their fitting quiet^ when the Law had done it ^ And would not he fuf- fer them. to Preach, when they ought to have done it, though againft the Will of the^ee« and the Si- peps ^ It appears that Beza was not of the Mind of our Adzerfiries'-^ but that he was of the contrary, it sppears plainly by this. That before he Perfwades the D/jJenting Miniflers rather to live privately^ than tofubfcribe 5 and that he expreffes^no fuch terrible apprehenfionsat their quitting their Places ^^s he doth . at their Preaching in Opposition to the Laws. (2.) As to the cafe of the People^ his Advice was, As long as the Do&rine vp as founds that theji pould diligently at' tend upon it^ and receive the Sacraments devoutly^ and to jojn Amendment of Life with their Prayers^ that by thoje means they might obtain a through Reformation* So that nothing can be more exprels againft Septra- ^/^/?,than what ishere faid by Be%a : for, even as to the Alinijiers^ he (ait h. Though he did not approve the Ceremonies^ yet flnce they are not of the nature of things evil in themfelves^ he doth not thir/k^ them of that mo- ment^ that theyfjculd leave their Fun& ions for the fake of them 5 or that the People fjould forfxke the Ordinan- ces^ rather than hearthofe who did Conform, Than Vv^hich words , nothing can be plainer againft Sepa- l&cizEpiJi. ration. And it further appears, by ^^Z/a's Pvefolu- 24. p. 148. ^-^^ ^£' ^ ^^Q^ concerning a Schifm in the French church Church then in London 5 That he looked on it as a Sin^ for anyj)ne to Separate from a Churchy wherein sound DoClrine^ and a Holy Life^ and the right ufe of the Sa^ craments is I^ept up. And^ by Separation^ he (aith, he means, Not meerly going from one Church to ano' ther^ but the DiJ continuing Communion with the Pub* lick^ Ajfemblies^ as though one were no Member of them* Bezas Authority being fo great with the Dijfent- ing Brethren ^X. that time, feems to have put an cffe- ftual Stop to the Courfe of Separation^ which they were many of them then indined to. But he was not alone among the Foreign Divines^ who, about that time, exprefled themfelves againft Separation from the Communion of our Churchy notwithOanding the Rites 2ind Ceremonies herein ufed. For Gualter^ aGualt^rrpi Divine of good Reputation in the Helvetian Chur- ^^f'^^^^i ches^ takeaanoccafion inan£f////etofeveralofotir Comth^ Bijhops^ to talk of the Difference then about thefe things 5 and he extreamly blames the Morofe humour ofthofe^ who dijiurbed the Church for the fake of fuch things^ and gave an occadon thereby to endlefs Sepa-- tions. And in an Epiftle toC^^cBilhopof fi/y, 1572, he tells him, How much they had diffvoaded themfron^ making fuch a fiir in the Churchy about mitters of no moment : and he Complains grievoufly of the Lyes and Prejudices againii our Churchy which they had fent Men on purpofe to pojfejs them witb^ both at Geneva and other places, Z^» could bc as mad as they ^ they would be kinder to him, ■r, I. 9'V-i'^^*- -And therefore he foberly advifeth the Governors of the Church to hok^ well after thk fort of Men ^ fo:, faith -f he^ifthey prevail Jt k not tv be imagind, what Mifchief and Difturbance they will bring 5 whofe Hypocrifle is more fubik and pernicious than that of the oldMonkj : for^ under a Pretence of Greater Purity^ they mil ne- ver give over , till they have brought Mejz under a Jewify Sla7jery. ThefeNewMen, full of bitter zeal, defpifed the old triflingControverfie ahontGar^nents and Ceremonies^ they complained, 77^.^^ al/was out of order in the Church , and nothing but .a New and • Thorough Reformation would pleaie them;. For,iri die Admonition prefented to the Parliament^ 1 4 £fe. they ^5) they complain for want of a right Mi^ijlerji^ a right Government in the Church according to the Scriptures^ without which (they (ay) there could be no right Re- ligion, The Liturgy they deride, as cuUed and picked out of the Popj/h DunghiS^ the Portuife and Majs" Book^i the Government of the Church hji Arch-Bijloops and B/Jhops they call Devilijb and Anti-chrijiian 5 and condemn the Vocation of the Clergy^ as Popijh and Un- lawful!'^ and add. That the Sacraments are mangled and profaned '-i that Baptifm is full of childijh and fu* perjlitious Toys. All which, and many more expreC- (ions of a like nature, are extant in the Firjl and Second Admonitions. Which bold and groundleft Aflfertions being (b openly avowed to the world, by the Leaders of the diffenting Party^ gave the true occajion to the following prafti(e of Separation. For when thefe things were not onely publilhedTn the name of the Party ^ being the Pleas for Peace at that time, but ftifly maintained with greater Heat than Learning, it is eafie to imagin what impreffi- oHs fuch things would make on the common (brt of People 5 who have ftill a good inclination to (ind fault with their Governonrs^ e(pecially in the Churchy and to admire thole that oppole them. And the(e they courted mofl:, having their Opinions fo fuited to vulgar Capacities , that they apprehended their Intereft carried on together with, that of Purity of Reformation. Hence they pleaded then, as others do at this day, for the Peoples Right to choofe their Bijhops and Pajiours againfi the Z)Jurpations^ as they accounted them, of Princes and Patrons 3 hence they railed againft the Pomp and Greatnefs of the Clergy^ which is always a popular Theme 5 and fo would' the expofing the inequality of Men's Efiates be, if E Men Men dutft undertake it with as great hopes of im- punity. Befides, it v/as not a little pleafent to the People to think what a (hare they fhould come to- in the new Seigniory^ as they called it, or Preshj- ierjf^ to be erected in every PanJIj 5 and what Au- thority they (hould exercile over their Neighbours^ and over their Minijier too by their double Votes. By foch Arts as thefe they complied with the natural humours of the People^ and fo gained a mighty int€- reft amongft them 3 as the Anahaptijis in Germany and Smtzertand at firft did, upon the like grounds. Euiiinger, Which made 'BuUwger^ in an BpifiU to Robert Bifhop^ bcrt'^win. rf tVwcheJier^ parallel the proceedings o( this Party ton^, in the here, with that of the Artabaptifis with them in thofe yippendixto Countries 5 For^ faith he, we had a 'fort of People Ju's firft here^ to whom nothitig feemed pure enough in our Re- Book: formati^n^ from whence they brake out into Separation^ and had their Conventicles among us^ upon vi^hich fol- lowed SeSs and Schifms^ which made great entertain- . ment to our common Enemies the Pap/Jh, Juft thus it happened here, thefe hot Reformers defigned no Separation at prefent 5 which they knew would un- avoidably bring confufion along with it 3 for that was laying the reins^ on the People's necks, and'- they would run whither they pleafed without any poflibility of being well managed by them 5 but fince theie Men would Refne upon the prefent Con^ Jiitution of our Churchy there foon arofe another fort of Men,^ who thought it as fit to Refne upon them. They acknowledged they had good Principles zmong them, but they did not pra3-ife according to them : ^f our Ghnrch were fo bad as they faid, that there was neither right Minijiery^ nor right Government^ noi right Sacrament SyXiOX right DifcipUne 3 What fol- •- lows., lows, (ay they, from hence, but that voe onght tx> fe^n^ rate frow^ the Communion of fo corrupt a Churchy and jojn together to ^aks ^tp new Churches for the pure ad" ^inifir^tipH pf^U Gofpel-Ordina^ces .angeYous Fofitions^Sic, 1 1, c. 5. 7he Second Anfwer for Communica- ihg^ p. 20. Printed by John Win- der, A, D. 1588. Page 45. Anfwer to Ainfworth, Page 57. Preface to the Reader^ |>. 17. and it appears by fever^l pafftge^ ojFhis B'ooj^^ that" he was a Non-conformifi 5 and he i$ joyned with Cartwr/ght^ Hilderjham^ Bfightman^ and other Nou^ conformifls^ by the Pre facer to the Defe/^ce of Brad- Jhavo againft Johnfon : and I find his name in one of the Clajfes in £^:v at that time. Thi AnthoHr of the Second Anfwer for comnmntcating^ who defends r. C. s Letter to Harrifon^ Browns Colleague againft Separation^ proves jojinzng with the Church a Duty ne- cejfarily enjoyned him of God by his Providence^ through his being and placing in a particular Churchy andjufi* ly required of him by the Church or fpiritual Body^ through that fame in forcing Law of the coherence^ and being together of the parts and Members^ which is the exprefs Ordinance of God, So th^t, faith he, unlefsl hold the Congregation whereof I am now difanuUed and become no Church ofChriJi^ for the not feparating an. unworthy Member^ I cannot voluntarily either abfent my felf from their AJfemblies to holy Exercifes^ or yet depart away being come together^ without breach of the. bond of Peace^ fundring the cement of Lovey^ empai^ ring the growth of the Body t?/Chrift, and incurring the guilt ofSchifm and Divifion. To the fame purpoie. he fpeaks elfewhere. Richard Bernard calls it, Am uncharitable and lewd Schifm which they were guilty of But I need not mention more particular i4^- thours^ fince in the grave confutation of the Err ours of the Separatijis^ in the name of the Non-conformijis^ it is (aid. That becaufe we have a true Churchy conjl' fling of a lawful! Minijiery and a faithful! People ^ therefore they cannot feparate themfelves from us^ hut they muft needs incur the mo ft JhamefuU^ ^nd odious • reproach of manifefi Schifm. And concerning the Jiate of the perfons who lived in Separation^ they fay (3i) feLYfWe held them all to he in a danger om ejlate^ (r»e are loth to fay in a damnable ejiate) as long ds they continue in this Schifm, SeU. 9. But for our farther underftanding the full jlatt of this Controverfte^ we muft confidcr what things were agreed on both fides, and where the main Points of difference lay. I. The Sepciratijls did yield the . Do&rin^ or Faith of the Church Ainfworth frames his Argument for Separation thus. Ainfworth'i That Ckurch which is not the true Church t?/Chirft and Comter-^oy. ^f Qq^^ ought not ^ by any true Chrijiian^ to be con- Ibid, 'p^'sy, Jinued^ or Communicated with 5 but muji be forfaken^ and feparated from ^ and a true Church fought^ and joyned unto^ &c» But the Chuvch ^/England k be- fore: (35) fort proved^ jjot to he the true Chnrch ^/Chrift, and of Gody therefore it ought to be feparated from^ Sec. By which we fee, the greateft Separatijis that were then, never thought it lawfiill to Jeparate from our Churches if they were true. On the other fide, thofe who op- pofed the Separation with greateft zeal, thought no- thing more was neceflary for them to difprove the Se- paration^ then to prove our Churches to be true Chur- ches^R, Brown (from whom the Party received their denomination) thought he had a great advantage a- gainft Cartwright ( the Ringleader of the Non-confcr- mifis ) to prove the NeceJJitj/ of Separation^ becaufe he (eemed to mal^e Difcipline ejjential to a Church 5 and therefore fince he complained of the vpant oi Dif- cipline here, he made our Church not to be a trpfe Churchy and conftquently that Separation was necef fary. L C, anfwers, That Church Ajfemblies are buil- t. Cs. Lemr ded by Faith only on Chrift the Foundation ^ the ^' ^"^^^"^ which Faith fo beings whatfoever is wanting of that ■■Jjcn^ inDe- which is commanded^ or remaining of that which is fence of the forbidden , is not able to put that Alfembly from the ffZ^'foUox^^ right and title of fo being the Church of Chrift. For mo/brown, that Faith can admit no fuch things as giveth an utter ^' ^^>99' overthrow and turning upjide down of the Truth, His meaning is, whereever the true DoSrine of Faith is received and profeffed, there no defeSs or corruptions can overthrow the being of a True Churchy or Juftifj Separation from it. For^ he addeth, although beftdes Faith in the Son ofGod^ there be many things neceffary for every Ajfembly 5 yet be they necejfary to the comely andjiable being^and not (imply to the being of the Church. And in this refpeti^ (aith he, the Lutheran Churches^ Page 10^. ( which he there calls the Dutch Ajfmhlies) which befide the maym of Difcipline^ which is common to our -^ F 2 Churches^ (3^) Churches^ are grojly deceived in the matter of the Sup- per^ are miwithfianding holden in the Roll of the Chur- Page 107. ches of God. Was not Jerufakm, faith he, after the return from Babylon, the City of the great King^ un* till fitch time as Nehemias came and builded on the Walls of the City ^ To fay therefore it is none of the Churchy hecaufe it hath not received this Difcipline^ me- thinks is all one with this^ as if a Man wonld fay^ It is no City^ hecaufe it hath no Wall : or that it is no Vine- yard^ hecaufe it hath neither Hedge nor Ditch. It is not^ J grants fo fight ly a City^ or Vineyard^ nor yet fo fafe againji the Invajlon of their fever at Enemies which lie in wait for them ^ hut yet they are truly both Cities and • Vineyards. And whereas T. C. ftemed to make Dif cipline effential to the Churchy his Defender faith. He did not tal\e Difcipline there fir i Sly for the Political guiding of the Churchy with refpzB to Cenfnres^ hut as Fage 91. comprehending all the Behaviour concerning a Church in outward Duties^ i. e. the Duties ofPaJior and People. Afterwards , as often as the Non-conformifis fet themfelves to difprove the Separation^ their main bu- fineis was, To prove our Churches to he True Churches. As in a Book , Entituled, Certain Pojitions held and maintained by fome godly Minifiers of the Gojpel^ againji thofe of the Separation'^ which was part of that Book, afterwards pubhfhed by W. R. and called, A Grave . and Modeji Confutation of the Separatifis, The Ground- work^ whereof^ as Mr. Ainfworth calls it, is thus laid. Camterpy- That the Church of England is a True Church of /«") h *»?• Chrift, and fuch a one^ as from which whofo- ever wittingly and continually feparateth kim^ felf^ cutteth himfelf off from Chrift. If (37) If this was the Ground-work^ of the Non-^conformijls in thole days 5 thole who live in ours, ought well 10 conlider it, if they regard their Salvation. And for this Affertion of theirs , they bring Three Reajbns, 1. For that they enjoy , and joyn together in the TJfe of thefe outward Means^ which God in his Word hath ordained for the gathering of an Invifihle Church 5 i. e. breaching of the GoJ^el , and Adminijiration of the .Sacraments, 2. For that their whole Church maketh Profcjjion of the True Faith : and hold and teach^ 8cc. all Truths Fundamental So we put their Two Reafons into One, becaufe they both relate to the Profejjion of the True Faith 5 whichj fay they , is that which giveth life and being to a Viflble Church : and upon this Pro- fejfion we find many that have been incorporated into the Vifihle Churchy and admitted to the Pr/viledges thereof even by the Jpjfiles themfelvcs. So the Church of Pergamus, though it did tolerate Grofs Corruptions in it : yet becaufe it kept the Faith ^/Chrift, was fiill called the Church of God, 5. For that all the k^own Churches in the World acknowledge that Church for their Sifter^ and give un- to Her the Right hand of Fellowfhip, When H Jacob undertook Fr. Johnfon upon this Point of Separation^ the Pofition he laid down was this 3 That (38) That the' Churches ere not fuch as did overthrow the being and conJiitH' tion of it. This will befl: appear by the Anfwers they gave to the main Grounds of Separation, I. That our Church was not rightly gathered at the time of our Reformation from Popery. To which Giffard thus anfwers, The Church (?/^ England in the GiffardV>Jrt. time of Popery^ was a Member of the univerfal Churchy f^^^ ^^^^^ and had not the being of a Church of Chrift from ^^^ ' Rome , nor took^ not her beginning of being a Church by feparating her felf from that Ramiflj Synagogue 5 hut having her Spirits revived^ and her Ryes opened by the Light of the Heavenly Wordy did caji forth that Tyranny of Antichrifi ^ with his abominable Ido- latry,^ Herefies^ and falfe WorfJjip x, and fought to bring all her Children unto the right Faith,, and true Ser- Gravz c^n- vice of God 5 and fo is a purer , and more faithful! J^^^^^^^ ^ ^' Church than before. Others adde , That the Laws of Chrijiian Princes have been a means to bring Men to the outward Society of the Church , and fo to make a viflble Church : Neither were fufficient means wanting in our Cafe for the due ConviBion of Mens Minds 5 but then they adde , That the ^ejiion mufi not bs^ Whether the Means ufed were the right Means,^ for the calling and converting a People to the Faith j but , , Whether Queen Elizabeth took^ a lawful! courfe for re- callings and re. €<,. / Duty^ as to the Oversight and Government of the Chiir-^ ' * ^^' ches ivithin his Dominion^ vpithout it : as is implied in the ftven ^ long as under them they perform the main and fithfiantial Du- ties of true Pafiours 3 which all the Minifiers of our Churcb'AJfemblies doe^ and by the Laws ought to doe* The(e Particulars I have laid together v^^ith all poffible brevity and clearnefs, from the Aut hours of beft reputation on both fides, that we might have a diftinft view of thQfiate of the Controverfie about Separation , between the old Non-conformifis^ and the Separatifis of that time. SeH. 12. But before we come to our prefent Times, we muft confider the alteration that was made in the fiate of this Controverfie^ by thofe who were called Independents^ and pretended to come off from tke Principles of Brownifm^ or rigid Separation. And here I fhall give an Account of the Progrefs of the Courfi of Separation, or the Steps by which it was carried on , and how it came at laft to fettle in the Congregational Way 3 and what the true State of the Difference was, between the Ajfembly of Di- vines^ (48) wnes^ and the dijjenting Brethren % and how far the Reafohs then ufed will hold againft the prefent Sepa- ration. Srcy»htn Off- wood 'i Ad- vertjfment - to John De- leclufc and H. May, p. 10, 39. Defence of the Admou. to the Fol- lowers of Brown, p. 127. Fa^e 133, When thofe who were called BrowKifis^ for the freer exercife of their new Church way, withdrew into the Low-Countries^ they immediately fell into ftrange Faftions and Divifions among themfelves. A. D. 1582. Robert Br^n?;;, accompanied vAth Har- rifon^ a School- Majier^ and about 50 or 60 Perfons, went over to Middlehurgh^ and there they chofe Har- rifon Pajiotir^ and BrownTeacher. They had not been there three Months^ but upon the falling out between Brown and Harrifon^ Brown forfakes them, and returns for England^ and fubfcribes, promifing to the Arch- hijhop to live obediently to his Commands, Concer- ning whom, Harrifon writes to a Friend in London in thele words : Indeed the Lord hath made a breach among us for our Jins^ which hath made us unworthy to bear hk great and worthy Caufe, Mr, Brown hath cajl us off\ and that with open^ manifeji and notable Trea- cheries^ and ifljhould declare them^ you could not be- lieve me. Onely this 1 tefiifie unto you^ that I am well able to prove^ That Cain dealt not fo ill with his Bro- tker Abel, as he hath dealt with me. Some of the words of Brown'/ Sub/cription^ were thefe, / do hum- hly fuhmit my felf to be at my Lord of Canterbury / Commandment^ whofe Authority^ under Her Majejiy^ I will never refiji or deprave^ by the Grace of God^ &c. But being a Man of a reftlels and faftious temper, no Promifts or Subfcriptions could keep him with- in due bounds 5 as one who lived at that time hath fully difcovered. For although he promifed to frequent our Churches^ and to come to Prayers and Sacra- Sacramcfjis^ yet, living Schoolhiajler at %.Olavcs in SoHthwarh^iox two years, in all that time he never did it 5 and when he was like to have been queftio- ned for it, he withdrew into another Parifh. Some- times he v/ould go to hear Sermons^ but that he ac- Vag^ 13$. counted 770 aS of Communion 5 and declared to his Friends, That he thought it vot unlaw full to hear our Page 134. Sermons 5 and therefore perfwaded liis Followers in London fb to do. Notwithftanding th'S, he preach Pagei^Q, . ed in Private Meetings^ and that in the time of Pub- lick^ Ajjemhlies ^ when he thought fit 5 Which this Authour ^ though a Non-con f or mijl^ and friend of r. C!s^ calls a Curfed Conventicle^: who (ets forth at large hisjirange J^gl^ngs^ and Jefuitical E(juivocations in his Suhfiri'ption. By the Bifloops Authority^ he faid Page 141. he meant onely his Civil Anthonty ^ by declaring the Church ^/England to he the Church of God^ he un- derftood the Church of hk own fetting up ^ by fre- Frfg.i$8j&c. quenting our Affemblies according to haw ^ he meant, the Law ofGod^ and not of the Land : he declared, hfs Child was baptized according to Law^ but then Ccmterpoy- told his Followers, it, was done without his confent^f'^^^ P- ^^' Mr. Cotton of New-England hath this paffage concer- Ar.f^er\o ning Brown^ The firfi Inventor of that way ^ which is R. Williams, called 'BjOtDnifnt) from whom the Se& took, hs Name, ^' *^^* fell back^from his own way^ to take a Parfonage called % Cf)UCClj^ Godfo^ in a firange (yet wife) Provi- dence ordering it , that Ae, who had utterly renounced all the Churches in England as no Church , fiould af- terwards accept of one Parijh Church among them^ and it called 3 C{)UtC&> But upon the Diflention at Middleborough^ between Brown and Harrifon^ that Congregation foon broke to pieces. Ainfworth can- not deny the early DifTentioHs between Brown and H liarrifon (50) Hanifort^ Bromn and Barrow^ Barrow and Fr. John" fon 5 but fee reckons up all the dijferencesm Scripture from Cain and Abel downwards to juftify theirs 5 not- withftanding, as Dr. 0. well obferves, We are to di- fiingiijjij between what falls out throf^gh the PaJJions of Men^ and what follows from the nature of the thing, . But one of their own Party at Amfierdam takes no- tice of a Third' Caufi of thefe Dijjentions ^ viz. The offwoodV Judgment of God upon them, I do fee, faith he, the mern^^ P?i$* ^^^^ of God if heavy upon them^ blinding their Minds ^ and hardening their Hearts^ that they do not fee his Truth ^ fo that they are at rpars among themfelves^ and they are far from that true Peace of God which follow-- eth Holinefs, There were two great Signs of this hand of God upon them, Firfi^ Their Invincible Objiinacy, Secondly^ The Scandalous Breaches which followed ftill one upon the other, as long as the courfe of Se- paration continued 3 and were only fometimes hindred from fliewing themfelves, by their not being let loofe upon each other 5 for then the Firebrands foon ap- pear^ which at other times they endeavour to cover. Their great Objiinacy appears by the Execution of Barrow and Greenwood ^ who being condemned for Jeditiot^ Books , could no ways be reclaimed -y rather choofing to die, than to renounce the Prin- ciples oi Separation, But Penry^ who fuffered on ihe fame account about that time , had more relen- - ling in him , as to the bufinefi of Separation. For Mr. J. Cat-- (51) Mr. 7. Cotton of Nerv-England relates this Stoiy of Corton'i • •him from the Mouth of Mr. Hilderjham an eminent M^^r to Non- conform iji t, That he confcffed , He deferved^;'^.^'^'^' death at the ^eeris hand^ for that he had /educed many of Her loyal SHbjeHs ta a Separation^ front hear* ing^^e word of Life in the l?arifh Churches , which though himfelf had learned to difcover the evil of^ yet he could never prevail to recover divers of Her Sub- je&s whom he had /educed 5 and therefore the Blood of ' their Souls was now jujily required at his hands, Thefe are Mr. Cottons own words. Concerning Barrow^ he ^^'^- • reports from Mr. Dod's Mouth, that when he flood under the Gibbet, he lift up his eyes, and (aid, Lord^ if I he deceived^ thou haji deceived me. And fo being jiopt by the hand of God , he was not able to proceed to fpeak^ any thing to purpofe more^ either to the glory of God^ or edification of the People. Thefe Execu- tions extremely ftartled the Party, and away goes Francis Johnfon with his Company to Amfierdam 5 where John/on and Ainfivorth fbon fell out 5 and Johnfon chargeth Ainfwgrth and his Party with Ana^ Ciifron'/ Ad^ haptifm, and want of Humility and due Obedience to'^'fj^f'^l]^' Government. In fhort, thej^ fell to pieces, ftpara- ting from each others Communion : fome fay. They Way of corh formerly excommunicated each other '^ but Mr. Cotton fl^^^i^^^^ will not allow that, but^ he faith, They only with- dearedyp.e. drew : yet thofe who were Members of the Church do fay , That Mr. Johnfon and his Company were ac- curfed^ and avoided by Mr. Ainfworth and his Com- pany : and Mr. A. and his Company were rejeHed and avoided by Mr. Johnfon and his. And one Church Profane received the Pcrfons excommunicated by the other, p^^^^*^-£^^' and (b became ridiculous to Speftators, as fbme of|». 63!' ' themfelves confciTed. John/on and his Party charged H 2 the (52) ' Ib,ck2.p.9, ^^^ Other with Schifm in feparatirjg from them : But, as others faid, who returned to our Church 5 Is it • a greater (in in them to leave the Commnmon of iVfr. Johnfon , than for him to refufe and avoid the ' Commtimon of all true Churches he fide I. 7« that, that he foon outwent him i and he charges the other Separate Congregations w'nh (bme of the very fame Faults which they had found in the Church of • England, viz. ( I.) Idolatrous Worfiip-^ for if they .^^eSmithV charged the Church of England with Idolatry^ in rea- tlfmU^ ^^^E> of Prayers 5 he thought them equally guilty ift agjhj} looking on their Bibles , in preaching and fmging. cirr'F/'' C 2* } Anti'chrifiian Government , in adding the hu- EviJences, Hiau Inverttions oi Dociors^ and ruling Elders : which h 5, ^-t 7» was pulling down one AntiChriJi , to fet up another 5, and if one was the Beaji , the other was the Image of • the BeaJi. Being therefore unfatisfied with all Chur- ches^ he began one wholly new, and therefore bap. SraithV Ep, tized himfelf For, he declared, There was no one lalllf ^^^'^' ^^'^^ Ordinance with the otUr Separatifis.' But this new Church (53) CbfTch was of fhort continuance , for , upon his Deaths it dwindled away, or was fwallowed up in the common QwMoi A^iabapifm, And now one would • have thought here had been an end of Separation '-, and fb in all probability there had 5 had not Mr. Robwjb^ o( Ley den abated much of the Rigor oi it ^ for he af- fertcd. The lawfuhefs ofcomr/nwicatitjg with the Church Cotton V ^/England in the Word and Prajer^ hut not in Sacra- J^^^ ^ ^^^^ ' ments and Difcipline, The former he defended in a Difiok'rfe between Ainfworth and him. So that the prefent Separati/is who deny that, are gone beyond him, and are fallen back to the Principles of the ri- gid Separation. Robinfon fucceeded ( though not im- mediately ) Jacob , in his Congregatioit at hey den , whom fome make the Father of Independency. But F^^ei$. from part of Mr. Robinfons Church , it fpread into New- England'^ for Mr. C^//^«. faith. They went over thither in their Church- jlate tit Plymouth 5 and that Model was followed by other Churches there 5 at Salem, Bofton, Watertown, &c. Yet Mr. Cotton prefefTeth, J'age^^ j^ That Robin fonV denyal of the Parifhional Churches in ^ England to be true Churches ( either by reafon of their mixt corrupt matter^ or for defect in their Cove* nant^ or for excefs in their Epi/copal Government) was never received into any hearty from thence to infer a nuUity of their Church-fiate. And in his Anfwer to Piigc 1^8. Mr. Roger Williams^ he hath thefe words, That upon due confederation he cannot find^ That the Principles and Grounds of Reformation do necejfarily cor. elude a feparation from the EngliJIy Churches as falfe Churches ^ from their Mini fiery as a falfe Minifiery ^ from their Worfljip as a falfe Worfljip 5 from all their Profeffours as no vifible Saints : Nor can I find that they do ei- ther neceffarily or probably conclude a feparation from hearing (54) E.wnilamv hearwg tie Word preached by godly Mimfters in th ^fnon'!^ P^r/^ Churches in England. Mr. if. Williams urged Urn-^MS, Mr. Cotton with an apparent inconfiftency between theie Principles and his own Praftice 5 for although he pretended to ovpn the Parijh Churches as true Chur- £hes^ yet by his a^ual fep^ration from them^ he fhew- cd, that really he did not 5 and he adds, that SepJi-- ration did naturally follow from the old Puritan ' Principles 5 faying. That Mr. Can hath unanfwerably ^age 39. proved^ That the Grounds and Principles of the Purt* tans againjl Bifiops and Ceremonies^ and profanenefs of People profejjin'g Chrift, and the necejjity ofChn&'s Flocks and Difciples^ mujl neceffarily^ ij truly followed^ lead on to^ and in force a Separation, Notwithftan- ding all this, Mr. Cotton doth affert the lawfulnefs of hearing Englifh Preachers in our Parijh Churches f> but then he faith, There is no Church Communion in hear* F^ie43. j^g^ huf Q„lj ifi giving the Seals. Mr. Williams ur- geth, That there is Communion in DolJrinc^ and Pel* CottonV lon>Jl)7p of the Gofpel. Upon which Mr. Cotton grants, wilhams ^ That though a Man may joyn in Hearing and Prayer jpijp, 132. before and after Sermon^ yet not as in a Church-Jiate. Yet after all, he will not deny our Churches to be true Churches, But if they remain true Churches^ it appears from the former Difcourfe, they can never juftify Separation from them 5 upon the Principles of either Party. So that though thofe of the Congre- gational way (eem to be more moderate , as to (bme of their Principles , than the old rigid Separatijls 3 yet they do not confider, that by this means they . make their Separation more inexcufable. The Dif- fenting Brethren^ in their Apologetical Narration^ to avoid the imputation of Brorvnifm , deliver this as their Judgment concerning our Parochial Churches. And (55) And for mr ow77 Congregations^ viz. c. (though more reformed) yet for their mixture^ mufi be in like manner judged no Churches alfo 5 which to imagine or conceive , is , and hath ever been an horror to our thoughts, TTea^ we have always f^ofeffed^ and that in thofie times when the Churches ^/England were the mofi^ either actually overfpread with Defilements , or in the great efi danger thereof '-^ and when our filves had leafi\ yea no hopes of ever fi much as vijiting our own hand again in peace and fitfety to our Perfons , that we both did and would hold Communion with them as the Church ofChn^. This is a very fair Confeffion from the Diffenting Brethren-^ but then the difficulty re- turns with greater force 5 How comes Separation from thefie Churches to be lawfully If they had gone upon the Brownifis Principles , all the Dilpute had been about the truth or falfhood of them 5 but their truth being fuppofed, the neceffity of Separation follow- ed, whereas now, upon altering xh^ fiaie of the Controverjie by the Independents^ though their Prin- ciples (eem more moderate, yet their PraSice is more unrealbnable. It is therefore a vain pretence uftd at • thia this day to juftifie the Separation^ That they do ttot deny our Churches to he true Churches^ and that therein they dijfer from the old Separatijis x, It is true, in that Opinion they do 5 but in Separation they agree, which is the more unjuftifiable in them, (ince they yield Co much to our Churches, And. yet herein, whatever they pretend , they do not exbeed their Independent Brethren^ whofe Separation themfelves - condemned^^ But the Presbyterians were then unfa- tisfied with this Declaration of the Dr/fenting Bre^ thren^ and thought it did not fufficiently clear them Amxm^ of from the Charge of Brorvnifm -^ becaufe ( i.} They i^ndepeKdtn- ggj-g^.^ ^yj^}^ ^^^ qJJ Separatijis in the main Principle 20, Sic/ ' of Popular Church-Government^ Which ^ they fay, ^ inconiljicnt ivith the Civil Peace ; as may he feen^ (ay they,' in the ^tarrels both at Amfterdam, and Rot- terdam 5 and the Law Suits depending before the Ma- gijirates there. (2.) They overthrow the Bounds of Parochial Churches^ as the Separatijis did, and think fuch a Confinement unlawiull. ( 5, ) They make true Suintjhip the neceffary qualification of Church-Members ^ as the Separatijis did ; Whereby^ fay they, they confound the Vifible^ and Invifthk Churchy and make the fame ejfential form of both* ( 4' ) They renounce the Ordination received in our Church ^ but all the allowance they make of a true Minijiery^ !s, by virtue of an explicit or implicit Call^ grounded on the Peoples explicit or implicit Covenant^ with • fuch a Man as their Paftor. For when they firft be- gan to ftt up a Congregational Church , after the new Model, at Rotterdam^ Ward was chofen Pafior^ and Bridges Teacher , but they both renounced their Ordination in England 5 and fome (ay , They ordained C57) ordained of^e another 5 others. That they had no other Ordination than vphat the Congregation gave them. SeS. 15. And now new Congregations began to be (et up in Holland upon thefe Principles ^ but they again fell into Divifions as great as the former. Simp- fon^ renouncing his Ordination^ was admitted a pri- vate Member of the Church at Rotterdam 5 but he grew foon unfatisfied with the Orders of that Churchy and thought too great a reftraint was laid upon the private Members, as to the exercife of Prophecying 3 and fo he, and thole who joyned with him, com- plaining of the mifehief of Impojitions ^ were ready for a Separation^ if that reftraint were not (peedily removed. Mr. Bridge yields to the thing, but not as to the time, viz. On the Lords Day after Ser» mon 5 this gives no fatisfaftion, for they muft have their will in every thing, or elfe they will never ceale complaining of the mifchief of Impojitions. And fb Mr. Simpfon and his Party fet up a ^en? M^ertotbe Church of thdv own: Which J. Goodwin Ao\h not ^3";^^°^°;. deny 5 for Mr. Simpfon^ (aith he, upon dijlike of fame perfons and things in that Churchy whereof Mr. Bridge was Pajiour^ might feek^and make a departure from it. But were thefe Churches quiet after this Separation made .ented , fo there had been many Meetings^ Sermons^ and all means ujed to prefs the Confcience of taking it offl by a Re- union of the Churches^ and yet the way to doe it could never be found^ till the tAagifirates Authority and Com* . mand found it. Thefe things I have more fully de- d-iced 5 not as though bare Diffenfions in a Church were an Argument of it (elf againft it 3 but to ihew (i.) That popular Church-Government naturally leads (S9) leads to DiviGom, and leaves them without Pveme- dy 5 and (2.) That humorous and fadious People will always complain of the mifchief of Impofitions^ though the things be never (b juft and reafondble , and (3.) That this Principle oi Liberty of Confd- ence will unavoidably lead Men into Confufion : For when Men once break the Kuks of Order and Government in a Ckurchy they run down the HilJ, and tumble down all before theai;^ If Men complain of the mifchief of owx Impofltions^ the Members of their own Churches may on' the fame grounds com- plain of theirs 5 and as the Presbjiterians cannot an- Cver the Independents as to the pretence ofConfcience 5 fb it is impoffible for either, or both of them to an- fwer the Anabaptijis^ who have as juft a Pk'a for Se- paration from them, as they can have from the Church of England, Se6f. 14. From hence we find that, although the ' Pretence of the diffenting Brethren feemed very mo- deft as to themfelves, yet, they going lipon a-com- mon Principle of Liberty of Confcience^ the Presby- terians charged them with being the occafion of that horrible Inundation of Erronrs and Schtfms^ which immediately overfpread this City and Nation : which • I ftiall briefly reprefentin the words of the moft emi- nent Pre/ij/er/^/?/ of that time. Thence Dr. A 5//^^^, - a zealous Scotch Presbyterian^ faid, That he verily be- Duply u lieved Independency cannot but prove the Root of all ^- ^-P- 53- Schifms and Herefies : Tea, I add, (aith he, That by confiquence it is much worfe than Popery. Thence the Scotch Commiffioners, in the firft place, xhe Scotch preffed Uniformity in Religion as the onely means to commiff, I 2 preferve ^' ^' ^' preferve Peace, and to prevent many Divijions and Troubles 5 a thing very becoming the JCing to promote^ according to the praHice of the good Kings of Judah $ and a thing which, they (ay, all found Divines and Polititians are for, 5eyw.Nov.8. Dr. Corn. Burgefs told the Houfe of Commons, 1541. That our Church was laid wafle, and expofed to confw (ton under the plaufible Pretence of not forcing Mens Confciences : and tBat, to pnt all Alen into a courfe of Order and Uniformity, in God's way, is not to force the Confcience 5 but to fit up Cod in his due place, and to bring all his People into the paths of righteoufnefs and life. Sem before The Errors and Innovations under which we groaned ) F^b^^'"* fi much of later years, ftith Mr. Cafe, were but Tole- J645. * rabiles Inepti^, Tolerable Trifles, Childrens Play^ com* pared with thefe damnable DoBrines, DoBrines ofDe- vils, as the Apofile calls them : Polygamy, Arbitrary Divorce, Mortality of the Soul 3 A^^ Minijiery, tio Churches, no Ordinances, no Scripture, &c. And the very foundation of all thefe laid in fuch a Schifm of bonndlefs Liberty of Confcience, and fuch lawlefs Sepa* ration of Churches, &c. Sam. before The famous City ^/London is become an Amfter- ike Lord (J^j^^ f^jj-j^ y^^^ Calamy, Separation from our Churches 14. 164$.* ^ countenanced , Toleration is cried tip. Authority ajleep. It would feem a wonder if I flyould reckon how many feparate Congregations , or rather Segrega- tions there are in the City 3 What Churches againji Churches, See. Hereby the hearts of the People are mightily diflracied^ many are hindred from Convert' fwn. Jion^ and even the godly themfelves have lofi much of the power of godlinefs in their hives. The Lord k§ep m^ filth he, from being poi/oned with fuch an Error as that of an unlimited Toleration, A Do&rine that overthroweth all Church-Government^ bringeth in Con-* fujion^ and openeth a wide door unto all irreligian an4 Athcifm. Diverjity of Religion^ fiith Mr. Matthew Njewco- sem. before men, disjoints and dijira&s the minds of Men^ and the Parla^ is the Seminary of perpetual Hatreds^ Jealoujles^ Sedi^ ^2^16^* tions^ Wars^ if any thing in the World be 5 and in a> little time^ either a Schifm in the State begets a Schifm in the Churchy or a Schifm in the Church begets a Schifm in the State : i. e. either Religion in the Church is pre- judiced by civil Contentions^ or Church-Controverfles and Di/putes about Opinions breaks out into civil Wars, Men will at lafi take up Swords and Spears inflead of Pens 5 and defend that by Arms which they cannot do by Argument So The(e may ferve for a tafte of the (en(e of fome" of the raoft eminent Presbyterian Divines at that time, concerning the dangerous efFefts of that To- leration which their Independent Brethren defi- led. The diffenting Brethren finding themfelves thus . loaden with fo many Reproaches, and particular- ly with being the occafion of fo many Errors and Schifms ^ publiftied their Apologetical Narration in Vindication of themfelves , wherein (as is fiid be- fore) they endeavour to purge themfelves from the imputation oiBrownifm 3 declaring, That they look^ed on CbfeYvatkns and Annota- tions on the Apologetical Uarration, J. 17. Sermon at 5f.PaulV, Fcl|.8. 164$ p. 41. enfome of our Churches as true Churches^ and our Mini- fiery 06 a true Minifiery 5 but yet they earneftly defire liberty as to tht peaceable praBice of their own way. To this the Presbyterians anfwered, firft^ That they did not underftand by them in what fenfe they allowed our Churches to be true Churches. Secondly^ If they did, what neceffity there was for any Separation^ or what need of Toleration. As to the (en(e in which they owned our Churches to be true Churches 5 either they underfiood it of a hare metaphyseal Verity^ as many of our Divines^ (ay. they, grant it to the Romifh Church 5 that fhe is a true Churchy as a rotten infe&ious Strumpet is a true Wo* man , and then they thank^ them for their favour^ that they hold our Churches in the fame Category with Rome : or elfe they underfiand it in a moral Senfe^ for found and pure Churches^ and then^ (ay they. Why do ye not joyn with «f, and communicate as Brethren .- cumjiunces^ but in the nature of the Aft '5 becaule then Separation appears moft unreafonable, when eccajional Communion is confefled to be lawful/. As will fully appear by the following Difcourfe. Thofe men therefore fpcak moft agreeably to their prefent pradice, although leaft for the honour o(t\it AJfembly^ who confefi, That they were tranjported with uhdue Mischief of heats and animojities againji their Brethren 5 which ^^W- P- s^» deferve to he lamented^ and not to he imitated 5 that * ^' they are not obliged to vindicate all they faid^ nor to he concluded hy their Determinations : that it is to be Letter out «/ hoped the Party is become wifir fince. This is plain '^^ ^o««/7, dealing, and giving up the Cauje- to the dijjcnting^*^ ' Brethren 5 and that in a matter wherein they happe- ned to have the ftrongeft reafbn of their fide. But hereby we fee, that thofe who juftifie.the prefent Se- paration have forfaken the Principles and PraBices of the old Nonconfermijis^ as to this point oi Separa- tion. Se&. 17. It remains now, that I fhew how far they are likewife gone off from the peaceable Principles of (78) of their Predeceffors, as to pivafe, perfo^ tmdertm k^ng to reform the Difcipline of tha* Churc::^ a^jd^ fd^ ting up new Churches^ again fi the cofent ot tfj^' i/un^ fir at e^ in a Reformed Church : and pirtioHlariy m This way of anpA^ering is juft as if one fhould quote a paffage out oi Curcell^ns Ins Gree^TeJiament^ and another fhould reply. If CurceU^us faid fo, it had been no proof Can Mr. B, (atisfie his Mind with liich Anfvvers ? When Fr. Johnfin (aid. That our Minifiers ought Vnreafona^ ^^^ ^^fiff^'^ themfelves to be Silenced and Depofed from blencfs of their pHblic!^ Minijiery^ no not by lawfuU Magijirates. ^.Mr^rr^n, ^[^^ Bradjhaw anfwered, This Affertion is falfe and * feditiom. And when Johnfin faith, That the Apojiles did not make their immediate Calling from God the ground of their refufal :^ but this^ that they ought to obey God rather than Man , which is a Duty required &f all Minifiers and Qhrifiians, Bradfljaw (a Peribn formerly in great tfteem with Mr. Bixter^ and high- ly commended by the Authour of the Vindication of his Difpute with Johnfin) gives this Anfwer. I. Though ^.89 ■ ^^5) 1 . Though the Apojiles did not ajjign their immedi- ate C tiling from God^ as the ground of their refnfat^ in fo many Letters and Syllables^ yet that which they do afjign is by Implication^ and in effeit the fame with it. For it is as much as if they had faid^ God himfelf hath impofed this Calling upon us^ and not Mm ^ and therefore except we fJjould rather obey Man than God^ we may not forbear this Office which he hath impofed upon us, For^ oppdfing the obedience of God to the obedience of - Mcin^ they therein plead a Calling from God^ and not from Man 5 otherwife^ if they had received a Calling from Man^ there had been incongruity in the Anfiver 5 confidering^ that in common fenfe and reafon^ they ought fo far forth to obey Men^ forbidding them to ex- ercife a Callings as they exercife the fame by vertue cf that Calling, Elje^ by this reafon^ a Minifier fjould not ceafe to Preachy upon the Commandment of the Churchy that hath chofen him 5 but fjould be bound^ to give them alfo the fame Anfwer^ which the Apojiles gave^ which vpere abfurd. So that by this grofs conceit of Mr, John- fon, there ft)ouId be no Power in any fort of Men who-, foevery to depofe a Minifier from his Mini fiery ; but that notwithjianding any Commandment of Church or State 5 the Minijler is to continue in his Mini^ fiery. 2. For the further Anfwer of this his ignorant conceit^ plainly tending to Sedition^ we are to k^jow^ that thoitgh the Apoflles^ Prophets and Evangelifis^ Preached Pfib- lickly^ where they were not hindred by open violence ^ and did not^ nor might not leave their Minijiery upon any Humane Authority^ or Commandment whatfoever^ he- cauje they did not enter into^ or exercife the fame upon the the will and pleafure of any Man whatfoever-^ yet they never ere&ed and planted puhlick^ Churches and Mini* fteries in the face of the Magi flr ate whether they would or no^ or in defpite of them 5 but fuch^ in refpe3 of the eye of the Magijirate^ were as private and invifible as might be, 5.* Neither were fome of the Apofiles onely forbidden fo as others jhould he fuffered to preach the fame Gof pel in their places 5 but the utter aboUfhing ofChriflian Religion was manifefily intended in Silencing of them. But our Churches whereof we are Minijiers^ are no pri* vate andfecret Ajfemhlies^ fitch as hide themfelves from the face of a perjecuting Magijirate and State 5 but are public k^^ profejfing their Worfjip^ and doing their J^eli^ gion in the face of the Magiflrate and State 5 yea^ and by his Countenance^ Authority and Prote3ion 5 and we are fit overthofe Churches^ not onely by aC ailing of our Peo- ple^ but alfo by the AuthoHty of the Magijirate^ who hath an armed Power to hinder any fuch publicly a&ion'-y who is willing alfo to permit and maintain other true Mini' fiers of the Gofpel^ in thojejlaces where he forbiddeth fome. If therefore after our publick^ Calling to Minijier to fuch a known and publickjChurch^ not by the Church onely ^ but by the Magifirate alfo^ the Magiflrate fhall have matter again fl us (whether jujl or unjufi it skil^ leth not) and fhall in that regard forbid us to Mini* Jier to our Church 5 I fie not by what warrant in Gods Word we fhotdd thin\ our felves bound notwithfian* ding to exercife our Minifiery fiill 5 except we jhould think^ fuch a Law of Minifiery to lie upon us^ that we fhould judge our felves bound to run upon the Sword's point of the Magifirate^ or to oppofe Sword to Sword, And fuppofi the Magifirate fhould do it unjufily and againfi (87) agairjjl the wtU of the Churchy and Jhonld therein fin t yet doth not the Church in that regard ceafe to he a Churchy nor ought pe therein to refifi the vcillofthe Magi fir ate , neither doth fl)e fi and bound^ in regard of her afftSiOn' to her Minifier (how great and deferving ' foever) to deprive her felf of the proteSion of the Migifirate^ by leaving her publick^ fianding to foHow his iW^ifiery in private an din the dark^-^ ref fifing the benefit of all other piihlick Minifiery^ which with the leave and liking of the Mugifirate pe may enjoy, • 4. Neither do I \noiPP what warrant any ordinary Minifier hath by Gods Word in fuch a cafe fo to draw any finch Church or People to his private Minifier y^ that thereby they fiwuld hazard their outward fiat e and quiet in- the Common- wealth where they live 5 when in fome competent meafure they may publickly with the grace and favour of the Migifirate e7?joy the ordinary means of Salvation by another : and (except he have a cal- ling to Minifier in fome Church) he is to be content to live as a private Member^ till it foall pleafe God to re- concile the Magi fir ate to him^ andio^call him again to his own Church 5 labouring mean while privately^ upon particular occafions offered^ to firengthen and confirm in the ways of God thofe People that are deprived of his publi(\ Labour. And I take it to be the duty of the People in fuch a cafe^ if they will approve t he mf elves fait hf ill Chriftians and good Subjeds^ fo to fubmit to the Mini fiery of another^ as that by Prayer^ and all other good^ dutifuU and loyal means^ they may do their be fi endeavour to obtain him^ ofwhom^ again fi their will^ they have been deprived^ and fliU to afieci and love him as their Pafiour : now if the People do thus^ then is thit C 88 ) that Mwijier called to be Sile^t^ mt onely by the Ma* giJlratCy but by them alfo^ though with much grief. Anfwer to To this Teftimony of Mr. Bradjhaw^ all that Mr. 5. Sem.p 99' faith, is, That Bradlhaw thought vpe Jhould fubmit to a Silencing Law where our Mini fiery was unnecejfary^ and fo doth he. If Mr. 5. did allow himfelf any time to confider what he writes, he would never have given fuch an Anfwer as this. For Mr. Brad-- JIjuw never puts the crfe upon the neceffity or no ne* cejjity of their Preachings but upon the allowance or difallowance of the Chriftian Magijlrate. And if it had been refolved upon the point oi necejjity^ Is it poflible for Mr. S. to think there was lefs necejjity of Preaching at that time than there is now, when him- felf confefleth, (everal years fince, That thirty years Defence 4)f ago there were many bare Readings not Preaching Mi* the Cure cf mfters^for one that there k now^ And what was there ^ /^Monx, ^j^j^]^ jj^g qJj Non-conformifts more complained of, than/^e want of a more peaching Minijlery .^S^:^^Aving made it my bufi- ^^ ne(s, in the foregoing Difcourfe^ to (hew, How far the prefect Diffenttrs are gone off from the Principles of the old Non-conformtfis if I come to confider, What thofe Principles are, which they now proceed upon 5 And thofe are of two forts. Firji^ Of (uch as hold partial and occafonal Com- munion with our Churches to be lawful!'^ iut not total and confianty i. e. they judge it lawfull at fome times to be prefent in fome part of our Worjhip^ and upon particular occafions to partake of fome a3s of Comr munion with us 5 but yet^ they apprehend greater pu- rity and edification infeparate Congregations^ and when they are to choofe^ they thin\ themfelves hound to choofe thefe^ although at certain feafons they may think !t N 2 IvwfHll (>4) lawful! to liibmit to eccafional Communion with our Churchy as it is now eftabliftied. 2f m. Secondly^ Of fiich as hold any Communion with bur Church to be unlavpfuU^ becaule they believe the terms of its Communion unlawful! 5 for which they inftance in the conjiant ufe of the Liturgy 5 the aereul Sign of the Crofs 5 kneeling at the Commumon 5 the obfer-uation of Holidays 5 renouncing other Ajjemhlies $ want ofDif- cipline in our Churches 5 and depriving the People of their Right in choofittg their own Pajiours, To proceed with all poflible clearnefs in this mat- ter we muft confider the(e Three things , i. What things are to be taken for granted by the feveral Par- ties with refpedt to our Church. 2. Wherein they dij^er among themfelves about the nature and degrees ol Separation from \t. 3. What the true ftate of the prefent Controverfie about Separation is. I. In General, they cannot deny thefe three things. 1. That there is no reafon of Separation^ be- caufe of the Do&rine of our Church, 2. That there is no other reafon oi Separation becaufe of the terms of our Communion, than what was from the beginning of the Reformation. 3. That Communion with our Church hath been ftill allowed by the Reformed Chur^ ches abroad. I. That Cp5) .; II' jji. That there is no Reafon of Separation becaufe m the DoSriffe of our Church. This was confeffed by the Brownifis and moft rigid Separatijis 5 as is proved already 5 and our preient Adverfaries agree herein. Dr. Owen faith. We agree with our Brethren Vindicaihn in the Faith of the Go/pel 5 and we are firmly united formial^^' vptth the main Body of Protefiants in this Nation in p. 8, 9. ConfeJJion of the jame Faith : And again. The Parties at difference do agree in all Subjiantiul parts of Reli- gion^ and in a common Interefh^ as unto the prejervati- Page 22. on and defence of the Protejiant Religion, Mr. Baxter lai) h. That they agree with us in the Do&rine of the 59 Articles^ as diftin^ from the form of Government M^^^ '<' and impofed abu/es. And more fully elfewhere, // ^'^"'•^^7• not the Non-conformijis Doctrine the fame with that of the Church ^/^ England, when they fubfcribe to it^ and effer fo to do ^ The Independents as well as Presbyte- Defence of rians offer to fubfcribe to the DoiJrine of the 59 Arti- '^l^^^'JJ; cles^ as diflinU from Prelacy and Ceremony, We agree ;).*64. Toith them in the Do&rine of Faith and the Subjiance ^^J^^^^ '-^ of God's Worjhip^ (aith the Authour of the laft Anfwer, p, ,5/ And again, We are one with the Church ^/England in all the neccffary points of Faith and Chrifiian Pra£lice^ Fage jo. We are one with the Church (?/ England as to the Sub- fiance and all ncceffiry parts ofGodi Worfjip, And even Mr. A, after many trifling cavils, acknowledges, That^ the Dijfenters generally agree with that Booh^ which is M'ifchUf of commonly called the 39 Articles^ which was compiled ^^^Vf^^^J^ above a Hundred years ago '^ and thk Book^fome Alen call the Church ^/England. I know not who thofe Men are, nor by what Figure they fpeak who call a Boo/{^ a Church 5 but this we all fay, That the Doc^ trim of the Church of England \% conXdlmtdi therein 5 and and whatever the opinions of private perfons may be, this is the Standard by which the Sep^Je of our Chtil^ is to be taken : And that no obje6lion ought to re made againft Communion with our Church upon ac- count of the Do£$rine of it 3 but what reaches to (iich Articles as are owned and received by this Church. 2. That there are in effeft no new terms of Com'^ .munion with this Churchy but the fame which our firft Reformers owned and fufFered Martyrdom for in Q. Marf^ days. Not but that (bme alterations have been made fince, but not fuch as do, in the judg- ment of our Brethren, make the terms q{ Communion • harder than before, Mr. Baxter grants, that the terms of hay Communion are rather made eafier by fuch alterations^ even fince the additional Conformity^ with refpeft to the late Troubles. The fame Rea- fins then which would now make the terms of our ! dicoh ttgainfl Communion unlaw full muft have held againft Cranmer^ ohnfon, Ridley^ &c. who laid down their Lives for the Re^ ^i^l^ltri\f^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^ Church. And this the old Non-con- 40' 42' 47|yi?r;5^//?/ thought a confiderable Argument againft 54» ^8, 19^ Separating from the Communion of our Church'^ be- BradfliawV caufe it refleSed much on the honour of our Martyrs :y Anffper to vi^ho not oucly Hved and died in the Communion of third Reafon, ^Ws Churchy and in the praftice of thofe things which Sen. 2. fbme are now moft offended at 3 but were themfelves gahfl Bf^'ovi: ^^^ 8^^^^ InftrumcHts in fettling the terms of our l>.97,98,ioo. Communion. 5. That Communion with our Church hath been ftill owned by the Protejiant and Reformed Churches abroad. Which they have not onely manifefted by receiving the Jpology and Articles of our Church into the 10, 27, 51. 92' (97) the Harmony of ConfeJJions 5 but by the Tejiimony ^nd Approbation which hath been given to it by the moft efteemed and learned Writers of thofe Chpirches^ and by the difcountenance which they have ftill gi- ven to Separation from the Communion of it. This Argument was often objefted againft the Separatifis by the Non-conform/Jls 5 and Ainfworth attempts to anfwer it no le(s than Four times in one Book, 5 but the beft Anfwer he gives, is, That if it prove any counterpojt things it proves more than they would have, Forjf;;^^ faith he, the Reformed Churches have difcerned the National Church ^/England to be a true Church 5 they have difcerned the Diocefan Bifhops ^/England, as well as the ParJjJj'Priefis^ to be true Minijiers 5 and rejoyce as well for their Sees as for your Parifhes^ having joy- ved thefe all alike in their Harmony^ As to the good opinion of the Reformed Church and Protejiant Di*- vines abroad, concerning the Conjiitution and Orders of our Church, fb much hath been proved already by Dr. Durel^ and fb little or nothing hath been faid to difprove his Evidence, that this ought to be taken as a thing granted 5 but, if occafion be given, both he and others are able to produce much more from the Tejiimony oi^ foreign Divines^ in Juftification of the Communion oi o\xi Church againft all pretences of Separation from it. Se&. 2. We now come to the feveral Flypothefes and Principles of Separation which are at this day among the Dijfenters from our Church. Some do feem to allow Separate Congregations one- ly in fuch places where the Churches are not capable to receive the Inhabitants. For this I find infifted on by almoft (p8) Letter out of almoft all my Anfwerers 5 Some Parijhes^ faith one, the Country, cannot receive a tenth party fome not half the People ^^' belonging to thent^ few can receive all. The Parochral Teacher^ faith another, if overlaid vpith a numerous Mifchief of throng of People. The PariJI) Minijlers are not near P/efalr* fi^cient fcr fo populous a City, faith a third. And ReiioHf of yet not one of thefe but affigns fuch reafbns for the Suttooeirc. „Q^^jjjfj, of feparate Congregations^ as would equally ^' hold if there were never a Church in London but what would hold all the Inhabitants together. This is therefore but a colour and pretence and no real Caufe, Any one would think, by Mr. Baxters irf- fifting fo very much on the greatnefs and largenefs of our Parifhes as the reafon of his preaching in feparate Congregations^ this were his opinion, That fuch Con- gregations are onefy allowable in fuch vafi Pari/bes where > they are helps to the Parochial Churches : And no Man denies that more places for Worfhip are defiiable, and would be very ufefull, where they may be had, and the fame way of Worfhip and Order obferved in them as in our Parochial Churches ywhtve they may be under the fame Infpedion and Ecclefiaftical Government 5 where, upon pretence of greater pu- rity of tVorJhip^ and better means of Edification^ the People are not drawn into Separation. But is it pof- fible that Mr. Baxter (hould think the cafe alike,where the Orders of our Church are conftantly oeglefted, the Authority of the Bijhops is flighted and contem- ned, and fuch Meetings are kept up in affront to them and the Laws } Would Mr. R have thought this a fufficient reafon for Mr. Tombs to have fet up a Meeting of Anabaptifis in Kidder minfi^er^ becaufe it is a very large Parijh <^ Or for R. Williams in New- England to have fet up a feparate Congregation at Bojion^ (99) BofioH^ bccaufe there were but three Churches there to receive all the numerous Inhabitants ? If (iich a number of Churches could be built, as were fuitable to the greatnefs and extent of Parijhes^ we (hould be (b far from oppofing it , that we ftiould be very thankfuU to thofe who would accomplifh fo excellent a Work : but, in the mean time, I§ this juft and rea- fonable, to draw away the People who come to our Churches^ under the pretence oi preaching to thofe who cannot come ? For, upon confidcration we fhallfind, ( i.^ That this is Mr. Baxters own cafe. For, if we obferve him , although he (bmetimes pretends Anfw. to ut. onely to preach to fome of many thoufands that cannot h 24* come into the Temples^ many of which never heard a, Sermon of many years 5 and to this purpofe he put fo many Quseres to me, concerning the largenefs of Pa- rijhes^ and the neceffity of nMre Affijlants^ thereby to infinuate , That what he did^ was onely to preach to fucb as could not come to our Churches 5 yet, when he is pinch'd with the point of Separation , then he de- clares. That his Hearers are the fame with ours 5 at leaji 10 or 20 for one ^ and that he knows not many Anfw^toLet. {if any ) who nfe to hear him^ that feparate from us, ^ '7- • If this be true, as no doubt Mr. B. believes it, then selnZ, * ^ what fuch mighty help or ajjjjiance is this to our f 57- great Parijhes ? What colour or pretence is there from the largenefs of them, that he (hould preach to the very fame per fins who come to our Churches ? And if fuch Meetings as theirs be only lawfull in great Parijhes , where they preach to fome of many thoufands who cannot come into the Churches , Then how come they to be lawfull, where few or none of thofe many O thoufands ( loo) fhoufands ever come at all, but they are filled with the very fame Perfons who come to our Varijh Chur* ches ^ Theft two Pretences then are inconfiftent with each other 2, and one of them cannot hold. " ¥ox if he doth preach to thofe who come to our Chur- ches^ and fear ce to any elfe ~( if any ^ as Mr. B. fuppo- iks") then all the pretence from the largenefs of our l?arijl)es^ and the many thoufands mho cannot come to our Churches^ is vain and impertinent 5 and to (peak foftly, not becoming Mr. Baxters fincerity. (2.) That if this were Mr. Baxters own cafe, viz. That he preached onelyto fuch as could not come to our Churches^ it would be no defence of the general practice of Drjfenters^ who exprefs no regard at all to the greatnefs or fmallnefs of Parijhes, As ^ if it were neceflary, might be proved by an InduSion of the particular Congregations within the City 5 and in ihe^ adjacent Parijhes, Either thofe feparate Meet- ings are lawful! or not ^ if not , Why doth not Mr. Baxter difown them ? if they be. Why doth he pretend the greatnefs oi Parifoes to juftifiey?/?^- rate Meetings 3 when^ if they were never fb fmall, they would be lawful! however } This therefore muft be (et afide as a meer colour and pretefjce^ which he thought plaufible for himfelf, and invidious ta us, though the bounds of our Parifties were neither of our own making, nor is it in our power to alter them^ And we fhall find that Mr. B. doth juftifie them upon other grounds, which have no relation at all to the extent of Pari/hes^ or capacity of Churches, I come therefore to the real grounds which they proceed upono CioO ^'.y^^. 5. Some do allow Communion With fame Pa- rochial Churches , in fome Duties , at fome Seafons 5 but not with all Churches , in all Duties^ or at all times. Theft things muft be more particularly ex- plained, for a right underftanding the Myjierji of the prefent Separation, Which proceeds not fo openly and plainly, as the old Separation did 5 but hath fuch arti- ficial windings and turnings in it, that a Man thinks they are very near our Churchy when they are at a great diftance from it. If we charge them with fol- lowing the Jieps of the old Separatijis^ we utterly de- ny it , (ay they ^ For they feparated from your Chur- ches ^imno true Churches 5 they dijowned your Minijie- ry ana Hierarchy as Anti-chrijiian^ and looked on your Worjhip as Idolatrous 5 but we doe none of thele things 5 and therefore you charge us unjuftly with Separation. To which I Anlwer, ( I.) There are many IP, efpecially of the Peo- ple, who purfte the Principles of the old Separatifts , of whom Mr. B. hath fpoken very well in his Cure of Divifions , and the Defence of it 5 and elfewhere. Where he complains of their Violence^ and Cenforiouf- cure of Di- ne/s 5 their contempt of the graveji and wijeji Pajlours 5 '^'Z* P' 393* and forcing others to forfake their own judgments to comply with their humours. And, he faith, A Jin full • humouring ofrajlj Profejjours^ is oi great a Temptation to them^ as a ftnfuU compliance with the great Ones of the World. In another place he (aith, The People will sacrWeg. ds- not endure any Forms of Prayers among them^ but they fir t ion , declare they would be gone from them , // they do ufe ^' '°^' them. And he doth not diffemble , that they do • comply with them in theft remarkable words, Should the Minijiers in London, that have fuferdfo long^ O 2 but '('102) but ufe any fart oj the Liturgy md Scripture Forms^ though without any motive hut the pkajing God and the Churches good^ What muttering and cenfuring would then be among them ? And woe to thofe few Teachers that make up their Deftgns by cherifiing thefe Diftem- • pers. One would thtnk^ that their warning had been ^ fair-^ but^ Si nati fint ad bis perdendam Angliaci^ The Lord have mercy upon us, (2.) When the matter is throughly examined, the difference betv/een their Teachers , and the old Separatijis^ will be found not near fb great as is pre- . tended. For what matter is it , as to the ^aiffre of Separation^ whether the terms of our CommiMion be called Idolatro7is^ or Unlawful! '^ whether the Mini- fiery of our Church be called a Falfe Minifiery^ or Infufficient ^ Scandalous^ Ujurpers^ Siud Perjecutours ^ whether our Hierarchy be called Antichrijiian^ or re- pugnant to the Injiitutiofyof Chrifl, Now thefe are the very fame Arguments which the old Separatifis ufed, onely they are difguifed under arK)ther appea- rance, and put into a more fafhionable drefs. As will be manifeft by Particulars. ( I.) As to the People. ( 2. ) As to the Minifiery of our Church. Se&. 4. ( L ) Our prefent Diffenters who dif- own the old Separation^ yet make the term.s of Lay* Communion for Perlbns, as Members of our Churchy to ¥hji Plea^ be unlawful!. For Mr. 5. in his late Plea for Peace^ Si^, 9. ij3^{^ ^ whole Chapter ofReaJons againfl the Communis ^' ^^' on of Laymen with our Church, And in the ftroe Book (103) Book he (aith, It is Schifmatical in a Church to deny - ^^B^iptifm without the tranfient Sign of the Crofs^ or for * tPdnt of Godfathers^ &c. or to deny the Communion to fuch who fcruple kneeling. Now if the Church be SchiJ^ page 4$. ^^matical^ then thofe who feparate in thefe things are not. For, (aith Mr. i3. When the Laity cannot have their Children baptized without fitch ufe of the transient dedi- M^- ^'^ eating Image of the Crofs'^ and fuch ufe of entitling and '^''^'"'^ ^^* covenanting Godfathers^ which they take to be no fmall (in 5 //// Separation to joy n with Pajioursthat will other- wife Baptize them . Country 5 thk were to exchange vijible Chriflianity^ for vijible (at leaji negative) "Paganifm. N0W5 that our prefent Diffenters do hold the terms of our Communis on unlawfully they are n^e forward to declare than 1 could have imagined. In my Sermon I mentioned fome paffages, wherein it (eemed clear to me, that (bme confiderable Perfons among them did allow Lay- communion with our Church to he lawful! : But they have taken a great deal of pains to undeceive me 3 fome declaring in exprefi terms, That they look^ on the terms of our Communion as unlawfull ^ and that there is a necejjity of Separation from our Parochial Chur* Dr. q.'s Kin- ches , and of joyning to other Congregations, And drwffon, &c. Qfj^gj-s faying, That fuch a Concejfion^ viz. That they hold Communion with our Churches to be lawfully taken in their own finfe^ will neither doe them any barm^ nor u^ any fervice. For, as Mr. A, hath dimmed up the Mifchief of (enfe of thefe Men. i. Many of them declare fo ^ ul'f!z6! ^^^ ^^^y d^^l^^^ otherwife And it's as good an (los) an ArgHmett to'pYot>^ tommumon unluwfftu ^ becaufe many declare againji it^ as 'tis to prove it lawfully he^ canfe many declare for it, 2. They declare Communion lawful! ^ hut 5 1l)o they declare total Communion lavp^ full .'Ef^gla»d way , and muft fall into the way of the moft rigid Sefaratifts. 2, Thofe that do hold ComntHnion lawfully doe it with (b many reflri&iofts and limitations^ that inpra- ftice it amounts to little more than the other. For Firfi^ it is onely with fame Churches ^ and thofe it feems muft be fuch, as do not hold to our ConfiitU" ' tion 5 for he (aith, Thefz^m Ceremonies are not urged in all Churches^ nor the fame rigid terms of Communis on exaBed , i. e. If any Churches among us comply with them , they can Communicate with them, i, e. if thej breaks their own Rules , they can joyn with them. Is not this an admirable way of Communica- ting with our Churches .^ But if our Churches hold to their Rule , and obferve the Orders prelcribed , then it feems they renounce all Communion with them as unlawfully And what is this but to deny Communion with the Church o( England^ For unlefs Parochial Churches dQ^zxt^hm thQ terms of Commu-- fjion required by it , they will have no Communion with them./ And Mr. A. delivers this not onely as his own M^ch\e^ of Opinion, but as the Senfe of the Party, That ifmofi ^Pl P* 5' of the Preachers in the Separate Meetings were asl^ed their Judgments^ about the Lawfulne/s ofjoyning with the Parochial Churches in all the parts of Worjhip^ or in any exclusive to their joyning with other Ajfemblies where the Go/pel Rule is more Jiri3ly obferved , they would flatly deny it. And he goes yet further, when he (aith, That the People cannot lawfully Separate from thofe Churches whereof they are regularly Mem- bers^ and from thofe Pajiours under whofe Minifierial ConduH their own Free EleHion hath placed them , to foyn ( 107 ) joyn ordbiarily and covflant.ly with any other particular Ckurchts, This is owning a plain and downright Separation in as clear and diftinft words as ever jF^r// (?/ Worjhip in the Roman Churchy and that frequently too, /^ Ae but they would think themfelves hardly dealt with, to be charged to have had Communion with the Church of Rome. And if they be urged with it, they will plead ftill. They were of the Protejiant Communion 3 and the Reafon they will give, is, becaufe they did not joyn with them in all parts of their Worjhip 5 not in Adoration of ^he Hoji^ or Worjhip oi' Images 5 and therefore they remained ftill of the Prohjiant Communion^ although they were occaJionaUy prejent ztfome parts of the Po- pijlj Service. And is it not the (ame cafe here. If Men only afford an occasional Prefence at fome parts of our Worjhip . and yet all that time were Members of the Roman Church becaufe they kept their Priejis^ and had Mafs in private, and declared. That though they looked on our Service as tolerable^ yet they thought the Roman more eligible 5 and fe> having full Commu-- nicn ffion with that, and being only occajio^ally prefefit at our Service^ they thought themfelves good CathoUckj. So if men do look on the Separate Meetings as wore eligible^ and a better n\iy ofWorJI)?p^ with which they conflantly joyn^ and alw.iys choofe to do it, their occa^ Clonal Prefence at our Aflembhcs doth not make them Members of our Churches^ but they ftill remain Me^^- bers of the Separate Cor7gregations if they maintain fall and conltant Communion with them. And none of the formed Separate Churches will look on any one as having Communion with them , for being occadonally prefent at fome parts of their Worfi/p , for they (ay. That Heathens and Indians may have fuch occaftonal Communion with them ^ but they require fromP^r- fons that are admitted to Communion with their Chur- ches^ 2l fubmijjion to all the Rules and Or^erj- among them. The New-England Churches will (ufFer no Man to continue a Member of their Communion that Icruples Infant'Baptifm^ or refufes to be prefent at the Adminijlration of it 5 although he be never (b wil- ling to be occafionaUy prefent at all other parts offFor- Jhip with them. For not only openly condemning and oppofing Infant' Baptifm^ but going about fecretly to fe* duce others from the approbation or ufe thereof^ or pur- pofely departing the Congregation at the Adminijlration of that Ordinance^ is liable, by their Laws^ to the Sentence of Banifhment. And they have found it fo neceflary to twift the Civil and Ecclefiajiical Interejis together, that as none but Church-Members are Free- men among them 5 fo none that are banifhed can re- tain their Church- Memherfiip. Fro:n all this it ap- pears, that this nerv Notion oi occajlonal Communion in fome parts of Worfhip^ exclufively to others , is dif- owned by all forts of Churches 5 and is a late fancy P 2 taken ( no ) taken up on purpofe to avoid the charge of 5f/^*^T rution, Se&. 5. But we here meet with an excellent Rea^ (on for the lawfulnefs of this occafional Communion with our Churches 5 viz. becanfe to hold Communion vpith one Church exclufively to all othrs^ is contrary to their true Catholicl{ Principles , which teach them to hold Communion^ though not equally^ with all tolerable Sacriki* de- Churches, Or as Mr. B. exprefles it, The benefit of jr orijp, . Qi^yjjij^^ Lcv.e and Concord may make it befi^ for cer- tain feafons^ to joyn even in defensive Modes of Wor- Pip^ as Chrift did in the Synagogues and Temple in hk time : though the leaji defe&ive muji be ckojen^ when 770 fuch accidental Reafons fway the othir way. From • whence we may take notice, ( i. ) That no obHga- tion to the Peace and Unity of this Churchy as they are Members of it, doth bring them to this occafional Communion vn\\\\x^ but a certain Romantick Fancy of CatholichJJnity 5 by which thefe Catholich^ Gentle- men think themfclves no more obliged to the Com* munion of this Church than of the Armenia^n or Aby(^ (Ine Churches. Only it happens that our Church is fo much nearer to them than the others are, and there- fore they can afford it more occafional Communion, •But I would fuppofe one of thefe Men oi Catholic l^ Principles to be at Jerujalem^ where he might have cccjflonal Communion with all (brts of the EaJitK^i Churches 5 and fome of the Members of t hole Churches iliould ask him what Church he is Member of ^ If he ftiould anfwer, He could have occafional Communion with all tolerable Churches , but was a fixed Member of none ; Would they take fuch a Man for a Cirz- jiian^ What i\,ChriJiian ^ and ^ /M.-ember of no^ Church I (in) Church ! That they would all agree, was no part oi Catholkk Chrjjiiamty. And I much doubt, whether any of them would admit fuch a ofje to occafiond Commuf77on that could not tell what Church he v/as Member ojj. For , as to the Church of Et^gland^ he declares , That he holds only occajlonal Commumon with thut^ as he would do with any other tolerable Churches. But, Were they not baptized in this Churchy • and received into C^.^/?i///;/^* P'^^- harm will it do me or them^ if any hearers go from me^ as you fay , to Dr. O. none that I know. For , as Dr. 0. faith, Since your Pra&ice is one and the fame ^ Dr.o's. Vtn- your Principles mufi be fo alfo^ although you choofe fe- ^i^^^* P* 20. mral ways of exprejjiffg them. But, did the whole (ii4) force of my Argument lie here ? Did I not mention their going from him to the Auabaptifts and fakers upon the very fame ground ? And is this a good way of anfwering , to diflemble the main force of an Argument that fomerhing may feem to be (aid to it ? I (uppofe Mr. jB.'s great haft made him leave the beft part of the Argument behind him. But I defire him calmly to weigh and confider it better $ whether he doth think it reafonable to fuppole, that fince the Peace zvAUraty of the Church is a thing of chnftianDi' fuch great importance, znd Separation fo^ mifchievom ^ r^m^74«- ^^^ ^^ ^^^^^ reprefented it) that the Peoples appre- henfion of a lefs defective way ofWorddip (hall be (uf- ficient ground for them to break a Church in pieces, • and to run into ways of Separation ^ Hath not Mr. Baxter reprefented ( and no Man better ) the Sacrikg. de- Ignorance^ Irjjudicioufnefs^ Pride^ Conceitednefs^ and grr. /). 1 02, "D^p^^Q^ii^^^j} of the ordinary fort of zealous Profef- fors of Religion .25. ^ifjg cannot bind them to hurt^ or famifh^ or en* danger their Souls. But why muft the King bear all all the blame, if Mens Souls be not provided for ac- cording to their own wifhes? Doth the Kwg pre* tend to do any thing in this matter but according to the e[iablijl)d Laws and Orders of this Church ^ Why did he not keep to the good old Phrafe o^Kwg andParlament ^ And why did he not put it as it ought . to have been, that they know what makes better for their own Edification than the Wifedom of the whole Nation mFar lament ^2Lnd the Governorus oit\\\^ChHrch do : and let them make what Laws and Orders they will, if the People^ even the rajld and injudiciot^ Pro- fejffours^ as Mr. B. calls them, do think other means of Edification better, and other wap of tvorjhip lefs defective^ they are bound to break through all Laws, and to run into Separation, And how is it poffible upon thefe terms to have any Peace or Order^ or ^uy ejiablijlid Churchy I do not remember that any • of the old Separatijis^ no not Barrow^ or John/on^ did ever lay down (iich loofe Principles of^ Separation as the(e are. The Browmfis declare, in their Apology, • That none are to feparate for faults and corruptions^ Apology of which may^ and will fall out among Men^ even in true Ij^s^/T^^^ conjiituted Churches^ but by due ' order to feek^ the re- drefs thereof. Where a Church is rightly conjiituted^ here is no allowance. of 5e/?^r^/7^« for defeSs and corruptions of Men^ although they might apprehend Smith or 'Jacob to be more edifying Preachers than either John fin or Ainfworth. The ground of Sepa- raiion with them, was the want of a right conjiituted Church 5 if that were once fuppoied, other defeSs were never till now thought to be good grounds of Separation, In the Platform of the Difcipline ofchap.i^. > New-England^ it is faid , That Church- Members mny not- depart, from the Church as they pleaje^ nor without J juji atjd weighty caufe : Becaufe fnch departnre tends to the -dijfolution of the Body. • \?\\^t>" Thofe juft Reafons lirCy c I. If a Man cannot continue mthout Jin^ . * 2. In cafe of PerfecHtion. Not one word oi better means of Edification. For the Independents have wifely taken care to fecure their Members to their own Congregations^ and not liiffer them to wander abroad upon fuch pretences ^ left fuch liberty ftiould break them into diforder and confufion. So in their Declaration ^t the Savoji^ , ^rderofcon- they lay. That Perfbns joined in Church'FellovpJhip^ gregatknal ^^gf^f „Qf lightly^ or without jufi caufe^ to withdraw m 2L * themfelves from the Communion of the Churchy where-- unto they are joined* And they reckon up thofe which they allow for jufi caufes. !• Where any perfon cannot continue in any Church without his fin .' and that in three cafes* Firft, Want of Ordinances. Secondly, Being deprived of due privileges. Thirdly, Being compelled to any thing in praltice^ mt warranted by the Word. • a. In cafe of Perfecution. 3, Upon the account of conveniency of Habitation. % Md (117) And in thefi Cafis^ the Church or Officers are to h . confulted^ and then they may peaceably depart front the ^-^ Commnnion of the Church, No allowance here made o^ forfakjng a Churchy meerly (or greater means of E- djficathn. And how juft foever the reafons were,they . are civilly to take leave oF the Church and her Of- ficers, and to tell them why they depart. And Mr. Burroughs condemns it as the direH way to bring irenic. c, 22. in all kjnd of diforder and confnfion into the Church. Yet this is now the main fupport of the prefent Separati- on 3 and meer neceflity hath driven them to it 5 for either they muft own the Principles of the'^W Sepa- ratifis^ which they are unwilling to do, or find out others to (erve their turn 3 but they are fuch, as no Man, who hath any regard to the Peace and ZJnity of the Churchy can ever think fit to maintain, fince they apparently tend to nothing but diforder and con* fufipn^ as Mr. Burroughs truly obferved. But what • ground is there to fuppofe (b much greater means of Edification in the Separate Congregations .«? fince Mr. B. is pleafed to give this Tefiimony tathe Prea- Anfr^, to Let- ching in our PariJJ) -Churches 5 That for his part^ he hath ^^^^ ^ '^* feldont heard any but very good well-fludied Sermons in the PariJIi Churches in London where he hath been 5 hut mofl of them are more fitted to well-bred Scholars^ or judicious Hearers^ than to fuch as need more praSi- calSubjeHs^ and a more plain^ familiar^ eafle method. Is this the truth of the cafe indeed ? ' Then, Tor all that I can (ee, the King is exculed from all blame in this matter $ unlefi it be a fault to provide too well for them. And, Is this a good ground for Separation^ that the Preaching is too good for the People ^ Some Men may went Cau- fcs to defend , but at this rate they can never ;. u (i 2 want watit Argun:£nts. Yet, methinks5the fame Men (houM • not complain oijiarving^ and famijhifig Souls ^ when the onely fault is, that the meat is toa good., and too . votU dreffed for them. And on the other fide, hath Samkg* de- not Mr. JB. complained publickly o\ the weaknefs and fin. p* 86. irjjudicioufnefs of too many of the Non-conformiji Prea- chers ^ and that, he really fears^ lejl meer Non confor- mifts have brought fome into reputation as conjcientious^ vpho^ by weak^ Preachings will lofe the refntation of be- ing Judicious more than their Silence loji it. And a- gain, But verily the injudicioufnefs of too many is for a Lamentation, To which he adds. But the grand Calamity ^, that the mofi injudicious are ufuaUy the mofi confident and felf- conceit ed^ and none* fo com^ monly give way to their ignorant Zeal^ to Cenfure^ Backbite and Reproach others^ as thofe that know not . what they talk^ of. Let now any Reader judge, whe- ther upon the ftating of the cafe by Mr. 5. himfelf^ their having better means of Edification^ can be the ground of leaving our Churches to go to feparate Con- gregations^^ unleft injudicioufnefs^ and felftonceited confidence^ and an ignorant zeal may perhaps be more edifying to fome capacities, and to fome purpo(es, than judicious and well jiudied Sermons, This Argument muft therefore be quitted 5 and they who will defend the prefent Separation^ muft return to the old Principles of the Separatijis, if tfiey will juftifie their own pra&ices. And fo I find Mr. jB. • is forced to do 5 for difcerning, that the pretence ©f greater Edification would not hold of it jfelf, he adds riiore weight to it, and that comes home to the ^fffw. |>. 18. bufinefs^ viz. That the People doubt of the Calling of the obtruded Men. This is indeed an Argument for Separation^ Separation^ Siud the very fifme, which Barron^, and Greenwood^ and Johnfot?^ and Smithy and C^;? ufed,. Now we are come to the old Point of defending the Calling of our Minijiery , but we are miftaken, if we think they now manage it after the fame man- ner. We do not hear fo much the old terms of a Falfe and Anti-chrijiian Minijiiry %, but if they do fubftitute others in their room as eifeftual to make a Separation^ but lefs fit to juftifie it, the difference will not appear to be at all to their advantage, Se3. 7. 2. I come therefore to confider the P/-7«- ciples of our new Separatijif^ as to the Mtnijiery of our Church 5 and to difcover how little they differ from the old Separatijis, when this matter is throughly enquired into , as to the Argument for Separa- tion. I. In general they declare, That they onely looh^ on thofe as true Churches^ which have fuch Pajiours whom they approve. How oft have I told you^ faith Mr. 5. Ar\^mt to my that I dijiinguijh^ and take thofe for true Churches^ ^^J^[^' . that have trne Pajiours. But I take thofe for no true Churches that have^ • 1 , Men uncapable of the Pafloral Office, 2, Or not truly called to it. 3, Or that deny themfelves to have the power effential to a Pajiour. And one or other of thefe he thinks moft, if not all the Parochial Churches in England fall under. ^You • (I20) Ypu^wjUI fay then Mr. B. if a rigid Separatrfi 5 af:d thtfilis it not lawful! to joyn with any of our Paro-' chial Congregations : hut this is contradicted by hfs own fraBice. There lies therefore a farther fubtilty in this mat- ter 3 for he declares in the (ame place he can joyn with them notwithftanding. But how > As tme Churches y though he faith they are not . that (l23) that cafe^ he (aith , If they be Men ofuntrkd and fuf- peSed parts of fidelity (of which the People are to be Judges) the Princes impofition doth not make fnch true Pafiotirs of the Church before^ or without the Peoples confent ^ nor doth it always bind the People to confent , and to for fake their former Pafiours^ nor prove them Schifmatickj becaufe they doe it not. Thirdly^ They give particular dire&ions to the Peo* pie what fort of Minijiers they (hould own , and what not. Mr. 5. bids the People not thinks that he - is perfwading them to make no difference^ but after he Cure ofDL hath fct afide the utterly infujficient^ and the heretical f^i°"^] ^^' (of which the People arc admirable Judges) he lays ^ down this general Rule : Any one whofe Miniftry if fuch as tendeth to defiruBion more than to edification^ and to do more harm than good is not to be owned. And if not to be owned fo, then he is to hefeparated from : and although he advifeththt People to lay afide partia^ lity and pajjion ^ yet whether they will or not, they are left fole Judges in this matter. And that we may not think all this to be onely a Romantick, Scheme, or Fiftion, he tells us elfewhere , That they are not able Sacrileg, it- to confute the People in too many places , who tell them f^^^- ^ *°* that their publick^ Priefis are fo defeHive in their nccef fary qualifications for their Office^ as that they hold it unlawful! to own fuch for true Miniflers^ and to encou- rage them by their prefence^ or commit the care of their Souls to fuch^ i. e. in plain terms they are encouraged to Separation on this account, which is diredily con- trary to the Principles of the old Non-conformifis^ as appears at large by Mr. Ball. If^ faith he, Cans zzW againfi meaning be^ that it is not lawful/ to communicate in the ^'"'P- '» 4> WorfiipofGodwith Minifiers not fitly qualified, dif ^* ^^' R. orderly orderly called^ or carelejly executing their Office and FunSion^ then it is direSllji contrary to the word of TrHth^ found Reafon^ and confent of all the Learned. Fag, 1$, 42» With much more to that purpofe. And even Mr. 5. lyiaiofNew h™^'^? when he takes upon him as a Cafuiji to de- chmchwlj, termine thefe things, doth then declare his Mind. chriftianVi' i. That a Minijiers perfonal faults do not allow 'hui.^^'^' People to feparate from the WorJIoip of God. 2. Nor all Minifierial faults^ hut onely ihofe that prove him or hk Miniflration utterly in* tolerable. Aiifv?.p,$o, But now, if Mr. 5. may be believed, the People need not be told how great ^ number of Cafes there are among us ^ where the Minijiers' are uncap able of the Minijierial Office , and therefore it k no fin in them to judge him no Minifter^ and confequentjy to feparate from him. Hath not Mr. B. fully fet forth the Pride ^ Ignorance^ Cenforioufnefs ^ Headinefs ^ Raflmefs of raw and injudicious Zealots . How few, how very few, even of thofe of tho- People who pretend moft to Knowledge in Religion^ have any to- lerable underftanding of the true Prtntiples and right notion of it 5 I do not fpeak onely of Artificers and Tradefmen 5 but of thofe of better education, who either by prejudices, or want of due application of their minds to fuch things, are fubjed to great mi- ftakes about Religion^ and yet may be very good Men ; If fuch as thefe are fo unfit to judge oi Mini* fierial Knowledge^ and the Do&rines of Religion^ What (hall we fay to the common fort of r^n? and in- judicious Profejfours of ReligionJ Mr. B/s experience in the World is not fo littlefas not to know and be fenfible of the truth of this , among the People moft apt to divide and (eparate. Is it not then a ftrange thing he ftiould thus fubjeft the Judgment of Mini- fierial Knowledge to fiich a Company of Triers as thefe ? But fiippofe they do allow their Minifieri to pafs for Men of tolerable abilities^ and reafonable good utterance^ there is a harder task yet behind, and that is, to approve themfelves to the People to be found and orthodox 5 For, faith Mr. B. (2.) If they be heretical^ they may without fin Jeparate from . them. But how (hall a Man efcape being thought heretical by the People^ if they have a mind to make him ft)^ i.e. if he croffeth their humour, and delivers fuch Doftrine as doth not pleafe them 5 for that is generally their Standard for Herefie .• $5' People have an antecedent Right to conjent^ which none Anfip, />. p. can tak^ from them.. And he ftith, he hath proved it by many Canons^ that he teas no Bijhop^ that was not chofen by the Clergy and the People 5 or came in without the Peoples confent. Nay, if they have the confent of fome^ and not of the greater part, thofe who did not content, may proceed to choole another Bijhep^ if Mr. B. fay true. For thefe are his words. If a Pkayp,Siy D/ocefe have aThoufand or 600, or 500 Parijh Pa- ^^- ftours^ an I a Hundred thoufand or a Million of People (cr 5ODO0 or 20000, as ye will fuppofe) andif onely a do'X.en or 10 Presbyters^ and a Thoufand People (or none) choofe the Bijljop^ this is not the Ele&ion or Con- Jent of the Diocefan Church 5 nor is it Schifm for twenty thoufand to go againji the Votes of two thoufand. Therefore if they have (b much the advantage in pollings as Mr. A. (iiggefts, there is nothing hinders them, but that in (pite of Laws they may proceed to the choice of new Bijhops^ and new Pajiours of . Churches^ where ever they think they can make the Majority, For this is an inherent and unalterable right in the People,^ (ay they, to choofe their own Pa^ ' Jiours. Again, faith Mr. J3. in the name of the Party Ibid. in hfS Plea, If Bifhops that have no better a Founda- tion^ i. e. That come in by the King's nomination, and not by the majority of the People, fhall impofe infe- riour Pajiours or Presbyters on the Parifh Churches^ and *' command the Peoples acceptance and obedience^ \, e. If they give them Inftitution upon a Patron's Prelenta- tion, the People are not bound to accept and obey them by any Authority that is in that command as fuch 5 nor is it Schifm to difobey it^ no more than it is Treafon to . reje3 the Ufurper of a Kingdom. It is plain then, all Bifhops of the Kings Nomination^ all Minijiers prefented prefented by Patrons are raeer TJfurpers : the l?eople may give them a good Title if they pleafe 5 but they are not to blame if they do it not. For in them^ Mr. B, faith, /^e chief Power is ^ and fbme- >l«/»^.^49. times he tells them, they are hound to Separate --^ however 5 vphile they do not confent they are no pieajp.Si, Chnrches which they are fet over 5 and it is rM Schifm fo to pronounce them $ nor to deny them Com- munion proper to a Church, Is not this an excel- lent Plea for Peace 5 and the true and onely way of Concord^ which lays the foundation for all ima- ginable Difordtrs and Confufions, onely that they might have (bme pretence for their prefent Separa- tion^ Self. 12. 5. Suppole the Bifliops and Clergy have gained the confent ^implicit atleaft) of the . People, and lb are no Z)Jurpers^ yet if they be Per/e- cutors^ or Ithacian Prelatijis^ i. e. if they either aft towards, or appYOve of thG Silencing Non-conformijis^ the People may Separate from them. When Mr. B. wrote the Defence of his Book^^ called. The Cure of Divijlons^ to fatisfie the People who were much diP pleafed with him for it ^ one of the material Que- ftions he asks about his Book, is, // there a word Preface to to per/wade you to Lommunion with Perfecniors .. 42. alfo profecute them with Mul&s^ Imprifonments^ Ba- wfljments^ or other Perfecution^ to force them to tranf- grefs^ this were yet more heinoufly aggravated Schifm : and therefore it is no fm to Separate from fuch» And how eafily Men are drawn in to the guilt of this T perfecu- ( HO ) • . perfecHtion^ appears by the example he makes of me, for although I exprefly fet afide the cafe of Mimfiers^ and declared, / intended onely to fpeak^ of Laji-commu^ Anfrp, p, 61, nion ^ yet he charges me with engaging my felfin the Silencing deftgn. And by fuch confcquences all that fpeak againft Separation may be feparated from, as Pe-rfecuters^ and Ithacian Prelatijisy- SeS. 13. 4. As long as they fuppofe the terms of our Communion to be fin full ^ they fay, the Schifm doth F/erf,^42. not lie on thofe that Separate^ hut on thofe that do im- pofe fuch term's 5 and therefore they may lawfully fepa- rate from fuch impofers. This is the moft colourable P/ea hath been yet ufed by them. But in this cafe, we muft diftinguiOi between terms of Communion plainly and in themfelves (in full -^ and fuch which are • ont\y fancied to be fo through Prejudice^ oiwilfuU Ignorance^ or error o^ Conference. That there is a real diftinftion between thefe two, is evident 5 and that it ought to be confidered in this cafe, appears from hence, that elfe there can be no jinfuU feparation un- der an erroneous Confcience. As fiippofe (bme men fhould think that Preaching by an Hour-glafs^ and much more Praying by one^ was a flinting of the Spirit in point of Time^ as Pra) ing by a. Form was in point of Words 5 and all men fhould be required to begin the publick^ Worfjip at fuch an Hour^ and fo end at fuch an Hour 5 time being a neceffxry circumftance^ our Bre- thren grant, that the Magifrate or Church may law- fully determin it. Here is then a lawful! impofition 5 and yet the ^ual^rs may really judge it to be (infuff^ and declare they cannot communicate unlefi this finfuU Impofition be removed ^ For it is againft their Confiences to have the Spirit limited to any certain certain time ^ On whofe fide doth the Schijm lie in this cafe ? Not on the Impofers^ becaufe they grant (iich an impojition larvfuU'^ therefore it muft lie on thofe that Separate^ although they judge ff/ch terms of Commumon Jirifnll, If therefore the determination of other things not forbidden be really as much in the Magifirates and Churches Power^ as the neceffary dr- cumjiances of time and place, Scot then mens appre- hending fiich terms of Communion to he (ififuUWiW not hinder xh^ guilt oi Separation from l)'it7g on their fide, and not on the Impofers. Becaufe it is to be fuppo- (ed, that where there is no plain prohibition, men may with ordinary care and judgment fatisfie themfelves of the lavpfulnefs of things required. As for inftance, when the Church of Rome impofeth the IVorfhip of Images, we have the plain prohibition of the Second Commandment to prove that it is really a (in full con- dition of Communion 5 but when our Church requireth the confiant ufe of a Liturgy, and Ceremonies, which are now pleaded as ftnfuU conditions of Communion ^ Where is the prohibition . but then (i.) They are fuch inventions which go about to reprefent God^ and io to difparage him 5 and no other inventions are to be underftood , than the Reafon of the Law doth ex*- tend to, /. e. not fuch which are confident with the Spiritual and Invifible nature of God. ( 2 ) They are not fuch as do relate to the manner or form of Worjhip 5 fuppofing the Worjhip it felf be performed in a W2LY agreeable to the Divine .Nature and Law, For otherw'ife all ufe of mens inventions, as to Preachings or Readings or Interpreting Scripture^ would be for- . bidden. And then this interpretation of the Second Commandment would ht unlawful! becauft it is a meer Invention of Men-^ as much as L/Zf/rg/e/, ox Cerema^ nieso * By this we . fee 5 what jiretching and forcing of Scripture there muft be, to make Liturgies or Ceremo- nks unlawfull terms ^f Communion'-^ And that Men muft firft blind and fetter Aeir Minds by certain pre- judices of Education , or Reading only one fort of Books^zrA taking fomethings tor granted w^hichthey ought not, befbre they can efteem the terms of Com- munion required by our Church to be (in full: and there- fore xh^Schifm doth not lie on the Impojers fide, but ^pon tho^e who fuffer themfelves firft to be fo eafily Deluded^ (143) Deluded , and then Separate from our Church ttpon it. But there is another plain inftance in this cafe, wherein our Brethren themftlves will not allow the Schifm to lie on the Impofers fide 5 and that is of thofe who deny the lavpfnlnefs oi Infant- Baptifm. Ma- ny of whom pretend to do it with as Auch fincerity and impartiality , as any of our Brethren can deny the lavpfulnefs oi Liturgy or Ceremonies ; if they break Communion rather than allow what they judge to be finfuU^ on whofe fide doth the SchifmXxt^ on theirs that require the allowance of it , as a condition of Communion ^ or not .«? If on the Impofers fide ^ they muft condemn themfelves , who blame the Anabap- tifis for their Separation. And fo did Fr. Johnfon , and lo did the New-England Churches. From *vhence it appears, that they do all agree , that where Men through mifiake do judge thofe to be finful terms of Communion which are not , the guilt of Schifm doth not lie on the Impofers (ide^ but on thofe that fepa- rate. Therefore , this matter of Schtfm cannot be ended by the Plea of Conference judging the conditio tions to be finfuU , but by evident and. convincing Proofs that they are fo 5 but till thefe are brought forth, which never yet were, or ever will be, they muft bear the blame of the Schifm , if they Separate on theft accounts. Thus I have faithfully repreftnted the Principles * of thofe who allow occaftonal Prefence in our Churches^ rather than Communion with them 5 which I have difcover'd to be of that Nature , as leads Men to the grc^teft Separation. SeB. 14. (144) SeS. 14. There are others who deal more openly and ingenuoufly, and fo need the Ie(s pains to dip- cover their minds, and thofe are, II. Such who do in terms affert all A&s ofCom^ munion with our Churches to be unlaw full. But there is a difference among thefe 3 For, Firfi^ Some allow hearwg Sermons in our Vub- lick^ AJJemhlies^ and joyning in the ^ul^it Prayers 5 but not in the Liturgy^ or any proper A3 of Church-' Communion. This I have (hewed, was the Opinion of Robinfon^ and the New-England Churches 3 and was lately owned by Mr. Ph. Nje^ who wrote a D\C- courfe about it, and anfwered all Objeftions. Yea, he goes (b far, as to own the publicly Preachings as a, great hlejjing to the Nation 3 and he thinks, the Dijen- ters and their Families are bound to frequent^ (as they ■have liberty and opportunity) the more publick^and Na- tional Minifiry. But towards the end of his Treatife heconfeffes l\\t generality of their People to be of ano- ther Opinion 5 which he imputes to the a&ivity of the Jefuits among them 5 and he was a very fagacious Man^ Secondly^ Others hold it unlawfull to joyn with • our Churches in any A&s of publick^ Worjhip. And ReSoY ef fome are arrived to that height, that one of my An- Suttov^c. ji^ey.^^^ confeffeth. That they refufe to hear him, be- caufe he owns many Parochial Churches to be true Churches. It feems then, they not onely think it unlawfull to hear us, but to hear thofe who think it law full '-i and the next ftep will be to feparate from tho(e (145) thoft who do not feparate from them, that own many Parochial Churches to be trne Churches. Several Books have been publifhed to prove it unlawful! to hear our Minifters Preach : and theft proceed upon the old Arguments of the former Sepa- ratijis 5 as may be feen at large in a Book, called Je- rubbaal: whofe Author goes about to prove our Wor- fhjp UoUtry^and our Minijicrs Anti-chrijiian 5 which Mr. N)ie was fo far from owning, that he grants our Miniftery to be truQ and lawfully and utterly denies it to be Anti'chrijiian 5 becaufe the Articles of our Religi- on^ to which our Minijiers are to conform their In- firul^ions^ are Orthodox^ and framed for the cajiing and keeping out of Popery, Se&. 15. The feveral Principles of our D/^/^/erx being thus laid dov/n, the State of the prefent Contro- verfle^ as to Separation from our Communion^ will (bon appear. And any one may now difcern, I. That I do not mean bare local Separation. For Mr. B. puts this in the front of his ^£res 5 Do you Anfw,p> 45. thinks that he is a Separatiji that meeteth not in the fame Parijh Church with you . where the true Religion is acknowledged , and the true Doltrine of Faith owned by the dijfenters them- felves, who break oW Communion with our Churches ? ^n/w.i$,58, Wherefore then doth Mr. B\ make fo many Qursres, 53) ^4' about the cafe ofthofe who lived under Heathen Perfe- futors ? or the Arian Emperors, or Idolatrous Princes .^ I hope he did not niean to Parallel their own Cafe with with theirs; for , What horrible refieftion would this be upon our Government, and the Froteftant Re- ligion eftabliflied among us ? To what end doth he mention Valens and Hunerkm that cut out the ? reach- Apfw,p, ers Tongues, and feveral other unbecoming Infinuati- ons?.when, God be thanked, w^e Uve under a moft mercifull Prince , and have the true Dotirzne x)f the Gofpel among us, and may have it ftill continued, if Mens great Ingratitude, as well as other crying Sins, do not provoke God juftly to deprive us of it. What need was there , of letting fall any paflages tending this way ? wlien I told him in the very State of the Quefiion , that all our Difpute was. Whether the upholding Separate Meetings for Divine Worjhif , where the Dotlrine eftahlifbed , and the fuhflantial parts of Worjhip are acknowledged to he agreeable to the Word of God, he a Sinful! Separation or not ? Why is this Diflembled and pafled over ? And the worft cafes imaginable fuppofed , in (lead of that which is really theirs ? If I could defend a Caufe by no other means, I think Common Ingenuity , the [Honour of our Prince and Nation , and of the Froteflant Reli- gion Profefled among us , would make me give it over. Sell, 1 6. And for the fame Reafons , in the ma- nagement of this debate, I rcfolve to keep to the true State of the Quefiion , as it is laid down ; and to miake good the charge of Separation, I. Againfl thofe who hold occajional Communion with our Church to be lawfull lafome parts. ofWor/hip; but deny confiant Communion to be a Duty. U X n. Againft noui jj^ Againft thofe who deny an^ Communion votth cur Church to be lawju/l, although they agree with fit i^ tMe SuJ^^ ^.^i- I. Againft thofe who hold occafional Communion to be lawjull with our Church in feme parts oiWor(hip, but deny conjiant Communion to be a Duty. To overthrow this Principle , I Ihall prove thefe two things, I. Thsith^iXQ occafional CommunionAothnoteX' V cufe from the guilt of Separation. a. That -as far as occafional Communion with our Church is allowed to be lawfull , confiant Communion is a Duty. I. That bare occafional Communion doth not excufe from the guilt of Separation. Which will* appear by thefe things, \^ Firfly Bare occafional Communion m^ktsnoMzn the Member of a Church. This term of occafional Com- munion y as far as I can find , . was invented by the T^ijfenting Brethren to give fatisfaftion to the Pres- byterians ^ who charged them 'with Brownijm: to avoid this charge, they declared, That the Brownijls held all Communion with our Parochial Churches un- lawfull, which they did not ; for, faid they, we can occa- ' fionally Communicate with you ; but this gave no man- ner of'fatisfaftion to the other Party, as tong as they upheld Separate Congregations, with whom they would con- cdftjlantlj Communicate ; and accounted thofe their ■ Churohes with whom they did joyn as Members of V the fame Body. But if notwithftanding this lawful- neji oioccafional Communion vjixh out Churches y they joyned with oxhtrfocietiesmjlriii and conflant Com- . munion ; it was a plain Argument they apprehended fomething fo bad or deteftive in our Churches , that they could not joyn as Members with them ; and becaufe they faw a neceflity of joyning with fome Churches as Members , they pleaded for feparate Congregations, And fo muft all thofe do who • think it their duty to be members of any Churches at j^ all; and not ioWow Grotius his Example in fufpend- ing Communion from all Churches. Which is a prin- ciple I do not find any of our dijjenting Brethren willing to own. Although Mr. B, declares. That he ^ and Jome others own themf elves to be P aft ours to no p^age2\* Churches ; that he never gather d a Church ; that he ^^l^ ^^* Ba/ftized none imo years; and gave the Lord's Supper ^^^ ' to none in iS years, I defire to know what Church. Mr. B, hath been, of all this time. For as to our Churches , he declares , That he thinks it lawfull to Communicate wdth us occafionally ; but not as Churches (for he thinks we want an ejfentialpart, viz. a Paflour with Epifcopal Power, as appears before) but as Ora- tories ; and fo he renounces Communion with our Churches zs Churches ; and for other Churches, he faith he hath gathered none yhe hath adminiftred Sacraments to none in iS years ; and if he hath not joyned as a Member in conftant Communion with any feparate Churchy he hath been fo long a Member of no Church at all. It is true, he hath Prayd occafionally ^ and re- €sivd tjge Sacrament occafionaUy in our Oratories , but • i>ifeK)W ^t?iii not (152) not as a Member of our Churches; he hath Preached occafionally tofeparate Congregations , but he ha$h ga- there/ no Church , he hath Adniinijlred no Sacraments ^ for 1 8 ytars together. So that he hath Prayed occafio- nally in one place , and Preached occafionally in ano- ther , but hath had no Communion as Member of a * Church any where. But I wonder, how any Man could think fuch a neceffity lay upon him to Preach , that Woe was unto him if he did not ; and yet appre- hend none to Adminifier the Sacraments for fo long together ; none, to joyn himfelf as a Member to any Churchy Is it poffible tor him to think it Sacr Hedge not to Preach ; and to think it no fault not to give the Sacraments to others , nor to receive one of them himfelf as a Communicant with a Church ? Was there not thtfame devotednefs , In Ordination to the faithfull Adminiftration of Sacraments , as to Preach- ing the Gofpeh W^snotthe fame Authority, the fame charge as to both of them ? Was there not tht fame promife and engagement to give faithfull diligence t9 Minifter the Doitrine and Sacraments ,^ Is there an indifpenfable obligation to doe one part of your du- . ty , and none at all to the other? Is this pofTible, to perfwade impartial Men , that for 1 8 years toge- ther you thought your felf bound to Preach againfl the Laws ; and yet never thought your felf bound to do that, which you were as folemnly obliged to do as • the other ? Mr. B, knows very well in Churchhifiory, that Presbyters were rarely allowed to Preach , and not without leave from the Bifhop, and that in fome -^ of the Churches he moft efteems too; viz. the Afri- can ; but they were conftantly bound to Adminifter "^ the Sacraments; fo that if one obligation were flrifter than the other, that was fo which Mr. B, difpenfcd with (153) with himfelf in for 1 8 years together ; and why he might not as well in the other, is not eafie to under- hand^ • However , Why all this while , no Conflant Communicant with any Church ? What , no Church among us fit for him to be a Member of? No Obliga- tion upon a Chrijltan to that , equal to the necejfity of T reaching ? Thefe things mull feem very ftrange to thofe who judge of Chrillian Obligations by the Scripture, and the Vniverfal Senfe and Prailice of the Chrijiian Church in the heft ^\A pur efi Ages. To what purpofe is it to difpute about the true notion of an Injtitu- ted Church for perfonal prefential Communion ; if Men can \\s^for 1 8 years together without joyning in Communion with any fuch Church ? What was this Communion intended for? The ancient Churches at this .rate might eafily be capacious enough for their Members, if fome never joyned with them in fo long a time. But he hath communicated occafionally • i^ith m : Yes , to Ihew what defetltve and tolera- ble Churches he can communicate with , but not m a Member, as himfelf declares; and this occafonalCow,- wunion makes Iiim none. For Mr. A. faith , Their Mifchhfof occafwnal Communion with us , is but like any of our ^ff^4'P*^S' cccafwnal Communion with them : or occafwnal hearing of a weak Treacher ; or occafional going to a Topijh Chappel; which no one imagines makes the Perlons Members of fuch Congregations. If therefore Men ufe tliis occafional Communion more than once or twice , or ten or twenty times , as long as they de- clare it is onely occafional Communim, it makes them no Members of our Churches ; for tlaat obhges them to fixed and conftant Communionj^ Secondly^ (154) Secondly, They that have/v(?^/ and conftant Commu- nion in a Church gathered out of another, are In*a State of Separation from the Church out of which it is gathe- red, although they may be occajionally prefent in it. Now if Men who think our conflant Communion unlaw- fully Do judge themfelves bound to joyn together in another Society for purer adminijlrations , as Mr. A, fpeaks, and to chooje new Faflours ; this is gathering new Churches \ and confequently is a plain Separati- on from thofe Churches out ot which they are ga- thered. The Jut hour oi the Letter out of the Country fpeaks plainly in this matter. Such, faith he, of the Fage 33. dijjenting Minifters , as have moji openly declared for ' Communicating at fome times with fome of the Paro- chial Churches ; have alfo declared their judgment of the lawfulnefs and necefftty of T reaching and Hearing, and doing other Religious Duties in other Congregati- ons alfo. If this be true, as no doubt that Gentleman well underftands their Principles, then we fee plain- ly a Separation owned , notwithftanding the occajio- . nal Communion with our Churches, For here is not onely a lawfulnefs, but a necefftty aflerted of joyning in Separate Congregations, for Preaching, Hearing, and other Religious Duties. And here are all the parts neceflary for making t^ew Churches y Pafiours y People , and joyning together for Religious WorP?ip , in a way feparate from our Aflemblieg. For although * they allow the lawfulnefs of occafional Communicating with fome of them ; yet they are fo far from allow- ing confiant Communion, that they aflert a necefftty of feparate Congregations for Divine Worfhip^ and what was there more than this which the old Separatijh held held ?■ For when they firft publiflied the Keafons of their Sepamtton^ which Gtfard AnfwereS, they laid down the grounds of their diffatisfaction wirii our Aift'mblies ; from w^hence they inferred the necef- fity of Separatton ; and then declare , that they only fought the FeUoivfhip and Commumon of Gods fdithfid frvants ; and by the direction of his Holy Spirit to fro-^^ ceed to /i choice of new Pafiors ; rvith whom they might ' ]oyn^ in all the Ordinances of Chrifi, And what is there in this different, from what muft follow from the Principles of thofe, who affert the neceffity of joyning in other Congregations d-flincl :.nd fe par ate from our Ajjemblies for the performance of Religwm Duties^ And if there ht'^ neceffity of & far at. on ^ as thisGe;?- • tlemanx,t]\s> us they generally hold^ that leem moft moderate,the holding the /im////>^'/; of cccafional Com-* miinion^ will notexcule them from ^^\^ gmlt of the ^ . other. For , as long as the neceffity of Separation was maintained^ the other was always accounted a .lefs material dilpute, and fbme held one way and. {o:^^ another. And for this occafwnal communion th.Q fame Author tells us, that he. looks upon it^ but a^ drinking -a f.ngle glafs of Wine^ or of Water ^ againfl Pag. $i. J;is G'^m.:ncltn.. 84. y^^ allow occafional Communion to be lawful^ where con-- Jiant is no duty ; as with other Par iflj Churches, t/pon a '^journeyy at a Lecture^^ &C. but who ever queffion'd the lawfulnefsof occafwnal Communion with Churches of the fame conftitution ; or thought a Man was bound to be always of that Churchy where he goes. to hear a Lefture, &c, but the qucftion is, about the Uwfalnefs of Sef^aration^ whQVQ occafwnal Comm'i-^ nionis allowed to be lawful. For a man is notfaid to feparate from every Church, where he forbears * or ceafes to have Communion ; but only from that V Church, with which he is obhged to hold Commu- nion, and yet withdraws from it. And it is a won- der to me, none of my Friends (my JdverfariesH • am loth to call them) could difcernthis. // /s laiv- y}^/, faith Mr. B, to have Communion with the French^ Anfw./. 105. Dutch, or Greek Churchy Mufl conflant CommHnion therefore with them he a duty ^ Yes, if he were obli- ged to be a Member of \^\Q/iQ Churches^ and thought it lawful to communicate fbme times, conflant com- munion would be a Duty. But becaufe this feems fo hard to be underftood,! will therefore undertake to prove itj by thefeTwo Arguments. fir^. (^57) Firji^ From the general Obligation UfX)n Chrifti- msj to ufe all Uwfid means for preierving the Peace and Vnity of the Church. Secondly, From the particular force of that Text, Phil. 3. 1 6. As far a^ you have already attaintd walk by the fame Kule^ &C. Fir ft ^ From the general Obligation upon Chrifli- ms to ufe all lawful means for preferving the Peace ^ and Unity of the Church. If tt he -pojjibk^ faith St. Paul, as much .u lies in you live peaceably with all Rom. 1 2.1 1 Men. Now I ask, If there be not as great an ob- ligation at leaft, upon Chriftians to prelerve Peace m the Churchy as with all Men? and they are bound to that, as far as pofftblej and as much as lies in them. And is not that po^ffibl^ and lies in them to do, which they acknowledge la;^ful to he done^ 3:nd can do at fome times f What admirable -Aiguments are there to Peace and Vnity among Chriflians? What Divine Enforcements of them ontheConfci- ences of Men in the Writings of chriji and his A- ■poflles ? And cannot thele prevail with Men to do that , which they, think in their Confciences they may lawfully do, towards joyning in Communion with us? This I am pcrfwaded, is one of the pro- voking Sins of the Non~oonformifts^ that they have been (b backward in doing, what they were con- vinced they might have done, with a good Confci- cnce. When they were earneftly prelTed to it by thofe in Authority , they refufed it ; r nd they have been more and more backward ever fince, till now • X 2 they (158) they feem generally refolved, either to break all iat. ' pieces, or to pcrfiftin SvparAtion. Mr.B. indeed very ,: honeftly moved them 1663. to confider how fartt. was ., Unfh'l ^ or thtir duty to ccfnmumcate with the Parifh^ Churches tn the htturgj and Sacraments \ and brought - many Arguments to prove it Imfuly and no one of the Brethren Jeemed to dfffent : but obferve the An- Mifchief of f\ver Mr. J. makes to this ', /, e. faith he, They d/d nipoi.;. $p, ^^^ enter their fever al F rote [Nations ^ nor formally de- clare againjl the Reafns of their Brother \ like wife and wary ferfons they would advtfe upon them. And fb they have httn advifn^^ 2ind confdering tvQY fincty till with great Wifdom and Warinefs they are dropt into . Separation before they were aware of it ; and the *" meer necefftty of defending their own practices^ makes them efpoufe thefe Principles^ Such - another Meeting Mr. B, laith, they had after the Plague and Fire^, at which they agreed^ That Communion with our Church wai in it felf lawful and. good. Here Mr. A, charges . il.U.- me for being tardy ^ and wronging the Relator y^ by leaving out the 7no(l con fder able words of the fentence^ viz. When it wo'dd not do more harm than good, A.nd upon this, he'expatiates about the ways when it ;^^>' db more harm than good \ Wliereas if the Reader pleafe to examine the place, he will find, I did confider the W^a. |). 240. force of thofe words ; v/hen I put it, thsa they refolved it to be lawful in it felf ;'?ilt\\Ol\^\ ibmc cir cum fian- ces might hinder their prefent doing it. For they declared, That it was in it ft If lawful and meet \ but the circumflances oi tlut time, did make them think it might do more harm than good] and therefore it is faid, They de laid- for a fitter oppor tunity^ which imkts -it clear, they were then relolved upon the lapful- : nefs mfs of the thing. But that opportunity hatli never hapned fince ; ^nd fo they are now come to plead againft tlie prxcilceQ>{\t ; as Mr. ^.plainly doth ; by liich rcafbns as thcfe. Co:^^mimon )vith oar Qb:irch:s . nv7/ then do more barm than good^ I, When fach Corrmmion (fjall ferfvade the Par/jjj churches^ th.it th'^ir frame is tligihle and not only tole- rable. As though Separation were more eligible^ than" Mifciii-rof '^Qornmimionx\\'^X,\^la'vf!il'^rAtolerAbk\ andSchifiii Impof. p. 4c were not more intolerable, than Comnunion with a tolerable Church. What will not Men fay in de- fence of their own praftice ? Was ever Sch'-fm • made fb light a matter of, And tliQ Pea^e and V- nity of chrifiians valued at fb low a rate; that for the prevention of the one, and the prelervation of ' the other , a thing that is larvfid may not be done, if there be any danger that what is only tolerable fhould be miftaken for more eligible ? As if all the Mifohiefs oiSchifm and D/x^i//^,^ in the Church, were, not fit to be put in the ballance, againflr fucha.hor- rible and monftro is inconvenience. Methinks, it were better fbmeti.mes to be wife and confiderate, than always thus fubtil and witty againft the com- mon fenfe, a«d reafbn of iMankind. ii When others ffjall thereby be thought obliged to fe- pirate from purer Churches ^ i. e. be drawn off from their Separation* ^; When it wilt harden^ the Fapifis. As though their D^viftons did not do it ten thoufand times morei, A^Whm-: ('i6o) 4. When it fljatl notably prejudice the Chrijlian Re^ legion in general. Yes, nodo\^ht thQ Cure: Qt.Divifi- ons would do ^Q. ^v^ v ! : By thele particulars , it appears, that he thinks them not obliged- to do wh^t kvfally they cm do. Yet at laft, he laith, he tells im^ 04 much Is done:, as their Confciences will permit them^ Say you fb ^, Is . it indeed come to this? Will none of your Confci- ences now permit you either to come to the LHurpy^ or to make ufe of any parts of it, in your own Meet'- ings? How often hath Mr. B. told the World, That you ftuck not at Set-Forms ^ nor at the Vfe of the Liturgy , provided fome exceptionable pailages • were alterM in it? Did not Mr. B, declare at his Meeting , publickly, in a Writing on purpofe, Thal^ they did not meet under any colour^ or pretence of any Religiom Exercfe in other manner^ than according to the Liturgy and Practice of the Church of England, and were he able he would accordingly Kt ad himflf? Is this obferved in any one Meeting in London^ or through England ^ Then certainly, there are fbme who do not, what they think they lawfully may do towards: Comm'inion with us. And Mr. i?. faith in the beginning of his late Plea^ That they never made Q-^e Motion for Presbytery^ or again fl Liturgies ; and thcfe words are fpoken in the Name of the whole ' Pirty called Presbyterians, And fince that, Mr. B.^ fiith. They did come to an Agreement^ wherein the A r . z cor^ftjmt Vfe of the Lituroy . with fbme Alterations^ vas requned. And are we now toki, l hat all that civa Li-v fully be done is done ^ Mr. ii.injeed acts agree- ably ably to his Principles, incomingtoour /.?W0; but Where are all the reft ? / nd, Which of them Reads what they think Uwfnl at their own Affcmbl^es? Do they not hereby ('ifcover, that they are more afraid of lofing their People, who force them to comply wiih their b-tmoHrs , than careful to do, what tliey judge./^.r/v//, towards Commumon'^'xxki our Church P' 'Sect.ij, But whence comes it to pafs, that any who think occafton:%lComm'mion with us to be Ltifui^. ■ fhould not think the Tifelves obliged to coyjft.int Com- mfimon^ From what grounds corne they topractife occa,(iond Qommnnion ? Is it from the Love of Peace mi Comorcijd.sMY. B. faith ? That is a good "ground fbfar, as it goes, Bjt will it not carry a Man far- tJier, if he purfueit, as he ought to do ? What^z^e ♦ of Concord is this to ht occafiomlly prefef^t at o^r Churches^ and at the fame, time-to declare, That there \s greater p-trity of WorjJjip, and better nieans of Edification in Separate Congregations? TI:^ one can never draw Men fb much tothe/^7^6' of Concord, as the other doth incojrage them in x}L\t Principles of Separation. But, if there be aji Obligation .upon : • Men to Communicate with the c/^/W^ they. live in, notwithftanding the defcBs and corruptions of it, that : Obligation can never be difcharged by meer occafio- nal Pr' fence at [')m^. tin^^es, 2iwd m fome Jcfs of Wor- ^qI^^Ix^ c Jhip'f for, faith Mr. Ballj To tifc one Ordinance^ and Sc\ydxmnn, not another, is to make a Schifm in^the Church, f. le. ;. 791 The only Example produced to juftifie ilicMocca- Jional Con^munion with defdir^K C hurches, is that our BJeJfed Savio/ir did communis at q after, that manner jn" tlj& (i6i) rJje JeiPi/Jj Spiagoguts md Temple. But this is fb far from being true , that the oU Separatijls granted, Tliat o^ir Lord Communicated with the Jewijh Church in Ro infon'i Qods Ordin.mces^ living And dying ci Member thereof \ Ainfworti^^' a«d from fliencethey prove, That the Jewtjb Church coffftder, ex' h.td A right Conflttution in our SAviotirs time^ ^milted J p. $. And did not he declare, That he came not to dif folvethe La:v^ but to f/dfilUt ? And that hecomply- ed with [Johh'^ BAptfm^ hecxufe he was to fulfil nil right eoitfmfs <; Did he not go up to the Feafls at Je- r/faler/?^ as a Member of the Jewijh Churchy and fre- quent the Sy/:agogues ? Even at the Feaf of Dedi- cation^ though not inftituted by the Law , he was Toiinic 22, pi'^f^nt, as other .TeiPj- were. Yea, Did he not ex- ^' 23. preftmore than ordinary zeal, for purifying the out- ward parts of the Temple j becaufe it \\^as to be a Houfe of PrAj/er for aU Nations ^ Was not this to fhew ' Mens Ohlig.itiontQ come and JVorJhipt\\QYCy as well, aS that the place was to be kept Sacred for that ufe? And, Doth not the Jpoflle exprefly fay, Thtt h?. was made under the Law^ Where is there the lead ground in Scripture , to intimate , that Chn^ only kept occasional ^ and not confant communion with the ""Jewifh Church ^ VS'hcit part of Worfliip did !ie ever . withdraw from ? Did he not command his Dfcipks to go hear the Scribes and Ph an fees , becaufe they fate in Mofes Chair ? Where did he ever bid them go Matt 23. 2. j-j-jji-j-j^p^ when they could have ;^(9 ^c^/-/-f^-; but when they could to be fure to prefer the PurtrwayofWor- jhfpy and better Means of Edification^ Was not his owm I)(9(;?r»e incom.parably beyond theirs? Istjfiere any pretence hx greater Edif cation wow ^ tobei^cn- tioned tlonM with what the D/fc/p/es had, to forfake the "Jew/lb Jjftmblks^ for the love oi CbrifPs ownltach- tng ? Yet he would not have them to do that, out of the regard he had to the P«^/r^' IVorfhip and, Teach- ing. Our Saviour himfelf did onely Teach his Difci- ples Occafonally, and at certain Seafons ; but their confiant Communion \\ as*with the ''Jewish Ajfemblies. And lb it was after his Paffion^ till the Holy Ghojl fell upon them, and they were then imployM to ga- ther and form a new Church; which was not done before ; and thence the Author of the Ordinary G/oJ]e obferves; That we never read of ChxiiTs Prayingtoge^ ther with his Difcifks (unlefs perhaps at his Tranf- figuration with three of his Difciples) although we often read of his Praying alone, ^o that no exam- ple can be mentioned, which is more dire^ly contra- ry to the Practice of Separation upon the prefenc grounds, than that of onir Bleffed Saviour'^s; which ought to be in ftead of all others to us^- Se^. 19. 2.1 2iYgUQ,from the particular force of that Text^ Phil. 3. 16. As far yds we have already attain- ed^ let US walk hy the fame Rule^ let m mind the fam.t things. From w^hence it appears evident, that Men ought to go as far as they, can^ towards Uniformity ; an^ not to forbear doing any thing, which they Ltv- fully may do towards Peace and Vnity. • To take off the force of the Argument from this place, feveral Anfvers have been given, which I fliall now remove ; fb that the ftrength of it may appear to remain, notwithftanding all the attempts which have been made to weaken it. Y Some Luk. 24, 55, V Vindicntion of Non-con- Some lay, TbM the Afoftks words are to he under fiooi of the different attainments Qhr'tflians had in know ledge y and the different conceptions and opinions which they had concerning the T. ruths of the GofpeL Thus Dr. 0. un- ^. ..V...-.UM- derftands the Text; whole fence is fbmewhat obfcure- formifts^p. ly and intricately exprefled; but as far as Icanap- 25, ?o. prehend his meaning, he makes this to be the Jpo^ files : viz. I. That although th befl Chrijiians in this life carmot attain to a ftdlmeafure and pcrfeBion in the comprehtn- Jion of the Truths of the Gofpel^ or the enjoyment of the things c(^ntained in them \yet they ought to he pr effing con- tinually after it. II. That in the common purfuit of this defign^ it is not to befuppofedy hut that Men will come to different at^ tninmentsjjave different meafures of light and knowledge^ yea and different conceptions^ or opinions about thefi things, III. That in phis difference of opinions ^ thofe who differ"^ d from others [hould wait on the Teachings of Gody in that ufe of the means of InflmBion which thej enjoy"* d- IV. That, as to their Duty in common to each other ^ 0far asthty hadattainedythey fljould walk by the fame "Rule J namely, which he had now laid downy and mind thefame things as he had enjfiyned them* From whence he infers, That the/e words nrs^fi f^: from being a Foiindatio'a: so charge them tvith \ ' ^ V Schifm,^ # ^-. SchifrHy v»ho Agrmng in tf^ fubfia/ice of the Dootrhu of tbe.Gfifpdj do yet dijfcnt from other ^^ infome things ; tnAt it en]oym a, muti^alfQihcarance towards thoje who art, dJfftrentLy minted. And again, he faith, The advice St. V2l\A gives to both Fart testis, that whereun- t) they have 4ttaintd^ ivhtrem they do agreey nhich yvere all thofe Principlts of Fatth' and Obedteme vvhtch were ^ecefjary to their acceptance with God^ they fljoiM walk by the fame Rule J and fnind the fame things ^ that is^ forbear mg one anothtr m the things rvhtrein they differ \ which ^ faith he, is theftbflance of what is pleaded for by the Non-conformifls. For the clearing of this matter, there are Three tilings to be debated, 1 . Whether the Apoftk fpeaks of different opinions^ QX different practices? 2, Whether the Rule hQ giVQS be mutual forbear- ame ? ' 5. How far the Afoftles Rule huh^in influence on our prefent cafe f Firjfy Whether the Apofile fpeaks of different op:- inonSy^QX of different practice's^. For the right un- derftanding of this, we muft ftrictly attend to the Apoftles fcope and defign. Itismort evident that tlie Apofile began this Difcoirfe with a Caution againft the Teachers of the Circu?HiJion^Ytxf, 2. Beware Of DogSy beware of Evil Worker Sjbew are of theConcifion. But fpeak- ingfb reproachfully of them, he fliews in the next words, tliat every thing that was excellent inthede- M^-s.^. Y2 fign Aa. 15.13. {166) fign of the Law, was accomplifhed in the Gofpel ; and fohe proceeds to declare, how juftly he was brought to a dififteem of the ^^eateft Prtviledoes of theL^«S in comparilbn with the things revealed by the Go{pel, which fliews, that the Apoftle had ftill an eye totheie Ft//J Te.xchers^ who were very bufie in difturbing the Peace of tht Churches^ ^nd draw- iiiv Difciples after them, pleading the ^/ere/^iy of obferving the Laiv ; and dividing the chrifiians in- to different Communions on that account, as appears by their proceedings 2xAntioch^ where they did fe- parate thenifelves from xki^GentUe Chrifiians^ and St. Piter for a time complyed with them. If fuch as thcle had not been bufie at Philip-pi ( where it tippearsthat je/pj- inhabited) What need St. Paul give lb much caution againft them ? What need all this difpute concerning the Priviledgts oftheL^r^? If it be allowed, that they were there carrying on the fame defigns, which they di'd in other Churches^ then it follows, he had great reafbn to perfwade them to Vmty fb earneftly , as he doth, Philip, 2 . 1,2. and to give fb much caution againft them ; and to reprefent the great excellencies ofthe Gofpel above' the Lav ; w^hich being done, the Afofile after his 11 hial method, makes a digreffion^ concerning him- felf, viz. Hov far (hort he thought himfelf of what he aimed at^ and yet with what earneflnefs he prejjed * forward^ toward Chrijlian perfection; making no longer any account (^ legal prlviledges. Which I take to be his meaning, when he faith, Forgetting the things which are behind I prefs forward, SfC. So St. Hierome underftands it, Legis oblivifcens adper-^ fe^a Evangelii pr^cepta me te'nco^ Forgetting the Law, Laiv, I keep to the Precepts of the Gofptl. This be- • ing underftood, the Apoftles fence naturally followj>, according to his former defign ; Let /^ thertforey a^ mdny as are arrived to this height of Chnjlianity ( ix} the word IIkmiis ufcd, i Cor* 14. 20. Ephef.i^, i j. Colofs.^. 12, Htb, 5. 14.) agree in purfutng our main end. But then comes the cafe of thoft^ who were not fb fully fatisfied in this mitttr ef the Law ; there being many and plaufible Arguments on their fide; well, faith the Apoftle, if they are doubtful, I advife them however, not to hearken to thefe falfe Teachers^ for they make nothing but FaBion and Divifions among you, \v9it patiently up- on God, which is the beft means for your latis- faftion. If any he otherwt ft minded^God fljall reveal even this unto you y i, e. faith Bezaiahls Pa'raphraf, If any yet doubt of the laying afide of the Law^ Itt them make nodi jlurhance^ in the Church about it. And fb Erafmm faith, It ought to be underflooi of the Ju- daizing Chriftians^ who did not yet dfcern, that the Ceremonial Lai? wa4 to be abol'fbed^ hovever^^ faith he, they ought not to break the Peace of the Church for it. But, what fence can Dr. 0. her.e put upon the being other wife minded'. Other wife than what? As many as be per feci be thus minded^ to pur (lie your main end; but, if any be otherwife minded; Did any think they ought not to mind chiefly their f/^reat end ? that is incredible ; Therefore the Apcfcle mult h^. underflood of fbmewhat, about which there wcie then very dijftrent apprehenfions ; and that it h cer- tain there were about the L^p among the C/^r//fe;^,v then. The Jpoftle therefore doth not fpeak of any • kind oi^ different apprehenfions Chriflians might h\l riato ; but of fuch as were at that time among them ^' (168) .them ; and fo one Copy reads ii, w %V^if(^9e^veiT&^ If httherto ye have heen other ivife mmdcd ; they ^had no difference concerning the 7a VTe^^gj/, the things before them '^ viz. the happwefi of the Gofpely hut they had concerning the -ra ottUcj^ the . things behind^ viz. theT^rceand (^^//^^/-/c^;^ of the Law, And fince this diferenct did not reft barely in opinion, but was carried on fb far, as ro break the Peace oi the Church about it; it appears to have been no bare diference ,oiOpnions, but Inch as related to the FcMe and Co/nm.imonoi Chriftians, Secondly y V^iether the Ritle which the Apoftlq lays down, be only a Rule of mutml forbearance ? Neverthelefsy whereto ive have already attained^ let m rvalk by t})efame Rule^ let u^ mmd the fame things. The fence acoordingto I>r. 0. is this, That thofe who are agreed in the fubflantials of Religion ^ fjould go on and do their duty without regarding lejjtr differences. Which is a ^^ce very uncertain, and doth not reach to the diiferenc(s then among them. It is very un- certain, becaufe it lets no bounds to diffenncs ; and fuppofes the continuance of fuch differences among them which he defigned to prevent, by perfwao^ Phi 1.27.2.2. iilgthem fo often in this £/>//?/e xoh^ of one mind^ of omfoA ; as well as to rfiind the fame things. Eefides, the difference then on foot, was none of xh^fmaller dfferences of opinions^ but that about whicli they difterM was urged on one fide, as neceffary to Salva-. A a 15. 1. ^^^^' ^y thtfalfe APoftles\ and appoied on. tlic other, as pernidotis and deshuctive to it. One of Rcaor of my Jnfverers faith, That the Judaizing Chriflians Settofl,;. 1$, jt^(.jrQ Itavend with fuch a corrupt Opinion^ as was ky, no no me^m Wbehorn' i^tih\''wfTt^ ktve m^e Chrifl: and his Death in vain. And that the Apojlle fits himfdf a^ainji it might and main^ fljtrving the dreadful confequences of it. And is it probable the* Apoftle fhould prefcribe a Rule o^ ?nutiial forbear- Gal$. 2. ancey in firch a cafe as this ? efpe.cialty, when in the lame Chapter^ he gives (b great a caution againft them,with (b much unufual, marpnefs ofexprellion ; Beware ofDogs^ beware of Evil Workers , beware of the Conciftony Doth this look like a Precept of mutual forbearance^ as to the differences then an^ong them ? thefe we know there were, kt D?;. 0 name any other fmallerij^/yf^re/^re/ di Opinion,, M'-hich might be an occafion of the Apoflles giving fiich a Rule of mu- tuat forbearance. But now, if wx fiippofe the Apo- . file tofpeak to the difference about the /^.trr, about : which the C/y/^rrZ^ej were then divided, the fence is plain, eafie, and pertinent. For fb, either (i.^ Ifc takes inthofe who hitherto differed about the Law \ and then the fence is, Although you are not come up to fb great fatisfaftion as others have, yet go as fer as you can with the Body of Chriftians, you live with ; keep within one Rule \\>x^'^wo\. the bounds di "Peace and Unity \y\\Y:h Qhrifi hath fet.you ; run not withthe7^//e Teachers into Separating dividing cotir- fes.. (2.) It is directed to thofe who have got the fart of others, and then it contains the cbligationu riiat lies upon them, efpecially to have a mighty re- gard to the Peace and Unity of Qhriftians ; not to break the Common ties and bonds on the account of ^t\x greater attainments,^ViOxXO Separate from others, asmeanerand lower Chriftians, becaufc they are not come up to that perfe^im^ w^hich you have at- tained, i C I/O ) tained to. And lb either wayf it conHins aii Wee!- lent R/ik, and of admirable ufe to the Chnjlian Church, not only at that time, but in all Ages of the Worldj w^. That thofe who cannot be fully .iatisfiedinall things, fliould^c? 'as far .t^ they can to- -L wards preferving \^eace and Communion among Chri-- fiians \ and not peevifhiy feparate arid divide the Church, becaufe they cannot in all things think as others do ; nor others oil the account oi greater fin- cttty and ptrfeciion^ defpife the inferior fort of Chri- fiUns^ -di^di for Jake their. Communion^ but they ought ail to do what lies poffiblyin them to prelerve the bonds of ?eace^ and the Vnity of the Church, ' Thirdly^ How far this Rule hath zninflitence on our cafe ? .(i .) It follows from hence, that as far as Comrmmton is lawful^ it is a. ditty^ fince, as far as they have attained, they are to walk by the fame Rule. And fb much Dr. 0. doth not deny ; when Jie faith, Thofe who art agreed in the Suhfiantials of Religion^ or in the Principles of ^aith and Obe- dience f f • 11 111 r r T of Non-con- Rult be produced iv:tb Any prcbability of frooj to ^? fomiifts.f. his^ a fid thty art all ready to Jubfcribt and. co/^form 25. unto it ^ This is the J po files Rtde^ to go as far as they • can ; and if they can go no farther, to (it dotvncjui- * etly^ And wan for farther rnfhuciion^ and not to break the Peace of the C/turchy upon present diffatisfaftion, nor to gather nerv Churches out of others upon (up- poficion o^ht'^her attainments^ J f the Rule reach our Cafc^ faith he again, it mufl Page 27. - hefuch as requires things to be obf.rveiyas were never divinely appointed^ as National Churches^ Ceremonies and Mod^s ofWorjhip, And fo this Rule doth in order to Peace, require the obfervation of fuch things, which although they be not particularly appointed by God, yet are enjoyned by lawful Authority, provided they be not unlawful in the^n- felves, nor repugnant to the Word of God. But the JpoJHes never gave any fuch Rules them- pj,ge -3^ felves y about o-:t;vard Modes of IVorjbip. with Ceremo- nies y Feajlsy Fajlsy L/tur0eSy Src. What then ? It is fuScient that they gave this general Rule, Ihat all lawful things are to be done for the Churches Peice: And without this no Vnity^ or Ordtr can be preferved in Churches, The JpoflUs, faith he, ^ave Rules inconftjlent with any deter mmtng P^ule^ viz. Page 28, $! of mutual forbear a/ice, Rom. 14. And herein the A- pojlle a5fcdnot up^n meer Rules of Prudence^ hut as a Teacher divinely infptred. That he \\^% Divinely in- {pired, I do not queftion, but even fuch a one 'may determine a cafe upon pr^fent circumfiames, which relblution may not always bind, when \\\zcircHm- Jlances are changed. For then, the meaning of the Z Jpojlk Jpofile muft be, that "whatever differences happen a- iPiOng chrifiians^ there muft be no determination either way. But the direft contrary to this we find m the Decree of the Apofiles at Jerufakr/i^ up- on the difference that happened in ' the chrifftan Ad. 1 5. 23. Churchts. And although there was a very plaufible pretence of the obligation of Confcience one way ; - yet the Jpofiles m^at a determination in the cafe, contrary to their Judgment. Which fhews, that the Rule of Forhtarmce^ where Confcience is al- ledged both wayes, is no fianding Rule to the Chrifitan Church ; but that the Governors of it from Fcirity of Reafon may determine thofe things which they judge to conduce moftto the Peace and Wel- fare oithu Churchy which they are bound to pre- ferve. And from hence it appears how httle Reafon there is for Dr. O.'s Infinuation, as though the falfe Apofiles ipere the only Impofers : whereas, it is moft evident, that the true Apofiles made this perempto- ry Decree^ in a matter of great confequence^ and a- gainft the pretence of Co^c/ence on the other fide. Page 7.8. But faith Dr. 0. further, The Jemjh Chrifians nnre left to their own liberty^ provided they did not impofe on others ; and the Diffenters at this day^ defire no more J than the Gentile Churches didy viz. not to be irapofd upon to ohferve thofe things which they are not fatisfied^it is the r/9ind f?/Chrift jhmld be impofed up- on them. I anfver, 1. It was agreed by all the Governours of the Chrifiian churchy that the Jewifh chriftians Qiould be left to their own liberty, out of refpeft to the Law of Mofes ; and out of regard to the Peace of the Chrijlian churchy which might have beeia been extremely hazarded, if' the Jpjlks had prefen- ly let themfelves againfl: the obfcrving the Jemjb i^iijlonis among the \javs thcmlcK'cs, 2. The fdfi Apoftles impofirjg on the Gr4tik QhrifllAns had two cW/;'/^/?.i;//re/init,.\vhichextren~.e!y alter their cafe from that of our /^rf/tV>;/D///t^;^^erj. For, (i.)They were none of their Lv.vful Govtmours^ but w ent about as Seducers drawing away the Difiipks of the Jpojlks from them. (2.) They impofed xhQjen>ijl> Rites a^s mcejjary to Salvation^ and not as mtcrly indifferent things. And therefore the cafe of our Dijjen^ers is very different from that of the ijentik Chnfttansy as to the Impofitions of the falft Apoftles, Thus I have confidered every thing material in Dr 0, which leems to take off'the force of the Argument drawn from this Text. The Author of the Letter Giith, (i.) TLit I ought to h.tve proved, that the Apoftles meant fome Letter out ot Rule fuper added to the Scriptures; and^ (2.^ That n. L. °'^^'^'^* other church-Guides had the fame Po.ver J its the Apo files had. But what need ail this? If it appear (1. ) that the Apoftles did give binding Rules to particular Churches J which arc not extant in Scriptures, as a}% pears by i Cor. 7.17. So that either the Scripture is ^n imperfect Ruk^ for omitting (bme Divine Rules ^ or elfe thefe were only Prudential Rules of Order and Government, (2.) That it is a ftanding Rule of Scripture,, that Men are hound to do all laivful things for the Peace of the Church. And this I have ftiewed, was the Apoftles defign In the words of this Text. ■ Z 2 Seci^ 20., (1X4) • Self. 20. Others pretend, that t]ie.:^/>{?//?^^m no more by thefe words, W thntChriJiUm mufi- {I've • u^ to, their knowledge ^ and mind that one things - Tbk is a very nm expofition\ and the Author of it ia-, . tends to fet up for a Critick ufon the credit of it.: It is pity tiicrefore itfliould pals, without Ibme Mifchicf of confideration. But, I pafs by the Chiidifh triflings inipofit p.<5, ^]3Qv,|- YiAylt,2i C anon ^viz. that it is not taken in a Military ftotion^ bceaufe gre t Guns ivere not then invented ; t^xt it is an Ecclefixjlical Canon ?nounted upon a platform of Moderation; which are things fit only for Bw in the S:hools ; unlefs^ perhaps^they might have been defigned for an AnilUry-Scrmon on this 7 ext\ but however,me-, thinks they come not in very futably in a weighty and ferious debate. I come therefore to examine the New-Light that is given to this Controverted Text. KayoK/ he ob- lerves />, What we have attained let U6 walk tip to the fame ; Which comes to no more than this^ unto whatfoever meaftre or degree of knowledge we hav£ reached^ let tu walkf}a.ablyjoJt. ^^^l.. But / •■ 075> But the Apoflk doth not here fpeak of the im^ . provement or knowkige ; but of the union md con- jitnSlon of Chrijlhnsy as appears by the next words 7^' AU7^ f^e^'vHVy to mind thtj^ime thing. No fuch mat- ter^ faith Mr. J, that Phrafe imply ts no more thm to mind thxt things or 'that very things viz. Verf. 14. pr^n^torvardsttje mark. But if he had plea fed tp have read on, but to PhiL 4, 2. he would have . found 7t fl^iA7e (?e^mr, to fignifie Vnani'mity. And St. Pa/dj 1 Cor. 12. 25. oppofes the ^avrh to^^h^^- That there he no Schifm tn the Bpdy'y b/it that all the Members jhould take care ^ToctyVa, one for another : and therefore the 70 etyro (^e^v«y> mindjng the fame //'/^j^i^is very aptly ufedagainft Schif/ns and Divifi- i5>i<5. Examples of the Jpojlolical Churches : and he faith, Mens Morofenefs in this Matter^ although it feems to florvfrom sxal^ ytt it m'tch rather comes from Spi- ritual Pridt , and a ftlfe opinion of tht:r own holt- nefs above others. Although^ faith he, there xvne fuch uni'verfal corruptions m the Jervijh Church, that Numb. t8. the Prophets compare it to Sodom .t;?.'^ Go norrha ; yet they never ft up new Churches^ nor erected other Altars^ whereat they might off tr Separate Sacrifices : hut whatever the People were^ as Img as Gods IVord and Ordinances were among them ^ they lifted up pure hands to God, although in fuch an impure Socie- ty. The fame he proves, a^s to Chrift and his A- po files. From whence he concludes, Th^t Sepa- Numb. 15. ration from fuch Churches , whi:re the true Word of God and Sacraments are , is an inexcu fable fault. But how then comes he to juflifie the Separation from the Church ^{ilorni? Becaufe inth.it Church ci^.i,n. i, the true DoBrine t?/ Chrift is fo m tch fatprtffed ^ 235,4,56. and fo many Errors obtruded on Mens Minds tn ftead of It ; and the fVorfh/p cfGodfo corrupted^ that the Pub lick Affemblies are Schools of Idolatry and V/ickednefs. And the truth of the Gofpel^ beiii-f the Foundation of the Churches X)nity ^ it canht no culpable Separation to withdraw from tha Communi- on of a Church which hath fo notorioujly corrupted his Docfrine and Injiitut ions : efpecially^ when they' Aa 2 Anathe- (i8i) jinathemdtize thoft who will not con^ly with them?- Vumh.g.ic^ But doth he mean any indifferent Rites ^ or Cere-- "' ' monies y where the Doctrine h found? No ^ buc^\ Falfe Docirine ^ and Idolatrous Wor(hip\ ashefre^- quently declares. And therefore he that would^ go about to defend Separation from a Church^ on the account of fbme Ceremonies prelcribed ^"^ and fbme Corruptions remaining in it , muft over-^ throw the fundamental grounds of the Reforma- tion, as they are explained by Calvin himlelf. Se5t, 2]. Among their later Writers, no Man hath Vindicated the Caufe of the Reformation with gTQRttr fucce/ and reputation than Mr. Daille in his. Jpology. And the Grounds he goes upon arc thefe, A^oldiy.c.^ ( I . ) That we are hound to avoid the Communion of thoft y who go about todeftroj and ruine Chrijlia^ nlty. ( 2. ) If the Church of Rome hath not rec^uired any thing from us which dtjlroyes our Faith ^ offends our Confciences , and overthrows the fervice which we believe due to God ; if the differences have beenfmall^ cap 4. andfuch as we might fafely have yielded unto ; then he will grant ^. that their Separation was rafh and un- jufy and they guilty of the Schifm» ^^P'$' ( ?•) He proves , that they had weighty reafom for their Separation ; which are thefe ; ( i . yimpo- fmgnewDoBrims^ nece^ary Articles of Faith - and ^^. -^ , yet J not all errors in Do^rine do afford fufficient ' S/oitnd for Separation^:) but fuch as . are pernicious •-- ^ md (183) anddefiruSiive $0 Solvation: for which he inftaa- ceth in the Lutherans ofimon (>/ChriftV Bodily Pre- fence in the Sacrament , which overthro>vs not the ufe of the Sacrament y nor requires the adoring it ^ it neither divides nor mutilates it , nor makes it an Expiatory Sacrifice for Sin ; all which follows from the Pofiffj Doctrine. From whence he concludes , That to fepar ate from a Church for tolerable errors , t^ an unjuft Separation. (2.) Requiring fich Worfhip^ ^ -^ as overthrows the Foundations ofChrijlianity ; which ^ ■ ' faith he, proves thenecefftty of our Separation ; and for this he inftances in Ador'ation of the Hoft ; which the Church of Vs^om^JlriBly requiring^ andthe Prote- ftants believing it to be a meer Creature y they cannot give it without Idolatry : from whence he concludes our Separation to be jujl , becaufe it was neceffary^ Befidcs this he gives inftances in the Worfhip of cj;.i8. Images^ Invocation of Saints ^ &c. By which we lee the Juftice of the Caufe of Reformation doth not depend on any fiich Ceremonies y as ours are, nor on the want of Difcipline , nor on the bare Diffatif- faBiondicenfciencey but on fiich great and impor- tant Realbns , as obtrudmg new Articles of Faith y . and IdolatroHs Worfhfp on the partakers of the Com- ^ munionoixht Roman Church, Amyraldus goes fb far , as to fay , That if there r r. .' had been no other faults in the Roman Church be fides ab Ecdk their unprofitable^ Ceremonies in Baptifm y and other ^om, &c. f, things, beyond the me afure and genius of Chrijlian ^^^ Religion y they had fill continued in its communion ; For y faith he 5 ^ Phyftcian is to be born r:ith that loads his Patient withfome unufful Prefer ipt ions , tf he be otherwife faithful and sktlfuL But if he mixes Pot fin Poffon with his ^ledicines'y^'affd bt fides adds ahuiii. dame of Prefer iptions^ both needlefs and chargeable^ then the Patient hath great reafon to look out for bet- ter help ^ and to take care ofhisownfafety and free- dom. By which he plainly declares, that bard Ceremonies^ although many more than ours, ai*e no fufficient Ground for Separation. Of late years, a Perfonoi Reputation in France let forth a Book d^g^Lin^ t\K Reformat wn-j charging prg'iu'ges le- it With Schf?n, becaufe of the 6V/>^r^/^/(?^^ from the ■gitimncQu^ Roman Church ; whicU hath been Anfwered three vUies^""'" ieveral ways by three learned Divines, M. Claude^ M. Pajon and M. Turret/n. But, Do any of thefe infiftupon matters of ^j^e'er Ceremonj whtre the Do- 6lrine is found ., the conjlant ufe of Liturgy^ bare negle^i of Dtfcipline^ 8^c. No, they were Men of better underftanding than to infift on fuch things asthefe, wdiichthey knew, could never bear that wxight as to \wK\^t Separation from a Church ; and that they fhould have expoftd themfelves and their Cauf to the contempt of all confidering Men, if they coi-ild have alledged no more Subftandal Reafons than thefe. cu%h U Bat they alia gree in fuch common re. fons,which vtjmt de |-ijey thought fufficientto make 2i Sep drat wn]\i^i- ti6n.2,'pln. fiabk, viz. Grtat corr//pt/on in Doclrin-^ Idola- i>a']on Ex A- troHS Worfljif^ and infup port able Tyranny over the '^l^^nniu Conferences of Men, 7//rrer/;? exprefly faith, No Turret irJ (light error s^ no tolerable Super fiitioti^ Kites that do difpu^. F. de :^^f- fj^ji^si the Confcience ( as they cannot where l^c!lf^e^ab tliey are not forced upon it by unfound Dodrine) (i85) nqt ^ny corruption of Manners^ nor defect m Qo- vtrnmmt , or Difcifline , are fufficient grounds for Separation. In one word, faith he , the Patient is not to he forfaken, unlefs his Difeafe be deadly and infefiiou^, nor then neither hut with great dtSfi- cfdty, Le Blanc (hewing the imfofjihility of Reunion LeBUnc with the Papifls , goes upon thefe 3 grounds. ^/l^/^t. ' I. That it cannot he obtained without fnbjcribing to the Decrees and Canons of the Council of Trent, and without Anathematizing all thofe who have op- pofed them. For the condition of Communion with that Church is no lefs , than receiving alt its Errors for necejfary Articles of Faith. 2. That the Puhlick Worfhip pra5tifed, and allow- ed in that Church is Idolatrous y he injlanceth in A- doration of the Hojl , the Worjhip of Saints and Images, J. That they cannot return to that Church without fuhje^ing their Confciences to the Tyrannic alVfurpa-r tions of the Pope. Let our Brethren now confider, what Triumphs ♦he Church of Rome would make over us, if we had nothing to juftifie our Separation from them, . but only that we could not hzvtom Children Bap- tized without an Aerial Sign of the Crofs^ nor receive fhe Communion without kneeling ; that we muft oh- ferve Holy-day s^ and ufe a Liturgy ; and that Men are not fo good as they flybuld hey nor DifctpUne fo exAci a^ were to he m/Bed ; How fliould wc be hiP- ftd and laughed at all over the Chnpa^ World ; if we had nothing to alledge for our ^epardtwn from the Roman Churchy but iuch things as thefe ? And when the Papjls fee the wea! nelsoftbele Allega- tions , they are hardnM in their own w^avs ; anct cry out prefently there is no end of 6^^/^//$^// and Separations on liich pretences as thefe , by which , unfpeakable mifchief hath been done to the Caufe oith.^ Reformat Wf7* SecL 24. (2,^ This pretence of Separation would make Vnion among the Protejlant Churches impofftble , fiippofing them to remain, a^s they are, Forthe£«- theran Churches have the fame , and more Ceremo- mes ^ and Vnfcriptural Impoftions (as they are called ) than our Church hath. They ufe the Crofs in Baptifm , Kjieding at the Communion ; and the obfervation of Holy-dayes and times of Fafling , and Set-Forms of Prayer^ &c. yet thefe Churches have been thought fit to be united w^ith the mojl refor- med Churches , by the beft and w^ifeft Proteflants bath abroad, and at home. I do not mean only to have Co?nmunion -with them in Faith and Love , as Dr. O. fpeaksjbut to loyn together fb,as to make . the fame Bodies of Char^hts.ASynodoi^tliQ Reformed churches in France at Charento/f, A. D. 1 6 j i . decla- J red, that tkc-re pjas no Idolatry ^ or Super flit ion in I the Lutheran Churches^ and therefore the Members r of the^r Churches might be received into Communion with them , without renouncing their own opinions or PraBuesyag, 435. and Confeffion , &c. and declares , That rve ought not to break off communion with Churches , or make aSchifmforthefe things. Zanchy accounts it a great zanch.i, it fin to difiurb the Peace of Churches for the fake, of in- ^^-^•p-7^5* different ceremonies ; and contrary to that charity we ought to have to our Brethren and to Churches » A- ^^)'^^^^- ^^ - myraldus (peaking of the ceremonies in the Lutfjc- ^'^^cLKom. ran Churches^ faith, Th^t thofe which came in ufe of- vequspace ter the Apoliolick times , have no other obligation on ^!^^f3l^T^L\ US , than that for the Jake of mdifferent tnings , though at fir fi af pointed out of no necejfity,^ nay though there he inconveniency in them^ yet the Churches Peace ought not to be difiurbed. And he very well obferves , That the Nature of • ceremonies is to be taken from the Do5irine which goes along with them ; if the Doctrine be good^ the Rites are fo ^ or at leaft^ are tolerable : if it be falfe y then they are troublejom , and not to he born \ if it be impure^ and lead to Idolatry , then the ceremonies are tainted with the Poyfon of it. But, faith he , the ^ornbee^de Lutheran Churches have no falfe or wicked Dooirine Evang^s'ia. it concerning their Rites ; and therefore he advifdh ^. 3- perfons to communicate with the Lutheran Churches^ as their occafions ferve ; and fo do others. And Ludovicm Prince Eleclor Palatine , not only con- gratulated the mutual communion of the feveral Churches in Poland , but Prayed for the fame in Germany too ^ as Bffljop Davenant -tdls us ; who ^^^,^ ^ proves at large 5 that there is no fufficient Re.^/a^z ^l^Jen'f.i B b 2 to to hind^k ; which he makes to lie only in three things. . l^Tyra>i'ay avtr Mens Faith and Confcknces^ dout III The Practice of Idolatry. *•- '-^ HI, The denial of fome Fundamtntal Artick of\ Faitk ' I • And none of thefe things being chargeable on the Lutheran Churches^ the Unfulmfs of the terms of/ Commumony^Alli them doth fully appear. And now I; defire our Brethren, who juffifie'i their Separation upon pretence that our Terms of coummunion are unlawful^ to refledl upon thefe things^ Will they condemn fb many ?rote(iant churches abroad, which have harder Terms of communion than we ? What would they think of the Exor-- u cifm di Infant Sy^ Oii Auricular Qonfejjion^ of Images in Churches^ and fbme other things, befides what are • obferved among us ? Do we want Difctfltne ? DOf they not in other Churches abroad ? i^uui The Tranfylvanian Divines in tlieir Difcourfe of ^fc!^' the Vnion di Protefiant Churches ^ declared, That little or none was obferved among them. Will they then Separate from all Troteftan't Churches f Will they confine the (Communion oi Chrijlians to their .i- Narrow Scantling^? Will they fhut out all theA'^ Lutheran Churches from any poflibility of Vmon •wi^ tliemJ For^. What Vnion can be juftifiabJe ;■ . - with I?f^.;, 55. with thofe whofc terms of Commtmion are unU^f^ful ? They may pity them, and pray for them, and wifh for their Rtformxtwn^ but an Vnion doth fuppofc liich a Comrnumon of Churches^ that the Members di onit m^Y comm/tmcate in another. Do they al- low this to the Lutheran Churches? If not, then they render Vmo?i among the Frottfimt Chnrchts impoflTible, becaufe imUwfuL If they do, will they be fb unjuft, as not to allow the fame favour and kindnels to our own church ? Can they think ^'f- piration neceffary from our Church on thole- grounds, which are common to us with other frotejiant Churches \ and yet think Union dtftra- hie and poffible with them notwithftanding ? Do they think that the Me,mhers of the Reformed Churches could Uw fully communicate with the Luthe- ran djurches, although they have the Crofs in Bap- tifm^ Kjieeling at the Communion y the Surplefs^ and' other Ceremonies which we have not ? and yet, Is it neceffary to Separate from- our Churches Commu- nion on the account of fuch things as thefe; where there is acknowledged to.be a {\A\ Agreement in the Suhftantials of Religion ? Either therefore they muft differ from the judgement of the Reformed- Churches , and the moft eminent Protejlant Di* vines abroad, or they muft renounce this Principle of Separation. Sc^^ 2^i (jO ^^^^ '^^^^ j'^ft^f^ f^^^ ancient Schifms which have been always condemned in the Chriflian Church. For letting afide the Ceremonies ( of which already) and the ufe of the Liturgy afid Holy-days (Vliich is common to our Chitrch with all other Qhrifiim Churches^ for many hundred years before the great degeneracy of the Roman Church) and arc continued by an VmverfxlQonfint in all parts of the Qhriftim World ) the other Rea- Ibns for Separation are (uch, which will juftifie the greateft Schifmat'icks that ever were in the Chrifii- vindication an Church , viz. Want of Evangelical Church-Dtfci' of Non-con- pl'me^ and the dne nutans of Edificationj and depriving il^26, ' ^^^ People of their Liberty of chpofing their own Paftors^ whereby they are deprived alfo of all ufe of their light and knowledge of the Gofpel, in providing for their own Edification. For, What gave occafion to the Nova^ tianSehifmj which began fb fbon, and ipread jfb far, and continued fo long, but the pretence of the want of Evangelical Church Difcipline , and better means of Edification^ and humour i/ig the People in the choice of their own Paflors I There were Two things the Novatians chiefly infilled on, as to Evangelical Difcipline, 1. The Power of the Kjys. 2. The Purity of the Church. 1. As to the Power of the Kiys^ they laid, That Chrift had never given it ahfolutely to his churchy . but under certain rejlriclions^ which if Men exceeded^ the Church had no Power to releafe them : and that was efpecially in- the cafe of denial ^/Chrift before ■ Aien^ when Men fell in time of Perftcutton^ g. Tk (.}9l) ■ .2. The Churches Purity ought to he preferved^ hy ke?png fuch who had thus falkf?^ from ever being rt-\ ceiv^d into 'communion aadin. They did not deny jf/'^^^'^ that Uod might far don Juch upon Repentance^ but ;?. 13. they faid, the Church codd not. And this they pleaded , wcfbld tend very much to the Edificati- on of Chrifi:ians^ and would make them more watch- fnl over themfelves , when they faw no hopes of recovering the Churches Coynmimion , if they once fell from it. Add to this, that Novatusj or No- . vatiamis ( for the Greeks confounded their Names ) in his Epifile to Dionyfius oH Alexandria^ faith, That Eufeb.i,6.c. he was forced to do what he did^ by the import tmity 45* of the Brethren^ who out of their z>eal for the Purity of the Ecckfi-ifllcal Difcipline^ would not comply with the loofer part which joined with Cornelius^ vacUn. Epifi. and therefore chofe him to be their Bijbop. And 3- ^^ smpon. fb much appears by Pacianus , that Novatus com- ing from Carthjige to Rome , makes a party there for Nov at i anus in oppofition to Cornelius j which confiflred chiefly of thife who had flood firmifl- in the Perfecution ; in their Name he Writes to Nova- tianus , declaring, That he was chofen by the zea- lous Tarty at Rome^ whereas Cornelius had admitted the Up fed to Communion^ and conlequently corrupted the Difcipline of the Chrijlian Chnrch. Here we have a concurrence of Df. O.'s Picas', • Zsal for Reformation of Difcipline , the greater Edi-^ jkation of the People , and the afferting their Right in choofmg fuch a Pafljr as was more likely to promote their Edifcationy But notwithftanding thefe fair pretences^, cm^n- E-v pretenses; -the making 2i Separation In the Churchy DiuVii^lc' ^'.as every where condemned as a great S^n ; as ap- cL de upfts. pears by St. Cyprian^ Dwnyfim of Akxmdria, Tkc- ^'d[1^^u' ^^re^ Epfhanim, and others. Dionyfim tells the /i^. /.*5, §. Author of the Schifm ^ that he had bitter have ft f- £piph> b;er,s9* fered any things than thm to have made a Rent in the Church : and it rva^ as gloriom a ^Martyrdom to die to prevent a Schijm ^ as to avoid Idolatry^ and he thinks it a much greater thing \ the one being a Martyrdom for the Church , the other only for ones . o)rn SouL St. Cyprian charges thofe who were guilty of this Schifin with Pride and Arrogance^ and doing unfpeakahle mifchief to the church , by breaking the Peace of it : and will hardly allow thofe to be ChrifHans who lived in fuch a Schifm : when as c^^xlm. dt Epifhanim obfeiTes, they Jiill pleaded they had the \i, 12 Vcf* f^^^^ Faith with the Catholick Church ; and yet St. Cy^ frian will not allow that to be true Faith which hath not charity ; and faith , That ' there can he no true charity^ where Men do thm break in pieces the Unity of the Churchy Eplph, h^r,^B. The Meletians in JE^gypt agreed with the Catho'- lick Chri^ians in the Subjlantials of Religion , hold- ing the fame Faith with them , as Epiphanim relates the Story ; and their Schifm began too about pre- ferving the Difcipline of the Church , and the btjl means for the Edificatwn of the People. 1 hey allow- ed a Reftit^tion for the Upfed to the Comm-.mion of the Church , but after a very fvere Difcipline^ and an utter incapacity of thofe in Orders as to any parts of their Functions. But Peter B ftjop of Alexandria thought the milder way the better ; whereupon Theod. Ui.C. 9. 095) whereupon a Separation followed : and the Mek- tiam had difiinA Churches ; which they called, Tht Churches of the Martyrs. This Schifm grew to that height, that they would not pray together m Prifo^y nor in the Quarries whither they were fent, Meletim be- ing a Hilhop was depofed by Peter of Alexandria^ but he went onftillto proniote the courfe of Separation in Thebaisy and other parts of Eg)fty upon wnich the Council of Nice, in their Synodical Epifiky deprived - him of all Epifcopal Power^ and the People that ad- hered to him, of the Power of choofmg their orvn Pajlors ( or rather of propofmg the names of thofe who were to be ordained. ) And fb, according to Dr. 0. they had jufi caufe to continue their Separation ftillj although it were condemned by the Council of Nice^ Audeus began his Schifm out of a mighty zeal for the Difcipline oi the Churchy and a great free- Epi^h.hxu dom which he ufed in reproving the faults of the 7°- Biffjops and Clergy ; but meeting with ill ufige, he withdrew from the Churches communion with his Vifciplesy although he ftill retained the fame Faithy and agreed in the Subflantials of Religion with the befi Chriftians ; but forbore all communion with them ; ^^^^ , - ' which E/?//?^^/;//// accounts '/^«>'o7sdf J' 'toVI^i' ;^ ^o^«f675d;K, the moft dreadful thing in the World : and yet upon Dr. O.'s Principles of Separationy they did -a very commendable thing,as long as their defignwasto re- ftore the Churches Difcipline^ and to confult their own . greater Edification,^ The followers of Eufiathius Stbajlenus are on this account likewife excufed, who withdrew from C c the the pMick Congregations on a pretence of greater fan^ity andfurityin PaphUgoniay andftand condem- ned ia (cVCTdl Canons 01 the Council dctr Gangra ;So arethofe memionM and condemned in the Councils of Conjiantinopk and Carthage ; and the Separation of FeliciJJimu6 and his Brethren from St. Cyprian; alt which are letdown together* in my iSer/^d?;^, but are ' gently paffed over by Dr. 0, and Mr. K and tha reft of my Adverlaries. R^aor of Gnely one faith, That the Errors of the followers of ^iion^&c^p Euftatmus Sebaftenus,, hoth in Opinion and Practlcey ^^ were verygrofsj which the Council takes notice of and condemns. Yet, as grofs as they were^ there was a pretence of greater San6lity and Purity in them. For their abjlaining from Marriage^ and peculiarity of Ha- hits, 2ind Separate MeetJngs^.wcTQ all cariied on with thtiktriQ Pretence. To proceed then. On the fame accounts the Donatijls will be vindicated in the main groffnds of their Schifm, although they were miftaken in xhQi matter of fa^ concerning: C^cUian ; for their great pretence was to prclerve the purity of the Churches Difcipline, as may at large be feen in Opatusy and St, , Auguflin ; and yet they frequently , anddelii- berately c^ll itj /i moji Damnable and S^cri legions Schifm. . The, £«f//€m;?i pretended fiich a ^e^/for the true FaithyZXid: xh^ Difcipline of the Church, that ih^ onlf pretence foxthoix Schifm was, that they could not communicate with thofe who had Tub- fcxibed: to Ananifmr^^ or received Ordination from Arian JrUn BijJjops\2iS may be feen at large inrtlieB^Aof M(ircellinu4 and Fanjlinus. And they )oyned with the. party of Vrfmu4 at Rome againft that of Damafu^^ and complained, they were deprived of the liberty of choofmg their own Payors* So that upon thefe grounds, there hath fcarce been any confiderable Schi/m in the ChriftUn Churchy but maybejuftifiedupon Dr. Oivms K^dSons for Separa.* tionfrom our Church. Sect. 26. ^^4.) Another Argument againft this courfe of Separatio??^ is, That thefe grounds will make Separation endlefs. Which is, to luppofe all the Exhortations of Scripture to Feace and Vnity among chrtjitans^ to fignifie nothing. For nothing being more contrary^ to Vnity than D/- 'Virion and Separation ; if there be no bounds fet, but what the fancies of men diftate to them, be fiiflicient Grounds to juftifie Divifion 2CcA Separa- tion ; any People may break Communion with a Churchy and fet up a new one, w^hen they think fit ; which will leave the Chriftian Church in a re- medilels condition againft thofe who break its Pe^ce and Communion, It being a true laying of cottonV * Mr. Cottons of New-England^ That they that feparate Anfwerto from their Brethren farther than they havejufi Caufe^ ^* ^i'^^^^s fhallat length find caufe (dr at leafl think they have found caufe ) ]ufl enough to feparate one from am- . thtr. I never heard^ faith he, of any inftance to ) the contrary^ either in England, or Holland^ The fub- ^jjftance of this I had objefted before in the Preface to fiiy Sermon; To which Mr. J. Replies after this manner *, Th.tt though fome petty and znconfi- Mifchfcf of derahle mconveniencies. fome little trouble may^- ^'^pofit-in C C 2 rifi urife to 4 Qhnrch from the kvity. and void Hit f of Mem Minds ; yet this is no reafon why they jhoM enjlave their "Judgments or Confcknces to others. And is this all the Antidote zg2!vL£t the Mijchief di Sepa- - ration^ Is it a Sin, to break the Churches Commpf^':^^^ ni^nyor-) Is it not? If it bp a Sin in fbme cafes, ' bqt not in others ; Why do you. not fliew us ^ what thole cafes are; and that it is a fmfnl Separa- ' tionin other cafes^ but not in yours? But to talk 0? fr^oB inconveniemies by the levity of Peoples minds ^ -'* is ChiidiHrrrifling, and not Anfwering. Is Schifm indeed become fuch an inconfidtrable and petty in- . convenience ? Is this an Anfwer becoming a chri- fiian^ To f\vell every fmall impofition into a huge infupportabie Mountain, and to make themfelves ■ lie groaning under the weight of a Ceremony or two^ as though their very heart-ibings were cracking, - and as ix Nero had begun a frefh Perfeeution ; and at the fame rime to lelTen the guilt of Divifon^nd Separation^ as though it were nothing but a little vpantonnefs in the Lambs oi their Flocks, frisking up and down from one Pafiure to another ; fome fmall and inconfiderable inconveniencies may happen by it, but not worth fpeaking of; and it is pity they fhould be deprived of their pleafure for it ? What a rare Advocate had this Man been for"the NovatianSy Donatifls^ Lucifer i an s^ or what Schifmx- cicks fbever rent the Church in pieces in former times ? And fuppofing St. Cyprian^ and St. Jugu- fliney and other great oppofers of the ancient Schifms^ to be met together, we may gather from theft words, and the Principles of Separa- tion^ which he lays down, after what manner he would accoft them- "Alas (faith he) What do you "mean (^99) ^^ nnean,C7^/)r/4», and Juflf^,2ind other Reverend Fd- " ff;ersj to talk with fo much feverity and fharpncfs *^ 2ig2^iniifeparatw/? from the communion of the Churchy ^^ as though it were liich a damnahk fin^ flich a yQm- ^' kg/ous Jmp^etyyiuch a horrid mckednefs ? Will you '^ make no allowance to the levity and volnhUify of " Mens Minds ? What ! you would have Men en^ ^' Jlave their Judgments and confeiences to other Sy " would you ? you would have us be meer Brutes ^^ to be managed by your Bit and Br/dk? If the No- " vatians do think your ^Difeipline too loofe, Why ^^fhouldnot they joy n together for ftrifterf Iffe- " liciffimus and his Brethren diflike fbme things in ^'the Churchoi Carthage^ Why may not they goto " the Mountains for feparate Meetings ? If the good ^^ People were impofed upon againft their Wills in '* the choice of Comelim^ Why may not they ^^ choofe Novatian for their Paftor ? What a ftir '^ do you C>/r/^»make in your Epifiles about kcep- *' ing the Pe^re of the Church, and fubmitting to ^^ your i?/^/ej of Difcipline ? As though there were ^^ not more mifchief in your impofmg, than in the " Peoples feparating. And as for you, Augufiin^ Who " can with patience read your long and fierce De- ^^ clamations againft^ the Ibber Donatijis? For, '' there w^ere mad hare-brained Fanaticks^ called ^' Circumcellionsy who were troubled with more " than ordinary levity and volubility ^ running from '' place to place ^ and taking away other Mensfives^* ^^ and their own too, out di pure zeal\ Thefel ^' grant have an extraordinary IVorm^ which ought *' to be picked out in time ; but for the reft of the " Brethren^ that only fe par ate on the account of " /Vw/z^r//; which they apprehend in your Churchy , Aug. c, ep, Farmm, /. t, C. 7. /. 2.C. I. I. Ve bapt, c, Donat. L 2. c. Crefcdn, U 2. C> 14. & $1, Colht. 3. Curthag, n, 258. (200) ^^ Why fhouldyoubefbfevereagainftthem? Why " do you fb often cry out of the fAcrilegioufmfs of ^^ this Schifm ? we know no othQX facriledge^ but the ^^ fAcrikgiom defertion of our Mimfttry^ in obedi- ^* ence to the Laws ; this is a Sacr Hedge we often ^^ talk of, and tell the People, it is far worfe than " robbing Church-FUte^ confidering what precious *^ Gifts we have. But for the Sacr Hedge oS. Schifm y ^^ that we can never underftand ; although I per- " ceive you have it over and over ; befides many " other hard words, whSrein you would ieem to ^'' make it the greatejl of aU Wickedmfs ; and you fay, ^' That God fumfhed it more feverely than Idolatry \ ^^ ftnce thofe who were guilty of the latter ^ were to he ^^ defiroyed by the Swordj but Schifmaticks were '^ fwallowed up of the Earth \ as Corah, and his Company. Whereas we that have greater light^ look upon Separation but as an efteO: of -the /ex^i/^ " and volubility of Mens Minds ^ and though fome ^' little trouble may come to the (Church by ity yet it '^ is far better than fubmiffion to others impolitions. " And is not this an intolerable impofition, for " you to force thefe honeft Donatijis to Commu- '^nicate in a corrupt znA impure Churchy 2iS they do ^'believe yours to be? When the Caufe was ^' ftriftly examined ^t Carthage ^ what was it their ^' Party pleaded for, but Purity of Difcipline, and ^"^ that the Church was defiled for want of it f and " therefore they were forced to Separate^ for greater '' Purity of Ordinances. And, Is this the Damna- *' bky Devillijby Sacrileoioa^ Schfm you talk of? ^' Methinks you fhould confider better the Mif ^' chief oiyom Impofttions^whtn you require Cc?;^?- mimion fb ftriftly with you, or elfe they muft '' prefently cc That it is the duty of every Chrijlian to Wor- ^ jhip Ged^ not only in parity of hearty hut according " to the purity ofGofpel-JdminiJlrations. Now ob- '' lerve that there was nothing the Donatijls plcad- ^^ ed fo much, and ib vehemently for, as the purity ^^ of Gofpel'Adminiftrations. This was that which ^' Parmeniany Pttilian^ and the reft ftill contended ^^ for, as appears by the Fka they put in for them- " lelvesin the laft Conference at Carthage. We are CsUat z. " ^^^?^ ^^^y ^h^y) ^^"^^ have fuffer'^d perfecution for carthli^'n. ^'maintaining the Purity of the Churchy this hundred 2 §8. '^ years ^ hecaufe we would not comply with their cor- ^' ruptionSj rve have been turned out of our Churches j ^' and kenfent to Prifon^ and had our Goods taken ''from tPSy andfome of our Brethren have been killed^ " and others hardly ufed for fo good a Caufe ; And, " Can fiich Men as you condemn them for a hor- '[ ribie Schifm ? I tell you, they are as Innocent " as our lelves, for they went upon the fame ^' grounds. '^ ( J. ) That every Chriflian is obliged to live in " the uftofall God^s Ordinances and Commandments. ^' Now, Is not Dtfcipline one of God'^s Ordinances ? " And, Do we not make want of Difcipline one '' of the Reafons of our Separation ? And there- " fore the Donatifls were very honeft Men, for they ^' were juft of our mind. And thefe being the " chief grounds we go upon, we cannot but in ^' Brotherly kindnefs fjxak this in vindication of them, ^' againft your unrealonable feverity. I know you '^ tell them often, Jhtre will he no end of Separation *' ufon thefe terms ; for why might not Maximianus '' do the fame by Primianus, that Majorinus did by ^' Cs:cilian ? and fo make frufium de fruflo^ by invu^^^^ ^ which they did mmutatim conciderej cut the ^* "Church ** be joyned together again : But, let me tell you, '^•5-^'«'^»«' "that the force of your Argument comes to this, ^^ That Men may choofe om Pajlortoday^ and another ** to morrow J and a third the next \ and fo turn round *^ //// they are giddy ^ and mn themfelvts out of breath *' in a wild Soofe chafe, till they fit down and reft in ^^ Irrtt'gion and Atheifm, And is this ail ^ (thefe ** are his own words. ) The Afoftle commands^ m to '"^ f rove all things (What! By running from one <* Communion to another ?) Muft we needs there-^ ^^ fore never hold faft that which is good ? nnfetled ^^ heads y and unfetled hearts will he wandring\ let " them gOy '*tis a good riddance of them if they he ob- ^^ ftinate\ hut where this humor ha^s defiroyed one ^^ churchy this rigorous forcing of Paftors on the Peo- '* pk ( as Cdtcilian on the People of Carthage ) h.tt *' divided and deftroyed hundreds. Thus far the Advocate-General for Schifma^ ticks. Judge now, Reader, whether the Caufes of the b prefent Separation^ as they are laid down by my Adverfiry , do not equally defend the Donatifts in xSm^ix Schfm\ and his making lb light a matter of Schtfffis doth not give encouragement to MeA to make more. Se^. 2^. But I n^all not fend him fo ftr back as St, Cyprian J and St. Auguftin^ for better irtflruftioi^ in this matter ; but I mall refer him to one whole \\'rirings I perceive he is better acquainted withj D d ev^ii Cure of Di- vifions, D/- Defence of the Cure,^ . 3, Chrirtian Dirc^ory, (204) even Mr. Baxter. Who bath very well, in feveral Books ^fet forth the greai^ Mifchief of Diviftons^ and ' Separatiom. He doth not look upon them as pet- ty and imonfiderahle imonvtnkncks^ little troubles to the churchy the effects of levity,^ and volubility of Mens Minds ; but he quotes above Forty places of 6Vr/- /'^/i^reagainftthem, and faith. That the JVorld^ the Flefh^ and the Devil are the caufes from whence they come ; that they are as much the Works of the Flefh-, as Adulter ieSy Fornications^ &c. that contentions divi^ ders are carnal Men^ and have not the Sprit ; that Divifwns are the Wounding^ nay the Kjlling of the Churchy as much as lieth in the Dividers ; and that to Reform the Churchy by dividing it^ is no mfer^ than to cut out the Livery or Spleen .74rQ out excufe ; Whoredoms ^ and Treafon^ and Perjury are .not oft ner forbidden intheGofpel^ than this: that it is contrary to the zfery defign dj/Chrift in our Kedem-^ ^tiony which wasj to reconcile m all to Gody and^to unite and centra m all in him : that it is contrary to the defign of the Spirit of Grace-y and to the very nature of Chri- flianity it felfl that it is a fin againfl the near eft bonds of our higheft Relations to each other ; that it is either a dividing Chrift, or robbing him of a great fart of his inheritance : and neither of thefe is a little fin \ that it is tccompanied with Self ignorance y and Pridey and great unthankfnlnefs to God .* that Church-divi- ders are the mofi fuccefsfil fervants of the Devily be- in^ enemies to Chrift in his Family and Livery : ahd that-^ they ferve the Devil mqre eff equally than open tnemits\ that SJjfm is afinwhichcontrMiUethdJ.l Dd 2 ■ ■ ^ • ^ X^ods iio6) 'Myy.G<>ds Ordimncts md Means of Gracty which 4^ fHrpofdy to procf^re md mn'tntAtn the Vnity of hh Church. ThAt it is a, fin sgalnjl as great a^id lamen- table experiences J as almofi a,ny fin cm be : and this is a, heinous aggravation of it ^ that it is commonly yifiified , and not repented of by thofc that commit it - and it is yet the more heinous, that it is commonly fa-^ thered ti^pon God: Lafilvy that it is m^oft unlike the Htofvenly State , and infome regard worfe than the Kjngdom of the Devil, for he rvoiM npt deflroy it by dividing it againft it felf Remember nowy fekh he^ that Schifm y and making Parties and Di'vifipns in theChi^rchy is not fofmah aSin^ asmanytakeitfor^ I conclude this, with his Admomtim to Bagfbmy up-^ on his leflening the Sin of Separation^ Alas, dear Brother y that after fo many years Silencing and Af defence of fliciion, after Flames and Plagues^ and Dreadfuljudge^ aEKceptl^.f. ^^^^^^ afterTmnty years PraBice afthe Sin it felf y^ and rvljen rve are buried in the Kuines which itcaufedy. ive fijould not yet knoiv y that our own Vncharitable Div^fionSy Alienations, and Separations are a Cryinc . Sin ! Tea, the Crying Sin ; as well as the Vncharita- blenefs and Hurtfulnefs of others. Alas I Will God leave m alfo^ even usyto the Obduratenefs ^/Pharaoh ?' Doth not "Judgement begin ivith us ? Is there not Cry- ing Sin with m .? What have n^e done to Chrift'/ JQngdomy to this Kjngdom y to our Friends (^dead _and alive^ to our felvesy and (4/^) to our Ene- mies y by our Divtfions I And^ Do we not feel it f Do we not know it ? Is it to m, even to usy. a Crime intolerable to call us to Repentance ? Wo to us ! In* to what Hard'heartednefs have we finned our felves ? Tea^ t^at we fljould continue ^ and Paffonately defend MJ^ ^iltr Wh^n mil God give us Rtpentame unto stNvvmNS- I-^tMr. v^. read thefe Paffages over Serioufly, r and then confider, whether he can go on to Ex- cufe and Palliate the ^/// of 6'CjW/vSil/. But It may be faid, Th^t Mr. A. fftsksall this Comparatively J with enflaving our J/idgemtnts and CorifderiQes to other Sy rvhich he calls an Enormous and MonjlroHS Principle ; and he faith, This is a Me-- dicim worfe than the Poyfon^ even as '^tis much better to have a Rational Soul^ though f^bjeB to MifiakeSy s^ than the Soid of a Brute^ which nmy he managed ^ you mil , with a Jirong bit and bridle. To make it plain , that he makes little, or nothing of the Sin of Separation^ we muft attend to the Argument '^^, he was to Anfwer; which was, That if it be laiv- ful to Separate on a pretence of greater purity y where there is an ^^ree;^f ;«/ />? Do^nmy zm t\iQ fubft an- tial parts of Wor^ip^ as is agreed in our Cafe^ then? a bare difference of Opinion , as to (ome circum- fiances of JVorJhip ^ and the beft Con flit ut ion of Churches^ will be iiiSicient Ground to break: Com- mun'on, and to fet up new Churches ; which confider- ing the great variety of Mens fancies about tliefe matters, is to make an infinite DivifibiUty\n€hur- chesy without any poflible flop to farther vfe/^^r^/;- on^ Where we fee plainly the inconvenience ur- ged IS, en die fs Separation: Doth he ffet any kind o£ bounds to. it ? No; but only tallis of mconfide^ r^bl^ Cio8) "riihle ahd petty wconvenkmiesy andfome little frdti- hie thsLt may arife to a Church from the levity and uolmility of Mens Minds ^ i. e, let Men Separate as long as they will, this is the worft of it ; and he niuft grant j that though Separation be endltfs^ there is no harm in it. But he that could find out a me- dium between Qircumflames of Worjhip^ and Suhflan- ttals ; can find out none between endlefs Separati- on^ and the enfavin^ Mens '^tdgements and Confci- ernes : for he luppoleSjOne of the two rtiuft of necet fity be : Which is plain giving up the Canfe to the Paptjls. For this is their Argument , Either we mufl give up our judgements and Confciences to the Condu^ of our Guides, Or there will be endlefs Sepa- ration. He grants the confequence^ and cries, What then ? It is nothing but the levity and volubility of Mens Minds J and thi^ is much rather to he chofen^ than the other. But any found Prote'flant that un- derftands the State of the Controverfie between us and them ( as this Author apparently doth not ) will prefently deny the Confequente : becaufe a pru- dent and due fthmiffion in lanful things lies between Tyranny over Mens Confciences^ and endUfs Separati- on-. But he knows no Mediumbctwc^nhtlng tied Neck and Heels together, and leaping over Hedge and Ditch, being kept within no bounds. And •what ignorance or malice is it to fuppole, that our Church brings in that enormous and monflrotis Princi^ ■pky of enflavtng Mens "judgements and Confciences ^ forcing^ them to fur render their Reafons to naked Will nnd Pleafure ? and if he doth not fijppofe it, his Difcourfe is frivolous and impertinent. For, a duQ fubmifjion to the Rules of our eftabli[!jed churchy withoU: without any force on the Qonfckmts of Men, as to the InfaHihility of Guides, or neccjjity of the things themfelvGs; will put a liifficient ftop to Separa- tton ; which muft be enMe/s on my Adverferies fuppofitions. V Secf. 2S. (5.) Laftly, lArgueagainft this &- pAratioriy from the Ohl'tgAtion which lies upon all Chri- fiUns , to prejerve the Peace and Unity of the Chnrch. And now I have brought the m.atter home to the Confctences of Men, who it may be will Httle regard other tnconveniencks^ if the pra- ctice of Separation do not appear to be unUful from the JVordof God. Which 1 now undertake^ to prove, upon thefe Suppofitions. (i.) That aWChri/lians are under th^ JlriBefi obligations to preferve the Peace and Unity of the church. For it is not poflible to fuppofe, that any Ditty fhould be bound upon the Confciences of Men, with plainer Precepts, and ftronger Argu- ments than this is. The places are fb many, that' it were endltfs to repeat them ; and therefore needlefs, becaufe this is agreed on all hands. So that violation of the Unity of the Churchy where there is no fiifficient reafbn to juftifie it, is a Sin^ ^ as much 2s Murder is, and as plainly forbidden. But it happens here, as it doth in the other cafe, that as MWer is always a)/;^; but there may be fbme circumflances^^]\\^ may make the taking away a- Mans life, not to be Murder ; fo it may happeji^ . that though SchifmhQ always a j//;, yet there may be fjch c/ra/A///?4/^fe^ which may make 2i Separation' not Clio) not to be a Schifm ; but then they mufl be fuch Reafons, as are not fetched from our Fancies, no more than in the cafe of Murder \ but fuch as are . allowed by God himfelf in his Law. ^ For, he on- ly that made the Law can except from it. (2.) The X/W/^ of the church Aothnoi lie in a hare communion of Faith and Love, but in a Joynt participation of the Ordinances appointed by Chrift to he ohferved in his Church, For although the for- mer be a duty^ yet it doth not take in the whole Duty of a Chrijtiany which is to joyn together, as Members of the fame Body, And therefore they are commanded to ajfemblt together ; and upon the firft Infiitution of a Chrifiian Churchy it is faid, The Dif Kcb. 10.2$. ciples continued in the Apofles Doctrine and Fellow- Aft. 2. 42. (hip^ and in breaking of Bread^ and in Prayers, And the Apoftle (ets forth Chrift tans as making one Body^ I Cor. 10.17. by Communion in the Ordinances of Chrift, We being ?nany a,re one Breads and one Body j for we are I Cor. 12.13. all partakers of that one Bread, And by one Spirit y ive are all Baptized into one Body ; whether we he Jews or Gentiles^ bond or free, and have been all made to drink into one Spirit, The Unity of tliQ Chrifti- Ephef.4. 3, an Church, St. Paul faith, is to be preferred by tht 4»5. bond of Peace \ and that Unity fuppofeth One Body and One Spirit ; and the Members of tliat Body as they are united to one Head^ whom he calls One Lord, ib they are joyned together by One Faith, ^. and One Baptifm. Therefore as the Unity of the Church is founded upon fome External Bonds, as well as Inttrnxl^ that is, One Faith, and One Bap- tfn 5 as well as OneLordy and One Spirit; ib tlie. manifeftation manifeftation of this Vmty ought to be by Exter^ nd Acis ; for, How can this Vmty be dilcovered by A^s mecrly Internal and Spiritual ; as in- ward love to the Members of the Body , being prefect in Spirit <' 8cC. Therefore, the Obhgati- on to prclerve the Vmfy of the Churchy doth imply a joyning together with the other Members of the Church^ in the Common and Publick Acis of Religion. (j.) Nothing can difcharge a Chriflim from this obligation to Co^nmnnion with his Fellow^ Members^ but wliat is allowed by Chrift or his Apoflles^ as a fufficient Reafon for it. Becaufe this being a new Society of ChrilPs own Infiitutton^ and the obliga- tipn to Communion being fb ftrictly enjoyned, we. are to fuppofe it ftill to hold, where fbme plain declaration of his Will to the contrary doth not ap-* pear. Although God hath, with great feverity, for- bidden Kjlling : yet when himfelf appointed par- ticular cafes , wherein Mens Lives were to be ta- ken away ; we are thereby affu red, that in thefe cafes it is not xh^tkilling which is forbidden ; fb in the prefent cafe, if it appear that although Separa- tion from the Commu-nion of Chriflians be a thing condemned; yet if the fame Authority do allow particular exemptions, we are certain in thefe ca^ fes fuch Separation is no fin. But then, as in the former cafe, no Man is exempted from theguiit of jhedding bloody who upon his own fancy takes upon him to execute ^ufiue ; fb here, no Mans imagination that he doth feparate for a good end, will juflifiehis Separations for the guilt of the fui E c remaiim (tit) Remains as great in it: felf. And there is fcarce any other fin more aggravated in the Neiv-Te/fa- mtnt than this ; it being fo direSlly contrary to that VmtyQ!i\\\% Churchy which our SAv'wur'^x^'^- ^ohni7. 21. ed for, and his ApQfiks withfb much earneftnefs recommended to all Chriftians ; and ufefo many Arguments to perfwade Men to preierve. From. . hence /re/?.f^j- faith, Jhj,t €\m^)vtll come to Judge Ifin. 1. 4. U2*^ ^hofi who make Schifms in the Churchy and. rather regard their own advantage^ than the Churches Uni- ty ; Tvho for flight catifes^ or for any^ make nothing J of cutting -a/under the great and gloriom Body of Chrift, and do rvhat in them lies to d^ftroj it».. They fpeak for Peace,' faith he, but they mean War i they Jhain at a Gnat^ and fvalloiv Camels. The benefit they hope to bring to tlk Churchy cannot make amends . ,. . , for the Mifchief of their Schifm. Nothing provokes^ £p^, 4. Y7.?^2. ^od rnorCy laitn bt. Lhryjojtom , than to divide his Church: Nay^ikith he, the Blood of M/irtyrdom will not wajh off the guilt of ir.^ The Mifchief the Church receives i)y it, is greater than it receives from open Enemies : for the one makes it more gloriom , the other expofes it to fbame among its Enemies, when iP is Jet upon by its own Children, ThiSy fi^tli he , i fpeak to thofe who make no great matter of Schtfm ; and indifferently go to the Meetings of thofe who divide the Church. If their do5irine be contrary to our s^ for that reafon they ought to abflain \ if not^ 7nn.(? yJi».Qv^ they ought to do it fo much the rather. Do not you know, what Corah, Dathan, and Khiirzmfuftred? and not they only y hut thofe that were with them^ But you fay, they have the fame Faith^ and they are very Orthodox ^^ Why then^ faith be.;, do they Sep a^ ratef' ^ate? One Lord^ one Fatthy one Baptifm. If they do rve/ly we dd HI ; if we do wellj they do HL If they have the fame Do5frineSy the fame Sacraments^ For what catife do they fet up another Church in opfo- fit ion to ours ? It ts nothing but vain glory ^ ambit i- sOn and deceit. Take away the People from them^ and your cut off the difeafe. And after much more to that purpoie ; I fpeak thefe things , faith he, that no Man might fay , he did not know it to be fuch x fin : I tell youy and tejtifie this to you^ that Separa- - 1 ion from the Churchy or dividing of it^ is no lefs ^ [in J than falling into Here fie. If the fin then be fb great and dangerous, Men ought to examin with ^ great care, what cafes thofe are wherein 6eparati- vn may be made without Sin. And I do earneftly defire our Brethren^ as they We their own Souls, and would Avoid the Guile of fb Great a Sin, hnpartially and without Preju- dice to confidei^his paflage oi Irenau^^ and how Parallel it is with their own Cafe who Separate fironi us, and fet_up other Churches in oppofition to ours, which yet they acknowledge to be very Or- thodox, and to agree with ihem in the fame Do- Brine J and the fame Sacraments. , 4* There are Three Cafes wherein the Scripture allows of Separation Firf, In the caf of Idolatrous IVor^jip. For the Precepts are as plain. that Chriftiam fliould ai^ ftam from Liolatry , as that they fliould preferve t?iie Vnity of the Church. Neither be ye Idolaters^ E e 2 Flet 1 Cor. 10.^. f/ee from UoUtry, Kjep your fdvts from TMs. ^^* Thou (Ijalt love the Lord thy God^ and him only {halt 1 5^ John 5,, thou fcrve. And to the cafe of Idolaters^ St. Paul applies the words fpoken of old to the Babylonn Mnt. 4. 19. ans y Come out from among them^ and be feparatCy^^ 2 Cor. 6. 17. ^^^ touch not the unclean thing. Now in this cafe/ where there is fb plain a Command , there is no - doubt of the lawfulnefs of Separation ; if Men can- liot joyn with a Church in their Religious Wor- fhip, without doing tiaat which G^^ hath fo ftriO:-. • ly forbidden. Secondly^ In cafe of //j^ D^c7r/;?f being impofed Hd). 1^.7.17. inftead of true. For although in other things rTfkil. 5.12, gxQ^^it fubmiffion is required to tht Guides and Gc- njernors oi thQ Churchy yet if any Teachers oftbrto bring another Gofpelj or to corrupt the true one , G3I. 1. 6 -J 8. ^^' ^^^^'^ denounces '^n Anathema againfl them : and ''' • th^.t implies, that they fliould h2iVt no Communion with tliem, but look upon them^as Pe;yS;^j-<:///^^ from the Body (like putrid Members ^i left they Tit. 3. iG. ftiould corrupt the reft. St. Paul commands T/- tus^ when there is no hopes of reclaiming fiich, to exclude them from the Society of Chrifiians, St. "^fohn forbids all familiar con verfation with fuch, 2. John TO. The Church of Ephefus is commended for ^.f//>^^ jUv. 2, 5, 15. ^[j^ Nicolaitans ; and tliQ Church oi Pergamus re- proved for tolerating their DoSrine.. Thirdly y In cafe Men mdkt things indifferent ne- teffary to Salvation^ and divide the church upon that account. And this was the c^ifc of the falje Aa^i5. 2. Jlpojlksy who urged the Cere^^j^wej- of the Law^ a^^ ne^ejfary^ nmjfary to Solvation \ and to propagate this Opi- nion ot theirs , they went up and down, and en- deavoured to draw away the Apoflles Difciplcs^ and to fct u\^ SapAV^^Je Lharches among the chriflmns y and to "allow none to partake with them , that did not own tlie Necef/ity of the Jeiviflj Ceremo- nies to Salvation Now although St. Vml him- ielf complyed fbmetimes with the pra-Elice of them; and the JeivijhChriJlians ^^[^jQ^chWy ■m'^udea, generally obferved them ; yet when thefefalfe A- * pflUs came to enforce the^i^y?r'z/^//cj;;of them, a^s n-'ceffary to Salvation^ then he bid the C/.Ti/?//?;?j at VhUifpi to beware of them, i.e. to fly their Com^ rkil. 3. munion^ and have nothing to do with them. 1 hefe are all the Cajts 1 can find in the New-Tefiament.^ wherein Separation from Pub lick Qommttmon is al- lowed ; but there are two others, wherein St. Vml gives particular diredions, but fuch as do not amount to Separation, I . The different opinions they had about Meats and Drinks ; ibme were iox2i Pythagorean Ahftinenct^ Rom. 1 4 , from all Flefh \ fbme for a ^ewijh Abfiinence, from fbme certain forts ; others for a full Chriflian Liber- ty. Nqw this being a matter of Diet^ and relating. . to their own Families^ the Apoflle advifes them not to cenfure or judge one another; but notr withftanding this difference , to joyn together as Chriflians in the Duties co?nmon to them all. For the Kjngdomof God doth not lie in Meats and Drinks ; i.e. Let every one order his « Family as he thinks fit.; but that requires /z^/^c^^re/^r/, and a care not to give- :rl 27^ give diftLirbance to the Peace of the Church for thele matters ; which he calls Peace a^d Joy in the Holy Ghofi ; which is provoked and grieved by the dit ientions of Chrijiims. AnJi he^ faith he^- that tn 1 8, thzfe things ferveth Qhrifl^ is acceptable to Godj and approved of Men. Let us therefore follow after the 19. things that make for Peace ^ and things wherewith we may edife one another. In fbch C^yey then, the Apoftle allows no Separation i]:om the p/Slick Com- munion of Chriflians. It was the fame cafe as to the obfervation of Days then ; for fotne Chriflians wx^nt then onjeivijh Holidays to the Synagogues \ Others did not; but for fuch things they ought not to divide from each others Communion in the common Acts of • Chriftian Worship. And the defign of x\\t Apoflle is not to lay down a flmding Rule of Mutual for- bearance as to different Communions ; but to fhew, that fuch differences ought not to be an occafioa of breaking Communion among Chriflians , and fo the Apoflles difcourfe, Rom. 14. holds ftrongly againft Separation^ on thefe and the like Ac- <:ounts. 2 . The corrupt lives of many who were not under the churches Cenfure. When St. P^/y/ taxes (b ma- ny Corruptions in the church of Corinth^ no wonder 4f fome of them, put the cafe to him, what they flioulddo, in cafe the/knew fbme Members oltli^ Church to be Men of bad lives ; although the of- fences were not fcandalom\ by being piblickly 'known ; Mufl: they abflain from the Co?nmunion of u, the Church for thet? To this St. Paul Anfwers, Ihat That every private^ Chriftian ought to forbeaiall familiar Converfitionwixh fuch ; If any ontthxti^ d Broth.r^ he a formcxtor^ &c. with fnch a om^ no not to eat. Which is all the Jpoftk reqares o^ pr> vate Chrifiians ; butif the. 6V.?W.i/be piiblick, as •} that of the InrAJiaom ptrfon^ the Chnrch h.id power to vindicate its own honor, by c.iftmgftuh out : not as though the Church Comm/mion were dt;fi!ed^ if Verf. 12, 13- tliey continued in', but the reputation and honor of the Church fufered by it ; the prefervation whereof, is the true caufi of the Churches D fci^ltm. But the AfOjik gives not the lead: coimtmanct to- • private Mens withdrawing from the C/y/zr^rAd/ Coy}i- munion^ though fijch perlons ftili continued in it* For there miy be many mi/^;^i to break Oi^ private ^ familiar ity^ which will not hold as to fuhlick Com- munion.. For our Communion in pubhck , is a thing which chiefly refpefts Qod^ and a necefTary duty of his own appointing, the benefit wher.of depends upon his Promifesy and all th^ comm/mio^ they have with other Men , is only joyning toge- ther for the performance of a common Relioio^s Du- ty : but private familiirityh a thing which wholly relpecis thePer/^;?j we converfe with,and a thing qi meer choice^ and hardly to be imagined without\?£- / rohation at leaft, if not imitation of their wickednep. And therefore -to argue from one to the other is \^y unreafonahky The matter of Separation being thus ftated ac- cording to the Scripture, there can be no way left to juftifie xh^Stparationi'iomovs Churchy but to grove J either that our VVorCtjip is IMatrof^s ^ or that -r'- .** that out Do^rme isfa/fe, or that cur Cenmomes are made necejf^ry to Salvation ; which are all fb remote from any colour of 7>»//^, that none of my Jdverfaries have yet had the hardiilefs to under- take it. But however, what P/e^ they do bring to juftifie this Separation ^ muft in the next place be examined. PART IIL (lip; PART. -Ill, The Pleas for Separation examined. Sect. I. ^%f^^^£§, LLtheconfiderableP/e^/attliis ^f|%<^#^^^|;^^ time made ufe of for Separation may be reduced to thefe Heads ^ I . Such as relate to the Confti- w//■;^Al^-^' % '1 tut ion of our ChnrcL 2. To the '^S4^'^:^y'ii^' terms of Communion with it. J . To the Conjaences or DilJ en- ters. 4. To the Parity of Rea/on as to our Separation from Rome. I. Such as relate to the Confiitution of our Church : which are thefe, 1. That our Parochial Churches are not of ChriJPs Inftitution^ • 2. That our DioceJanChurchesix^ unlaw full. J . That our National Church hath no foun- L dation. 4. That the People are deprived of their ii/^/^/^inther/y(?/feoftheir Pafioiyrs. I, I begin with our Parochial Churches \ bccaufe it is Separation from thefe, with which we prin:ipally Ff charcT^e iiio) charge ourAdverfaries; for hereia they moftdifcb- ver their primiples oi Separation, fmce in former times, the Nof2'canformifis thought it their duty to keep up^ . Communion with them. But fince the Congregational ivay hath prevailed in England^ the prelent Diffenters are generally fallen into the practice of it, whatever their principles are, at leaft fo far as concerns forfa- king Communion w^ith o.ir Pa^'ochjal Churches^ and. joyning together in feparate Congreaations for Divine IVorjhtp, This principle is therefore the firft thing to be examined. And the main foundation of that way, I laid, w^as, that Communion in Ordinances muft be only in llich Churches as Chrifi himfelf inftituted by unalterable Rulesy which were only particular and Congregational Churches^ Concerning which I lafd down two things, (i.) That fuppofing C^;?^^^^.'^^-^ tiond Churches to be of ChrijFs Injiitution^ this was no reafbn for feparation from our Parochial Churches^ which have, all the e/Je;i/^/.t/i of ^adxtrue Chirchesm them* (2. ) That there is no realbn to believe that tlie Infiitutwn of Churches w^as hmited to f articular Congregations, In anfwer to this Dr.O. faith thefe things, (i .) That they do not deny^ at leafi fome of our PArochial Chur- ches to be true Churches-, but why then do they deny Communion with them .? Buty he faith, he hopes it rvill not he made a Ruky that Communion may not be withheld (So tlie fenfe muft be although ;^(9/^ be left-: €iut) or with drarvn from any Church in any things fa long as It continues as unto the effence of it to be fo, ^iA • This is fbmewhat odly and faintly expreffed. But as long as he grants, that ou*r Parochial Churches are not guilty offuch heinous. Err ours in Doctrine^ or idolatro: s , * '. ' Praciue. (Ill) PraciUtm Wvrfhip as to deprive them of the Unh^ dm NaturtofChurchtSyl do alTeit it to be a Sm tofepa- rate from them. Not but that I think, there may •; be a feparation without fin, from a Society retaining • the eJfe/7tra/so(d. Church ; but then I lay, the realbn oUhchJeparation is, fome heinous Errour m Docirine^ orfome idolatrous Praflice in Worjhipj or fome tyranny over the Confciences of men ; which may not be fuch, astodeftroy true Baptifm^ and therefore confiftent with the ejfentia/sof a Church, And this is all that I know the Proteftant Writers do affert in this matter. (2.) Heanf\vers, That they do not fay, that kcaufe • Communion in Ordinances mufl he onely in fuch Chur^ ches as Chrifi hath inflitutedy that therefore it is larV'- full and necejfary to feparate from Parochial Churches^ hut if it be on other grounds necejfary fo to feparate or withhold Cammunion from them, tt is the duty of theri^ who doefoy to joyn themfelves in or unto fome other part i^ cular Congregation, To which I reply, that This is either not* to the - bufinefs, or it is a plain giving up the Cauft of Inde- pendency, For, wherefore did the dt^enting Brethren lb much infill: upon their feparate Congregations^ when not one of the things, now particularly alledged againftour Churchy was required of them. ^ But if he infifis on thofe things common to our Church with other reformed Churches^ then they are fuch things, ^s he liippofes contrary to the firjl Jnfitmon of r Church':s\ And theni intreat him to tell me, M-hat - diTerence there is, between fiparating from our Churches bccaifje Co?n'miin:on in Ordmancts is o?i'ly to k X-^TjO'J^ d inCnoh Churches, as Chrift h^uh !nfiituted-\ F f 2 ■ ' ^yd in A ftparating from them hec'mfe they have things fe^ fugmnt to the firft Infiitution of Churches ? \s nod this the primary reafon of Separation^ Becaufe thriji hath appointed unalterable Rules for the GoverHminf of his Church \ which we are bound to obferve, and which are not obferved in Parochial Chircf/es ? In- deed, the moft immediate reafon oi fepp^^aiion froni fuch a Church is not obferving Chrtji'*s infiitution i but the primary ground is, that Chr'ift hath fettled fuch. Rules for Churches ivhich muji be unalterably c^ ferved. Let us then ( i . ) fuppofe that Chrifl hatb by unalterable Rules appointed that a Church jhall confifl onely of fuch a number of men a^ may mtet in .one Congregation^ fo qualijied ;. and that tlnfe by tn- Jring into Covenant with each other become a Churchy and choofe their Officers ywho are to Teach y and Admo- nifh and Adminifter Sacraments^ and to exenlfe Dip cijjline by theconfent of the Congreg^ation ; And let us X2' ) fuppofe fuch a. church not yet gathered^ but there lies fit matter for it difperfed up and down iq feveral Parijhes. (^. j Let us fuppofe Dr. 0. about to gather fuch aChurch, (4.) Let us fuppofe not one thingpeculiar to our. Church required of thefe. memt ^hers ; neither the aereal fign of the Crofs^ nor kneeling At the Communion^ &c. I defire then to know, . whe- ther Dr. 0. be not bound by thefe unalterable Ruks to draw thefe members from Communion with their Parochial Churches^ on purpofe that they might form A Congregational Churchy according tO Chrifl* s in flit u- fiion f Either then he mull: quit, thefe. //;?/i//er./^/e Rules ^ ' gnd the Inftitution of Chrifl y or he muft acknow- ledge that fettitjg up a Congregational Church is the primary ground of thch Separation from our Parochial ^3^^ (^- X:Z'//;x^e/. If tlieyc-oliippofe but one of thofe Or^i- nai-^cu ;7ir;5W"e/ wanting which they believe Chrjjl h2Lt\\.infli- t^pedin particidar Churchesy do they not believe this a fiifficient ground iox ft:p.^ration? It is not therefore any /^e^;? peculiar to our Churchy whicli is the true Canft oi their feparation', but filch Rerjons as arc conimon to all Chiirchts, that arc not formed juft af- t^F^ their o^-a moc'el. If there be then tmalttrdk Rh Its for Co'/i^re oat tonal chnrches^ tlcle mull be ob- served, and /r/'4r.t//d?;^ made in order to it; and there- fore ftpraration is neGeiTary Upon Dr. 0?% grounds, not iftomthe particular Cmditions of Commum(n\\\x\\ us, hut becaufe our Parochial Churches are not form.cd after the Con^^reg^itiond ivay. But this was a necef- fery piece of art at this time, to keep fair with the P/*cj-^y/er/V//?P/2r/r, and to make them believe (if they canbe fbforgetfuU) that they do not ownjtparativn from their Churches, but onely from ours^ the con- trary whereof is (b apparent from the debates with the d'ffeNting Brethren, and the fetting up Congrcir^.'- tiond Churches in thole days, that they muft be for- getfiiU indeed, w ho do not remember it. Havethofe of the Congngatioml way fince alt^r'd their judg- ments ? Hath Dr. 0. yielded, that in cafe h?Lit terms of Corrmmntoniw our Chtlrch were not infifted upon, they would give over feparation'^. Were not tlicir churches firll gathered out of Presbyterian Congrega- tions^' And if Presbytery had been fettled upon the Kjngs Re Jl duration^ would they not have continued x\\t\x Separation?. Why then mufl: our church now be acculedfor giving the Occafion to the Independent /eparationy w'hen it is notorioufly otherwile;. and. tliey did fi p. irate d.nd form their churchcs^ upon rea- fens common to our Church \v'\t\\ all other Reformed- Qhurcb^s ?- This is more.artificialthaningenuaus.- ••- Stci. 2^. At (224) ^ect:^ As to the Second, Dr. O. anfwers, that it Vlndlc.^, 57. is Jo clear and tvidtnt in matter of fact j and fo ftecef- fary from the nature of the things that the Churches ■planted by the Apofllts were lirmted to CongregAtioBS^ that many xvift men^ iv holly unconcerned in our Con-^ trover fieSy do take it for a thing to be granted by all mthout djfpute. And for this two Tcflimonies are alledged, of Juflice Hobart^ and Father Paul ; but neither of them fpeaks to the point. All that Chief Juflice Hobart faith is, That the Primitive Church in its greatefl Purity^ wuvs but voluntary Congregation of Believers fubmltting t he mf elves to the Afoflles^ and after toother Paflours. Methinks Dr. O. rfiouldhave \cit this Tejlimony to his Friend L. du Moulin^ it fignifies fb very little to the purpofe ; or rather, quite overthrows liis Hypothecs \ as appears bythefc two Arguments. ( i . ) Thofe voluntary Congregations over rvhich the Apoftles were fetj were no limited Congre- gations of any one particular Church ; but thofe Con- greoations over whom the Apo files were fet^ are thole of which "Juflice Hobart fpeaks. And therefore it is plain he fpake of all the Churches which w-ere under the care of the Apoflies^ which he calls voluntary Congregations. (2.) Thofe voluntary Congregations- oveir whom tlje Apo files appointed Pafbours after their deceafe^ were no particular Congregation^: in one Gity ; but thofe of whom 'j///?/Ve //:^^.^r/ fpeaks, were fuch; tor he faith, they firjl fuhmitted to the Apo files ^ and after to other Paftours. But Juf ice Hobart could not be flich a fhanger to Antiquity to believe that the chr/fhans in the Age after the Jpojlles amounted but to one Congregation in a City. And therefore, if he confults Juflice Hobart'^s honour or his own, I advife him to let it alone ftx the future. As to the Teftimonv cf (Z25) of Father Panl^ it onely concerns the hemocraticd Government of the Churchy and I wonder how it cane into this place ; I fhall therefore confider it in its due leafon. St^, 1, I come therefore to confider now, the evidence for thd Ir?jlitntwn of Qongregationd Churches ^ concerning which, the(e are my words. ^'^ Itispof- ^'-'^^t-'^^* *'fible at Hrft, there might be no more Chrifti ns in '^one City than could meet vcv one Aflembly for ^^Worfliip; but where doth it appear, that when "they miiltipUed into more Congregations, they ''did make new and diftinft Churches under new ^'Officers with a feparate Power of Government?' ''Of this lam well aifured, there is no mark or toot- *^^ftcp intheNewTeftament, or the whole Hiftory ''of the Primitive Church. I do not think it will '' appear credible to any confiderate man, that the '• 5000 Chriftians in the Church of JeruJakmAVi^d^z " one ftated and fixed Congregation for Divine Wor- " fhip ; not, if we make all the allowances for flran- "gers which can be dcfired: but if this were gran- "ted, where are the unalterable Rules, that as Ibcn ''^s the company became too great for one particular " AfTembly, they muft become a new Church under '^ peculiar Officers and an Independent Authority ?.' lo this Dr. 0. anfwers in four particulars. I . Th.^t dnncconnt' VMy ere lon^ he giuen of the irr- ftnfikle deviAtion of the Ftrfl Chnrchcs after the de- cejfeof the Apo files from tfje Rule of the firfl hijtitu- tion : Ti^htch although at frfl it began in matters of fmall moment ; yet fill they increafed untill they ijfued dn a fatal /ipojlafy j Or as he after expreffcs it, /ij.'ir/;?^ - theJrr their Infant Jl ate J ky degrees^ they At lafl brought forth the Man of Sin, But I do not underftandhow this at all anfvvers the former Paragraph of my Sermon concerning the /'V/? In(Htution oi Churches \ but be- ing I fiippoft intended for a Reafon why he doth not afterwards anfwer to the evidtnce out of Anti^ cjuity^ I fliall not onely lb far take notice of it, as to let him know, that when that is done, I do not que- IHon, but the Primitive Church will find fuScient Advocates in the Ch'irch of England: but I defire that undertaker to confider, what a blot and difho- no'Jr it wdll be to Chrt(lian Religion^ if the Primitive Churches could not hold to their iirft Inflituthon^not for one Age after the Apofiles. I know what aboqii- nable Htrtfits there were fbon after, if not in the <^ylpofles days ; b.t tlie queftion is not concerning thefe, but the pur eft and he (I Chi^rches ; and ^bout them, notwhetherfbme trifling Controverfies might not arife, and humane infirmities be difcovered; but xvhtther they did deviate from the plain Infii tut ions of Chr fl^ and the un alter ah le Rules of G over nm' nt which .'. he had fixed in his Church ? This fcems utterly in- a^'- credible tome upon this confideration among many others : That Government is fo nice and tender a thing, that every one is fb much concerned for his ftarein it, that men arc v\ot eafily induced to part M'ith it. Let us fuppofe the Government of the Church tohavebeen Democratical at firlt, as Dr. O. feems to doe ; is it probable that the People would have been \\ head led out of the IvVeetnefs of Govern- ment lb foon and made nonoile about it? Yea Dr. 0. r^W/V.;. 4r^ ttJIs US that m Cyprians time it continted at Carthage', aJid otliers fin', a great deal longer : there was then no fiich change as to tl:is part of the Governmtnt io fcoa '^-9^. foon after. And w hy fliould we Imagin it gtlierw ifc, as to extent of Pover ancj 'Jurifdiciion ? Suppofc Chrift had limited the Power o^^l Church to one QoTi- gregAtion\ the Pafiour of that church could l^ve no more pretence over any other Congregation, than Dr. 0. by being Pafrotsr over one Congregation in London^ could challenge a right to Govern all the Independent Congregations in London or about it ; and appoint their (ei^eral Teacher ^^ and call them, to an ac- count for their proceedings, I appeal now to any 'manofconfideration, whether there be the leaft pro- babil ty thatliichan alteration could be made with- out great noife and difturbance ? Would not Mr. G. Vix. B. Mr. C. and many more, think themfelves con- cerned to Ilund up for their own Rights} And if 'they could be dra\\'n intp the defign, would the . PeopU fubmit ? Let us put the cale, as to A^erv- * England. Suppofe tlie Jpoftks an Age or two fince, had planted fiich Congrtgatwnal Churches there, as 'have been formed within tliefe lafl 50 years at Pli- ^mofith. Bojlon^ Hertford, Newhaven^ o-c- ^nd had in- \'eH:cu every Congregation wlili tht fu/i Po)Yer of the T^eys^ the execution whereof they had intrufi:^ with the feveral Eiderjhips^ within their own Congrega- tion; butfb, as not to have -any Pomrox A/ithor/t}-, 'over the Elders or Mtmhers of any other Congre- gation', let us then (iippofe, that after the deceale of the Jpoflles^ thefc c/^.vn^c^j garduallv declined fbfar, that ill this Age Mr. Cottomi Bojlon fliould take up- on liim the whole Poorer of the /vtr-^, 2nd not one- ^••lylb, but appoint Pajhurs over other Congregations, ■and keep a gvi:u number oi EldirV uadeir him, and ;challen*ge the Eccltfafl'fcaljirrifki'clion over the whole "Xolony-o^ Map,ch'fJctSy of which Bofion is the chief ^ ' Co- Torn^ (228) Tovn^ and fb three others doe the fame at the chief jP/^r^^ of the other C^/c';^/^/ ; would hot this be a won- derfuli alteration of the Church Government? Afid is it poffible to concdve, fuch a change (hould be brought about inlenfibly/ without any complaint of the fiAordindte Eiders, or the members of the CoH^re- ^^zttioHs^ who were robbed of their inherer^l Rigkhj ^hhftitutwnoi Chrifi^ and fo late an efVablifhment by the Apojlles ? DoCtrines may be infenfibly chan- ged by continuing the names and altering opinions, through the carelcliiefs and unskilfulnefs of Peoj)k\ but mmxtters of Governrhe'/tt^ the meaneft People are fen- fible, and look big with an opinion of it. If therefore it be not conceivable in this cafe,the Qovernment fhould be thus changed from the Inftttution of Qhrifi in fb • fliort a time ; let the fame* confideration be applied to .. the Ages which really fucceeded th^ Apoftles, ^ /^f^*' .1^ Sect,A^. I fliall, to prevent all cavils, choofe that-- 'Zy£t "^^^y ^^^'^^^^' ^^^^^^'^ ^^' ^' ^^entions, and I find ^^ "^ Mr. Cotton and others make their Apfeds to, and 1 that is the Church oiCxrthige in Saint O'A^^'^^'s time. Here Or. 0. ^Xi6s^\^ Community of members djetermi- fflTle T^ ^^^^ Church affairs ; but Mr. Cotton hath further dif- \iondchX COWQ]:^(\xh^ jiidoment of the Elders, the Fates o^ tht ches cleared, Congregat/ony and the Confent of neighbour Miniflers ; h^^^99* inmort, he hath found there, theexprefs and lively IpK^jnents of the 'very Body of Congregational Difci- fline \ and the fame for fib fiance wherein they walk (as he calls it) ^^ /'A// day. Hitherto then, there was ;^^ ^e- njiation from the unalterable Rules of Chrifl, Let us therefore impartially .confider, what the Government ohhtChurch oi Carthage tXi^nw^'y \ concerning which thele thing may be obferved. J, That I. That there was ^ great number of Preslyun belonging to the Church of Carthage^ and therefore not probable to be one fingk Congregation. This appears from Saint Cyprian's Ep/ files to them in his Cyprian /. 5. retirement, in one he gives them advice how tovi- utsEdit, fit the Confeffours in Fr/fon^ which he would have Ep. 5. them to doe by turns , every one taking a Deacon with him J hecaujk the change of Ferjons n'O/rld be lejs invidi- OHs : and confidering the number of Confejfours and the frequent attendance upon them, the number of Fresbyters and Deacons muft be confiderable. When he lent AWW/^j- to be placed among the Presbyters ^ at Cartham;; gives an account ofall that had pafled in this matter to Mofes and Maxi?nus two Roman Fresby- /{rj- and CcnfeJJoursy they return him anf\ver^.//Af^ ep.26^ they were v.ery glad^ he had not been wanting to his Office^ efpe daily in his [ever e reproving thoje who' had obtained from Presbyters the Corn??2:mion of the Church in his ab fence. In his Epiflle to the Clergy of Carthage . he mightily blames thoik who communicated with thofe ^g^. per fins who were reconciled to the Church rneerly by Presbyttrs without him ; and threatens excommunica- tion to any Presbyters or Deacons who fiould prefume to doe it. The Ro^^ian Clergy in the vacancy of the- See^ t?tkQnotiCco{ the dificretion. of the Martyrs in remit- ^^ ^. tingthelapfed to the Bijljop^ as anr argument , of their great mode fiy'^ and thxt 4hey did 'not think the Difici-* pline of the Church belonged to them ; and they de- . clare their refbliition, /(? do nothing in this matter, f?.?^. till they had a new Bijhop^ By which wt fee the Power oi.Difeipline was. not then fiippofcd to be in the .:• tliQCo^gregatio^yOr that they were t\\Q, firfi fnhjt^.of thePoiver of the Kjys; but that it was in the Bi/bop . a.s ///perwfir to the Presbyters. And that they were then far from thinking it in the Power of the Peo//e, £;,33. to appoint and ordain their own Officer Sj Saint Cyprim lends word to the Church of Carthage^ th^t he had taken one Aurehus />/^^^ the Clergy ; althottgh his gene* ral ctiftom was in Ordinations to confidt them before j and to, weigh tog^ether the manners and d.eferts of every ' ^' ^^[ one ' which is quite another thing from an inherent Right to appoint and conftitnte their own Church- Officers : the lame he doth loon after, concerning £?• s$- ' ^^^^^^^'^^ ^^^^ NiimidicHs, When he could not go among then himlelf, by realbn of the perlecution, ^'l^*' he appoints CW^i?;;//i{-r and Fort/mat us two Bijhops^ and Rogatianiis and Numidicas two Presbyters^ to vijit tn his name ; and to take care of the poor^ and of the perfons fit to be pro^notedto the Clergy, Who give an £i?. 3^ account in the next Epiftle^ that 'they had excommmt- c^.t/e^Feliciffimus and his Brethren for their feparation, J. That Saint Cyprian did believe that this Antho- rity which he had for governing the church was not from the Power of the People^ but from the Inftitution . of Chrifl, So upon the occafwn of the Martyrs inva- ^^' "'* ding the DifcipUne of the Churchy he prod uceth that laying of Chrifi to 6aint Peter ^ IPhoit art Peter ^ &c. And whatfoever yon (hall bind^ &c. From whence^ laithhe, /^)' a conflant fucceffion of times ^ fuch a cotirfe hath been al^vays ohfrved in tlie Church , that the Church hath been flill governed by BijbopSy and every Aci of the church hath been under their care and ' cond/^^. Since this^ faith he, is a Divine Infitution^ I wonder At the boldnefs of thoft who have written at th,tt rate to me (coHcerning the lapled) fmce the Church (onfip in the Bijhop^ the Clergy and tire ftmdmg People, In llis EprftletO AntonLintd^^ llQ fpt^ks of thQ Jgreement of the ^^' ^^' Bijhops throughout the whole world : and in that tO Cor/te- ^' ^^* ////^, that every Bifbop hath a part of the flock committed to hiniy which he is to govern and to give an u count thereof to • Qod : and that a Bijbcp in *the Church is in the place-of £/>. (55, Chrift ; and that difobedknce to him is the' caufe offchifms nnd df [orders. To thefamepurpofe he fpeaks in his Eptflle to Rogatianits, and to Bnpianus^ where he £;. ^9. • decla-res a church to he a People united to a, BijJjop ; and toStephanuSy that they have fiicceeded the Apofiles in a £|,, 75, conflant courfe. . • Let th(b' reader now judge, whether thefebe the ' fir okes and lineaments oi the Congregrational way; and whether Dr. O. had any reafbn to -appeal to Saint Cyprian (or the D emocr at ical Government of the Church. . But we -have this advantage from this appeal, that they do not fiippofe /t/^j' deviation th^n from the Pri- mitive Infiitut/on^ and what that was in Saint Cypri- • /?«'s judgment any one may fee ; when he fpeaks of * nothing peculiar to his OM^n Churchy but what was generally obferved over the Chrifiian world. And- now let Dr. O. give aft account, how a change {q great, fb fudden, fo univerfal/ fhould happen in the Chrifiian world^ in the Government of the Church ; that when Chnft: had placed the Power in the People^ , the Bifhops in fo fhort a time fhould be every where letledjand allowed to have the chief management in Church-afairs^ without any controul from the : People : which to me rs as ftrong an argument as a matter ofthis nature will bear, that the Power was at firft lodged in r^e;^?, and not in the People. For, . asMie . ^ht, '• as Mr* Ahys o£ Narv-Emla^^d v,'q\\ argues,- It is not imaginable that Bijhofs fhould come by fich Power ^ as Aaron p (52. ^^ recorded in Ecckftaflical hlflory^ arid that over all the world ; and in a way of ambition^ in fuch humbling times^ without all manner of ■oppofuion for Joo years . together^ and immediately after the Apoftles ; had it been if/r/pation or innovation. When and where is in- '■ novation without oppofttion ? IVould not Elders^ fo > many feeing and knowing men^ at lea ft feme of them, have contended for Truth y wherein their own Liberties ' , nnd Rights were fo much intereffed i" Aerius his op- poftng of BifljopSj fo long after their rife and ftandtng^ IS inconfiderable. Tl^e force of which reafbuing will ♦ Iway more with an impartial and ingenuous mind, •than all the difficulties I ever yet faw on the other fide. So much for the account Dr. 0. promifcs of ^\'t deviations of the Qhnrches after, the Apoftles dt- ceafe. . Seci. 5. (2.) Dn 0. anf\versa*>to the ^y,r//er of faB » concerning ///e inftitution of Congregational ch:irches^ • xhdit it fttms to him evidently e:Kempl fed m the Scrip- Vindic.f.i^, ff^y^ yiliQ waller oi facf is, that when Churches grew • ; too big for one ftngle Congregation in a City^ then a ''mw Congregational Church was fet up under nev Of ficerSy Math a f par ate Power of Government, Let us •noM' fee Dr. O.'s proof of it. For although it may be there is not exprefs ipention made that tbefe or thofi f articular Churches did divide, themfelves into more Congregations with new Officers : i. e. Although the matter offa^i be liot evident in Scripture ; yet^ faith he, I hire (are In [lances of the er eel ion of new particular CQm,rega':ions in.thefamt-pravinc€,^^.^S wltat is. this to,rhe proof of the Conoregational way^ The thing - ' ^ Ide- I defired was, that when t\\Q..Chrijha!7i im' o^c C/iy multipUed into more coffgregArldm\f chey would prove, that they did make new and dijlinct Churches ; and to exemphfie this he mentions new Congre^dtions in the fame 'Province. Who ever denied or difputed that ? On the contrary, the proof of this, is a great advantage to our Qanfe ; for fince, where the Scrip- i ^ ture (peaks of the Churches of a Province, it fJDca&s of them as oi different churches \hi\t when it mentions the Chriftians of one City^ it calls them the church of that City ( as the Church ofjeruftlem^ the Church of Ephefu^ '^hut the Churches of Judea^ G alike d.nd Samx- ^^ « ria ) what can be more evident, than that the Chri- * * ^ * (liansoi one City^ though never fb numerous, made. \ but one Church ? If one obferve the language of xhe Ne-n? Tefiammt^ one may find this oblervation not once to fail: that where CWr^e/are (j^okenofinthe plural number^ they are the Churches of a Province^ j ThefT.^.ii. as the Churches of^udea^ the Churches of Jfia j the i Cor. 16.19, Churches of Syria and Cilicia) the Churches of GaUtia ; ^?^ 15-41. we Churches of Macedonia ; but where all the Chri- Qal. i. 2.* ftians of one City are fpoken of, it is ftill called the 2 Cor. 8. i; church of that City ; as the Church at Antwch ; the Church at Corinth ; and when the 7 Churches are fpo- ken of together, they are the 7 Churches-^ but when fpoken to fingle, it is the Church of EpheJ/i^, the church of Smyrna^ &c \\'"'luch being fpoken, without any difcrimination, as to tlie difference of thefe places, in greatnefs and capacity, or the number of Be- lievers in them, doth evidently difcover that what number foever they were, they were all but the Church of tlxit City, For it is not to be luppoled that the number of Chriftians was no greater in Ephe- fu^Sy SardiSj Pergarnus and Laodicea^ which were great Hh and (t]6) and populous Cities, than in ThyAtira and PhtLdeL fhia^ which were much lels ; ejpecially, confidering Aft. 20. i^. ^j^^ time Saint PauiikdAA at E^hefus) and the eighty ^^' faccefs which he had in preaching there ; which will I Cor. i6, p. amount to no great matter, if in three years time, . he converted no more, than made up one fmgk Colore- o^ition. And thus men to ferve an Hypothefts take off from the mighty Po ver, and prevalency of the Go/pel. I cannot but wonder, what Dr. 0. means when after he hath produced the evidence of diftinS Vkdk.p,4/al?0y who pla- ceth it in the way from Tegea to Jr^^os through the P^rtheman Moimtdin ; and it is feveral times Thucyd.i.l mtntionQd by Thmdules 2iS diftinft from Corimh : ^' ^' 3- and fb it is moft likely was a Chunh ongmally planted there, and not formed from the too great fulnefs of th.^ Church of Corinth. g.41. . As to the Church of Jerufikrn, he faith, that the ^00© Converts were fo dlfpoftd of or fo difperfed, that fbme years after, there rv^ fuch a church there: as did meei together m one place, as occafton did require, even the rvhole multitude of the. Brethren ; nor rvas their number greater when they went unto Pella. To which *I anfwer ( i . ) the force of the Argument lies in the Aa.4.4. cobo being Taid to be added to the Church, before any difperfwn, or perftcution. In which time we muft fup- pole a true Church to be formed, and the Chrifiians at that time ^^tx[oxmmgt\\Q^ActsofChurch-communjon : the Qiiehon then is, whether it be in the leaft pro- bable that 5000 perfons fhould at that time, make • one W^ andfxed Congregation for Divine Worfhip and all the Acis of Church-communioni What place was there large enough to receive them, when they met for Prayer and Sacraments ? Dr. 0. was fenfible of this inconvenience, and therefore onely fpeaks of the Church of Jerufilem when thele were difperjed', but mvqueftion.was about them, while they were toge- ther Were they not a Church then? Did they not continue m the Apofiles Do^rme and Fellowfhip and breaking of Bread and Prayers? But how could 5000 tiaen do all this together ? Therefore a c/jurc/jl^ccor- ding to its firil: Irjfiitutwn is not limited to a fwgle Corigregation. ( 2. ) A Church confifting of many Con- gregatwfjs^m2iy upon extraordinary occafwns affemblc together ; as the (everal Ccmpames in a Ccmmon-Hall for matters of general concernment, which yet ma- nage their particular interefts apart: fb for Acts of Worfjip and Chrifiian Communion particnl/.r Congrega- tions may meet by themfelves ; but 'when any thing happens of great concernment they may occifiondy a^emhU together ; as in the two debates mentioned str.u<). Aci, 15.4. and 21. 22. ib the feveral Tribes m Athens ^^4^^-^^ did, at their general Affemh/ies ^ which Strata ?Lnd EiM.ui^ Eufiathimiky^wtxQ 174. (j.) Ther£ is no number ^'V mentioned oftheC^r//?/^;?i that went to Pe//^, neither ^P^'j'^-^'*^' hjEuJebit^^ nor Ep/phan/us who relate theftory, fb that nothing can thence be concluded ; but if tlie force lies, in his calling PeSa a. Village^ J amfure Eufthms calls it a City ofPer£a^ beyond Jordan ; and Epiphanius adds, that they [pre ad themfelves from thence to Ccclefyria^ and ^ Decapo/isy and Bafanitis. So that all this putjto- gether makes no proof at all, that the Chyrflian Churches by their /r/ Infiitution wxre limited to fingle Congregations* Se6t. 7. (4. ) He anf\vers that he cannot difcern . the leaf necejjlty of any pefitive Rule or DireBion in ;.42. this mattery ftnce the nature of the thing and the duty of men doth indifpenfably require it. But is it not Dr. 0. thatlaith that the Inftitution of Churches ^ and the. Rules for their dfpofal' and Government through- Ev^fisti. out the tvorldy are the fame^ fable and unalterable f ^^"^' ^' ^^' AreallthefejR/if/ej now come to nothing but what foHows from the nature of the thing ? Is it not Dr. 0. that H C240) that ililth, that no religious Vnion or Order among P'^S' Chriftians is of fftritnd ufe and Mv ant age to them^ but ivhat is appointed and-defigned for them by ^efn^ Chrift ? 'Doxh not this overthrow any other Or^er or Vnion among Chnflians but what Chrtfi hath in- flittited and appointed for them ?^ The queftion is not about fiich a Con flit at ion of Qh'nrches as is neceffary for performing the duties o^religiom rvorfhip\ for all Parties are agreed therein ; but whether Church-power be limited to thefe exclufively to all other Unions of Chr/flians^ whether every fingle Congregation hath all Church-power wholly in it felf, and unac- countably, as p fubordination to any other ? How doth this appear from the ;^^Avre^/.4e things and the mcijfary duties of Chriftians ? I grant the Inflitntion 0? Churches Wcis fir Edification: And I think a great deal of that Edification lies in the orderly difpofil of * -things. Whatever tends to' Pe^re and l/Wif/ among ChrifiiAnSj in my judgment tends to Edification, Now ' I cannot apprehend how zfole Power of Government in every Congregation tends to the preferving tliis Peace and Vnity among Chriftians : much lefs how it fol- lows lb clearly from ^/?e nature of the thing^stotdk^ avv^ay the need of any pofitive Rule or Direclion in this matter. And here the main Controverfie lies, htt\wttnViS ?inAlh^Congregational Churches. Is there no pofitive Rule or Direction in this matter ? then it follows as much from the nature., of the things that fince Peace and Qrd::r is to be kept up among Chur^ ches as well as Perfons^ .^vtx'f . fingle Congregation. ought not to engrofs Church-power to it, le-lF, bnt to frand accountable for the management of it to thofe who arc intruded with the iiTwnediate care of the' Churches Peace^ And I cannot yet fee, by all that' hath (24i) Iiath been faicl,. how thole that break the eftabUflied Ordbr in a Church wheretn dli the fnbflantials of Re- ligion are acknowledged to he found ^ and fet up particular Independent Churchts in oppofition to k^can acquit thein- felves from the Guilt of ^chilln, how great and intolera- ble foever it be thought. -^^ 4> • * As to w'liat concerns the Churches tn the Hoi/fcs of • Frtfcilia and j4(juila^ and Nymphas and Phikmon^ I lay, that this is to be under flood, not of a Church mee^ ;-44' l^ing in thar //i;///?!, but of their own Families^ was pleaded by the dfffenting Brethren^ who fay, mofi of nufonsa- our Divines are of that Opinion \ and therefore the g^iri^thnn'^ Argument holds againft them^ And from Dr. O.'s ^^'^83?^''' Dilcourfe I left underftand than I did before, what obligation oi Confcieme can be upon any, when they may ferve G^^- in their Families^ in oppofition to . Laws to 'keep up fuch pihUck Congregations as are forbidden by them. For (i .) he grants that a Church maybe in a Family \ although a Family as fuch be * not a church. Then the members of a Family fub- mitting to the Government of the Mafer as their Pafour are a true Church : for a churchy he faith, may con [if onely of the Per fans that belong to a Fa- mily.. Then there is no necedity of going out of a Family for t\\Q ABsoi Chnrch-communion'^ efpecially, when the addition of four more, may provide fuffi- ciently for all the Officers they believe necelTary to the making up of a Church, ( 2. ) All that he faith, is, that there is no fuch example given of Churches in pri- vate Families in Scriptures ^ as jhould refrain the ex- tent of Churches from Congregations of many Families. And what thenf the Quejlion is not now whether they be /^n/////,. but whether they hQ,^ necejTary ; for nothing ^Ahl p-ii. Chi) nothing lefs than a Dmine command can juftlfie tlie breach oiz plun La)v\ but ^here is thit Command? Doth not Dr. O. appeal to the nai;iire of the thim^ and the indiffenfdbk duties of men with refpeft to the end oiChurchesy as his great Rule in thefe cafes ? But which of all thele necelTary duties jnay not be performed within the terms of the Lnv ? fb that no ohligxtion can arifefrom thence to have■CfHl and tnfuf fort able : whicit is more than the Independent Brethren themfelvxs do aiFert. Now for our better underftanding Mr. B.^s . meaning, we miift confider his defign in that place from whence thofe words are quoted, i . He faith, Chriji hAth inftituted only Congregational or Parochial Churches. 2. That Diocefan Epifcopacy is a new fpe- cies of Churches dez^i/ed by men without Go£s Authority^ and impofed in fuch a manner^ that thof are called Schifmaticks -who dijfent from it. J . Thj,tfuch an im- position is worfe than that of Ceremonies and Liturgies ; and confequtntly affords a better plea for Separation^ But to prevent any mifunderftanding of his meaning, o I will let down his own Cautions, i. TZ'j/ /^e ^e- ^''^f^onkion ^i^^- Jlion is not whether every particular Church jbould way of c^ have a Bijhop with his Presbyters and Deacons : i. e. cord. whether every Rectour of a Pari/h be not a Bijhop, if he hath Curates under him. This he calls Parochial Epifcopacy. 2. Nor^ whether thefe fhould have Arch- bijhops over them^ as Succeffours to the Jpoflolical and general Overfeers of the firjl j4ge^ in the ordinary con- tinued pirts of their Office. I. Nor^ whether Patri- archsy Diocefans and Lay-chmcellours he lawful^ as Officers of the Kjng, exerciftng under him fuch Go- vernment of the church as belongeth to KJngs^ to which in fuch exercife all Subjects mujl for confcience fake fubmit, 4. Nor^ if Diocefans become the fole Bifhops over many hundred Parifhes^ all the Parochial Bifljops and Parijh Ch:trches being put down and turned into Curates and Chapels^ whether a Minifler ought yet to live quir'tly and peaceably under them. You will ask then, where lies this horrible impofition^ and intole- I i rable ( ^44 ) rable ufurpation f It is in requiring the owning the law- ftilntfs of this Diocefm Epijcopdcy ; and joyning with Parochial Churches as parts of it. But wherein Ues the unfuSerable malignity of that? i. b is making, a new fpecies of Churches without Go£s Authority^. 2. It is overthrowing the [pedes of God^s making : which, according to Mr. B. requires two things. I . Local and prefential Communion^ as he calls it, /. e. That it confifts only of fb many, as can well meet together iox Church Society. 2. The fall exercife of Difcipline within it felf by the Pafloitrs ; which be- ing taken away, they are only Curates^ and their Meetings Oratories 2iad no Churches. This I think is. a true and fair reprefentation of Mr. B.'s opinion in this matter. Which tending fo appareatly to over- throw our prelent Confiitution ^sinfippor table, and to ]vSk'AQ feparation from our Parochial Churches zs. members of a Diocefan Church ; Therefore to vindicate thQConflitution oi our Churchy l^dXl undertake theft three things. I. To fhew that our Diocefan Epifcopacy is the fame iox fubjlance which was in the Primi^ tivt Church. 3:. That it is not repugnant to any Inftitution of Chrifly nor devifing a new fpecies of Chiirchzs without Go£s Authority.. J. That the accidental alterations in Dfcipline do not overthrow the being of our. Parochial Churches, \^ That our 'Diocefan Epifcopacy) s the fame for fd-- ^ance vhich was in the Primitive Church. ihis I feeginwith, becaufe Mr. jB. fb very often awakes his: Appeal Appeal to Anti(]uity \nt\\ism2ittQr, And my firft in- -z- quiry fliall be into tlie Epifiopdcy practifcd in the African Churches ; becaufe Mr. B. exprefleth an efteem ^^^ ^or of them above others ; for in Saint C7/>r/Ws time he chm-ch'.'Hi-' ikiththey ivere the bejt ordered Churches in the rvortd ; ftory,;. 57, and that the B/fhops there ivere the mqft godly ^ faithful^ peaceable company of Bijh&ps fmce the Apoflles times. And of the following times he thus fpeaks, Moft of ^7^ the African Councils^ faith he, mre the hefi in all the world. Many goodCanons for church order were made Church-HF- hy this and mofl of the African C&fmcils^ no B/jJjops "'^^y'^57• being faith fuller than they. Therefore concerning the £/>//60/?.?^)' there praftifed, I fhall lay down theie two Obfervations. Gbf I . That it was an inviolable Rule among them, That thtre was to he but one Bishop in a City^ th ugh the City were never fo Urge-^ or the chriftians never 16 many. This one Obfcrvation made good, quite overthrows Mr. B. 's Hypothefis. For upon his vrinciuics^ where ever the Congregation of Chriftians became lo cjreat, that th^y could not conveniently af- ^'"^'^' ^° , r 7 1 t r 1 r 1 r^ Serm. ;. 74. ) Jemble at one place fo as to have perjonal Commilmon in preface,^ as he fpeaks ; there either they mufl: al- ter the infiituted [pedes of Government^ or they muft have more Bijhops than one in a City. For, he faith, the Church muft be no bigger^ than that the fame B/fhop may perform the Paftoral Office to them in prefent Communion^ and for this he quotes i Thef 5.12,15. Htb. 1 g . 7, 1 7 . /. e. their Bifbops m uft be f iich as they muft hear preachy and have converfatton with. But that this was notfb underftood in the African Chur- t/'e.f, appears by their ftria obfervance of this Rule ; of having but one B:(hop \n a C/ty how lar^c fbever li 2 it (1^6) k was. And how punftually they thought them- felves bound to obferve it, will appear by this one * Inftance, That one of the greateft and moft pernicious Schifms that ever happened, might have been pre- vented if they had yielded to more Bilhofs than om in a City ; and that was the Schifm of the Don^ifts, upon the competition between Maprims //^/c;7 to have more Bijhops than one w a City. At C^r/^f^^e it feemsfbme turbulent Prcs- hyters that w^ere not fatisfied with Saint Cyprian b Government, or it may be looking on the charge as too big for one, chole one Vortunatus to be h-frjop there : with this Saint Cyprian acquaints Corndius ; ^yr^^h%s* and there tells him, how far they had proceeded, "*'^'^* and what niifchief this would be to the Churchy f,?7ce the having 077 1 BijJjop n\^^s the heji means to prevent Schifms. ' After the eleftion o^Cornelms^ ibme of tlie • C^;;?/£j[/c'//rr whohadfidedw'ith A^(?t'.^/-/^;^ deferted his Party, and were received back again at zfolemn Jf rp» 46, n, ^ ftmhly^ where they confefled their fa.ult, and declared, That they were not ignorant^ that as there was hut one Cod, and one Chrifi^ and one Holy Ghoft^ fo there ought to he htit one Bi(hop in the Catholick Churcl), Not according to the fenlelefi interpretation of Va^ melius^ w^ho w^ould have it underftocd of one Pope ; but that according to the ancient and regular Difci- pline and Order of the Church, there ought to be but one B/fhop in a City. ^ After the Martyrdom of Corne- lius 2X. Rome^ Saint Cjprian fends to Rome to know £;. sg.^r.s. nho that' one Bfhop jvas^ that ivas chofen in his place. And the necelTity of this Vnity^ he infifts on elfe- mumt..zccu where ; and faith, Our Saviour fo appointed it^ unam ^- ?'4' Cathedram conjiituit^ ^ unitatis ejujdem originem^ ab ' uno incipient em fua au^loritate dijpofuit. AVhich the P;i/>//?i- fooliflily interpret of Saint Pf/fr'sC/^.i;/> ; for in his following words he utterly overthrows the fupremacy^ ^^yii^g? ^^ ^^^ Jpoflles were equal ; and a little after, Epijcopatmunus efl^ cujus a fingulis in fo- lidum pus tenetur^ But this is fufficient to my pur- pofe, to fhew that thefe holymen^ thefe Martyrs and Co;?fiJforsy men that were indeed djif?^ dMly^ and that for Chrifi too, were all agreed tliat a Bi{loof there muftbe, and that but c/iem /? C/V/, though ne- s. Auo%^, ver ■ fo large and full of Chrifiians, Saint Aiigujl'm % £^r . hi his excellent Ep^file to the Domtifts, gives an ac- * """"^ ' count of the proceedings about CAcHian after the election of M.i]orin:is^ and that Meichiades managing that matter with admirable tdnper, oiferM for the healmg of the Sch'fn to receive thofe who had been ordained by MAJorinns, M'ith this Provifo, that where by renfin of the Schifm there had been two Bfjhops tn a City, he that wa^ firfi ccnfecrated %vas to remain B^- (hop J and the other to have another People provided for htm. For which Saint •^^/.^////;^ commends him, as an excellent man^ d true Son of Peace^ and Father of Chriftian People. By which we fee the beft, the wifeft, the moft moderate Perfbns of that time, ne- ver once tlioughit that tlicre could be more B:f}jops than one in a City. In the famous Conference dit Car- thage between the CathoUck and Donat/Ji B/jhops^ the coiu^. Car- Rule on both fides was, but one Bijhop to be allowed thage I. of either ftde of a City and Diocefe^ and if there had been any new made, to increafe their number, as it. was objected on both fides-, if it were proved, they were not to be allowed : for generally then, every Dioceft held ^nw Bifljops of tlie different Parties ; but in fome places they had but one^ wliere the People were of wne mind ; and nothing but this notorious Schifm gave occafion tofuch a multiplication of Bi- jhops in Africa ; both Parties itriving to increafe their Nmnbers. Stcl. 9. ( M9 ) Sr{l,(^. Olf.2. Incv>/e/and Dioctfts which were rnder the can oi onQ B/Jhop^ there were fiveral Co/;- nre^ations and Altars, and diJUnt place u Caythage was a vxry Lir^gf Ci/j^ and had great ntanbers of Qhri- •^••^' ^?' 45' (lians even in S. Cyprians time, as I have already fhewed. And there befides the Cathedral called Ba- • filica Major & Rtfituta(2i)^ in which the Bi(ljops at- Vimy Vi- xvaysfatt^ as ^/c/c^r Vttcnfis iaith ; there were feveral ^' Jj,^* cVw. other confiderable C^.'/r^^6'/, in- which S. Aii^i^uftine 4. 14. ic2. often preached when he went to Carthage \ as the ^^^'^^'j^^- (b) Bafilica i'aujli ; the (c) Bafdica Leontiana \ the b Stm. 1 2, (d) B^^//r^ Cekrin^ mentioned by ^ /^/c?^r likcwife, \^^^^^^^' ''" who faith it w^as otherwife called Scillitdnomm. The c m 'diurf, (^i) Bafilica Novarimi. l^ht{g) Bafilica Pet) i. The ''-^ , (h) Bafilna Paulu And I do not queftion there were ^ yicu. i, many others, which I have notobfervcd; for Viclor fuc^v faith, that wher^ Geifericus enter'* d Carthage he found f^j'^J,^^ there Quodvultdeus the Biflwp^ & niaximam turkam Cle- remj). \ ricorumy a very ^r eat multitude of Clergy^ all which he ^^24.^^^/- immeiiAtely banished. And without the City there were two great Churches^ faith ViBor ; one where S. Cypri- an fuffered Martyrdom, and the other ^vhere his body w.ts buried^ at a place called Mappalia, In all he: • reckons about 500 of the C/er^/ belonging to the ^^^^^^^'^*- Church of Carthage^ taking in thofe who M'ere trai- ned up to it ; And doth Mr. JS. imagine all thefe were intended to fcrve one Congregation ? or that all the Chriflians then in Carthage could have local and ■prefential Communion^ as he calls it, in one Church ; and ?it one Altar f Sometimes an Altar is taken with' « a particular refpecl to 3. Bifhop ; and fb fetting up ^;^e Altar againft another j was letting up one Bijhop againft another, as that Phraft is commonly ufi^d in Saint Cy- ^r,?'^-?? and Saint Auguftin\ fbmetimes for the place at whiclii \vhkh the Ch'/fii^^s did ^ommumcate, and fo there were as many JUars3.s Churches. So Fortunatns i Q^itholick Bijfjop objected to PttilUn the Domt'ifl^^ ca'lat. I. ^ f/^^jj ,^ theCitpvhere he was B'ffhop, the Hereticks h/d n^\^9^^ ^broken down a!l the Altars : which is the thing Optar Gpit.i.6, t/4soh\zQis fb miich againft them. And that there wxre Alurs in all their Churches appears from hence, that not only the OhUtions were mxde there, and the Communion received, but all the Prayers of the Church were made at them : as not only appears from the African Code and Saint Atigujim ( which I have mentioned eife where) but from Opt at us ^ who upbraiding tlieDonatiJlsiox breaking down the AL tars of churches^ he tells them that hereby they did what they could to hinder the Churches PrayerSy for, "^ faith he, iliac ad aures Dei afcendere folehat popull oratio. The Peoples Prayers rvent up to Heaven that . way. And chat diflant places from the City \\^ere ia the B'ljhops Diocefe and under his care I thus, prove. * In the African Code^ there is a Canon that no Bifhof (bould leave his Cathedral Churchy and go to any otheK Church in his Diocefe there to refide ; which evident- ly proves, that there were not only more places,, hut ?^ore Churches in a Bifhops Diocefe. And where the Donattfls had erected ne-w B^jhopricksy as they of- ten did, the ^/9/^.t;^ Cr?///?r/7 decrees, that after the de- 5^ yp. ceaft of fkch a Bijbop^ if the People had no mind to have another in his room^ thev might he in the Diocefe of another Bijhop. Which Hiews, that they thouglit the Dimfts might be fb large^ as to hold the Peor pk that were under two Bijhops, And there were many Canons made about the People of the Donatiji Bifhops. In one it was determined, that they ffjould. bdongto the B/jhop that converted them^ withaut limi- tation Cod. Ecrl. Jfric. c. 7 1 Ution of dijlance; after that, that they {houU hdong ^- nr. . to the fame Diocefe they were m before : hut if the Do- c. i ig. ;fat/f Btjhop rvere converted , then the Diocefe was to be divided betiveen them. If any Bijbo^ negk^edthe converting the Veoflfof the places belonging to his Dio- cefey he that did take the patns in ity was to have thofe , places laid to his Diocefe ; unlefs fufficicnt caufe were ^'lai; (hewed by the Bijhop , that he was not to blame. Let Mr. Baxter now judge , whether their Bijhopricks were like our Parifhes^ as he confidently affirms, church wf^ Saint Augufiin mentions thQ Municipium Tullenfenot ^^'^•^5' far from Hippo^wherc there was a Presbyter and Clerks De curlpr^ under his f.treand government : and he tells this par- ^?>'*^^ ^» «*• ticular ftory of it ; that a certain poor man who lived there fell' into a trance^ in which he fancied heftw the ^ Clergy thereabout^ and among the refi the Presbyter of ) that place who hade him go to Hippo to he baptized of ' Auguftin who was Bishop there ; the man did accord- ingly^ and the next Eafter put in his name among the Competentes and was baptized y and after told Saint * Auguftin the foregoing parages. It fcems the Dona- tifis wer€ very troublefbme in fbme of the remoter parts of the Diocefe of Hippo^ whereupon Saint Au* guflin fent one of his Presbyters to C^cilian the Ko- Aug. ^, 60. man Prejidentj to complain of their infolence, and to crave his affiftance, which, he faith, he did, lefi he jljoidd he blamed for his negligence^ who tvas the Bi-- [hop of thxt Diocefe. And can we think all thefe per- sons had pr.eftntiat and local Communion M'ith Saint AugHJiinin his Church zx. Hippo? While he was yet • but a Presbyter at Hippo, in the abfence of the Bi- fljop he writes to Maxminm a Donatifl Bijhop a fliarp . Letter , for offering to rebaptize a Deacon of their ^^s- ^^ 20J. Church who was placed at Muta^ena^ and lie faith, Kk^ h: he went from Hippo to the place himfelf fo be fat/sfiei- tp. 2<34. 9f the truth of it. At the fame place lived one Dam- tus 2. Presbyter of the Donatifrs whom Saint *Augu(iin would have had brought to him againft his Will, to be better inftrufted, 04 being under his care, but the .obftinate man rather endeavoured to make away him- ^/« ^^^* . lelf, upon which he writes a /ong Epifile to him. In another Eft file he gives ah account, that there was. a place called Fujjalay rvhich with the Country about ity belonged to the Diocefe of Hippo ; where there w.^ abundance of Peopky but almofi all Donatifts ; but by his great care in fending Presbyters among them y thofe. places were all reduced ; hut becattfe Fuffala^ was « 40 miles diflant from Hippo, he took care to have 4 ^ Bi/hop placed among them; but as appears by the , event, he had better have kept it under his own- Care, For upon the complaints madeagainft their- ' new Bi/hop, he washin to refr^me ity as appears by. tp, ad Qhod- a Presbyter of FuJJala, which he. mentions afterwards, . vuUdem am Howcvcr It appears , that a place 40 miles di (lance was then under the care or 10 great ?L 15. n, 2. cianoflra per aliquot Civ it ate s, faith he again ; which fhews that more Cities than CarthageVitx^ under his care. Quoniam latins ftifa efi provmcia no fir a^ in his Epiftle to Cornelius. In the African Code it appears ep.^$,n,2. the Bi/bop of Cart f^a^e hd,d the Primacy by his />/^fe ; in the other Provinces by Seniority of Confecration, Vi^or mentions one Crefcens^ who had 120 Bijhops viaw.rh under him as Metropolitan. And I hope at Icaftfor ^- '• the fake of the African Bifhops^' Mr. B. will entertain the better opinion o( thf^ Engli/b Epifcopacy. % Sect. 10. But that he may not think this fort of Epfcopacy was only in thek parts of Africa^ let US enquire into the Epifcopacy or the church of ^Alexm- ^r/.^. . And we may fuppofe Athanafius did not fpend all his zeal upon doctrinal points^ but had fbme for the right Conflitution of Churches ; and yet it is moft certain the Churches under his care could not have perfonal Co?nmunion With him. It is obferved by Ei?iph, h^r. EpiphaniuSj that Athanafius did frequently vifit the ^8.^.^. neighbour Churche.^, efpecially thofe in Marssotis; of wliich Athanafius himfelf gives the bell: account. '^^/;^;j^/:^„ Mar£otis^ faith he^ is a Region hehngmg to Alexan- ;. 781, Soj. •dria, which never had either Bijhop or Suffragan in it ; hut all the Churches there are immediately fuhject to the Bijhop of Alexandria; hut every Presbyter /> fixed in his particular Village ; and here they had . Churches erected in which thefe Presbyters did offi- ) date. AH this we have exprefly from Athanafius • himfelf, whence we obferve, ( 3. ) Thatherev^ere' true Parochial Churches ; for fb ////^.t^.ty/z/j" calls them K k 2 Churches^ (254) €hunhe f y 2ini not hre Oratories. (2.) That thele hdid^ Presbyters fixed among them, who performed. divme Offices th^xQ. ( J.) That thefe were undet tlie tm me it Ate inf feci ion of the Bifhof of Alexandri/ij^ fb "that the whole Government belonged to Iiin^i (4.) That thefe were at thxt diftance^ that they Gould not have local Comrmnion with their Bijhofn in his Chtirch at Alexandria, W hich is direOJy con- • trary to Mr. Baxter'^s Epifcopacy.. So in Jlexandrix: mrtf.6^. it felf, there were many dijiant churches with fixed 3.4.^p.».i. pjr^shyters in them, 2iS Epiphanim feveral times ob- lcrve3 : and it would be a very ftrange thing indeed, ' if fq many Presbyters fhould have J^jce^ churches in. Alexandria^ and yet the whole Church of Alexandria ffchiiT'yfi ^^ ^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^ make one Congregation for per fa- f, p. ^ '-^ * nal Communion with the Bi/hop. But Mr^ Baxter^s . great argument is, from the meeting of the whole mul- trtude wtth Athananus />?. the great Church at Alexan- dria to keep the EafteK: Solemnity -^ whence: he con- cludeSj that the Chrifiians in Alexandria were no more: than that the main body of them could meet and hear AtUu^Af, in one Affembly. Whereas all tliat Athanaf/^ faith, f 6a5. amounts to no more than. this, that the multitude was too great to meet in one of the leffert Churches^ and therefore a great} clamour was r^ifed among them that they might go into the New Church ;; Athanafiiis /?r6jC^ fed them ta bear with, the inconveniency and d/fperfe themfilves in^to the lejfer- Churshes ; the' People grew *■'" * impatient y and Jo at lafi he yitlded to them.'. But:- what is there in j all this to prove tlmt all the Chrijli- ^ans mxhQjwhole City w-ere then prefent^ and that this . Church would hold them all ? If^a great Affembl^ Ifeould meet stt onejcrf* the lefler churches mLonden MgOA fpme ihknm^caafion^^ and findirag^tllemfelVes ■ "■ . - ^ ■ ^ t-co- too big for that place fliould prefs the Bl/bop to open Saint Pa/fPs for that day before it were quite fnijhedy becaufe of the greater r^^/rr/'/y of the church for receiving fucha number, would this prove that Saint Panrs held all the chriJlUns in London ? Jrha- »afius faith nofea word more, fhan that it rvas Eafter, and there appeared a great number of People^ ficch a one as Chrijiian Princes would iv/fb' in a ChrifHan City^ Doth he 4ay, or intimate, . that all theChriftians of the City were pnjent f that none of them went to the /tj[tr Churches ? or were ab(ent, though the Cro wd^ was lb great? Doth he not fay, the multitudes mre jh great in the fmaller churches in the Lent Jjfcmhlies^ t « that not a few were ft i fled and carried home for dfad ? And therefore it was necejfary to conftder the multitude %^sm^x^' At fuch a time. In my mind Mr. Baxter might as well • ' ' ^*»*^'*^ Im- prove tliat the. wbde A^>r//^;; of the "^ews made b^at. ."^'"^ one Congregation ; becaufe at the dedication of Solo- monsTemple there was fb greif '^ multitude prefent^ that one of the leffer ^r;?^^^?.^//^' could not hold them. But the argument is of greater force in this refJDcQrj that God himfelf appointed but one Temple for the i^hole Nation of tho,.: J ews : and therefore he inten- ded no? more tlian a ftngle Congregational Church. But to ferve this hypothefts, Alexandria it felf muft be fbrunk into a lefs compafs ; although Dionyfipis Eni.b.i.':? Alexandtinus who was Bifhop tliere faith it was » ^ ^' "^' ^^ TToA/f a very great City^ . and the Geographer pub- liflied by Gothofred faith it was. <^^^c^ f^-/^ y' an y.tus orbu exceeding great City) fo great that it was ^ J),pmU^^ for the Chrifians meeting in fever al Congregations, If there were fuch a number of chriflians at Alexan- dria fb long before, under the {harpeft perfecution, is ^ it polTible to imagine, in fo great a City^ after Chri- * * fiianity had fb long been the Religion of tlie Empire^ that the number of Chriflians rhere fhould be no greater than to make one large Congregation ? There is 130 hopes of convincing men, that can build Theo- ries w^onixxdi itrange improbabilities. I fliallonly add one Inftance more from Antiquity^ which is plain enough of it felf to iliew the great extent of Diocefan Power then ; and that is of Theodoret , a ♦ great and learned Bifhop ; and although his Bijhoprick was none of the largeft, yet in his Epiflle to Leo he 'ihUorjHAiz. laith, he had the Fajioral charge of Zoo Churches \ for • fb many Par/lheSj faith he, are in my Diocefe^ ivhich he had then enjoyed twenty fix years. Doth Mr. /i. believe that all the Chrijlians in tkfe 800 Churches had perfonal Communion with Theodoret ? And yet thefe Par/fhes did not change thdrfpecies^ for he faith, they were churches flilL This Tcftimony of Theodoret is f b full and peremp- Fpn^corjcy ^^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^*' Bixter hath no other way to avoid j <: ' ' the force of it, but to call in queftion the Authority of tlie the Epijlk, But without any confiderable ground, unlefs it be that it contradifts his Hypothefis. For, rvh.it //Th^doret'/ Epijlies. c.ime out of the Vatican Copy ? Is that a, fuScient agument to rejeSl them, unlefs fbmc inconfidency be proved in thofe Epiftlcs, with the Hiftory of thole times, or with his other Writings? Wliich are the Rnks ^ Rivet gives for cm/V. 5icr. . judging the fincerity of them., Tktt EpiJHe'n4)ich i"\'C^^i.- Bellarmin ^;;i others rejecf as fpurious^ is contradicted bj other Epirtles of his flill extant y wliich llie^v a full reconciliation between Cyril of AlexmirrA and him beforeJiis death- And it isfiippofed, tliat "^ohn of Antioch was dead fbme confiderable time before (:y^ ril\ which manifeftly overthrows the Authority of it. But what is there like that in this Epiftle to Lco^ when the matter of faft-is proved by other £/?.7?/fj- 1' As to the. unreafbnable proceedings of Diofcorus againfthim,, (which was the cccafioa of writing it) His other Epiftles are fb full of it, that Mr. R never read the reih if he calls this into queftion uponthat^ account.. Ihsit Hypatius^.Abramius2indjllyprus\\Q,xQ lent into the IVeJi upon Theodoret'^s account, appears by the Epiftles to Remtus and F/ore/^t/uSy.whieh '^"^'^^•'^P"^^^^ follow that to Leo, What if feveral Epiftles .cf his ^''' ^*'' are lojly which Nicephorus /it^, doth that" prove alt' tliat are remaining to be counterfeit? But he is much' miftaken,. if he, thinks, therewas no other- Cop hut the Vatican trri.nfl.ited, by Metius ; for Sirniondns tells us he simo.nd. vr*f. met with another Copy at A^^/>/e/,* which he compa- ^^^ ^ "-^ ^'^'^ red wjth the Vatican^ and publifhed the various Rea- dings of the Epijllesfroin it. What /fLtontiusfi/th thai Heretieks feigned Eps/}ks in Theodoret'i" name f Doth that prove zr\,Epi(ile wherein hg. vindicates - himlelf from thcJmputatjopi o^iHtrtfisy tO-be fpurious ? • ^ Wfet. Cm8) . What Mr. B. means l^y the printing this Epijlle alont after TheodoretV Works y I do not well, underftand, unlels he never faw any other than the Latin Edition of Theodoret. But it is a very bold thing to pro- nounce concerning the Authority of a man's Writings, without fo much as looking into the latefl: and beft . Editions of them. But there are two things he ob- jects which feem more material, (i .) That it feems incredible thxt a To^vn within tivo day^ journey of An- tioch fhou/d have 800 Churches in it at that time, ( 2. ) Thjit he proves from other places in Theodoret, that it is very improbable that Diocefes had then Jo many Churches, * I. As to thefirfi:; certainly no man in his w^its 'ever undortook to prove, that one fitch City ^sCyrM ' then was , had 800 Churches in it. But by Cyr^s^ Theodoret means the Diocefe of Cyrus ; as will after- wards appear. If Cyrus were taken for the Regio Tto'tm. L 5. Cyrrheftica with the bounds given it by Ptolemy, Stra-* ^- '5- bod.nd.Plinyy then there would not appear the leaft VunJ.'s. ' improbability in it , fince many confiderable Cities t, 24. \\xre w ithin it ; as Bercca ( now Jleppo ) and H/era- polisj and extended as far as Euphrates ; Zeugma being comprehended under it. The Ecclefiaftical Province was likewife very large, andby the ancient A''6'//>i4r; Amm.y.xytti it is fbmetimes called Euphratenfis^ which in Arnmi- ^- »4- anus his time took in Comazena and extended to Sa-- mo fat a (but the Regio Cyrrhefiica before was diftin£l from Comagenazs appears by Strabo ^nd others*) in , that Province there was a Metropolitan, who was _ •sotitUAn- called the Metropolitan oi Hmopolis,. which by the qdcur. a s. lame N otitic appears to have been then one ot the ' r^/^/'^. h 59- names of Cyrus^ or Cyrrhus. But not withftanding,' I * do ^ notthmk the words o( Tleodoret are to be unJer-* flood of the Province^ but of his own peculiar Di(h cefe; for Theodoret mQmm% thQ Metropolitanht was Ti^?odor.tp.t^ under. By Cjrus therefore we underftand the Re- • ^w?t about the C//7, which was under Theodorefs care ; within which he was confined by the Empe- rour's Order, as he complains in ieveral Epiftles, rhcodor.tp^ and there it is called by liim, » Kv'^h^y ;^'as R^g^o 7^»^^- Cyrrhejlica ; and Theodoret himfelf lets down the ex- tent of it in his E0k to Qonftantitis^ where he faith, #/. 42. it was forty milts in length and forty in breadths And he faith in another Epijlle, that chrifiianitj was then f-72. fo much fpread A?nong them^ that not only the Citiesy ' hut the Villages y the Fields^ and utmofi bounds were filled with Divine Grace. And that thefe Villages hd^d Churches and Prtejis fettled in them under the care of' the Bijhop^ appears exprefly fromapaflage in the L,fe of Symeon ; where he fpeaks of Baf^us v.tikH mf. "vifiting the Parochial Churches ; "o^ mms-vlA vn^^at^ p.^BiJ!"^^^' 'mticiAvn KjoijMii Toli .xp yjo^v hfivmv ^hgi^oiv, li there were then Parochial Churches fettled with Presby- ters in them, and thefe under the care of the Dio- cefan Bifbop^ then Mr. J5.'s Hypothefts is utterly overthrown. In his Epiftle to iVi?;»//j-, he mentions '^3'• . ^ eight Villages in his Diocefe that were overrun with the Herefie of Marcion, another with the Eunomian, ano- tJrer with the Arian Hertjie ; which were all converted by his care : and in another place he faith, he had brought ^;. 14^ ten thoufand Marcionifts to Baptifm, In another he mentions the fpreading of Marcion'y Docfrine in his Diocefe^ and the gre4t pa'ns he took to root it Out ; ^^^.l^^^eo^ dnd the fuccefs he had therein. And we find the 86r, &c. names of many of the J^illxges in his Lives, as Tilli^na^ ^^|» ^^^^ Targala^ NimuzayTeledaj Telaniffus^ whtfh are fuffi- 878^??' LI cicnt ( i6o) dent to fhcw, that Theodoret had properly a Diocel fan Churchy and that his Epifcopal care and Author!- . ty did extend to many Parochial Churches ; his Dich ccfe being forty rmlts inr knoth^ antia^ many in breadth. So that l^r. B. muft rejed, not only that Eplile to Leo^ but the reft too, and his other Works, if he hopes to make good his Parochial Epifcopa^y ; which is too hard a task to be undertaken, without better evidence than he hath hitherto brought. 2. But he offers to produce other Tefiimomes out 9f Theodoret to (hew the improbability that Diocefes hadfo many churches. The queftionis not about the h^iX^ number di Churches va D/^^re/?/, which all men ^ know to have been very different ; but about the extent of Epifcopal Power ^ whether it were hmited to one Parochial Churchy or was extended over many. And what is there in Theodoret v^Mioki contradiQ-s this ? I extreamly failed of my expeftation, as to the other places of ^heodoret^ which he promiledto Trcatife of produce ; For I find five or fix places cited out of Epifcopacy, {^jg Hiftory^ but not one that comes near any proof 50? ^'^* "^^^ of this matter. The (i .) proves that in a time of * Ptrfecution at Alexandria , nineteen Presbyters and Dea- cons were banifhed.to Heliopolis in Phoenicia, where ihioLHifi, there rvere no Chriflians. Therefore in Theodoreis /.4. f.ip. time, there was no Diocefan Epifcopacy. The (2?) l.^.c.i%. ihcwsthat in afmall City <9/Thebais, whither Eulo- ^ws andVxQ>X.O^twz% werebanifjed^ and there were but a few Chriflians^ yet there was a Bijhop. Who ever denied this, where there was a profpect of conver- ting more, as appears by the endeavours* of Eulogius and Protogenes there ? But he ought to have proved that as th^'Chriftians increafedy mw Bifhops were made^ (z6i) made, which this IS very far from. The (j.) proves that Lucius ^/Alexandria w.ts^ade Bifhop by force^ la,,c,i^, rvithoHt any Synod of Bijhops^ or Choice of the Clergy^ or Requefl of the People. I fuppofe by this time, Mr. B. had forgotten what he promiftd to prove from ' Theodoret. . But I wonder, how it came into his mindtofay//'eC/;//r^/^^/' Alexandria /?/ that time was Like a Presbyterian Church : which I am fure he had not fromfheodorety nor from the Epiftleoi Peter of Alexandria. The (4.) is intended to prove^ that in ^•4- -^-21. the time of Valens the Patriarchal Orthodox Church of Alexandria was but one JJfembly^ which 7net only in ' one p Lice at once. But it is very unhappy, that Theo- doret fhews juft the contrary in that place, for he ^ laith, thatY^il^ns expelled the Orthodox Chriflians out ) of their Churches^Tav U^Sv l^ii^ctcnv o^Ikjiov^ are his very words : to whom, he faith, Joviani-^s had likewife ^iven the new built Church. Which Mr. B. thus trans- lates, Valens found the Orthodox^' even in the great Patriarchal City of Antioch in poffeffton but of one Churchy which good Joviniai^-^e Emperour had given them^ of which he d//poffeffedthe?7;. I defire anyone who relies on Mr. B.'s skill and fidelity in thefe mat- ters, but to compare this lyanjlation w^ith the Text mTheodoret ; and I dare fay, he will fee caufe to admire it,- Butifanyone can imagine that the Pa- triarchal Church of Jntwch in the time of Valens could confifl: but of 0!ie Congregation^ for my part, I mufi: give him over, asoneuncapableof being convinced of any thing by me. I do not fpeak wliat the Church in a time ofgreat pcrfecution might be driven to, but of what it was in \is fettled fate. The (5.; is, from ^' 4- ^- ^^ Terentius his begging One Church for the Orthodox of Valens ; which faith Mr. B. intimates their numbers. LI 2 lam lam afhamed to read, much more to confute -fuclar arguments as thefe. Tor if tliQ Pap/Jls fhould defire the I/kr^j but of p^e Church in Loniion^ doth that . prove they are- no more than can make om CongregA- . 1*^5 :.4v.. tio/^^ The f60 ^xowts that }Az.x\S)v.ts made B/jhof of DoHcha a [mail Town infeBed with Ar'tan?f?n, It is trUQ jTheodoret faith, Doliche w.ts a little Ctty^ and * fo he tells us, Cyras was no great one ; but he doth not fet down the hounds of the Diocefe ; which for any thing wefeeinT/^^^^re/^, might be as large, as,, w^ehave evidently proved from him, the Diocefe of Cyrrhus was. Let the Reader now judge, w^hether Theodora doth not plainly overthrow^ Mr. B. 's notion^ of Parochial Epifcopacy. But Mr. B: infifts upon the Inftitution of ChriJF ; and ifChrip\hath appointed one fort of churches^ viz. for per fond C'omrKiunion^. and men make another^ is not this a "violation of Chri(Ps Command^ and fet ting up Man a^ainfi God '? I Ie.c no evidence produced for a^ny fuch Inflittition of Chrifty which limits Epifcopal Porver to 2,.Jingle Congregation) and therefore the ex- tending it to more,. can. ie no violation of Chnft^s Commandy OX fet ting up a new fpecies of churches ^2iS will appear from Mr. J5. himfelf under the next par- . ticular. Yet Mr. B. according to his wonted meek- nefs towards his J^'zer/ir/ex, charges me,for. ipeaking Amw.ro againftthis principle of his, with pleading for ^re- 5cnn.*. 7g. fjijnption^ profanation^ nfiirpationy uncharitablenefs^ fchifm^ w^hat not ? What is the reafon of all this rage and hitter nefs ? Why, I fet down>a faying of his, as going beyond the Independents in making the deviftng new fpecies of Churches beyond Parochial or CongregatiOf^rd without God'^s Authority^ and to imfofi them jhtmcnth^ rvorldj ye a in his namCy and' caH all di^m- ters Schifmatlcks^ a far xvorfc a fur fat ion than to make or impofe new Ceremonies or Liturgies. But is not alt this true^ f^^fP^P^^ that fuch new fpecies of Churches be fo devifcd and fo in'ipcjed ? That is not to the bufi- nefs ; for that which I quoted it for, was to fhew that Mr. B. looked upon all churches beyond Parochialy as churches meerly of mens devifmg ; and held that to charge men with Schifmfor oppofing any fuch Conflitution is unreafonable ; and that the impoftng it as Divine ^ is an intolerable ufurpation ; and all this at the fame time,. . when he pretends to write for Peace and Concord,. _My bufinefs is now to fhew Sect. II. 2. That fuch an Epifcopacy as is pra^i- fed herey and wasfo in the Primitive church is no de- vipng ' a new fpecies of Churches ^ nor hath any thing repugnant t9 any Injlitution of Chrifl, ' And to prove this, I need no more than one of Mr. B. 's own Cau- tions in his Premonition ; viz. that he doth not difpute the Uwfdnefs of ArchhtfmpSj as he calls them, over parochial Bifuops^ as Succejfours to the 'Afoflolical and other general Over feers of the fir fl Age^ in the ordinary continued farts of f heir Ofice. And what he faith in his own name and others in his Plea for Peace : Thtre ^* ^^^ are fome of uSy that much incline to think that Arch- hifjopSy*that iSyViifjops that have over fight' of -many Churches with their PaflourSy.are lawful Succe (fours of the Apo files in the ordinary part of their Work. But I 'jr-« n_Cy cannot here omit Mr. B^x^e^-'s x^rguments to prove, that the Ordinary ooveminzpart of the Apo folic at Of Chri^^ian >' ytcCy was Jtttled for all joUowing Ages. i. Besauje we Eccief. Cafes^ read of the fettling of that form^ but we never read ^s^-P-fi^^? af any abolition^ aif charge ^ or ceffation of the Injlitution* 2* Be- a. Becaufeifive A:ff}rm a ctjjation without proof y we feem ' to accufe God of mut ability ^ its fettling one form ofGo^ vcrnment for one Age only, and no longer, J. Wt leave room for mdaciom Wits accordingly to queflion other Go- fpellnjlitntionsy 4r/*of the Apojioltcal Poiver in Governing Chur- chts\ \xyM2iHtw fart di Ep^fcopacj notliQ^td of in the • ancient Church, which fwallows up the ^vhole Power of Presbyters^ and leaves them only a bare name of CV/r4/-e/, and deftroyes the^e/>^of Parochial Churches. But if I can make the contrary to appear from the Frarm ZwdiConfittution of this Churchy I hope Mr. E. will be reconciled to oui? EpifcopalQovernment.zxxA endeavour to remove the /'rgW/^ei he hithcaufed in Peoples minds againft it. SeB. 12. Now to examine this, let us confider two things, (i .) What Power is left to Presbyters in our Church. (2.) What Authority the Bi(hops of our Church have ov>er them. ^ '^ov I. What P(^;r€r is left to Vrbhyttis wt^x ' Church : and that may be confidered two wayes. i . With re- fpefttothe rvholeBody of this Church, 2. With re- fpe£t to their particular Congregations ox Cures, I . : With refpect to the whole Body of tins Church : and fb (i.) There are no RultsofDifcipline^ no Jr- • ticks of Doctrine^ no Form of Divi'ne Service^ are to be allowed or received in this Nation; but, by the Confiitution of this Church, the Presbyters of it ■ have their Fotes in p2iSing them, either in Perfin^ orbyPrtTJc/. Eor, all things of that Nature^ are to pais both Houfts of Convocation ; and the lorver Houfe confifts wholly of Presbyters ; who reprefent the whole Presbytery of the Nation ; cither appearing by their orvn Right, as many do ; or as being shofe-n ^ h - hj the rejl, from whom by Indentures they either do, or ought to receive Porver to tranfaft things in their , nxmes. And the Cuftom of this Church hath ibm-etimes . been, for the Clergy of the Diocefes to giVQ limited Proxies in particular Cafes to their Procurators. Now I appeal to any manof underftanding, whether the Clergy of tl|i^ Church have their whole Pojver fvvallowed ..up by the BTpjopSj when yet the Bijhops have no power to oblige them to any Rules or Canons but by their own confent ; and they do freely vote in all things di com- mon concernment to the Church ; and therefore the Pre/- iyters are not by the Conftitution deprived of their (hare inone of the greatcft Rights oH Government^ viz. in ♦ making Rules for the whole Body. And in this main part of Government the Bi(hops do nothing without the CounfeloS. their Presbyters y and in this refpeO: our Church falls behind none of the ancient Churches^ which had their Councils of Presbyters together with their Bifhops ; only, there, they were tiktnfmgly m every City'y and here they are combined together in Provin- cial Synods ; modelM according to the Laws of the A^^- tion. And whtnthe whole Body of Doc7rin,D//cipline and Worjhtp are thus agreed upon by a general con- tent, there ieems to be far lefs need of the particular Councils oi Presbyters to every Bi(hop ; fince both B/- pjops and Presbyters are now undtx fixed Rules ^ and ^^.31.^^55. are accountable for the breach of them^ (2J In gi- ving Orders ; W tlie Rules of this Church four Pref byters are/^ affiftheBifl^op ; and to examine the Per- fins to be Ordained ( Or the Bijhop in their prefence ) and afterwards to joyn in the laying on of hands upon the Perfons ordained. And is all this nothing but to be the B/Jhop^s CurafeSyZnd tQ officiate in fome of his Chapels f . :/. ' • ■- \ 2. As 2. hstothzvc panictiUr charges \ one would think thole who make this objection, had never read over the Office oi Ordimtion ; for therein (i.) For the • Epijlk is read the Charge given by Saint Paul to the Elders at Mtkttis^ Aft. 20. or the third Chapter of the firjl Epijlle to Timothy , concerning the Office of a B/jJjop. What a great impertinency had boththefe been, if the Presbyters Pover had been quite fwal- lowedup bytheJS//J^/>i-? But it hence appears, thait our Church looked on the Elders at Efhefm^ and the . Bilhop in Timothy to be PresbyteYs^ as yet under the 1 rare and Government of the Apoflles^ or fuch as they tleputed for that Office, luch as Timothy and Ttttis were. Which I fuppole is the true meaning of Saint 'Jerome and many other doubtful paffages of Anti- quity, which relate to the community of the names of Bi^of and Presbyter^ while the Apofiles governed the Church themfelves* And at this time Timothy - being appointed to this part of the Jpoflolical Office of ijovernmentj the By/^f?fj mentioned in the Epijlle to him, may well enough be the fame with the Pres-- byters in the Epiflle to 'Titus ^ who was appointed to ordain Elders in every City^ Titus i. 5. ( 2. ) In the Bishops Exhortation to them that are to be ordained, he (aith, Now we exhort yon in the name of the Lord 'Jefiis Chrifty to have in remembrance into how high a, dignity^ and to ho)v chargeable an Office ye be called^ that is to fay^ the Mtjfengers and Watchmen j the Pa- Jlors and Stewards of the Lord, to teach ^ to premonijb^ to feed and provide for the Lords Family^ S{C, have always therefore printed in your remembrance- , hox* great a treafitre is comm'tted to your charge \ for th'ny ' be the Sheep of Chnfi which he bought with his death ^ -Afid for whom hi jhed his blood. The Chinch and Con- M m oreoation gregation-^hom you mufi ftrve is his Sponfe and Body. And if it [hdl chance the fame Churchy or any member thereof y to tdke any hurt or hinder ance^ by reafon of ymr negligence, you know the great nefs of the fault and of the horrible punijhment which will enfue^ &c. Is this the language of a Church which deprives Presbyters of the due care of their flocks y and makes Parochial Congregations to be no Churches^ ( ?• ) The perfbn to ' be ordained doth Iblemnly promife to gti/e faith- ful diligence to minifier the Do'^rine and Sacraments y and the Difcipline of Chrifl as the Lord hath comman- dedy and as this Realm hath received the famey accor^ ding to the Commandments of God y fo that he may teach the People committed to his Cure and Char gey with all diligence to keep and ohferve the fame. Here we fee a Cure and charge committed to the Presby- ters ; Preaching and Adminif ration of Sacraments required of them ; and the exercife of D'fcipline as far as belongs to them, ( of which afterwards ) ; but now in the Confecration of a Bifhopy this part is left out, and inftead of that it is laid, That he is called to the Government of the Church ; and he is required ta corre^ and puni(h fuch as be uncjuiety difobedient and criminoti^s in his Diocefe. So that the more particu- lar charge of Souls is committed to every Paftor over his gwn Flock, and the general care of G^i/er;?- ment and Difcipltne is committed to the BiJhop\ as. that which elpecially belongs to his Office as di(tin£t from the other^ SeB. i^. II. Which is the next thing to be con^ fideved, viz» What Authority the Bijhop hath^ by virtue of his Confecrationy in this Church^ And that, I fay, fe what Mr.. B, calls th^ordinary parts of the Apofiolical ' Author Authority ; which lies in three things, Government^ Ordwation and Cenfurts. And that our Church did believe our Bifljops to fucceed the Apoftks in thofe parts of their Office^ I fhall make appear by thefe things, (i .) In the Preface before the Book of Or- dindtion^ it is faid, That it is evident unto all men^ diligently reading holy Scripture^ and anclt'nt Authors^ that from the Apoflles time^ there have hem thefe Or^ ders of Mintfltrs in ChrifPs Churchy BijhopSj Pri^fls md Deacons, What is the reafbn that they exprefs •; it thus , from the Apoflles time^ rather than in the Apoflles times, but that they beheved, while the ^/>^- flles lived, they managed the affajrs of Government themftlves ; but as they withdrew, they did in fbme Churches fboner, and in Ibme later, as their own continuance^ the condition of the Churches^ and the qualification of Perfons were, commit the care and Government of Churches to fuch Perfons whom they appointed thereto ? Of which, we have an uncon- .; troulable evidence in the Inftances of Timothy and Titu^ ; for the care of Government was a diftinct thing from the Office of an Evangelifl ; and all their removes do not invalidate this, becaule while the i: Apoflles lived , it is probable there were no fixed Bijhops^ or but few. But as they went off, fbthey came to be fetled in their feveral Churches, And as -; tliis is moft agreeable to the fenfe of our churchy fb it is the faireft Hypothtfis for reconciling the diffe- rent Teflimonies of Ami quit y. For hereby the fuc- celTionof jB;/Z?^/?/ is fecured from the Apo files times, for which the Teftimonies of Iren^t:is^ TertuWany^ Saint Cyprian y and others, are fb plain ; hereby room is left to make good all that Sain: "[ierom hatli faid ; and what Epipbanius delivers concerning the ciffcring M m 2 fettle- (270) fcttkments of Churches at fir ft. So that we may al- low for the Qommtmity of names , between hi^Jjo^ and Presbyter^ for a while in the Churchy t. e. while tlie A^ojlks governed the churches themfelves ; but afterwards, that which was then part of the ^/>^/^- lied Office^ became the Epifcopd^ which hath conti- . nued from that time to this, by a conftant fucceffion in the Church, (2.) Archbijhop Whitg^ift feveral times Defence of declares that the/e parts of the Jpoflolicd Office flill to^the^Admo- ^^^^^^^^^ ^^ ^^^ Bijbops of our Church, As for this nkp. 218. ^Art of the Apofiks function^ faith he, to vifit fuch Churches as were before pUnted^ and to provide that Juch were placed in them, as were vertuoas and godly Paflors y I know it'remaineth Jlillj and is one of the chief parts of the Bijhops function^ And again, thert p. 424. is riow no planting of Churches^ nor goi^g through the, whole worlds there is no writing of new Gofpelsy no prophefying of things to come^ but there is Governing of churches ,., vifiting of them^ reforming of Paflors and directing of then^^ which is a portion of the Apo- ^.427, folic al fmclwn. Again, Although that this part of the Apoflolical Office which did confiji in planting and^ founding of Churches through the whole world is cea- fed\ yet the m inner of Government by placing Rifhops tn every City^ by moderating and Governing them^ by vifiting the Churches , by cutting off fchtfms and con^ tentionSy by ordering Miniflers remaineth ft ill j^ and (hall cont inline y and is in this Church in the Archbijhops and Bi/hops , as mojl meet men to execute the fame. Bifjop Bilfon fully agrees as to thefe particulars,. F^rpe;:ual (i.) That the Apo files did not at frfl commit the^ ^f^cfiiHft?^ C/'/zr^i^fi' to the Government of Bi/hops^ but referved chm(^3 ch. the chief power of Government in their own hands, §42. p. 224, ^2.) That upon experience of the confufwn anddtforder which:, which did arife through equality of Pajlors , did Ap- point at their departures certain approved men to he Bijhops. ( 3 . ) 2 hat thefe Bijhops did face eed the Apo- ch.i 5. p, 244, files in the care and Government of Churches^ as he proves at large ; and therefore he calls their fun^ton Jpoflolick. Inftead of many others, which it were eafie to produce, I fliall only add the Tefiimony of • Y^m<^Qharles\. in \\\%dehatts about Epifcopacy, who underftood the Conftltution of ouj Chnrch as well as any Bfijop in it, and defended it with as clear and as ftrong a Reafbn. In his third Paper to Henderfony he hath thefe words , Where you find a Bifh^p and Presbyter in Scripture to be one and the fame ( which I deny to be always fo) it is in the Apo [lies times '^ now I think to prove the Order of B/Jhops fuccecc!:\d^t of the ApofileSj and that the nxme wf.ts chiefly altered tn reverence to thofe who were immediately chofen by our Saviour. In his fir ft Paper at the Treaty at A'ew- port, he thus ftates the cafe about Epifcopal Govern ment. I conceive that Epifcopal Government is mofl confonmt to the word of Godj and of an Apoftolical Inftitution, a^s it appears by the Scriptures to have be-en pra^iftd by the Apo (lies themfelveSy and by them com- mitted and derived to particular perfons as thtir fub- ftitutes or ficcejfors therein ( as for ordaining Presby- ters and Deacons^ ^l^^l'^^ Rules concerning Chriflian Difcipline, and exercifmg Cenfures over Presbyters and others^ and hath ever finceto thefe Lift times been ex- erciftd bj Bi/hops in all the Churches of Chrift^ and therefore I cannot in confcience confent to aboliflj the fitd Government. In his Reply to the fifl Anfver of tlie Divines , he faith, 4hat meer Presbyters are Epifcopi Gregis only^ they have the overflght of the Flock m the duties, of Pre Aching^ Admintf ration of Sacra-.. Sacraments J pMick Prayery Exhortm^^ Rehuking^ &a l?nt Bifhops are EpifcopiGregis & Paftorum too^ h^ ving the overfight of Flock and Pajlors within their fever dl precinBs in the Acfs of eocttrnal Government. And, that y although the Afojiles had no Succe^ors in eundem gradutn as to thofe things that wereeoztraor- dinary in thewj as namely the Meafure of their Gifts^ the extent of their charge^ the infallibility of their Do- ' Brine y and the having feen Chrijl in the ftfb : hut in thofe things that were not extraordinary ( and fuch thofe things are to he judged which are necejjary for the fer- vice of the Church in all times ^ as the Office of Teach- ing and the Power of Governing are ) thty were to have and had Succejfors ; and therefore the learned and g(mt^ Fathers and Councils of old times did ufually file Bifljops the Succejjors of the Apojlles without ever fcru- plmg thereat. Many other paffages might be produ- ced out of thofe excellent Papers to the lame purpofe, but thefe are liifficient to difcover that our BifJjops are looked on as Succejfors to the Apo files ^ and there- fore Mr. Baxter hath no reafbn to call our Epifcopacy a new deviftdfpecies of Churches^ and flich as deftroys the being of Parochial Churches, Secl\ 14. 5. It now remains, that we confider whether the reftraint of Dfciplme in our Parochial Churches doth overthrow their Conflitutwn ^ To make this clear, we muft underfland that the Difcipline of the Church either refpefts the admiffon of Church- members to the Holy Communion \ or the cajling of them out for 5f^?;^^.W afterwards. I . As to that part of Difcipline which ref}3e8:s the admifflon of church-members. The Rubrick d-kcrCon- firmatioi$ fr mat ion faith, Thdt none {ball be admitted to the holy Communion^ untill fuch time as he be confirmed^ or be ready and dcfirous to he confirmed. Now to capaci- . tate a perfon for Confirmation, it is neceffary that he be able to give an account of the neceffary points of the chrijiian Faith diVidi FraBice^ as they are contain- ed in the Creed^ the Lords Prayer^ the Ten Com- . rnandments and the Chi^r:h Catechifm ; and of his fuf- ficiency herein the Parochial Mintfttr is the Judge. For he is either to bving or fend in writings with his hand ftbfcribed thereunto^ the names of all fuch per^ fans within his Pari/hy as he /ball think ft to be pre- fented to the Bifljop to be confirmed. Now, if tliis were ftriftly obferved ( and the Church is not icfpon- fible for mens negle£t ) were it not fufficlent for the fatisfa£tion of men as to the admifjion of Church-mem- hers to the Lords Supper^? And I do not fee, but the Objeciions made againft the DifcipUm of this Church might be removed, if the things allowed and required by the Rules of it, were duly praftifed; and might attain to as gr^cit purity, as is ever preten- ded to by the Separate Congregations \A^ho now find lb much fault for our want of Difcipline. For, even • the Churches oi New- England do grant, that the In- Synod of f ant feed of Confederate vifible Believers are members ^(^-E.»ijavd' of the fame Church with their Parents^ and when grown ti^ fubJe'Jt of up are perfonally under the Watch, Difcipline and Go- Baptifm, c^^r. uernment of that Church. Andj that Infants b apt iz.ed * have a right to further priviledges^ if they appear quali- fied for them. And the main of thefe qnalifications are, under ft anding the Doctrine of Farth, and publick- ly profefjing their affent thereto^ not fcandalom in life^ and folemnly owning the Covenant before the Church. Taking this for the. Baptifmal Covenant ^ ^nd not their church Church Covenant^ mr Church owns the fame thing, only it is to be Aont before theBijhop inftead of their Congregation, But the Mint ft tr is to be ]?dgt of the confirmaci- qualifications^ which Mr . Baxter himfelf allows in this on, ;. 20. " cale. Who grants the Frofefjion of Faith to be a Condition of Right before the Church ) and then adds, f. 49, 52. that fitch profeffion is to be tried^ judged and app-ovid by the Faftors of the Church to whofe Cjjice it belongs ; hecaufe to Minifters as fiich the Kjys of the KJngdorrt of Heaven are committed ; and they are the Stewards" of Gods Hotf^ &c. which he there proves at large ;. 155. by many Arguments. But he com flams of the old carekfs fraclice of this excellent duty of Confrmation, • This is a thing indeed to be lamented, and it is too J haftily and cuiforiiy performed : but let the fault then be laid, wdiere it ought to be laid ; not upon the Churchy whole Rules are very good, but upon thofe perfons in it who flubber over 16 important a Duty. But is it not more becoming chriftians in a peace- able and orderly manner to endeavour to retrieve lb excellent a means for the Reformation of our Pa- rochial churches ; than peevifhly to complain of the want oVDifcipline^ and to rejeft Communion with our . church on that account ? And I fhall defire Mr. Bax- ter to confider his own words, That the practice of fo /. 172. much Difcipline^ as rve are agreed in^ is a likelier way to bring ti^ to agreement in the reft^ than all our dtf . putings will do without it. Yea Mr. Baxter grants, That the Presbyters of our Church have by the Rubric k the Trial and Approbation of thofe ^ that are fent to the Bijhop for Confirmation ; and that the Doctrine and p. 262. PracJice of the Church of England, is for the Power of Presbyters herein as far as they could dtfre. This is avery fair confeflion^ and fuiEcient to make it appear thac tliat onr Dioccfm Evifiopacy doth fiot ovxrtlirow tli^ P(?rerof Pre.^^rferc,astothis part of DifjpLnewlmh concerns admif/ion of Church-mt?nhtrs to the Comrns' nion. Sect i<;.2 As to that part of Church Difciplinp which rclpecls the rejedling thole for Scanddj who have been Church-members. In cafe oi open and publick Scr/iLxl^ our Church doih allow if not re- ^,,v,nr\h^ quire the Parochial Mimfltr to call and advtrt/fe f.^Commw fuch a am thxt is guilty of it in any wife not to cornt «'^'^- to the LordHs Tahlc^ until he hath openly declared him- [elf to have truly repented and arr.ended his former naughty Itfe^ that the Congregation may thereby be fa^ * tisfiedy ivhich before was of ended. And in cafe the offender continue obflinate^ he may repel him from the Communion ; but fo^ that after fuch repelling^ he givz an account to the Ordinary within 14 doxys ) and the Ordinary is then to proceed according tj the, Canon, Here is plainly a Power granted to put back any Scindalou6 offender from the Sacrament^ whole faults are fb notorious as to give offtnce to the Congrega- tion ; but it is not an abfolute and unaccountahle Po'.r- er,but the A//;?.7?t'ris obhged to give account thereof within a limitedf time to the Ord/nary. Now wherein is itthat our D/(:;re/i;^ Ep.fcopacy dtRioys the being of Pa- rochial Churches for want of the Po.vtrofD/fcipl/ne? Is it that they have not Power to exclude men, whe- ther their faults be Scandalous to the Congregation or not ? Or is it, that they are bound to juftify what they doe, and to profecute the P^rfbn for tl'.ofe faults for which they put him back from the Com- munion'^ Or is it, that they have not Power to pro- ceed to the greyer Excomn:ui/cttionj tluthoingrc- N n ■ ferved ferved to the B/fhopy upon fall hearing of all parties concerned ? But as long as by the Confintitwn of our Church every Minifter in his I^arifh hath power to keep back mtoriom Offenders^ it will be impo!li- ble to prove fro. n other circamftances that the be- ing of our Churches is deftroyed by our Diocefan • vefmeof Epifiopacj, Mr. B. faith, that /f it could he prove jy th? Flea, that the lejfer cxcomrnumcatiOf% out of our particular ^ ' ^ ' Congreg^Mons rvtre a /lowed to the Parijh Miniflers^ it ivoiild half reconcilt htm to the English fort of Prelacy ; but tf it he foj he hath been in ajleep thefe 50 years^ that cotdd never hear or read of any fuch thing. It is ftrange, in all this time, he fhould never reade or confider the 26 Canon, w^hich faith, that no Mjni- 'ft erf J all in any wife admit any one of his Flock ^ or un- der his care to the Communion of the LorcHs Supper^ vjho is notorioiifly knoivn to live impenitently in any fcandalous Sin. This is not in the Reformatio Lc~ gum Ecckfiajiicarum^ which he mentions as an aboK tive things puhli[hed by John Fox^ ( which laft any one that hath feen the Book knows to be amiflake) nor in Yh, Mocket'^s Book which was burnt ^ yet not fb dellroyed, but with fbme diligence he might have feen it (but it wzsfor nothing of this kind^ that i?^^/t' underwent fb levexe a cenfure ; as Mr. jB. infi- fiuates ; but for feeming to incroach too much on the Kpig^ Prerogative. ) But I appeal to what Mr. B. calls the Authoriz>ed Church Canons ; which Itliinkare plain in this cafe. >ButMr. B. faith, this i snot the leffer excommunication ^ lut a temporary fuf fmfion of the Minifter s own A6i in delivering the Sa- crament tofichpe.rfons. Let Mr. B. call it by what fiams he plealeth ; this is certain, the Minifter is im- powxed, is required to doe this ; the queftion then IS, is,' whether this be not fuch a Cenfureof thcC/^unff^ as to iuif end ?7ororw^s Off enders from the Sacrament. ^ and that within the Power of the Parochial Mint? fier ? I grant, this is not the lejfcr excommumcationy • according to the Vfe of this Church, for that fuppo- ieth th.e jkntmce paded \ and is ib called by way of diftinftion from the greater pronounced by the Bi\hot) in Perfbn, upon extraordinary occafions. But yet • it is a Church-cenfurt upon Ojfenders^ and was ac- counted a fort of excommumcation by the Ancitnt Church ; for thofe who were in tlie fvate of Penitents were then faid to be under a kind of excormminicn' tion ; as appears by feveral paifages in S. Atiguftiny ipia, la. produced by ^/'^/^/^e/^/zi to this purpofe, ^7^. to prove I'oflcoUxt. that there was a pnitential excommumccitiori. But I'fo?'^^* Mr. B. quotes Albafviriau^ to ^t\w that the old Ex- sp^iiat.Ls. communication did Jhnt pcrfom out from all other ^'^' Church'commimion as well as the Sacrament. Which is very true of the greater Excommunication ; but befidesthis there were other Cenfures of the Church upon Offenders^ whereby they were fuj^ ended from full Communion ; but not debarred the hofes of it up- on faiisfaclion given. Thefe w^ere faid to be in the ' ftatedi Penitents. It was a favour to the excommu- A'bjfvn^ nicated to be brought into this Jlate ; and others '•^• were never allowed to hope to h^ reftored to Commii- iiion ; otliers onely on their death-beds ; others ac- cording to the nature and degrees of their Repen- tance, ; of which thofe were left to be Judges^ wlio w^ere particularly intrufbed with the care of the Pe- nitents. Alhafpin^m- grants that as long as men re- mained Penitents they were aclually deprived of the Priviledges of Church- communion ; but he faith, r/;^ Penitents were in a middle Jlate between the excommupt^ N n 2 c^.ted C. 1. f ti7^ ) fiicMed Jihd th^. faithfidl^ he'f^g JtiH CmdidateSy as he calls them ; fb that all that were Penitents WQxo^fifi peniedho-XiCommumon ; but not wholly c aft out of the €hnrch\ becaufe the Chriftims might as freely con\/erIewiththefe, as witli^any, but they were not a^Uo\^^ed to participate in the Sacred My ft enes. But there was no q-ieftion, wherever there was a Po.ver tofufpenddLny Perfons from Qommmion^ there was a Pover o? D'fciplim ; becaule the Churches Difeiplme did not coLifi I meerly in the pover of Excomrn'mica- tion ; no more than a ^'^iges power lies onely in condemning men to be hanged; but in lb governing the Mimhers of the Churchy that Scmixloi44 perft)ns may be kept from the greateft Acts of Commtnw/iy and by Aimomtion and Counf I be brought to a due preparation ioi It. ^Vince then our Church doth give vower to Parochial Minift^rs to fufpend notorious Of* fenders from the Commmion^ it is thereby evident, that it doth not deprive them of all the neceffary • and elential parts of charch-Difcipline. But faith X^tsm^Qf -^^^^ ^^- If a Minfter doth pub lick ly admonifh another th^i'iej, ify nxrn:^ not cenfired by the Ordinary^ the Lawyers d.<55, 72. tell him h^mty havihis attion againft him. I anf\\7er, I . Wliat need this pubiick Admonition by name f Doth the nature of Chwch-dfcipline lie in that? Suppofe a man be privately and eSeftually dealt with to w ithdraw himfelf^ is not this fiifficient f I T)i:r.-mpm am fure Saint Atgnftin took this courle with his ^i\m.i^%, p^oplQ 2it H'ppOy he p^rfvaded them to examme their own Confiiencesj and' if th^y found them/elves guilty of ftcb Crimes as rendred them 'unfit for the holy Comr rn-mion, he advifed thtm to withdraw themfelves fro?n it\ till by Prayers and Fafting and Alms they had okitnfed their Confciem^S:, and then. they, might co/m. "-^■'''- to it. to it. Here is no pnblick Admonition hy na?ne ; and mvmny cdiiks Saint JhohJI in dtchixts the Church may juftly forbear the txercift oiDifciplinc towards oftn- ^ders, and yet the Church be a trm Chiirchy2i\A Chri- /?/i7;?/ obliged to communicate with it ; as appears by ali-his di/pHtes "With tht Donat/fls. 2. If a reftraint be laid on Mimjitrs by Law : the queftion then comes to this, whether the obligation to admoniihpublickly an Offender, or to deny him the Sacrament, if he will come to it, be (b great as to bear him out in thevio lation of a Law ; made by publick Authority, w^ith a defign to preferve our Rdigion ^ But my defign is onely to fpeak to this cafe fb far as the Church is concern- ed in it. Sect, 16. If it be faid, that notwithflandmg this, ihemgkB and ahnfe of Difcipline among us are too great to he jujlified^ and too notorious to be concealed J lanfwer^ i.^That is not our queftion, but whether out Parochial Churches have loft their being for want of the Power of Difciplme ? and whether the Species of our Churches be changed by Dwcefan Epifcopacy ? which we have (hewed fufficient Reafbn to deny. And what other ahufes have crept in, ought in cin orderly way to be reformed, and no good man will deny his afiftance in it. 2. It isfareafier to fepar ate ^ or complain for irytrtt^ of Difcipline^ than to find out a due way to reftore it. No man hath more let out the almoft inxlipera- o^cofr/irnia- ble Difficulties which attend it, than Mr. BajKter hath i^'ov. p. i -4.. done ; efpecially in that, it will provoke and exaf- ^^ '■• perate &c. (28o) ped'ate thofe niofl: who ftarxd in need of it; and be moft likely to doe good on thole who need it leaft. 3, The cafe of our churches now ^ is very diffe- rent from that of the Churches in the Prtmit I've times. For, the great Reifon oi Difciplme is not, that. for want of it the Confciences of FelLo\v-co}?imumcmts would be depleci ( for to alTert that, were Dona- tijm ) but that the honour of a Chrifiian Society may- be maintained. If then the Chr'tfiian Magijlrates do take -care to vindicate the churches honour oy due p/i- mlhment of Scmddom Offenders^ there will appear ^^ fbmuch lelsneceiTity of reftoring the/eT'er/Yv of the ^ ancient Difciplme. To which purpofe thefe words Nis Ma'efies ^^ ^^^ Roy.d Martyr Kjng Charles I. are very confi- find Anfwer derable. '' But his Majefty feeth no neceffity that totheuivims ^' the B//&^/^ J challenge to the Power of JurifdicJton f t^ATewporr, a f];iouId be at all times as large as the exercife there- ^' of at fbmetimesappearethtohave been; the exer- " ^.^ thereof being variable according to the vari- ^' ous conditions of the Chnrch in different times. " And therefore his Majefty doth not believe that ^' the B/(hops under Chriftian Princes do challenge ^' f Lich an amplitude of Jurifdiclion to belong unto '^ them in ref J3eft of their Ep'^fcopd Office prccilely, -" as was exercifed in the Primitive times ^ by Bishops ^^ before the days of Conftantine, The realonofthe '^ difference being evident, that in thofe former times ", under P.^^^^. Pr//?rf/5 the Church was a diftinBBo- '^ dy of it i^S^ divided from the Common-wealthy and "^'fo^vasto be governed by its own Rules and Ru- '' krs ; the Bilhofs therefore of thole times, though ^^ they had no outward coercive power over ^Vmens Perfbnsor Eftates^yet inasmuch as tvtry ^^ Chriftian (i8i) ^' Chrilllan man wlien he became a Member of the '^ Ciiurch, did ipfo faSfoj ahd by that his own ^' voluntary A£t put himlelf under their Govern- *' ment, they cxerciled a very large Power of J urif- " ^iQixoninfpiritiidthiis, in making Ecchfuxflicd Ca- *' nons^ receiving accufations, converting the accu- ^' fed, examining Witnelles, judging of Crim.es, ex- " eluding fuch as they found guilty of Scmddom *': offences {xom the Lories Stifper^ enjoyning Penan- *^ ces upon them, cafting them out of the Church, " receiving them again upon their Repentance, &c, *' And all this they exercifed as well over Preshy- *' ters as others. But after that the Church under .; ^^ c/yr/////f;^ Pm^rej- begantobe incorporated into the ^f-Common^wexlth^ whereupon there muftof neceffity ^\So\\ow 2l ^compile moft of the Crjil and Ecckliafiicd *^ P£;.Ter, the JurifdicJion of B/fhops (in the out- *' ward exercife of it ) was fubordinate unto, and '^^ limitable by the Supreme Civil Power, and hath ^' been, and is at this day, fb acknowledged by die ^^Bifhops of this Realm. !;'?> 4. The due exercife of Difcipline is a \\ ork of fb mucli frudeme and dijficuhy^ that the greateft ^<^^- lots for it, have not thought it fit to be trufted in the hands of every Parochid Minifler and his particfi- lar Congregation. Cdutn declares, that he mi^er c^i-'" thought it convenient that every Minifier (hould have ^^j^s. the power of Excommunication \ not only hkcanfe of \ the invidioufnefs of the things and the danger of the example ; hut hecaufe of the great nbufes and . Tyran^-y it may foon fall into^ and hecaufe it was contrary to the JpofloUcalPraclice. And to thefame purpole, Beza - deliveis his judgment, who likewife gives this ac- '- count count of the Difcipline of Genev^t^ that the ParachLtl /^. h;» 20. ^^-^^y^^^j. a^^dEUers f rocked no ftirthtr thxn Adinoni^ t'ton \ hut m ^dfe of Contumacy they certify the Presb- tery of the City which fus at certain times and hears ) aS Ca'.ijes relating to D{fciplin?^ and ^/ they j:tdge fit either give adm:>nitiony or pro:eed to fi^f^e-ifot from the Lord! s dipper ; or, ivhich is a rare cafe^ and when no other remedy can preuail^ they go on to fahhck Ex- communication. Where we fee, every Parochiil church is no more trufted with the Pover of D-fcipUne than among us ; my, the Mmifler there hath no power to repely but all that he can doe is to admonish ; and how come then their Paro:hial Churches to be . tme^ and not ours? Befides, why may notour Mi- nifiers be obhged to certify the Bifhop, as well as Lohx nc' theirs to certify the Presbytery F fince in the African fs^^'ll'At, Churches the matter of Dfc/p/ine wasfo muchrefer- ved to the Bi/hop^ that a Presbyter had no power to receive a Penitent into the Communion of the Church without the advice and iirtBion of the Bifljop ; and Saint AiT^-^fiin propofed it, that whofoever received one that declined the j Judgment of his ovn B (Jjop^fhould undergo the fame cenfure which that per f on dferved ; and It was allowed by the Councif Alipins^ Saint An- c, 10. g-ifims great Friend and Legat of the Province of A-iimiditj propofd the cafe of a Presbyter under ihe cen- fure of his B^hopy who o.ft of pride and vain-glory fets up afeparatt Congregation in opposition to the Order of th' Ch'irch ; and he defired to know the judgment of the Coined about it \ and ih-y unanimDufly determined that he wjs guilty of Sshfn, and ought to be antthe- mitized^ and to Lfe his place. And this was the '^fuigment even of the Afi:an Bifljops, for whom ^\y. /J/v/e/'profeTeth greater reverence than for any others ; -"•-•; others ; and faith, their Qouncils were the heft in the rv^r/^ ; and coiliinends their Canons for very good about IJifcifLme. But he pretends that a Bi{hofs Dioceft • there y was hut like one of our ParijheSj w^hich I have already refuted at large, by fhewing that there were places at a confiderable diftance under the care of the Bifhops. So that the bringing the///// /?d?;i;er of D//?/- • pline into every Parochial Churchy is contrary to the practice of Antiquity^ as well as of the Reformed Churches abroad, which plead moft for Difcipline ; a-nd would unavoidably be the occafion of great and Icandalous difbrders, by the ill management of the Power of Excommunicdtion ; as was mofl: evident by the Separat/fts when they took this Sword into their hands, and by their foolifh. and paflionate, and indif- creet ufe of it, brought more di/honour upon their Churches, than ifthey had never ir eddied with it at all. And in fuch a matter, w here the honour of the Chrt- - ^/>;?^Q^/>//isthecIiief thing concerned, it becomes Male men to confider what tends moft to the promo- ting of that ; and whether the good, men promife themlelves by p//^/)?//;^;f, will countervail the Schifms. and Contentions, the heart burnings and animofities wdlich v/ould follow the Parochial cxercife of it. The ♦ diffenting Brethren in their Apologetical Narration do fay, That they had the fatal mifcarriages and Ship- ^' 5' rvrecks of the f^par^tion^ a^ Land-marks to forewarn themof'^ the rocks and ftothes they ran uvcn ; and there- fore they fay they never exercifid the Power of Ex- '"' ^' communication. For they law plainly, they could never hold their People together if they did ; fince die, excommunicated party would be fure to maVe friends enough, at leaft to make breaches among them ; and they, holding. together by mutual ^onfent^ fuch O 0 ruptures (iH) rupturis u-ould fbon break their clmrche^ to pieces," Befides, this would be thought no lefs th^n letting up an Arbitrary Court of Judicature in every Par ifh ; beeaufe there are no certain Rules to proceed by ; no ftanding determination what thofe fins and faults are, which fhoulddeferve excommunication'; no me- thod of trials agreed upon ; no fecurity againft falfe WitnefTes ; no limitation of Caules ; no liberty of Appeals, ( if . Parochial Churches be the only infti- tuted churches^ as Mr. Baxter affirms :) befides mul- titudes of other inconveniencies, which may be eafily forefeen; fb that I do notqueftion, but if Mr. Bax- ter had the management of this Parochial DifcipUne in any one Pan^ in London^ and proceeded by his own Rules ; his Court of Difcipline would be cried out upon in a fhort time, as more arhritrary and tyrannical^ than any Bifljofs Court this day in Eng- land : Let any one therefore judge, how reafonable it is for him to overthrow the being of our Parochial Churches^ for want of that, which being fet up ac- cording to his own principles^ would deftroy the Peace and Vnity^ if not the very being, of any Pa- rochial Church whatfoever. 5. That want of Difcipline^ which is in Parochial Churches, was never thought by the moft zealous Non-conformifts of old, deftru9:ive to the Being of them. Of which I have already produced the Tejii^ monies of Cartwrighty Hilderjham^ Gifardy and many others. SeB, 17. And fuppofing all perfbns left to the judgement of their oivn Confciencesy as to their own fitnefs for the //(?/y Communiony we may obferve thefe things 5. ( 185 ) Idlings ; which may ferve towards thcvrndUatJo;^ of our Parochial Churches. (i,) Tliat the ^reatefl Offmitrs do generally ex- communicate themfelves ; not daring to venture upon lb hazardous a thing, as they account the holy Com- munion to be, for fear of the damnation following unworthy receiving. So that, the moft conftant Com- mimicants^ are the moft pom and fober and devout Chrijlians* (2.) Thatif anyfuch do voluntarily come, it is upon {omQ gr^2it awakenings of Confcience\ fome/re/Z? rifolutions they have made of amendment of life ; after fbme dangerous ficknefs, or under fbme great affliftion ; when they are beft inclined, and have ftrong conviftions, and hope for greater 'firength of Grace againft the fower of Temptations. So that whether this Sacrament be d. converting Ordinance or not, by God^s Inftitntion^ yet the preparation and dif^ pofition of men's minds before it, puts them into the fitteft capacity for Divine Gr.ue ; if they be not look- ed on as the eff'ecis of it. (5.) That it is no prejudice to the benefit of this holy Sacrament to thofe who are well prepared, if thofe who aix not, do come to it ; anymore than in joyningin Pr^ytroxJhanl^foivmjy^ with them. And if the prcfence of Rich per loiis who ^of a Church ; then Chrijl and Ills Difciples did not make a Churchy when Jud^u was prefent with them; as in probability he \\'as, ?.t liis laft Supper. _ At leaft, if this kind of D/fcipline had been fonecefl Oo 2 fary, fary,it would never, have been left fb doubtful, as it is by the Eva^gelijts ; fince it had been neceflary for the information of the Chrijlian Churchy to have fet it down exprefly ; not only that he was not prefent, but that he ought not to he \ and therefore was c^^Ji out before. (4.) That leveral Presbjterian churches for many years had no Difctplme at all among them ; nor 16 much as the Lor£s Supper adminiftred. And were thefe true Churches all that while, and are not ours Plea for ^ ^^^ ^ ^^^ ^^- ^^^^'^^ faith, That fame Non-confor- Peace,;. 245, mifls have thefe feventeen or eighteen years for horn to Anfw. to Baptize, or adminifier the Lord's Supper ^ or to be Pafiors of any Churches. Now I would fain know, what Churches thefe men are of? Some or other they muft own, if they be Chrifiians ; New Churches they have not^ they fay ; either then they muft own our Churches to be true^ notwithftanding the dtfe^ of D if Upline^ or they muft be of no Church at all. (5.) That our Church is but in the fame condi- tion, the church of Conflantinopk and other Churches were in, when Neciartm changed the Difcipline of . it, or rather rook it quite away. For, the Fc^niten- tiary^ whom he removed for the fcandal given, was the Perfbn whole bufinefs it was to look after the Difcipline of the Churchy and to fee that all known Offenders performed the Penance enjoyned them, for, latisfaSion of the Church, And, the confequence of S6cr,L«,, CA9* it Socrates faith was, That every one was left to the judgement of his own Confciente^ as to the participation of the holy Myfieries. And this Socrates faith, he had from. Eud^mon himfelf, who gave the Couufel to NeHariu^ t& to take th.tt Office away ; which was accordingly done ; 2inAno?yiorerefiored^{^M\\Sozomen : the conlcquence ^o^^l-i^cie. whereof was, faith he, That every one went to the , Lord's Table^ «? av Iclvtt^ // becomes a Duty. For the general Rules oiGo- 'venmcmhy an obligation upon men toufe the beil means for advancing the ends of it. It being then taken for granted among all ChriflUnsy i. That Cbrijlis the ^;^/At^r or founder of this vy^^/e/y which we call the Church \ 2. That he defigns the conti- numce 2SvS.fr eftrvat'ion of it ; j. That the beft way oiiis prefervatio)^ is by ^nVmon of the members o£- it ; provided the Vnion be fuch as doth not over * throw the ends of it: We may reafbnably infer, that whatever tends to promote this Vnlon^, and to prevent any notable inconveniences or mifchiefs which may happen to it^ is within the. defign of the: firfilnfiitu.mn\ although it be not conmined in exr prefi words. Sell-. 19. We are now therefore to confider,. whether fmgk Congregations difperfed and diflinited-. over 2iNdtio'ai or a comb mat ion of thcrn together under fome common bonds as to Faiths Government. mdlVorfj/p, be the more hkely way to promote Re- Ugion^ to fccure the Peace and Tranquillity of a; Church. Let us then compare theft two Hypothecs togetherr in point o^Reafon^ as to theie.ends* In the Congregational rvay^ there may be as many. Religions as Churches, I do not fay there ^?t, but we are arguing nowuponwhatmay.be, from the nature Q^ tm thing. Suppofing then every Congre- gation to have an entire and unaccountable Power ¥«rithinitlelf; what hinders but of ten Congregations ojpe ( ^93 ) one may be of Socm/d^Sy znoth^r o( P^pijisy another of ArUnsy another of Quaker Sy another of Anahnp- ti(lsy &c. and it may be no two of them of the fame mind ? But if they be, it is meer chame Sindgood hap ; there being no obligation upon them to have any more than mtituaL forhtaranct towai'ds each other. Let now any rational man judge, whether it appear pro- bable, that fb loole and fljatterM a Government as this is, fliould anfwer die obligation among Chriftiansy toule thebeftand mofb effe£lual means to preferve the Faith once delivered to the SaintSy and to uphold Peace and Vnity among Qhrifiians ? But fuppofing - all thefefeveral Congregations \xm,^d together under fuch common bonds, that the P/-e.fc^i?A is accountable to fuptriours ; that none be admitted but fuch as own t\\Q true Faith, and promife obedience; that publick legal Cenfures take hold upon the difiurb:rs of the Churches Peace : here we have a ftr more effe^lual means according to Reafbn for upholding tr/ce Reli^ ^/.^/^ among us. And that this is no meer theory y2i^- . psars by the fad experience of this Nationywhtn up- on the breaking the bonds of our National chinch- Government^ there came fuch an overpow ering m- unAsitionoi Err ours and Schffms among us, that this Age is like to finart under the fad efteors of it. And • in Ne^v-EmUnd, two or three men^ as Williamsy Gor- ton and Clark difcovered the apparent we.:knefs of the Independtnt Government : which being very ma- terial tothisbufinefs,IibaIlgiveabricf account of it asto one of them. M. Roger Wi!lia'?its was the Tea-^ cherofsi Congregational Church ^t Salem y and a man in very good efteem as appears by Mr. Cottoih Lerter n'niiam hU' to him: he was a great admirer of tlic///r/>y of :he Anir^^-^ New-England Churches ; but beinn; a thinking man, ^^^^'"^^^ P p 2 he Cottons Anfy^er to J^. Williams 0^94 ) he purfoed theprm/ples of that way farther than they thought fit, for he thought it rmlawfull to joyn with unre^enerattmen in prayer^ or taking ^in Oath \ and that thtre ought to he dn unlimited toUration of Opi- nions ^^Z. Thefe Doftrines, and fbme others ofllis not taking, he proceeded to Separation from thern, and gathered a New Church in oppofition to theirs ; this gavefucha difturbance to them, that the Magi- firates fent for him, and the Mimfiers realoned t!ie cafe with him. He told them, he went upon their own grounds^ and therefore they h.td no reafon to hlame him. Mr. Cotton told him they dtftrved to hepunifhed who made Separation among them ; Mr. Williams replied, this would return upon themfelves \ for had not they done the fame a^ to the Churches of Old-England f In fhort, after their debates, and Mr. ?f^/7//W;^j continu- ing in his pri;fciples of Separation from their Churches^. ^Jentence of banifhment is decreed againft him by the Magifirates^ and this fentence approved and juftified by their churches. For thefe are Mr. Cottons words, That the increafe of concourfe of People to him on the hordes daysinpriz^attj to a negleci or defer ting of pub- lick Ordinances^ and to the fpreadmg- of the leaven of his corrupt imaginations^ provoked the Magiflrates^ r^^ ther than to breed a Winters fpir it ual plague in. the C-oimtrey^ to put upon him a Winters journey out of the Country. This Mr. Williams told thtm^ was falling into the National C/?^n-^ n'^/, which they difowned ; or elfe, faith he, why muflhe that is hantjhed from the one y he hanifl^d from the other alfj? Andhechai?- gss them that they have fuppreffed churches fet up after the Parochial way) and although- the Perfons r^ere otherwife allowed to be godly ^ to live in the fame air rvjth jhemfiftheyfet up any other Church or Worjhtp than than n-kit them ft Ives pracltfed. Which appears by •vthe L'-n'i of A'w-F/?(7/W. mentioned before : and Mr. Cobkt one of the Teachtrs. qf ^ their, C/-///^/;c'/, ' •. confelTeth that by the Laws of the Countrr^ none are. >. , , , to be free men^'biit juch as are mcmb:rs of Lhnrches, AnfinrtD I now appeal to any man, whether thcic procecdi/^ps ciaj-ks.v.r- andtheleL^n'jdonot manifefUy dilcover tlie appa- ^^''^^'-'^ ^ 4o» . rent wxaknels and infufficiency of the Lo.n^rtgatio77iLl way for preventing thofe difordtrs which they apprehend to be dtjtriicitve to tJieir Churches r why had not Mr, /f W//.i;^;j- his Hberty of ^e/^jr.^//^;^/ asv/cil as they? why ^rc no J/Mbapt//h or c^/^/t^j- permit- ted among them? Becau/e thi/e ivays noLtd difturb their Peace J. and dijira^'i their People^ and in ttrne overthrow their churches . Very well:, but where is the entirenefs of the power of every fingle Congre- gation^xSxt mean while? Why might not the People at ^ Salem have the lame hberty as thofe at Bofion or Fly- mouthl The plain truth is; they found by experi- ence, this C(?;^^rf^/2if/^;/^t/ jr^7 would not clo alone, . without Civil Sanfticns, and the interpcfing oftte Pa fours of other Churches, For when - H^/7///i;;;>:i?, and Gorton^znd Clark had begun to make fome im^- preffions on their People, they bcftirred themielv^es as much as poffible to have their mouths' ftopt, and - their perfbnsbaniflied. This I do onely mention, to fhew,that wliere this way. hath prevailed -moft, . tliey have found it very infofficient to carry oit thcfe ends which themselves judged ncceffary lor the prD<. fervation of their Rel/gion^ zndo? Peace and Vn/ty atnong tliemfelves. And in their Synod ?Ji,Bofon^ . 1662, the Ne\v-P.n^Jand Churches are com^e tOvajv prehend the neceHity of Confoaation of Clmrhesj m •> cafe o^divijions ?Lnd.\conte/it/ons i aSid for '^tht reel i- Synod of fyinzof mtle-ddmim/irations^ and healing of err ours Und.p.io, AndJcAndialSy that are umeakd among thcmjelves : Dejence of Por^ ChriJPs carCy fay they, is for whole Churches as f.iQ2? * well AS for particular perfons. Of which Con foci at ion they tell us, that Mr. Cotton drew a flat form before ~- his death. Is fuch a Confociation of Churches a Duty or not, in liich cafes ? If not, \yhy do theV doe any thing relating to Church Government^ for which they have no Command in Scripture ? If there be a Command in Script ure^ then there is an Inftttution of a Power above Congregational Churches. It is but a flender evafion, which they ufe, when they call thefeonely voluntary Combinations ^ for what are all Churches elfe ? Onely, the antecedent obligation on men to joyn for the Worfhip of God makes entring into oA\tx Churches a Dutj^^md ib theobli- gation lying upon church-Officers to ufe the befl means to prevent or heal divifions, will make f lich Confociations a Duty too. And therefore in fuch cafes the Nature of the thing requires an union and con]unElion fuperiour to that of Congregational Chur- . ch,s ; which is then moft agreeable to Scripture and Antiquity when the Bifbops znd Presbyters joyn to- gether. Who agreeing together upon Articles of Doctrine^ and Rules of IVorjhip and Difcipline^ are the National Church repnfentative ; and thefe being owned and eftabliflied by the ci\^il Power, and re- ceived by the Body of the Nation^ and all perfbns obliged to obferve the fame in the feveral Congrega- tions for Worjhip ; thefe Congregations fb united in thefe common bonds of Religion, make up the compleat National Churchy^ (^97) Seff. 20. And now I' hope I may have leave to cpnfider Mr. Baxter^s fubtilties about this matter ; which being fpred abroad in abundance of words to the fame purpofe, I fliall reduce to thcfe follo\\ ing head, wherein the main difficulties he. I. Concerning the difference between a National Ch.irchzn^diChriJtun Kjngdom, 2. Concerning the Qoverning Power of this Nationd Church ; whicli he QdXh xh^ Confiit/aiz^e regerit part. ^. Concerning ^\<^corHmomtksx>i Rules which make this Natioml church. r. Concerning the difference between a chriftian i4'/W.p.3i,32« IQngdorn 2inA^ National Church. A Chrijiim Kjng- domy he fay;h, they all o:vny bi4t this is omly eqnt^vC" eJly called a Churchy huty he faith, the Chrifltan J3/- ^JOfs for 1300 years^ were far from believing that a Pri^e or Civil Paver was ejjent/al to a Chrijlian Churchy or that the Church in the common ferfe ivas not conjlituted of another fort of regent ffirt that had the Power of the Kjys. If there be any iudiChriJli- ans in the world, that hold a Prince an ejfenttal part of a Chriji/an Churchy let Mr. Baxter C0nfute.> them ; but I am none of them ; for I do beheve there were Chriflian Churches before Chrijlian Prin- ^eSy that there are Chriftian Churches under Chriflim Princes y and will be fiich, if there were none lefto. I do believe the Power of the Kjiys to be a diftinft Diffmnct thincT, from the Office dixh^ Civil Maoifir ate \ and \''^^'^'f': It he hadammdto write agamtit iuch an opmion^ Magipaus • he fhould have rather fentit to his learned^ ftncercy andchu-ck.^ and trorthv Friend Lewis du Moulin},, if lie had je^i!'^ b.eejQ ftill living, . Bi^t if I\ omly m^^an. a. Chri(lian J^ingdamp .. P-i7,4' K^incdom^ who denies /> r faith he; If all this con* . fff^d ftir^ be about a Chrifllan KJngdomy he tt known ' to you^ that we take fitch fo be of divine Comm.tnd^ ?• 37' • Nay farther, if we memalltheQhiirchesofa.Kjm:.- doryi afjocidted for Concord ^ equals^ we deny it not^ What is it then, that is fb denied and difpnted againii, aiid luch a flood of words is poured outabouc? It feemsat ialt it is thisy //5?^/- 7;^^ Nation mufl be one Church ^15 united in om Sxcerdotal heady perfonxl or cofleci-ivey iMon.trchical or AriflocraticAU Befoi'e I anfwer this Qiieftioii, I hope, I may- ask another; whence coxies tliis zeal now againft a Natwnd Church^, For, when the Presbyterians were in powder, they wer-e then for National chu-^chesj arid thought they proved them out oi Scriptures ; and none of thdhpbti/ties about the Conjlitutive Regent . fart&'iA ever perplex, or trouble them. Thus the ^ . Presbyterian London Mtrnft^rs 1654. m.ade no diii- . Mlni(i ^tvm- culty of owuiug National churches ; and particularly Zilkl2^\un, \ht Church of England, in thefe words. And if all Z'' 12, 13, 14- ^^^ Churches in the world are called one Church ; let no man be offended if all the Congregations in England^ be calledthe Church of England. But this you will fay, ^ is by ajfociation of equal Churches. No, thcy lay, it ' /jT when the particular Congregations of one Nation li^ vingunder one Civil Cj over nrnent^ aoreeing in Do^hine and Worfjipj are governed by thtir greater and lejjhr ' Aijernhlies^ and inthis fenfe^ fay they, we affert a Na- N,i^9nf>f twnalCh'irck Two things GJth Mr. Hudfjn^TQVQ- m church. quired to make a National Church, i . National agree- ^*'^' rnent in the fame Faith and IVorfhip. 2. National uni- on in one Eccle(iaflical body, in the fame Community of Ecclefiaftical Government. The old Non-conformljls ' Iiadnofcruple about OvVning thQChurchof England^ and and thought they underftood what was meant by It. Whence come all thcfe difficulties now to be railed about this matter? Is the thing grown fo much dar- ker than formerly? But fbme mens Underftandings are confounded with nice diftinftions, and their Con- fciences enfharcd by needlefs Scruples. To give therefore a plain anfwer to the Qtieftion, whal^ ive mtan hy the Nationd Church of England. By that is iinderftood either (i.) The Church of En- gland d'ffufve. Or (2.) The C/W^rZ^ of England re^rt* ftntwtivQ. I. The National Church of Engjmi diffufive^ is, the who e Body of Chrtfilans in this Nation, con- fifting of Fafiors and People^ agreeing in that Frnth^ Govtrnmcnt and IVorjlj/p^ which are e(lablin]ed by th© Laws of this Realmy And by this defcriction, any one may fee, howeafilythe Church ot K^^gland is difTinguiihed from the Fap/fs on one fide, and the Dijjtnters on the other. Which makes m.e con- tinue my wonder at thofe who fo confidently lay, they cannot tell what we 7nean by the Church of En- gland. For was there not a Church here letled upon the Reformation in the time of Edward 6, and S^en Elizabeth ? Hath not the fame Doctrine^ the fame Government^ xhtfame manner of Wor(hipj continued in this Ch:irch ? ( bating only the interruption gi- ven by its Enemies. ) how comes it then fo hard for men to underftand fo eafie, fo plain, fo intelligi- ble a thing? If all the Qneftion be, how all the Congregations in England m.ake up this one church P I fay, by unity of co/^fnt ; as all particular Churches make one Cathol/ck Church. If they ask, how it c^r^.s Q^q tii to he one Ndtmd Church? I lay, becaufe it wasre^ ccived by the common confmt or the rvhok Nation in PayU Anient y as Other Laws of the Natwn^iX^^ and is univerfally received by all that obey thofe La^s. And this I think is fufficient tp fcatter thofe iiiifts. which fonfie pretend to have before their eyes, that they cannot clearly fee \xhat ive mem hy the Church of England, 2. The reprefentathe Church of England^ is tlie- Bijhops and Presbyters of this Chiirch^ meeting toge- ther according to the Laws of this Realm^ to conf iilt and advife about matters of Religion, And this is de- U^.il9> » termined by the allowed Canons of this Church. We do not fay, that the Convocation2itWeJlminJlcr\s.the reprefentative church of England^ tiStliQ church of En- gland is a National Church ; for that is only refre* fentative of this Province^ there being another Con-- vocation in the other Province ; but the Confent of both Convocations , is the reprefentative National Church of England, '^• . St[l, 21, And now to anfwer Mr. Baxter'* s grand difficulty, concerning the Conflitutive Regent part of this National Church, I fay, i. It proceeds upon. a fa! ft fuppofaion. 2. It is capable of z plain refolution. I. That it proceeds upon a falfe ftppofition : which is, that where-ever there is the true Notion o£ . \ a Chiirchj there muft be a Confiitutive Regent part^ /'. e. there muft be a (landing Governi>2g Poner^ which is an effentia! part of it. Whicfi I fliall' prove to be . falfe from Mr, Baxter hirjafelf. He aiTerts, that there i'^^om Catholick vifihk Church ; and that all particular Churche'-c^^ churches^ which are headed by their particular BipjopSy ChriflianDI- or Payors , are parts of this Vnivtrfal Churchy a^s a cafe^j^o. 55, 'Troop is of a?i Army^ or a City of a KJngdom, If this /^.Sgo. Doflrine be true, and withall it be neceffaiy that ^"^^^""^^ ,, ^ J r^ n • 1^ '■^'y Sermon, tuery Church r)^ujt have a Conjiitutive Regent pirt as ^.77. e\]ential to it^ then it unavoidably follows that there muft be a CathoUck uifible Had, to a Catholtck vifi- hk church. And fb Mr. Baxter'^ s JZonflitutive Regent part of a Church , hath done the Pope a Vv^onderfui kindnefs , and made a very plaufible Pka for his Vmverfal Paftorjhip. But there are ioinc men ia the world, who do not attend to the advantages they ^ive to Popery \ fb they may vent their fpleeri againft the Church of England, But doth not • Mr. Baxter fay, that the Vniverfal Church js headed by Chrill himfelf? I grant he doth ; but this doth not remove the difficulty ; for the Queflion is about that zfifible Church v; hereof particular Churches are parts ; and they being vifibk parts do requii'e a vifible Conflitutive Regent part as effential to them; there- fore the whole vifible Church muft have like wife a -z//- fihle Conftitutive Regent part , i. e. a visible Head of the Church ; as if a Troop hath an inferiour Officer ^, an Army muft have a General ; if a City hath a Alayor^ a KJngdom mu\k\\2iVQ a Kjng^ that is equally pref.nt and vf fihle as the other is. This is indeed to make a Kjy for C^/fo//V^'/, by the help of which they may enter and take poflfellion. 2. The plain refolution is, that we deny any ne- • Cedity of any luch Conflitutive Regent part, or cnt formal Ecdfiaflical Head as efjcntial to a National Ch'irch, For a National Conftnt is as lufficient to iiiake a National Churchy as an Vniverfal Co/fnt to Q^q 2 make make a Caholkk QhuYch. But if the Queftion be, by what way this National Confent is to be declared ? then we anPvver farther ; that by the Qonlluntion of this Churchy the Arch-hijhops, Bijbops^ and Presbyters being fummoned by the l^^/r.gs Writ are to advifi and declare their judgements in matters of Religion ; which being receiv^ed, allowed and enacted by the JQng and three Efiates of the Kingdom ; there is as great a Natioid Confent^iS is required to any Lan\ And a'i Bif/jops^ Minijlersj and People^ tak^.n toge- ther, who profefs the Faith fb eftabUfljed^ and ;r^r- foip God according to the Rnles fo appointed, make up this National Chnrch of England : which notion of a National Church being thus explained, I fee no manner of difficuliy remaiuing in all Mr. Baxters Q^ries and Objeclions about tliis matter. Seel, 22. 5. That which looks moft hke a difB- Gulty is (3.) concerning the common ttes or Rules ' which make this National Chnrch. For Mr. B. would 'Anft9, p, 34. know J whether by the common Rules I mean a Divine Rule or a meer humane F.ule. If it be a Divine Rule^ \ they are of the National Church as well as we ; if it be a humane Riile^ ho'v comes confnt in this to make a National Church ? hon? come they not to be of it for not ionfentirg ? how can fuch a conjent appear, when there dve differences ajnong our felves ? 1 his is the fub- ftance of what he objecls. To which I anfwer ( I.) Our Church is founded upon a Divine Rule^. 'viz.. the Holy Scriptures^ which we own as the Brfis and Foundation of our Faith ; and according to which, all other Rules of Order and JVorJb/p are to be agreeable. ( 2. ) Our Church requires a Co;^for^ mity to thofe Rules which are appointed by it, as- agreeable- ,0 Agree Me to the woroi of GoL And fb the Churches of Neiv-EnoUnd do , to the ordtrs of Ch.'/rch-Co- ^jermncnt among themfelves by all that are members of their Churches ; and annex civil Privt ledges to them ; and their Mdgifli ates impole civil Punifljments on the breakers and difturbers of them. And al- though they profefs agreement in other things, yet becaufc they do not liibmit to the Orders of th.eir churches^ they do not own them as members of their Churches. Why fhould it then be thought unrea- fonable with us, not to account thofe memkrs of the Ch trch of EngLxnd^ who contemn and difbbey the Orders of it ? (j.) There is no difference among - our felves concerning the hwfHlmfs of the Orders of our churchy or the d:tty oi fiibmif/ion to them. If there beany other differences, they are not mxterid^ as to this bufinefs: and I belie\^e are no other than in the mraner of explaining ibme things, \\hich may happen in the beft Society in the \\ orld, \\ithout breaking the Pexce of it. As about the d/fftrence of Orders ; the fenfe of fbme P^fjages in the Athmxfim Creed', the true explication of one or t,vo Articles ; which are the things he mentions. A multitude of p. 39. fjch differences will never overthrow fiich a Confent among us, as to make us not to be members of the fame National Church, SecL 2]. Having thus cleared the main difficulties w^hich are objefted by my more weighty Adverfaries^ the weaker affaults of the reft in wb?.t they. differ from thefe, will admit of a quicker difpatch. Mr. A, Gbje£ls, ( I.) That if National Churches have Fo:ver Mifchicf of to reform themfelves ^ thenfo have Congregational') itnd ImpoC^.a^, therefore I do amifs to charge them: with Separation. Igrant I I grant it, if he proves that no Cop^^ye^atiomlCfmrcb hoith any more Ponder over k, than a Natwml Church hath : /. e, that there is as much evidence againft both Epifcopdl and Presbyterial Government as there is againft the Papers VJlirpatmjs. When he doth prove ihiL that, he may have a farther anfwer. (2.) That Na- t'wnd Churches deftroy the being of other Churches un- der them ; this I utterly deny, and there wants no- thing but Proof; as Erafmm faid one Andreltn^ was a good Poet , only his Verfes wanted one Syllable ^29. and that was N«f. (3.) By my d^fcriptwrz the Par- liament may he a National Churchy for th-:y are a Socie- ty of men united together for their Order and Govern- ment^ according to the Rides of the Chrtfvian Reli- gwn. But did I not immediately before fay," that National Churches are National Societies of Chrijlians^ under the fame hares of Government and Rules of IVorfJj/p ^ from whence it is plain that in the next words, when I v/ent about to prove National Chur- ches to be true Churches^ I ufed fuch a general de- fcription as was common to any kind of Church and p. go. not pro^xr to a National Church. (4.) He gives this r erf on rvhy confent (hould not make National Churches as r\rell ^ts Congregational ; becauft it mufl he fuch an agreement as the G of pel warrants ; and that is only for IVorpjipj as^d not to deflroy their own being. This is the reafbning of a Horfe in a Mil! ; ftill round about the fame thing. And therefore the fame anfwer p.$i. i^'^y ftrve. (f ) Out come Mr. hh Objeclions, a'^^arnf a vifikl" Head of this National Church ; and the manner of unioj^^ and the differences among our fives ; as tliough Mr. E. could not manage his own Argu- ments, and therefore he takesthemand ftrips them of their heavy andrufty Arm.our; and makes them appear appear again in the field, in another drefs, and if they could not ftand the field in the former habir, they can much lelsdo it in this. ,/ The Author of the Letter faith, / only prove a ytrerou^of N:it'tonal church a pojfibk thing. He clearly miflakes ^^'j^^'""'^^' my defign ; which v/as to Hiew that if tl^ere be fuch a thing as a Natiomxl Churchy then no fin;de Congrc gations have fiich a power in themfelves to fcparatc from others in matters of order and decency ^\']icre there is a confent in ^\q, fxme Faith. To prove that there was fuch a thing, I fihewed that if the true No- tion of a Qhnrch doth agree to it, then upon the faiTie reafon that we own particular Churches^ and th.e Ca- t ho lick Churchy wx are to own a National Ch.rrch ; fb that the defign of that difcourfe was not barely to prove the polfihtUty of the thing ; biit the truth and.reallity of it. But, faith he. Can it be proved ^'^^" that Chriii hath invejled. the Guides of this Churchy not chofen by the People^ with a Poiver to make Laivs^ and Decrees , prcfcribing not only things ntce^ary for common order and decency^ bit new federal rites ^ and teaching figns and' fymbols ^ fuper added to the whole Qhrifiian Isflitution f &c. I aniwer , that fuch a Church hath Power to appoint Rules of Order and Decency not repugnant to the word of God^ which on that account others are bound to fubmit to ; and to take fuch care of its prefervatwn^ as to admit none to its priviledges but fuch as do fjbmit to them ; and ' if any difturb the Peace of this churchy the Civ/lMa- gijirate may juftly inflift f/i//7 Penalties upon them for ir, A 11 which is no more than any fttled Church - in the world afferts, as well as ours. And I \\'onder this flhould be (b continually objedled again-l our Lhurchy, Churchy which all Societies in x\\t world think juft and neceiUlry for their own frefer-vaiion. As to the Quides of the Church not beirig chofen by the Peoplcy I fnall fpeak to that afterwards. One obje61:ioa more he makes, which the others did not, viz. I had laid that by ivhole or National churches^ I underfiood the churches of fuch Nations which upon decay of the Roman Empire reftmed their ftfl right of Governing themfelves^ and upon their owning Chrijiianity incor- porated into one Chrtfitan Society^ under the fame com- mon ties and Rules of Order and Government. Such Churches^ I ftVy have a jiifi right of Reforming them- f elves y and therefore are not liable to the imputation of Schifm from the Roman Church. Would one think, what unlucky Inferences he draws from hence? P'"^^' r I • ) Then all that re?nain within the Empire^ were hound to continue in the Communion of the Roman Church. What, if I fliould deny the continuance of iht Roman Empire? then all would be fa fe. But do I any where fay, that being in the Empire^ they w^ere bound to fuhmit to the Roman Church ? No ; but as the Nation refunded its ]ufi civil Rights^ the Church might as rightfully recover it felf from. P^/?;?/ Vfirpatwns\ not laying the force of one upon the other , but paralleling them together : and the ad- vantage of the argument is on the Churches fide. (2.) Then where Princes have not refumed their jufl riohts its to Reformation^ they art Schifmaticks that Pan 2. feparate from Rome. That doth not follow: for in the cafes before m.entioned yJ/^.er^//^;^ isla^rfd, but no Reformxtwn is fb unexceptionable, as when there is a Concurrence oi the Civil Power. My My laft Adverfary doth not deny a NAtiond '^^f^'^^ Church fvom confent in thz fame Articles of Religion y ;.27.' and Rules of Government and Order of Worfhip ; but then he faith, fuch ought to he agreeable to the efta- hlrjhed Rule of Holy Scriptures. And therein we are all agreed. So that after much tugging, this pointis thought fit to be given up. Sect. 24. The next thing to be confidered, is, the inter efl and Power of the People /is to the choice of their Pafiors ; for want of w^hich great complaints are madeby my ^^T^er/^r/ej-jasathing tn]uriom to them^ and prejudicial to the Churchy and that we therein go contrary to all Antiquity. Dr. 0. pyts the depri- vindication^ 'ving the People of their liberty of choofing their Pajiors ^'' ^' 5^* among the Caufes of Separation. Mr. Baxter is very Tragical upon this argument ; and keeps not within tolerable bounds of difcretion^ in pleading the People s Caufe^ againji Magi fir at es and Patrons and Laws: Anfw. ^. 15, and he tells me, / go againJl all the ancient Fathers ^^* and Churches for many hundred years ^ and am fo far a Sepxxratift from more than one Parijh Prief ; and therefore my charge of them is fchifmatical and unjufy and recoileth on my felf; who inflead of God'^s Rule^ ace fife them that walk not by our novel crooked Rules ^ which may make as many modiflj Religions as there are Princes. When I firft read fuch paflages as thefe, I wonderM what I had laid, that might give occafion to fo much undccent Paffion^ as every wliere almoft difcov^rsit Iclf in his Anfwer : and the more I con- fider'd the more I wonder'd ; but at laft I refolved as Mr. J. doth about the Affembly, that Mr. B. is but a many ?.s Other men are ; and for all that I fee, <:£ eq^ual paf/ionsy and that upon little or no provoca- K r tion. tlon. For I had not faid one word upon this Argu- ment. What then ? would Mr. B. fc^ a Ca/jfe to exprefs his a^s^ger againft me ? 2iS if I had allowed Primes to ftt up n^hat Religions they pkafe.. Surely, bethought himfelf writing againft //(?^^i- and SpinofcL then. No : but thus he artificially draws me into this fnare. I Ipake much againft Separation. .How tlien ? They would never have feparatedj if they had not been filenced ; therefore my hing againfl their pparation^fljewslamfertheirfilencing. As though tnefe neceflarily followed each other. What is this to Princes impofing what Religion they fleafe .? Thus.. Then Mdgiftrates by their Laws may put out Non^ confrmifs^md put in Conformifts. But have we not the fame Religion ftill ? But, faith Mr. Baxter ^ theft miijl he my fuppofed Grounds ; that Magifirates may appoint what Religion they pleafe^ and thofe are Sepa-- ratifls who do not obey them. Is not this admirable ingenuity, to rail upon a m^Si^^ox fuppo fit ions of bis own making ? However Mr. Baxter will have it fb, let mx lay what I will. The People\ part he will take, and let me take that of the Magifirates and Laws, if I think good ; and fince they are fallen to my lot, I will defend them as well as lean, as tothis^ matter. Mr. B. appearing very warm in this bufinefs, ; what doth Mr. ^. coming after him, but make it the very jfr/? d^nA fundamental Ground of thQiv Separation ? Mifciikfof viz That every particular church upon a due ballance of impoiitions^ ^.// circumflances, has an inherent right to chufe its own Pajlorj and every particular Chriftian the fame •. Power to chufe his ownChurch, Nay then, I thought, ^ we were in a very fair way of fettlement ; when the Anabaptifls laGermany never broached a loofer prin- r-f^/ethaq this ; nor more contrary to the very pofli- bility, Preface. billty of having an eflablijjjed. church : for it leads to all manner of Schifms and Fa^ior?s in ipiglit of all Laws and Authority in Church or St^tty The Author of the Le^/er goes upon the fame principle too, and f\feCoun7c^^ laith, Tht Guides of the Church are to he chofen by the p. 25. * Peopky according to Scripture and Primitive pra^ice. This I perceive is a popular argument^ and a fine de- vice to draw in the common People to the dijfenting Party ; whatever becomics of Laws , and mens juji and legal Rights of Patronage^ all muft yield to the antecedent Right of the People. But to bring this matter to a ftrift debate, we muft confider thefe three things. I. What Original^ or inherent Right and P(?)rerthe People had. 2. How they came to be de- vefedof it. 5. Whether there be ihffLcknt ground to refu?ne It, And from thence we fhall underftand, whether Ibmeof the People^s contenting to hear the Nonconformifls preachy notwithftanding the Laws ^ can excufe them from Separation ? for this lies at the bottom of all. I . As to the Original^ inherent Right and Power of xht People. Dr. O.fuppofeth all Church-Power to be originally in the People ; for to manifeft how favou- rable wife n^.en have been to the Congregational wajy he quotes a faying of F. Paul ; outofaS^^^/^of his, vindlear. . lately tranflated into Englif/j^ that in the beginnings ^'5^' the Government of the Church had altogether a Demo- /ej depended fb much on thcApoJlks laying on of their hands ? For then the Holy Ghoji rva^ given unto them. But in all the Churches planted by tiiQApoJllesy i'nall the direftions given about the choice 0? Bifhops d,nd. Deacons^ no more is required, as to the People^ than barely their Teftimony ; there- iTirn.3. 2o fo^c it is laid they mufi he hUmclfs^ and 7nen of good 7> ic. report. But, where is it faid or intimated that the Congregation being the ^rfl fuhjecl of the Power of ths Kjysy muft meet together, and chooie their Paftor^ and then convey the Mmiflerial Power over them- felves, to them ? If it were true that the Church Go- vernment at firjl was Democratical^ the Apofl'les have done the People a mighty injury ; for they have feid no more of their Power in the Churchy than they • have done of the Pofes, It is true tlie Brethren M, 1. 14. were prelent at the nomination of a new Apoflle : but were not the Women lb too ? And is the Power of x!^e^Ksysm their hands too ? Suppole not, doth this prove vjproV2 diatthe Chtirches Power was then Democratic ^.cd'f then the People md^do, an Jpoftk and gave him his Power ; which I do not think any man would fay, much lefs F, Paul. As to the eldlion of Deacons ; . it was no properly Church Power which they had ; but they were Stewards of the coryimon Stock ; and , was there not then, all the realbn in the world, the ^ ^i^Commumty fliould be fatisfied in the choice of the iiJfM^n ? Whe?i Smnt Peter received Cornelius to the Ad. ^.3, 5^ . i]Faithj he gave an account of it to all the Church. And what then? Muft he therefore derive his power from it ? Do not Princes and Governours give an account of their proceedings for the fatisfa&on of their Subjects minds ? But here is not all the Church mentioned ; only thofe of the Circumcifwn at Jerw Ayhlch was Popular. Which account is neither agreeable to Reafon^ nor to Antiquity. For, was not the Government of the Church Jn/iocratical in the Jpoflks times ? How came it to be changed, • from that to a Democratical Form ? Did not the Apoftles appoint .Rulers in the feveral Churches, and charged the People to obey them ? And was this an argument the Power was then in the People ? It was not then the People^ s withdrawing^ (o? which there can be no evidence, if there be fb much evidence ftill left for the Peoples Power ^ in Antiquity) but the ConftitHtion of the Church was Arijiocratical by the appointment of the Apoftles. SeB.Q.1^. We therefore come now to confider the Popular EleBions^ as to which there is fb fair a pre- tence from Antiquity ; but yet not fuch, as to fix any inherent^ or unalterable Right in the People. t As I fhali make appear, by thefe following obferva- Sv^xU.'>M^ tions. 1. That the main ground of the Peoples Intereft I Tim. 3.237. was founded upon the Apoftles Canon, That a Bijhop muft be blamelefs dinAoi good report. 2. That the People upon this affuming the Power of Elections, caufed great dijlurbances and dtforders inthc church. ^. That to prevent thefe, many B//hops were ap- pointed without their choice, and Canons made for the better regulating of them. 4. That ,4. That when there were Chri{tian Mag^ifirates^ they did interpofeas they thought fit,notwithftand- ing the popular claim ; in a matter of fb great confe- quence to the Feact oi Church 2Si& State. 5. That upon the alteration of the Government of Chrijlendom the Interefl of the People was fecured by their confent in Parluments^ and that by fiich confent the Nomination of Bifhofs was referved to PrmceSy and the Patronage of Livings to particular Ptrfons, 6. That things being thus fettled by eftabUflied Lam, there is no realbnable Ground for the Peoples refuming the Power of ekBin^ their own Bishops and Mimfters in oppofition to thefe Laws, If I can make good thefe Ohfervations, I fhall give- a full anfwer to all the Qt^flions propounded, concerning the Right and Power di the l^'e^/'/e, which ray Adveriaries build fb much upon. (i.) That tht main ground of the Peoples inter eji nits founded upon the Apoflles Qanon^ that a Bifhop mufi he blamikfs, and of good report. For fb the Greek Scholiafi argues from that place in Timothy^ If a Bi[hop ought to have a good report of them that are without y 7n>ha f^hXQV arm 1^ dAh^uv , HoW much rather of the Brethren^ vn^^^a fxuy^ov tlw dm n^/S" pKay , faith Theaphylaci. And both have in from Saint Chry- fojlom. bo it is faid concerning T/^^/^j' himfelf, 'O^ had a good Tejlimony from the Brethren in Lyftra ^^^' i^* ^ md Iconiitm. And tliis is mentioned before Saint PaaPs taking r5H9 ta^ii^g him into the Office of an Evmgetift. So in tlie choice of the De acorn ^ the ^/?(?/?/e/ bid them find out, k^u 6, $. h^^4 e| v^v ^f 7Uf «^Jlo'y; , mm of good reptitation among them. And there is a very confiderable ''FeftU cimmu Epifi. fnony in the Epftk of Clemens to this purpofe ; where fH> 5$j 5 > ^^ gives an account, how the Afoftles preaching through Cities and Countries^ did appoint their Firft- friiits, having made a fpiritrial tridl of them^ to be Bi- (bops and Deacons of thoft who rvere to believe. Here it is plain, that they were of the Apofiles appointment y and not of the Peoples choice ; and that their Autho- rity could not be from them, whom they were ap- pointed fir(i to convert 'Si'^di then to govern^; and although their number was but fmall at firft, yet as they increafed, though into .many Congregations^ they ' were ftill to be under the Government of thofe, whom the Apoftks appointed over them. And then he fhews horvthqfe rvho had received this Power from God came to appoint others: and he brings the Injlanceo^MofeSy ivhen there w.ts an emulation among the Tribes^ what method he took for putting an end to it^ by the bloffom- tng of Aarons Rod ; which, {aith he, Mofes did on purpofe to prevent confufton in Ifrael, and thereby to bring Glory to God ; now, faith he, the Apoftks fore- fav the contentions -that would be about the name of • Epifopacy (^* */« o/o^^Q- t^^ 'Etw^jw^^) /', e, about * tlie choice of men into that Office of Ruling the ' Church; which the lenfe fhews to be his meaning: therefore^ forefeeing thefe things per fecflj^ they appoin- ted the perfons before mentioned^ and left the diftribu- t ion of their Offices^ with 'this inftruction, that as fome died, other approved rnen (Jjould be chofen imo their Office > Thoft therefore who were appointed by the?n^ or ^ Qtha emmmt Mer^^ • th ivholt Church being therewith "^ well- weR-pkdft'd, difcharging their Office with humilitf^ qftietnefsy readinefs^ and imhUmeahkmfs^ being men of A long time of good report ^ we think Jitch men cannot ]uftlybe caft Ota of their Office, Itfcems, (bme of the Church of Corinth were at that time fa^iom againfl: fome Officers in their Churchy and endeavoured to throw them out for the like of one or two Men, and made fuch a difturbance thereby as had brought a greAt fcmdd^ not onely on themfelves, but the Chrifiian Church ; which made Clemens write this EpiJiletothQm ; wherein he advifeth thofe bufie men rather to leave the Church themfelves^ than to continue making fuch a difturbance in it \ and if they were good Chriftians they would do fo ; and bring more glory to God by ity than by all their heat and contentions. Now by this difcourfe of Clemens it is plain, (i.) ThatthefeOj^cerj" of the Church were not cho- fen by the People^ butappointed by the Jpojlks, or o- ther^re>c/Afe/;, according to their Order. (2.) That they took thiscourfe on purpofeto prevent the con- tent ions that might happen in the Churchy about thofe wholliould bear Office in it. (5.) That all that the People had to doe,wastOj^/^'e7V/f/>»^;;)', or to ex- prefs their approbation of thole, who were lb appoin- ted. For he could not allow their power of choeftng^ fince lie laith, the Jpoftles appointed Officers on pur- poft to prevent the contentions that might happen about it. And it leems very probable to me, that this was one great realbn of the faction among them ; viz^ that thole {tw Popular men in that Church, who cau- fed all the difturbance, reprelented this, as a great grievance to them ; thajt their Pajlours and Officers wxre appointed by others, and not chofen by them- fclves. For they had no obje^wn againftthc Pres- S f hyten '%'ters themfthesy being allowed to be men of u^- hlamedle lives \ yttd, contention there was, and that about cafting thtrn out \ and fuch a contention, as the Jpojiitsdefigned to prevent by appointing a fuccef- Jion from fuch whom themfelves ordained ; and there- fore it is very likely, they challenged this power to themfelves to cafl out thofe whom they had not chofen. Butitfeems, the Apojiles knowing what contentions would follow in the Churchy took care to prevent them, leaving to the People their Tejiimony concer- ning thofe whom they ordained. And this is plain, even from Saint Cyprian where hedifcourfethof this Af^,^, 27. matter, in that v^xy Eptflle concerning Baftlides and Af;3fr///j///, to which Mr. B^x/er refers me. For, the ^lji4^. force of v/hat Saint Cyprian faith comes at laft onely to this giving Tejiimony ; therefore, faith he, God ap- pointed/he Priefi to he appointed before all the People^ thereby fljev^ing that Ordinations hf the Chrijiian Church ought tohej frtb Populi Afjiftentis Confcientia^ in the Prefence of the People : for what realbn ? that they might give them Power ? no ; that was never done under the L^.'i^ ; nor then imagined, when S. Cyprian wrote; but he gives the a^ccount of it himfelf; that by their pre ft nee y either their faults might be publifhedS^ or thir goodaHs commended^ \ that fo it may appear to be a pfi and lawfull Ordination^, which hath been exa- 'mined by ' the fuffrage and judgment of all. The Fe^/'/eherehad a fliare in the Eleifion^ but it was ill matter of Tejiimony concerning the good or ill behaviourof the Perfbn. And therefore^ he Gi^ith^ it was almofi a general Cuflom among them^ and he thinks came down from, T>rvin.e Tradition and ApoflB- li'cal ^Pra^Hcty ■ that when ^ any f?eQpte 'i^Tanted a Bifhop^ A, f^ rietghbour BifjQps rnif together in that place ^ and ■" *' ' th^ the PJerv Bfjhap n\ts chofen^ plebe prcufinte^ the People.. heifi^a^prefintj ( not by the /^(?/eJof t\\Q People) qua fw^ulorum vitafti pkn'ijfime novity nhich bfft under- Jlands every mans Qonverfa,tion : and this^ lie faith/' was ohfervtciin theQanfecration cf their Fttlow-bijhop' Sabinus, rvhoiihts put /nto the place of B^CiMcs. Where he doth exprefs the Confrat di t\\Q, People, but he re- quires the Judgm:nt of the B'jbops ; wdiith being tlius performed, he encourages the People to witli- draw from Bafiltdcs and to adhere to Sablmis, For, Baftlides having fallen foully into Idolatry^ and joy- ned hUfphe?ny with it, had of his ovn record laid down his Bi(ljoprick^ and defired onely to be recei- v^ed to Lay-comr/iiwwn^ upon this Sahi^'ms was con- fecrated Bf(hop in his room ; after w^hich Bafilides goes to Rome and there engages the B/fhop to inter- pofe in his behalf, that he might be reftored ; Sabi- nt46 finding this, marfe his application to Saint Cypru an and the African Bifljcps^ who write this Epijile to the People to withdraw from Bajilides^ iaying that it belonged chiefly to them to chooft the good and to refuje the had. Which is the ftrcngeft Teflimony in Anti- . quityioxtht PeopUs Power ; and yet here we are to confider ( i . ) It was in a cafe wliere a Bi[}jop had 'voluntarily re figned, (2.) Another i^//&<5^ was put into his room, not by the Poner of the People, but by the judgment and Ordination of the neighbour Bi- fljops. (^.) They had the judgment of a whole C^?//^- ciloi African Bijhops for their deferting him. (4.) For ■a notorious matter of faft, viz. Idolatry and Blafvhemy by his o-rn confffwn. (5.) Allthe proof whicji Saint Cyprian brings for this, doth amount to no more, than that the People were nioft concerned to give Tclli^ 'fkony^ as to the good or bad lives of their BijJjops, Sf2 This This further appears by the words in Lt^mprUim concerning Alexander Severus^ who ppopoied the names oihis civil Officer^ to the People ^ to hear tvhat they had to obje^ againjl them^ and fkid itrvas a hard caje^when the Chrifiiam and Jews did fo about their Vriefisy the fame fhoM not he done about Governours of Provinces^, tvho had mens lives and fortunes in their hands. But no man could ever from hence imagin, that the People had the Power to make or unmake the Orig, hm* 6. Governours of Roman Provinces. Qrigen faith. The itiLiviu. i^ copies pre fence was necejfary at the Confer ation of a Bffhopy that they might alt know the worth of him who rva4 made their Bifhop ; it muft be afante Populo^ the People Jlanding by ; and this is that Saint P^i^/ meant, when he laid, A Bi/hop ought to have a- good Tefiimony from thofe that are without*. (2.) That the People upon tmsajfuming thQ Power of Elections caufed great difturhances and di [orders E'ufeb: de in the. church.. EHfehim reprefents the diforders of T^*!T^. ^/^//V?^/^ to have been h great in the Citjuponthe ^^' ' ' choice oX ^new Bi/hop, by the Divifwns of the Peo- ple^ that they, were like to hxve fljaken^ the Emperour^s Kjndmfs to the Chriftians. Por^ fuck a^ fame VP^ts kindled by ityXh^thtikikltj it' was ?jear deproying both the Church and the City : and' they had certainly drawn Swords J. if the Providence of Gody and fear of the Emperour had not refrained them. Who was forced, to/end Ojficers and Mejfages to keep them quiet v, and after much trouble to the Emperour and ma,ny meetings <&niv N^7r of Bifljops^ at- Lift Euftathius - was chofen. Greg. JVa- Qrat, 39. ;^^^^;.;en lets forth the mighty unrulinef qf tbQ People of C^tfdrea in the choice oi their Bifljopj faying, it came W. a da'ftgerom fedition^ and nft eajy to be fi^pprejfed: - -: " ' ' • ' ^ , andi c, s. and he laith, the City was very frone to ity on fuch oc- cdjions. And although there was one Perfon of tn- comparable rvorth above the reft, yet through the Parties 2.nA PaBions that were made, it was a, hard matter to carry it for him. He complains lb much of the inconvemencies of popular EltciionSy that he rvifljes them alter"* d; and the Ekclions brought to the Clergy J and he tllinks no Common-wealth fo diforder- ly as this method of Election rvasi E.vagrim faith, the fediticn ^/-Alexandria was intolerable^ upon the divi- [ton of the People between Diofcorus/r;?ii Proterius ; thn F eoplerifmg again fi the Magi fir ates and Sotddierswho tndea^ouredto keep them in order ; and at lafl they mtir- thered Proterius. Such dangerous Seditions are dc- ftribedat Conftantinople^ upon the Election of Pau- lus and Macedonius^ by Sozomen ; and in the fame place after the death of Euioxiu^s^ and after the ^^^^. ^ death of Atticus by Socrates ; and after the depriva- c. \'\. tion of Nefloriu^. And again at Anttoch upon the ^^' v ^- ?• ^- 5' removal oi Endoxms-:^ and about the EletT:ion of l^,2$['^^. Elavianm ; at Ephefm by Saint Chryfoflom ; at Vtr~ felles by Saint Ambrofi ; at Milan ||y Socrates^ and ^,j/,,.^r many other places. I fhall onely adde a remarKa- f^ 82, blc one at Rome on the choice of Damxfiis : which ^^^'' ^' *** came to bloodfljed {qx fever at ■ days \ and is particu- sorj.^. larly related by Ammianm, Marcellinus ; ani the ^- ;S- Preface to Fauflinus his Libellus Precnm, Mr. Baxter c!l[iJ.l. 1 1, grants /-/^ere /ere inconveniencies in the peoples confn- Amm.M:i)c, ttnq Power ^ and fo there are^ in all humane affairs, ^ 111 . o If" til- • • -) T 1 • T-» Anlvv. f>, I <- But are tnele wer^^/e //?^(?;^^'6' ;^/e;^f /fi r Is this Pow- v er fliil to be pleaded for, in oppoftion to Laws^ as ihough Religion lay at ftake ; and only Magi fir ates y^Q hadmen^ and the People ahvays^^W and wife z^vemwks^ A man muft have great fpite againft Mm Hurm. ad- virfiis fovin, in Ec^s^c, 33, .Ori^, in Num.h9m.22» Men in Power J and unreafbnable fondnefs of the Common People that can reprefeT;it grea,t Men as wick- ed^ dtkmched, and enemies to Pkty^ and at the fame titne'diitemble, . and take no nbtice of the Fices of the Common People ; befides their Ignorance and in- cdpacity 0? judging m fiich matters, and their great, pronenefs to fall into ftdings and parties and unreafona- hie contentions on fuch occafions . But Saint Chryfoftom complains much of the unptnefs of the People to jud^e infiich cafes. Saint Hlerom faith, they are apt to choofe men like thtmfelves: and faith elfe where, they are much to he feared whom the People choofe. Origen faith, the People are often moved either for favour cr reward. HUYon, Epifl. ad Evigr, Ecchs'ienf. dtOrig' feci. AUx, c. 6, (3.) That to prevent thefe inconveniences many Bijbops were appointed without the choice of the People^ and Canons were made for the regulation of Elections. In the Church of Alexandria the Eleciion of the Bi(hop belonged to the 12 Prcshyters ; as Saint Jerom and others fhcw. For by the Conftitu- tion of that Churchy before the alteration made by Alexander^ the Bishop of Alexandria was not only to be chofcn out of the 1 2 Presbyters^ but hy th. m, So Sever m in the life of the Alexandria Patriarchs^ faith, that after the death of their Patriarch, the Presbyters met together and prayed^ and prccetded to <:ltBion ; and the frfl Presbyter declared it belonged to them to choofe their Bijhopy and to the other Bijhops toco?ifecrai'ehim. To which the Bi/hops ajjented^ onely fxying^ if he were worthy they would confer a^te whofn they chofe^ but not otherwife, Elmacint^^s makes this a Conflitut/on of Saint Mark m the firft foundation of thdJi Church ; and faith /> continued to the time of the Nicene u r3»o 'N^icme Cottnctl\ and then as HiUrius the Deacon ftith, the cuftom was alter* d^ by a Qoimcil Among them- commnu in felves^ which determind that they might choofe the 4 £^*- •mofl: deferving ferfon^ whether of that Body or not. And there could be no room hr popular ekBions^ wherever ^\2it Cufiom obtained, which the Coun- terfeit Ambroje fpeaks of, ut recedente uno ftquens et fnccederet) fpeaking of the Bifhop dying find the mxt in courfe [ucceeding. But if this be onely a particular conceit of that Author,, yet we find the jB//y&c?/>jconfecrating others in feveral Churches with^ out any mention of choice made by the People. xSo, when A/"4raj[//^j retired from '^eruJAlernyEii(i^hiiu{d!vA\^ LiS-h.i. 6. the neighhour Blfhops ajfembled^ and conftcrated on^ ^' ^ ^* Dius m his room ; and after him followed Ctrmdinio ^. ^., and then Gordius, in whofe time Narciflus returned : hut being grown very o Id y Alexander ji?4/ brought m to affift him y by Revelation^ and a Voice from Heaven to^ fbme of the Brethren, Sever m Bifliop oi Mikvis m . his life-time appointed his Succeffour^ and acquainted the Clergy with it^ but not the People j great diftur- bance was feared hereupon ; the Clergy fent to Saint Auguftin to come among them, and to fettle their ^'^i'^P 2'^' new Bifhop ; who went, and the People received the Bif/jopfo appointed very quietly. .S. Auguftin himfelf, . declares, the fad effeEts he had often feen of the Chur- ches Election of Bifrjops ythxo\\^\ the ambitjonoi^OTiQy, and the contention of others^ and therefore he di fired to prevent any fuch difturbance in his City^. when he fv^ dead. And for that realbn, he acQuainted the. People that he defigned Eradiii^^ or as fome Copies havfe it, Eraclius for his Succejfour. Jo Paul/w the ^-ovatian Bfjhop at Conftantmopk^ appointed his 6*//^- ^o:r. /. ^*' cfJfmrMsrCiantts id prevent the contentions that might ^' ^^" • ^ happen happen after his death ; and got his Presbyters to confent to It, The Greek Cmomjis arc of opinion, that the \ycondU Nicen, Council of NlCQ took away all fonder af elcH ion of Bi- M ^'^' /hips from the People j and gave it to the Bifljops of the • Province. And it is apparent from the Council of conciL An- Antioch^ that Bijhops were fometimes confecratedinthe tmh.c.is, Eafl, without the confent of the People y for it doth fuppofe a Bijbop after confecration may not be recieved hy his People, which were avain7///>/>^y7//V?;f if their- election neceflarily went before it. And withall, it ■c.i'j. puts the ^-V^ of a Bijhop that refufedto go to his Peo- ple after confecration \ which fliews, tfiat the confe- cration was not then performed in his own Ch$nch^ socr. /.a. Gregory fubfcribed at Antioch as Bifhop^of Alexandria^ '' '°* before ever he went thitlier. So Saint Bafil mentions h\s confecration oi Euphronitis to be Bifljop of Nicopo- lis^ without any confent of the People before ; it be- BifiL ^"g ^hen performed by the Metropolitan in his own sp. 194. See : but he ptrfvades the Senate and People to accept of him. If the Ped?/>/e did agree upon a Ptrfon to be Biffjopj their way then was, to petition the Metro- politan and his Synod, who had xh^ f ill Power either . to allow or torefufehim. And it is evident from the twelfth C^;?^';; of the Council oi Ldodicea^ that al- though all the People chofe a Bilhop^ if he intruded himfelf into the poJfe//lon of his See without the con- fent of a. Provincial Synod^ he was to be turned out or rejected by them. Which fliews how much the bufmefs oi eleclims was brought into the Bijhops Power in the Eaflern parts. And by virtue of this Canon, ctncilchd- Baffianu^ and Stephanie were rejected in the Council , ccL Aet. I r. ,of Chalcedon. By tlie Law of Juflinian^ the common People^ rc'opk wcreexcludcct from' cldiions of Bifijops ; and ^''^'^'V-»>< t\\QCkrgy2LnAbetter fort of Citizens were to nominate ^^^'*5'^* three to the Metropolitan ; out of which he was to choofe one. 3y the Canon of Laodicea, the common [• ^^ ^-P^f^- . People were excluciedfrom the Power of choojing any cfn, laod.Jf into the Clergy : For they .were wont toraife tumults '^•i?. upon {ii'ch occafions ; fuch as Saint ^^^^///z;^ defcribes ^^'^•'^225. in the cafe of Pinianm ; but fbme of the Qreek and L.ttm Canomfls inlarge the (enle of the Laodicean Canon to the eleffion of Bijhoj?s too. The fecond • Councilor Nice rellrained the ckEtiononly toBifhops ; <^^'^'*^^'' ^' which was confirmed by followiog Conmils in the ^'^* GrcekChurch ; as Can. 28. ConciLC&nJianttnopoL againfl: <^oy:^ e. c. i?. Photius ; and the People are there excluded with an Anathema. So hx wqxc popular Elecliop?/ grown put of TQCinQiiinthQEa/ern church. (4.) That when there were Chriflian , Magifiratesy * they did interpole in this 7natteK. as they judged ex- pedient. So Conftanti^e did in the Church of -A-ntioch^ ^^v ^- ^- ^' »?• when there was great diffenfion there, upon the de< pofitiorrof En (I at hi us y he recommended to the Synod Euvhronius of Cappadocia^ and Georgins of Arethufij or whom they fliould judge fit, without taking any notice of the interefloS. the People: and they accor- dingly confecrated Euphrcnms, After the death of Alexander Bifljop oiConftantinopky the People fell in- 5^^./. 2. <:.<<, 7, 'to Parties^ Ibme were for Pa-tUs^ and others for Mt- cedonii-i^ ; the Emptronr Con ft ant ins coming thither puts them both by, and appoints Eufibius of Nico- media to be Bz/Z'^/' there. £/^yei//// being dead, the ^^m- Orthodox Party again choofe PaHlnSyConftantius fends Htrmogenesto drive him out by force : and was very tw^i^-^mx^iiMaoedonins for being made Bifljop with- c, it. T t out (P4^ out his leave ; although afterwards he placed him in ^ 23. his throne. When Athamftus was reftored, Qonftm- t'ms declared, it was hy the decree of the Synod^ and by his conftnt. And he by his Authority reftored like- wife Paultis and Marcellasy Afckpts and Lucms to So\, /. 7. r. 7. their feveral Stes, When Greg^ory Nazimzen refigned the Bijhoprick of Conjlantimpkj Theodofms commen- ded to the Bifhops the care of fi^dfng out a Ferfon, who recommendingVA?;^^ to him, the Emperonr him- ;. 8. c. 2. felf pitched upon NtB.trius^ and would have him made Btfhop^ though many of tli€ £//&(?/? .roppofed it. socu l.'].c.7o. when Qhryfojiom w^as chofen at Conft'mttmple^ the Royd Client was. given by ArcadiiiSj the elecfim being made^ faith Sozomen^ by the People and Cltr^ ; ^w'^*^'^' but .PalUdius gives a more particular account of it, ^^7»4^« yj^;. That upon the death of Neftarius many Compett" tours appeared^ fome making their application to the Court, and others to the People ; in (0 much that the People began to be tumultuous^ ( h^oi/«tc«^ faith Palla- dius ) upon which they importuned the Emperour to provide a fit man for them, Eutropius being then chief Minijier of State^ recommended Chrylbftom to the Emperour J and immediately an exprefs rvas fent to the Comes Qrientis, that he fjoald with, all privacy^ for fear of a tumult at Antioch^ fend him away to Con- flantinople : whither being brought ^ he w^ts foon after confe crated Bi/hop. So that here was no antecedent, election of the People^ as Sowmen faith, but what- ever there was, was fiibfequcnt to the Emperourh de- termination. After the death of Sifmnius^ the Empe- rour declared, That to prevent diflurbance they would Sifcr.i.T' c.4^. have none of the Clergy of Conftantinople chofen Bi- (hop there ; and fb Neflorius was brought from An- tmL. Maximianus being dead he gave order -that Proclus Proclffs fliould be made Bi/hopy before the others body was buried. Thefe inftances are fiifficient to fliew, that chriflian Primes did from the firft think fitjWhznJNji occafwn was given, tomake ufeof their ^///y&t^r/i^ in this matter. («j.) Upon the alteration of the Government of . Chrijlendom there was greater reafbn for the Ma^t- fir ate s interpofing than before. For upon the en- dowment of Churches by the great ItberaUty of the Northern Princes, it was thought at firft very reafb- nable, that the Royal ajfent fliould be obtained, though ^Brfljop \V2iScbofenhY t\iQ Clergy and People : which at firft depended only on tacit confent ; but after the fbie.mn AfTemblies of the People came to be muchufed, xh^^^pnviledgesoi Princes came not on- ly to be corfirmed by tht Confent of the People^ but conc. Au- to be inlarged. For, the Princes obtained by de- ^'^^^^^•^'^' grees not only the confrmation of the elected^ but v, concH, the liberty of nomination ; with 2. fbadow oi election '^■^^^^<^o^' by the C/d'r^r and Others of the Cot/yr/ ; as appears by c^n.'^,^^* xhtFormuU di Marculphas. This way was not al- concii.toiit* waye^ oblerved in France^whcrt frequently according 1^)1)%^:. tothe£^/V7of Clotharius^ the Clergy ^nd People chofe^ fm, the Metropolitan conficrated^ and the Prince gave his ^^^^'^* ^^j^* Royal afjtnt : but in doubtful or diScult Cafes, he cmiLv^tY- madeule oi his Prerogative^ and nominated the Per- ^e^fican,2, ion, and appointed the Confecration. Afterwards, ^^\p^iaii there arole great contefts between the Papal and To,2>CQmU Royal Power ; which continued for feveral Ages-; f^l^'^^y^^, and at laft among us, the Royal Power overthrowing rL'f,- '' '■ the other, relerved the Power oi Nomination of Bi-' ^^^^5 9^> P^ops^ as part of the Prerogative ; which being allow- ;^^Grfl//V ed in frecjuent Parliaments, the Confent o'l t\\Q People P^'^^fpN T t 2 is is fwallowed up therein : fince their Jffs do oblige the whole Nation. For not only the Si^atute oi i Edw.6. declares, Th Rig/jt^ of appomtmg B/Jbops to he intheKjng', but 25 Edw. 3. it is like wife de- clared, That the Righl: of dtfpofing Bijfjoprtcks was in thelsjnghy Right of^ Patromge^ derived from hi6 An- cefiors before the freedom of ^eleciions was granted. Which fliews not only the great Antiquity of- this Rights but the confint of the whole Nation to it. * And the fame is fully rela'ted in the Epifrle of Edw, 5. Wdfing\f.h to Clement 5. where it isfaid, That the King did dif E^».3.;.i6i. pJq ofthem^ jure fuo Kegio, by his Royal Vreroga- tive ; as his Anceflors had done from the fir ft foun-^ ding of a Qhriftian Church here. This is likewife ow- ned in the famous Statute oi Carltfle 21^ Edw,!. ib that there is no Kjno^dom where this Right hath been more fully acknowledged by the general confent of the People J than herein England ; and that from the Original planting of a Chriffian Church here. As to the in&nour Right of Patronage ; it is juftly thought to bear equal date with the firffettlements of Chri- jhanity in peace and quietnefs. For when it began to {pread into remoter Villages and places diftant from the Cathedral churches^ where the Rifrop refided with his Presbyters^ as in a Cc^/Ze^^e together ; a ncceffity was loon apprehended of having Presbyters fixed among them. For the Council oi-Neoc^farea mentions the ' ^hn-^eioi 'TT^icrf^v-nes^ > the Countrey Presbyters^ c. ij. whom the Greek Canonifts interpret to be filch as then were fxed in Countrey Cures^ ^nd thh Council . was held ten years before the Council of Nice. In the time of the frfl Council of Orange^ A. D. 441. cxprels mention is made of the Right of Patronage rcierved to the fir fl Founders ofChurcheSy r.io; viz. If Jf AjhjJjopbuilt a Church an his O'vn Lmd in mother Bi(hop*s Diocife^ yet thz right of frcfntin^ thd Clerk was refirvedtohim. And this was confirmed by the fecoid Council di Arks, c,^6. J. D. ^c^2. By the • Confi/t/aion oi' the Emperour Ztno. A. D. 470.' th:: 5'f^'V^V T. • / r r. ^ n iV-Yi ? I ^ Cod. di S^crof, Rights of Patronage are ejLiblijhed^ upon the agree- EccUj: ments at firll made in the enlovmmts of Chirrches, ThlsCbnflit/aion was confirmed hy^u/l/nian^ A, D. ^'^^^' 5"* ^41. and he allows the nom'inition and prefentation of a fit C/er/C' ; And the fame were fettled in the /.p-g,^'^-i25.(r.i3. Jlern Church ; as appears by the n'nth Co/mcil'oi To- ledo^ about y/, D. 650, and many C.^.^^;^^ were made infeveral Cov;?;//; about reoulatinq the Rights of Pa- tronage^ and the endo^v^^ients ot Churches^ till at laft it obtained by general confent that the Patron might tranfmit the right of prefintation to his heirs^ and the Bijhopj were to approve of the Perfins prefen- ted,andto give/;^y?/>///-/(?;^ to t\\^ B':;nefice. The Ba- ^j^t^^J^^* ai rons of England in the Epifile to Gregory I X. plead. That their Ancefiors had the Right of Patronage^ from the fir (I planting of Ch'riflianity here. For thofe upon whofe Lands the churches were buik, and at whofe coft and charges they were erefted, and by whom, the ParochialChnrches were endowed, thought they had great Reafon to referve the Nomination of the Clerks to themfel ves. And this \foh. Sarisburienfis |J^/'^f ;^. faith, was received by a general cnflome of this whole Kjngdom, So that the Right of Patronage w^as at firft built upon a very reafonable confideration ; and- hath been ever, fince received by as univer^fal a Con- fent'ciSd.nY Lawoi' Cufiom amon^us. And the only • cQ^f/?/^?;^/ now remaining are, whether ^wzh'dLConfnt can be made void by the Dijftnt of fbme few Perfins, wjio plead it to be their inherent Right to -choof their own ^ar^ Pafiors ?' and fiippofing, that It might be done, whether it be reafomble'ib to do? Arjd I conclude, that, 6. Things being thus fettled hy general confent and ejlahltjbed Laws^ there is no ground for the People to rtfiime the lihertj of EleHions ': (i.) becaule it was no unalterable /^/^/y/jbut might be pafTed away; and hath been by confent of the People upon good conG- derations ; arid (2.) becaufe no fuch inconveniencies can be aliedged againft the fettled way of difpofal of Livings^ but may be remedied by Laws ; far ea- fier, than thofe which will follow upon the Peoples taking this Po)ver to themfelve^^ which cannot be don^ in a divided Nation^ without throwing all into reme^, dilefs confiifion. (j.) Becaufe other Reformed Churches have thought this an unreafonahle pretence. Beza de- Eplfi. 33. claims againft it, as a thing without any ground in Scri- pure^ or any right in Antiquity^ andfabjelt to infinite diforders, InSrveden the Archbijhop and Bijhops are appointed by the Kjng : and fb are the Bijhops ih Den- mark ; In other Lutheran Churches, the Superintend Rittnihuf, ad ^e;i?/i are appointed by the fevcral Pnnces and Magi- ^'''^^^^^Y''^\Jlrates : andinthefe the P4^rc^;^/prefent before Ordi-. nation. . The Synod of Dort hath a vSWz^^/{', which hath P over to dcpoftthem. And it would be very ftrange, if this inherent and unalterable right of the Pf^;/e*fliouldonIy bedifcovered here ; where it isasunfittobepradiled, as in any part of the Giri- ftian world. Sea, 26. Se^. 26. But Mr. B. is unfatisfied with any Laws Trcatifeof that are macfe in this matter; for when the objection p^l2^:^'^'^' is put by him, Tku the People choft the Pdrlia?nent rvho make the Lavs rvhlch give the Patrons Po^ve?'^ and there" fore they nov corjf^nt ; he faith, thisfeemcth a J eft ; for, he faith, i. It cannot he proved, that all the Chitrches or People gave the Patrons that Po'ver, 2. They ne- ver confcnted that Parliaments ^fljould do what they lifi^ and d':fpoJe of their Souls ^ of rvhat is necejfary to ■the faving of their Souls, j. They may a^s well fay ^ that they confnt to he haftiz,ed and to receive the Sacraments, hecaufe the Parliament confenttd to it. 4. Their forefathers had no porcer to reprefent them hy fiich conjenting. 5. The oh ligation on the People w^ Perfonal, and they have not God^s confnt for the, tranf nutation. Sothatonewouldthink by Mr. B/s Doilrine, all Laws about Patronage are void in themfelves ; and all Rights of Advonfon in the K.ing^ or Nohlemen and Gentlemen^or Vniverftties are meer 'Vfar pat ions ^ and things utterly unlawful among Chrijlians, fince he makes fuch a perfonal obligation to choofe their own Pajiors to lie on the 'People^ that they cannot, transfer it by their own -JcL But upon fecond •'•' thoughts I fuppofehe will not deny, that the free- dom of Ptihlick churches and the endowments of them, do lie within the Magiflrates Power ^'^vA fo binding Laws may be made about them ; .unlefs he can prave that the Magiflrates Power doth not extend to thofe things which the Magi ftr ate gives. And if thefe may be jurtly fettled by Laws^^^\t^\ the Rights of Patro-. nage are ^sjufi^nd legal Rights 2ls mtn have to their Efiates ; and confequently every Minifter duly pre- iented Cm) fented hath a kj^al ThIq to the Templ^ md Tithes ^ as Mr. B. calls them. Bia this. doth not^ faith he, mxkt a Minifier for their Souls^ and the Parliament cannot difpofe of their Souls, The meaning of all which is, if tlie People be humorfbnic and fadious, they may run after w^hom they pleafe, and ftt up what Minifter they pleafe, in„.oppofition to Laws. And fbfor inftance^ fuppofe a Parifh be divideTin their Opinions about Religion, (as we know too many are at this day ) all thefe feveral parties, viz. Anfbdftifls^ Quaker s^ yea and Papifts too, as well as others, will put in for an equal fhare in what con- cerns the care of their Sods^ and confequently, may choofe a feveral Paftor to themfelves, and leave the hmmhent the bare poffeflion of the Temple and Tithes. But if there be no other objeftion, this may be tliought fufficient, that he was none of their choofng^ being impofed upon them by others, who could not difpofe of their Souls, By which means, this pre- tence of taking care for their Souls ^ will be made ufe of, to juftifie the greateft. difbrder and confufion, which can happen in a Church. For, let the Pcrfbn be never fb worthy in himfelf, the People are ftill to have their liberty o^choofing for themlelves And . who are thefe People? Muft all have equal Votes? then according to Mr. B. 's opinion of our Qhurche^^ the worft will be fboneft chofen ; for why fhould we not think the worll People will choofe their like as \^'ell as. the worf Patrons^ and the worft Bijhofs^ But if tl:re Profane muft be excluded^ ^j/ jvbatLoipf^ Is it becaufe they have no right to the Ordinanc-es .-? But have they no right to their own Souls and to the care of, them r therefore they are equally concerned with others. Yet let us fuppofe all Uiefe excluded/- as no HO- competent fudges ; fliall all the refl: he excluded too, who are mcompetent 'fudges ? then I am afraid, there will not be many left. . And whatever they pretend, the Feo^k where they do choofe, do trull other mens Judgments, as well as where the Patrons prefi'ftt ; and- to prevent popular tumults, fuch elec- tions are generally brought by a kind of devolution to a few Perfbns who are entrufted to choofe for the reft. But if all the People were left/^o choofe. their own Pafloursj it is not to be imagined, what parties and faftions, what mutual hatreds, and per- pctual animofities, they would naturally fall into on liichoccafions^ Do we not daily fee fuch things to be the fruits of popular eleftions, where men are con- cerned for the ftrength and reputation of their Par- ty ? What envying and ftrife, what evil Ipeaking and backbiting, what tumults and difbrders, what unchriftian behaviour in general, of men to eaclr- other, do commonly accompany fuch eleciions ? Which being the natural effefts of mens paffions ftirred up by fiich occafions, and there being lo much experience of it in all Ages of the Chriftian Church, where fuch things have been ; I am as certain, that Chrijl never gave the People fuch an unalterable Right of c hoofing their own Minifiers^ as I am, that he defigned to have tht peace 2iV\Amity of the C/'^r^^ prefer ved. And of all Perfbns, I do the mofl: wonder at him, who pretends to difcovcr the Onely way of unity and concord among Chrifitans^ that heThould fb much, fb frequently, lb earncftly infill upon this; which if it be not the onely, is one of tne mofl: effe^ual ways to perpetuate d/forder znd confufion in 2ibToken and divided Church. And fb much for the P lea (or Separation, taken from the Peoples Right' to choofe their own Mimflers, Uu ' St.ct.26. Mifckiefof Se^i ^6. Having thus dirpatched all the P/e^ for StpAration^ which teUte to the ConftHution of our c/?«rfA, I come to thole which concern the Terms of ^pmmunion with us ; «?^/Vi6 ^r e /Sj/^ to be unlmfiilL One of the chief: Vitas alledged (otSeparatiohy. by rmpofi'tions, Dr. 0. and Mr. A. is, z^.?/- many things intheconfiant fM'' total Communion of Parochial Churches art imfofbJL onthe Confciences and Practices of men^ which are not- according to the mind of Chriii. Thefe are very ge- lier^l words ; but Dr.O. reckons up the particulars, which ( letting afide thofe already confidered ) arc, vindicoi the ufe of the Aereal fign of the Crofsy kneeling at the 0.12.^°"* Communion^ the Religions obfer^kt ion of Holy-days \ andtheconflant ufe of the Liturgy in allthe fublick Of fees of the Church. As tothislaft, I#iall lay nothing, br. raij^ner's It being lately lb very well defended by ^learned Di- ^'"uruMcs, '^'^^^ ^^ ^^^ Church, To the other, Mr. B. adds, ^>&e ,3^ So. ' ufe of Godfathers and Godmothers ; and now I am to examine what Weight there is in thele things, to make men lefioufly think Ct?^^//;?.w with Our Church un- l^rvfulL When Ifbund our church thus charged with pre- fer ibing unlaw full terms of Communion^ I expefted a particular and diftinft proof of luch a charge, becaufe the main weight of the Caufe depended' upon ito. And this is the method we^ ufe in dealing with the Church of Rome. We do not run upon general char? ges of unfcriptural Impofttions^ and things impofed' on mens Confciences againjl the mind of Chriti ; but we dole with them upon ithe particukrs of the charge, ^^JVorJhip of Images^ Invocation of 'faints y Jdoratior^ oftb^H^ plain *y^r/- ^_4^jnx.^-ii ..^yj: pture. ftun'y ,tliat thdh diYQ forhiddejf jsind therefore fwl:r,p\, ftilL Biitlfindnofuciv metfiod taken or purfued by oiir llnthren ; onely WcT are told over and over, tliat they judj^e, they thinky they efteem them unlaw- fiitl\ and they ca?r^Qt be fattsfied ahout them ; but foi' particular argumeots to prw^e them unla^fuH I find none ;' which makes the whole charge look very fuf- picioufly. For men do not ufe to reaiain in generals^ when tliej have any aflTurance of the Goodnefs of "their C^///e. Yet, to let the Reader fee that I decline hothing that looks like argument in this matter, I fh^U pick up e\^ery thing I can find, which feems to prove thefe terms oR on^CommmiGntoh^fmUw' full^ or to juftify their Sefaratjon, In the Epiflle before my Sermon I had ufed this Argument againft t\\t prefect Separationj'^t\\2it if it *' be lawfuir to feparate on a pretence of g^r eater pu- ^' rity^ wherje there is an agreement in Docir'ine and l^^ thtfuhfiaHtial parts oflVorffjip, as is acknowledged ''^ in our Cafe j then a bare difference of opinion,, as ^'tofbme vlrcumftantials of WorfhipznA the hefi con- ^'ftitutlon of Churches will be fufficient ground to *' break Qommmunion and to fet up new Chnrchts ; ^' which, confidering the great variety of mens fan- ^' cies about theie matters, is to make an infinite Di- " vifibility in Churches without any poffibie flop ^' to further ^^pajTftion, This Ai:gument.others were willing to pafs over/ but Mr. X in his Pre/rrf , undertakes to anfweritin alltl^eparts.ofitv which being fb material to our burinefi,,! ihall.now diflindly confider; and like an able Difputant he allows nothing at all in this Ar- Uu2 ' cument/ (JH) -gument jforhedenies the Siippofitioff^ viz. tJnt ther^ 7s anyfuch agretmmt in DoBrine and the.fubft ant id. parts of Wor(hip \ he denies tht firjl confequence; and as though that were not fiifRcient, he denies the remoter conje- qnence tpo. And what Argument can ftand before a man oi fiich proweffe in di fpu ting ? I. He denies an Agreement in Do5irine^ which I have already fhewed was allowed by all Diff^nters before him, from the days of R. Brorvn to Mr. J. But we muft not miftake him, for as fierce as he feems to be at firft, yet let him but have (cope to fhew ibme tricks of Wit, and trials of his skill in fencing ; and he is as tame and yielding as you would wifh him ; for at laft he confefles they gene- rally agree with the Do5trine contained in the 59 Ar- ticles ; and but for meer fhame, he would have laid all\ for I never heard of one before him made any fcrupleofit. And this is the Do5lrine eftabliOiedin this Church ; and if there be an Agreement in thisj then this &///^^//(?« is granted. . ..^ ^. 2. As to fnhjlmtial parts of Worjhi^ ; he denies aa ^'11 '^*^ on, jareement tn this tea : although Dr.O,laith,H^e are agreed in the fubfl ant lal farts of Religion ; and I hope the />/2r/x of Worjhip are allowed to be feme of them. But he pretends not to know what we mean by the differ erne between the ^ arts ofWorjhip^ making fome fubflanttal^ and others circHmfiantial\ and then he offers to prove /^^/ our church appoints new fubflantial farts of Worjhip^ and therefore he muft know one from the other ; and after he hath (pent fbme leaves in the proof of that, at Igft he fairly concludes, that there is^ difference at leAJtm^jQir'- cumjlantiaipart ofWor^ip, '■-'' ..--.^^^*. .^^-^ -:-.V: ' But. Butbecaufe this is a weighty charge againft our Churchy I fliaii take the more pains to confider it, becaufe the main objeftion againll our Lcrenjomts Kes under it, and tliat which moft flicks with the- more Ibber Non-confortmfis. Mr.^.'s charge about ^ yi^y/^;?//^/ fAvt oflVorfhip being appointed by our Churchy is thus drawn up. « . An outward vifthleftgn of an inward invifible grace^ where- by a per/on is dedicated to the frofejjion of andfubjecfion to the Redeemer^ is a fuhftantial fart of Worjhtp, Now this he chargeth our Chiirch with,but gives no iaftance; but thc/;^/»ofthe Crofszktx haptifm, is that which he means: which Mr. B. calls the tranfient dedicating Anfw.;. 49. Image of the Crofs, For the clearing of this, it will be neccflary to fliew, i. What we mean by afub- Jlantial part of Worjhip, 2. How it appears that the ftgn of the Crofs is made no fbjiantial part offVorfhip by our church. I . What we mean by a fib/hntialpart of diz/^e Worjhip. For I have obferved, that the want of a clear and diftinft notion of this, liath been one of the greateft occafions of the Scruples of the moft- confcientious Non-can for mi (is. For being afraid of di{plealmgGod,byufingany othtv parts of Worjhip ; than himlelf hath appointed ; and looking on our Ceremonies, as real parts of divine Worjhip^ upon this reafon they have thought themfelves obliged in confcience, at leaft to forbear the u(e of them. The great principle they went upon was t\m, that what- ever was any ways intended or defigned for the IVcrfJjip ofGod^ was a real and fuhftantial part of Ins IVorfhip ; and when their Adver Jaries told them that Divine In- - • . fiitution, flmtwn was tieceflkry to make a p^i $f Worfipjp ; their anfwcr w^as, that Divine Inftttution did not makethata/^^r/^/W^^r/fo/? which \N^%mm, but that ID be A part affrueWorJhJpy -which otherwife would! bQa part of fa If e Worjhip. In the meantime, thejr did not deny the Urvfidnefs of the appl at ion of com- mon circumfiamts to Acis of Rdigtous Worfljip^ as Time and Place^ &c. but the annexing any other Rites^ or Ceremonies to proper ^^7/ of RHigious Wor* fhip (as the (ign of the Crofs to Baptrfm) they fuppo- ftd to be the making new fuhflanti^l parts of Divine Worfhip ; and therefore forbidden by all thole places oi Scripture^ which imply th^ Scripture it ftlftoh^di fQx^tdiRtdeofWorjfjip. This as mr as I can gather is the ftrongeft Pk^ of thtNon-conformtfisfide^ which I have feprefented with its full advantage, becaufe my delign is, if poffible,. not fo much to confute, as to convince our Diffeating Brethren. Let us then ferioufly confider this matter, and if we can find out a plain difcernible difference between fuhfl ant ial parts of Divine JVor/hrp^ndmcYC acc/de?:- tal appenAitiss^ this dilcovery may tend more to dit ^ entangle fcrupulous minds, than tlie multiplying of arguments to prove the lanfdnefi of our Ceremonies. And that we may better underftand where thcdiffi- cuky Hes^ the fe following tliiiigs are agreed on both iides. I . That befides proper Acts of Worfhip there are ibme Circumfiances which may be differently uled, without letting up mw parts of Worfhip. Asfor in- itance, Adoration is a fuhfiantial.^wd prefer Aci ;Qf. Divine Worfhip \ but.whctlier ^J^ .AdorMionh^ per- formed formed by prqfiratio;fy or by howin^^ or hykneelw^, is in it ik\i indtferent ; and no man Will &y, that he * that makes his adoration kneeling^ make's another ptew p/irtoilVorjhip, from what he doth who performs it fmding ox falling on his face. And io^ if the An- • dexit Eafiern Church did at certain times forbid tee- ling in /i^i- oi Adoration 'r this doth not prove that they differM in point of Adoration from the Wefier^ Church which requires kneeling in tlie fame Offices of Divine Worfhip ; becauie they agreed m tht d^ oi Adoration, but onely differM in the manner of cxprefling fe. 2. That Divine Tnjiitution makes thofe to be ne< ceffary parts of IVorfh/p whidi of tbcrcdhlv^ are not io. As is plain in the Sacraments of the New Ttjiji- ment\ \^ch of themfelves ar£ no ntce^Ary fuhftan- tial parts of the worjhip of God; but onely become fb, by being appointed by Chrifi.. So under the Law, many things mcerly ritual and ceremonial in ^ tiiemfelves, yet by vertue of Divine appotntmmthi^^ ' Q^Lm^fuhJlantialparts oi Divine fVorfhip.^ i • *^ i . • ' .:iX J. That for men to make netP Paris of Divine . Worjhtp is unlawfulL For that is to fuppole the Scrip- ^^ ture an imperfect Rule of fVorfhip ; and that S'^perjlitim is no fault ; and confequently that our Saviour,. \mh' •out caufe, found fault with the Scriies and Ph^'-rfees for their Traditions. 4. That there are many things which may be done in the Worjhip of Xjod ; which are not forbidden to be done unlets they be Parts of Divine Worjhip. For, if the fuppofed reafon of their prohibition^ be .y^u^^^^ . their; theif being made Pans of Divine Wor(!jipy\i \tht made appear, that they are not fb, then it follows they are notforbidden. 5. That what is n^ilitr forbiddm directly^ nov by confeqtfence is U vfuU and may be praftifed in the War- jhipoiGod. For although Mr. A. quarrels with me, for faying, they require exprefs Comm.tnds to make wifchkfof things /^/v///// in the HVyZ^//>/?/G(:/v?f; yet he allows, inipof./.2p. that what is not required either dirtcily or by con'- fecjueme is unlawfull ; and by parity of Keafbn, what is not forbidden in the fame manner muftbe lawfull. Sect, 27. It remains now to find out thofe certain notes and marks of diJiinU;ion in this matter, as may give fatisfaftion to the confciences of mep, in the difference between innocent Ceremonits^ znAfuperfii- • tious parts of Divine Worjbif, For the difference here doth not lie in fuppofing fbme things of Divine ln(litution which are not, but in making thofe to be parts of Divine Pl^orfhip which are not. And that may be done thcfe ways. I . By fuppofing them to be fb necejjarjj that the ) doing them would be a thing pleafing to God, and th^' omitting of them would be a thing difpleafwg to God, although there were no humane L^;p which re- . quired the doing of them. For, where there is no obligation by vertue of any humane Law, and yet men fuppofe they fhould pleafe God by doing, or diJpleafeGodhy not obferving fbme particular Cere- monies ; it is a fign they efteem thofe to be parts of Divine Worjhip. And this was the cafe of the Scribes and 039) etnd Phmfees whom our oW^^r repfeYC^; ^^^^ fo much for their frevfuent wafhin^s^ as for fuppofing that a m^s Confaeme was defiled, if fie did not ob- Mar. r^. n, ferve them. For they had taken up an opinion «f» 2<5» among them, (as H. Grotim obferves) tliat any thing that was touched by a Perfbn unclean by the Law, did communicate an uncleannefs firfl: to their Bodies, and then to their Souls ; but that this ceremonial wafhing^ did purifie both Body and Soul: upon which iuppofition, they concluded this wafhing lb neceffary a part of Go£s Worfhipj that the doing of it was a thing very pleafingto God, andthe omidi- on of it muft be dilpleafing to him, becaufe it left an inward defilement upon their Confciences, which might have been removed by the ule of i^ But it is lately pleaded by. Mr. A. that this ^vajhrng of hands Exerdcon among the Jews condemned by our Saviour, rva^ pijl ^^^^* ' 5«^i3 9* of the nature of our Ceremonies , being only obferved as it command of their Sufer tours not repugnant to the' Ilaw of God, but rather more agreeable to it than our ;. 23, 2$. Ceremonies are: from whence ne infers, thatallTr^>- ditions, Canons^ Injunctions , concerning unnecejfary' P'2d, .things are contrary to the Larvof God, and con/eque^- ly invalid and not obligatory. But I fay, theReafbn of our Sav^iours oppofing the Pharifees about this matter, was not becaufe a thing in i! felf unne^ ceffary, was determined by their Suptriours, but be- caufe of the fu per (lit torn opinion which the Pharifees had concerning this wajhing with refpeQ: to the Con--" fciences of men. And that I fliall prove, i . From the - force of our Saviours realoning.- 2. From the gene- ral Icnfe of the Jews concerning it, X X - I. Front - "rom the fofce of our Saviourh realbning : xuji^li,\v5ll. appear, by obferving what He proves, z'-j^'-'&i^x they let v\^ th^ixTraditiof^ nbove theLm^^ v,^^. JVhjf do yo:i alfo tranfgrcfs the Commmdmcnt of God by your Tradition ? and v. 6. Thiis ye have ?n.td€ tht^ Commandment of God of none effect by yo:ir Tradjtion. V. 9. Full rvell ye reje^ the Commandment of God^ that ye may keep your onm Tradition, Our Saviour here proves by a plain and undeniable Inftance about the Vow Corban^ that they did believe their Traditi- ons to have a force fuperior to the Law ; elfe it were impofTible they fhould fuppofe fuch an arbitrary Vo.v fhould fuperfede the obligation of the Law ; as to the duty which C/?//^/'e;^ owe to their Parents ; but from hence it appeared that they believed the keeping of this fow to be a thing more pleafing to God^ than, relieving their Parents, and lb they efteemed it a more neceffary znAfnbflantial part of Divine IVorffjf, The force of his Argument tlien extends to all things which they looked on as things pleafing to God, on the account of the Tradition of their Eiders ; for i:e argued againft the main fuppofition, the truth of which he proves by a clear inftance, where the.T^.f. dition did contradifl: the L^:?^^ And fince by this it appeared, that they thought their Tradition to over-rule tlie L^^t, it was no wonder they fet up others equal to it; and thought m.ens confciences flriQly obliged to obferve them., Bnt ho.v doth the argument reach to the prefent c^J}^ viz.> Becaufe that when their Traditions contradicted the Law^ they were not to be dfervedy therefor^y not^^ whe?%' agreeable \ unlefs he rejected all kind of Traditions ? lani'wer, the Pharifees did think a man's Con/cience defiled if ^ he. did not obferve.that Tradition, as appears by what follows. follows, when he taught the Peppleupon thisocca- fion, V. 1 1 . That which cntreth into tht mouth dtfikth mt a man j hut that which comet h out of the mouth dtfileth a man. This was tlie Doctrine Qhrifl taught the Feopk\\A\\\ refpcftto this difpute with tliQ Pha- ■nfees : which fignified nothing, unlefs the opinion among tliem was, that eating of bread w^ith unwaflien hands, did really defile a man's Confc/cnce towards God. At which the Ph,irifees w^ere much offcaded, as the Difciples tolJ him, v. 12. and they were not lb very well fatisfied, but th^ydcfire a further expli- cation of this matter from himfelf; which he gives them, z'. 1 7, 18, 19. where he fhews that no d^fik' ment cowld come to m^mConfciences meerly by ivbat they did eat ; but that mens m-r/trd IhJIs were the things which defikd them^ for thefe were the (burce of thole wicked a^iions^ which w^remoft difpleafing to God. And fo he concludes his Difcourfe, v. 2:0. Thefe are the things which defile a man , hut to eat with unvafoen hands dcfleth not a man.. From whence it follows, that the main thing in difjoute w^as, whe- ther this ttremonyoi wafhing bunds could be omitted, without defiling the Confidence ? or elfe our Saviours conclufion dotli wot reach the Queftion. But if the conclufwn was contrary to the Pharifiees Do^rine^ then they muft look upon this Ceremony of wajhin^ ofi hands as a p.wt of IVorfljip equal to the Law of Gody and w^hich men pleafed God by doing, and difple?.- fed him by omitting it ; not meerly with refpccltG tho command of Superiours^ but as they fuppofedfome lel-cr guilt upon tlie Confidence might be expiated by it, Vv hick would remain, if they did not ufe it^ X X 2 c. Tron. 2. Froni th(i general, fenfe of tliQ Je\n. Evefl Mr. ^. himfelf, in the very fame difcburfe, where he would make this waflji^g of hands like Our Ceremonies ^ p. 17. quotes feveral paiiages of the Talmudijls^ to prove that the J eq/idled their Traditions with the Laws of God) and fofnetimes fet them above them ; arid par- ticularly of this Tradition he faith, It is a faying of the Talmud^ that he that eats bread with unwdfhen hands J (ins as grievonfly as if he lay with a Whore, ExarptaGe- Wliichisa faying of A. ^/^ in Sota) and abundantlyr^ mr,c.u§.6, pj.Q^7^^ j-j^^^ this was not looked on as an indifferent' Ceremony^ but as a thing, whofe omidion brought a guilt on the Confcience. And I wonder Mr. A, did not difcern, that by this one faying, he overthrew . all the reft of his difcourfe : but this opinion is not: built on the faying' of any Rabbi, but on a conftant Tradition among them, which they derive from the days bf Solomon ; who , they fay, appointed ft firfi, %vhzn they dtd^eat of Sacrifices ; afterwards, the wife men applied it to the Ternmah^ and at laft Hillei and S-chammai decreed it alight to be obferved for their greater purification^ before ths eating fheir com- ' mon Meals, And the Pharifees placing the greateffe part of their Religion in the nice obfervance of fuch Traditions , thought themfelves i^o much more holy than others , as they did more carefully avoid the- defilements of common Convcrfation; and for that Mark7,4. reafbn they obferved this wajljing efpecialiy when', they had been in promifcuous company. .For they thought themfelves ^e/?/e^ by any touch from the or- dinary Jbrt of People ; and this, Maimonides faith, They iooked on^ as a peculiar part of SanBity ', and tlie more ftrift and punftual they were in this, the.: more holy they were accounted. Therefore in the. Hahmd fdlmid one ^ohn\}iit sm of Gud^ed is particularly admired for his S.mcfity^ btcmfe he exceeded othtrs in chiglgi c, x^ the nicentfs of vMJh/ng his hxnds. P nd they have a ^- ^^^* laying in the M/^.^ to this ptirpofc, The Garments of . the comtnoH People , are a pollution to the Phanfees^ thi GutMems of the Pharifees to thjfc that eat the . Terurnahy and theirs to thofe that eat of the SacrificeSy dfid theits to thofe th It touched the water of cleanfing^, ^ So that tliey had different degrees of Sanclity about this rmtter of ivajbtngy none of which was impofed for the fake of ckanlinefs^ but from xht fippofitwn of Ibme inward piirificatJonx\\(^Y obtained by it, from the common filthinefs of the world. And upbn this principle, even the vejjtls of the Temple were to be wajbed all over, if they mre but toiahed by the com- mon People. In the nyaffjing their hands, they put a difference between that before, and that after meat ; the later they accounted a matter of liberty, or at leaftonly /6?r health to wafli off the dangerous/t//;^2 -particles which they luppoled to remain ; but the former w^as required for inward purification \ which • they require (b ltri6lly, that if water maybe had with- in fo:4f miles ^ a ^ew is bound not to eat till he hath.- wapjedj no not with a fork ; * and in cafe none can 'be had J then he is to cover his hands and fo t.it ; nor can- he take meat from another in his mouthy tint it his mouth he frfi wafljed. If there be no more water than will fir-ve for his_ djink, he ?ntifl part with enough of it to waft) his hands ) and therefore R. Akiba ia prifbn faid, unh in /.• 2i». He would rather perifj with thirfi than want water to wifh his hands. And they fiy, Whofever difjieems this Qiiflomy dcferves not ofly excommnnicatio'n hut death too. Since all this is evident from the moil ajithentick Writers among thcfews^ I cannot but ad- ^ naire- 044) mire at Mr. A*s defign, who would make die worici believe, that this was no more than an indifferent Ceremony among the .Yeir/, that was only required for Order and Decency^ as our Ceremonies are, wh-en thole very citations he brings from Buxtorf and Dr. Liohtfoot do manifeftly prove the contrary. This I thought neceffary to be cleared, becaufe this is the chief place in the /Vtw Teftament which they bring to prove the unUvfulnefs of our Ceremonies. From hence it now appears that the reafbn oF CljrifPs condemning that Ceremony of wafbinjy of hands ^ was not upon the account of Decency y but a /uperjl/- tio;^ Opnion they had concerning it , that it did exp/ate a leflerkind q{ guilt and ffiritud fdthinefs which they contracted by the impure touches of men lefs holy tlian themfelves. And this the Pharifees more wondred at in Chrifls Difciph's^ becaufe it was a Rule among them, that the Difciples of the Wife ou^ht to be more fricl in thefe cafes than other s ^ h^- cauie thefe things tended to advance the reputation of their holtmfs^ among the People, And where fiich an opinion prevails, there fuch Ceremonies are made parts of Divine Wor^ip. 'Sect. 28. And thus it is in many of the Ctremon es B/'fam.dg //. of the Roman Church, which their Divines affertto L2I c/21!* hav^e a purifying and cleaning faculty as to the Sonls sui. tertu. of men ; not for ju /rife at ion of men from' mortal fins^ hut for othtr fpiritualeffeEis^ and taking a^ ay the guilt' of venial fins. For fay they, no douht they are ef ftciual for the ends to )vh:chthe Church appointed them^ ■ a "id of thiSy there is no dfpute among Cat holt cks^ And witlral, they add, ThAt a i^ probable that the Church hith pojver to appoint Ceremonies in fach a nunncr^ that they may produce theft ejft^s^ exopere operate, >f//fc Sacraments do JHJiificationy hecauft Chnjt bath it ft it in the pover of the Church to apply his mcrjtsfor/cjj^-r efft^Sy having appointed the Suraments hirf^/flf for the greater. But Btllarmin thinks tins latter [)artc!i([xN table concerning the opti^s operatum of C(.remon:es \ but as to the former, uiz-, by ivay of mipetration,, he faith, it is pafl all doubt among Catholicks. So, as to the fpr ink ling of Holy Water ^ Btllarmin filth, // ts no B^iLdecultn ?neer fgnifcant Cercnwny ] but it is effeJual for the ^^''^'f ^- V ^-T* blotting out of venial fins y and he quotes Saint The- ^"^^^'^^ mfSj and Dom. it Soto^ and Gratian for it ; who pro- duceth the Ca/ion of Alex. i. whereby it appears it was hrft \\\^\KX\lQ^^Ht e-i cunct'i afperfi fancli^centur& ■ purtficentHr \ that all that were fpr inkled might be fanClified and purified by it. lx\ the prayer of c^/?- o, .., ^ ,. Jrcratwn tor the o.?//- to make Holy iVater^ oneexprci- ad anuan fion is 5 that it ?n}ght be rvholfome both to Body and ^^^^'-''i'- 'Jo- Soul'', and the Water is confecrated to drive a vay the ""Ba/.^^"^^' power of the Devil. Jzorim faith, that: holy Water A-r^ot.infi/t, cleanfth venial [ins , ex opere operato , and drives f'^f' '' 4- avay Devils. Greg, de Falentia agrees in the thing, G^ eg.de r^- but is not lb pereriiptory in the manner. But Ahrji' ^^'|f- ^'^' 4- li'MColamna hath written a whole Book oithQ admi- pl^'l,'^^' rable eff-cis of this Ceremony. And fo for the fign of MarfiKco- the Cr of y Btllarmin attributes nwn-derful eff-Bs to it, ^v'1^^;^'"^* fcr driving .v^ ay Devils and Dfesfs, and frriclrfyrng Bii\% i>nag.- the things It is applied to^: and he laith, it hath power •• 2. r. ;o. againtt the Devil ejf optre optratc. ret. Fhyr.^n^x.nQ />/?,?.;. 3. Jefi^'t^ attributes ti proper eficiency to the fign of the ^•''^^• tpfsagatnjl the pover of the Devil.. Cocci li^- ^wh^^-^^^^ffff'f^^ it ts a terror to the Devils^ and very bentfcial to ?n m- kind. Wliichaiakesme wonder at Dr, Am^^s hisdii- ingcnuicy. i^ FrencbSuh ingcHuity , whcn he would go about to make the llnv^Mo' Dodrine of our Ch^rrc/j about Q^enmonks not todif- f-42''. ' * fer from that of the Umrch oi Rom?. It is true, /wf'T/*-^'^" ^^iff^^^^^ ^-"^ ^^^^^ ^^^''' <^^hers, talk at another rate; d^pf' ' '* arid Caffander hunfelf faith, the bcji men on both fid^s ivere noreed about thefe v/iatters. But we are not tO take their general fenfe from fiich as Ca^.mdtr ; efpe- cially when .their puhlick Offices ipeak the fenfe of their Church better than Caffander, Gre^. de Fakff- Tp-4. ^/(p. 3. tii indeed faitli, it is a lie that they attribute as much 1' ^'^'^' to Ceremonies as to Sacraments : and in truth they do it not ; for they attribute Jufiification to the S^tcra- rnents^ and t[\texpiation of the remainder of venial . ftns to the ufe of Ceremonies, However, fince they attribute (0 fpiritual effects to them ; it is an argu- ment they look upon them as real parts of Divine IVor/hip^ as much as they do on Prayer, with which they compare them in point of efficacy. But with what face can this be objefted againfl: our Church; which utterly rejeAs any fuch fpiritual 'efficacy, .as to the Ceremonies that are retained among us ; and de- clares that they are no otherwife received in our Preface to tV.c Churchy than as they are purged ixomPop^Jh^Superfti' Sye?,Tan. ^^^^ ^^^ Error. And therefore all opinion of me- 30. ' rit and fpiritual efficacy is taken from th m; which do make them to be parts of Divine IVorjhip ; which being removed,. they remain only naked Cer(mGmes^ i. e, as Caffander we'd exprelTes it, Words m.tde viable ^ or teaching Aciions\ whole defign and intention. be- ing towards us, and not towards G^^, they cannot bethought to be made ptrts of Divine Wcrjljip^ al- . thouglr they be ufed in the performance of them. As if the Chrtftians in the Eaft did wear the badge of a Crofs upon their ^r^i, at fomt? folemn days, as on good (347) ^ood Friday at t\\Q\x devotion s^ to diftiriguifli them from Turks and Jeivs ; would any one (ay, that they m2idQ this l?ad^e a. part of Divine Wor(hip'f But when they fee the Fapijfs on that day ufing the moft fblemn p:)[tiires of adoration to the Crucifix^ they might well charge them with making this zpartoi Divine Wor- fhip. So that the diftinction between thefe two^ is not fb hard fo find, if men apply their minds to the confideration of it. 2. Men may make Ceremonies to become /'^r// of Divine IVorfh/p if they fuppofe them undterdle^ and , obligatory to the Confcitncts of all Chrijlians : for ) this fuppofes an equal ft^cefftty with that of Divine Inftitution. If mtn do aflert fb great a Foiver\]\ the Churchy as to appoint things hx fpiritmlejfeUs, and to oblige- the Consciences of all Chrijlians to obfervc them ; it is all one as to fay, the Ch.irch may m.ake new parts oi IVor/hip. But this can with no colour be objected againft a Church which declares as ex- prefly as it is poffible, that it looks on the Rites and Preface m Ceremonies ufed therein^ as things in thefi^orvn nature Coramoa indifferent and alterable ; and that changes ami alte- ^ rations may be made^ as feems neceffary or expedient to thefe in Authority : And that every Country is at liberty to vfe their own Ceremonies • ^nd that Second Pre- they neithtr condemn others nor pnfcribe to them. ^^^^* What can more exprefs the not making Ceremonies any parts of Divine Worfhip than thefe things do ? And thus I have at once fhewed, what we mean by fchflantial parts of Divine Worfjip^ and that our Ch'frch doth not make any human Ceremonies to be fb. V'^Sk^^ 29. I now come particularly to cxamln the charge againft our church. For Mr. J. faith, An oat" mird vijihk figrt cf An invar d invifihlt grace^ ivhere^ h ^ p^l'fin is dedicated to the $r'ftjijn of and fub- jeBioH to the Redeemer y is a fnbjtantial fart of fVor[Jj:p^ lanfwer, I. An out ivard vifible ftgn between men reprefen- ting the duty or enoagtment of another, is no fart of Druine JVorfh/p at all, much left 2ifnbftantialpart of it. G There are fbme vifible fi^ns from God to men^ repre- ienting the effects of his Grace to us ; and tlioie \vc -y^.cali.y^^r.?^^e;?//; there are other {igns from mm to God^ to teftifie their fubjection and dependence^ and thele are acfs of fVorJhip ; and there are (igns from men to men to reprefent fbme other thing befides the bare afilion; and thefeare/^;^/y?^.f^^ Ceremonies, fuch as the Crofs in B^ptifm is. For, . after the Child ts haptized2indvtQdv^dintothQ Churchy the fign of the Crofs is ufed in token that hereafter he (hall not be ajJ^rmed to confefs the faith of Chrifl crucified, &c. \ To whomis this token made r* is it to G^i? no certain- ty. If it were a permanent fign of the CVt:/;-,would it be for a Tefiimony to Gody or to Ahn? When the Primitive Chrif/ansufhdtht flgnof the Crofs in tcken they were BOt afhamed di Chrifl crucified, was this a dedicatingfign to God^OY a declarative fign to mem hiiA \\A\2iX, if it repre- iQntsfdjtclionto ■./)"/y?as the Redeemer ? muft it there fore hzmQh^.no.^itiYard vfible fgn 0^ tn:vard invifible ^..* \ Grace:y?s the Sacrarnsnts arc ? It reprefenrs the Duty and not the Grace ; the Duty is ours and may be.reprefented ^^ by us ; but the Grace is Godsy and therefore he muff ap- point thtfignsto reprefent and convey that, becaule he alone is the.u;^'C^• of it. 2. Tlie 2, The Crojs in Baptifm is not intended by our Church for 2l fio'^oi immediatt dedicatwn to God^ but of obligation on the perfon. Itis true, thatinthe 30 Ca- non it is faid, that this Church retains the fign of tht Crofs, follo:ving the example of the Primitive and Jpo- flolical Churches ; and accounteth it . a Uivfull outward Ceremony and honourable badge^ nhereby the Infant ts dedicated to the fervice of him who died upon the Crofs^ But for the right underftandlng thereof, we muft confider, l.hzt}japtifm is declared toht complt at be- fore ; fb that the ftgn of the Crofs adds nothing to the perfeBion or vertue of it, nor being omitted, takes nothing from it ; as it is there expreifed as the fer^fe of this Church. This therefore, is no part of tllQ Baptifmal Dedication, And the Mimfi.r a9:s in -J) - a double capacity^wh^n he doth baptize, and when he figns with the fgn of the Crofs : w hen he baptir zeth^ he aGs by vertue of Authority derived from Chrifl^ I baptize thee in the name of the Father^ &rc. Which being done, and the Child thereby folen:nIy dedicated to God in Baptifm ; he then Ipeaks in the nameoi thQChurch^\dixfmg the number; We receive this Child into the Congregation of Chrift'i Flock ^ and do fign him with tlje fign of the Crcfs^ &C. /. e. We Chriftians that are ah'eady members of Chrtft^s Flock do receive him into ol r number ; and in token of his h^ViSgobUgedx,^ perform the duty belonging to fuch a one, do make ufeofthis (ign of the Crofs^ as the Rite of admiffipn into the , C/^/zrc^, and of his obliga- //(?^_to behave himfeT, as becomes a C/^r//?/^;?. And if we coniider theyyv/^^/'/Z/e Crofs in thisfenfe, asnp doubt it was fo intended, all the difficulties about a Piei for Dedicating , Covenanting , Symbolical , S.icrament. I P^ace, Sign^ concerning which fbme have made fo great a ^,'.y/* Y y 2 ftir, ' ' * pefeftcc©f ftjjp^ ^yiij fj^Qj^ appear to be of no force. For why 1.11 ^^' ^^y "^^ ^'^^ C^^rc/6 appoint fuch a Rtte of AJimifflon of one of her Memkrs declaring it to be no fart of . Bapufm ? Let us fuppofe an adult perlbn to be ktp- tized^ ^nd immediately after Baptfn to be admitted a Member of an -Independent Church 'y and the Cer^-: mony of this adm/JJion to be holding up of his hand in token of his owning the Church-Covenant^ i. e. of promifing to live as a Church-memher ought to dee among them; the P/ry?^//r of the Church then bap-- tizes him, and immediately after, upon the holding up of his hand in token of his o\n'ng the Church 'Cove- nant, he faith in the name of tlie Church, we receive thee into this Congregat'ton^ and accept of thy holding up of thy hand (is a token that thoti wilt h:reafttr he- have- thy f elf a4 a, Church-member ought to do among m.:^ What harm is there in all this ? And yet i$ not this a Profejjingy Dedicating^ Covenanting^ Symbolical , Sa- cramental Sign^ as much 2iS tliQ Sign of the Crofs is among usf Doth not holding up the hand figmfy and reprelent ? Is it not therefore' a, (ignificant and fymbolical Ceremony f Doth it not import ^nobl/ga- ' tion lying on the perlbn? Is it not therefore dedtca- ting, covenanting^ and facramental^ as much as the ; fign of the Crofs ? Why then lliould this be Icrupled - more than the other ?: Hea for And by this Mr. B.\ great miftake appears about iTizL ^Ws matter ; who fuppokth that the Mmipr Ipeafo eth in the name of Chrift whsn he fgns with thcflgn cf the. Crop', 2ind as God's Officer from him, 2nd fa dedicates him by this ftgn to the fervice of him that d/ed upon the Crofs ; whereas the Minifer in that Act ^)eaks in^the ^/i/?^e of the C/'/^r^/', as evidently ap- I pcais , (no pears by tliofe words, IVe receive him i^njthe Coft- ^re^atwn of ChnH'^s block ; and ilvzn follows^ as the Iblemn rite of Admiflioii, And' do fum hm with the fion of the Crofsj &c. All publick and io\Q,\rn Jd- - mijfion.s mto Societies^ having fbme pecuUar Cere- .many belonging to them. And lb as 6^/?/y^* befides . it^facramLntal Efficacy is a Rite of Jdmifflcn into Chr^[Ps Cathol:(k Church ; lb the fij^n of tht Crofsis ' kit o our Church of England : in which this Certmony is ) uled, without an^ prefer ipt ion to Qihcx^hiirch. s, . Sect. 50.. But faith Mr* B. thoftgh the fignr of the ^^^^-^^-^^^^^ Crofs may be la.vfillj as, n. tr,%nfitnt^. arbitrary^ p^^y f" '"^^'^^■ry. finofiT^n; yet not as a ded/cat/n^ (10^7^ and as the com- ^^*^"^^''''>^iical man fr of effing fymlol of h-aptized Per fans. If it be.^ j^ iq,.. • law full in the former fen{e, I cannot underftand how. it fliojld be unLi-.vfuU in the latter, .. Tt/, laith he,- thz infituting of the lattr hi longs- to God o/wlj. How doth that appear ? Bt^a/fe he hath made tivo Sacraments already for that • end. True, but not onelyfor that end ; but to be the means and infiru- ments of conveying his Grace to men ; which none -^ but Gc5^ himfelf can doe, and theretore none but he. ^ ought to appoint the means for that end^ And we account it an unfiifferable irlblency in tlie Roman Churches y for them to take upon them to make appli- cation of the Merits of Chrift to Rites of their ovn In- (Htution\ which is the only poTible way for a; Church to make ne v Sacraments ; but if every fignifi-- . cant cuflom in a Chnrch mu ft pals for a new Sacram^nt^ , then fitting at th^ .Sacrament iscinev Sacram nty be- caulewe are told it betokens refl and Commu?jion ivith Chrift ; then putting oS' the Hat in Pruytr is a new Sacrament^ becaule it is 'diproftjfmg fign of Reverence , : thea; then laying on the hand^ and kifflngtht Book inf^vcA" ringz.xz new Sacraments^ becaufe they are publick f^,mbolicd Rites, But lakh Mr. B. it belongeth ontly to theKjng to make the common badge orfymbol of his own Sub]ecis. Yet I hope, every Nobleman or Gen- tleman naay give a diJiinB Livery v^dthout Treafon^ And tlierefore why may not every Church appint its own Rite of admiffion oi Members into its Body^ . But the obligationJoere is to the common duties of Chri- ftians. And is not every Church-rfiember bound to perform thefe^ That which is pccuhar, is the man- mr of admifflon by the fign of the Crop ; and this Rite,om Church impofes on no others but its own Members, i. e. makes it neceffary to none eife ; and to fhew it to be onely a Iblemn Rite of Adm^ffiony it allows it to be forborn in private Baptifm. But laith Mr. B. Chrifls Sacraments or Symbols are fuffi- cienty we need not ' devife more^ and accufe his Inflitu^ tions of in f efficiency. If it be lawfull, the Church is to judge of the expediency ; and not every private perfbn. And to appoint other Rites that do not encroachupon the /?^y?/^////^;^j of Chrift^ by challen- ging any efeci peculiar to them, is no charging them . with infuHiciency^ Well, faith Mr. B, but it is un- lawftill on another account^ viz. as it is an Image ufcd, as a fnedium in God^s w}^/j/Pj and fo forbidden in the SecopdCommmdment. He^ay as well make it un- lawfuU to ufe Words m Go^s M^orfbip, for are not .they Images and reprefent things to our ;wWj, as well as a trafjfi nt fign of the . Crofs ^ Nay, doth not Mr. B. in the lame place make \t law full to make an Image an Obje^ or Medium of our confideration exci- ting our minds to Worfjip God? as he inflanceth in a CrucifxyOr hiflorical Image of Chrifl^ or fome.holy man. If any Divine oftlie Church of EngUni had faid any thing to this purpofe, what out-ciies of Poftry liad been made agunft us ? How many Advances had\\'e prefently made for letting in the ^ro{\ift lioUtry'^. How many Divines of x\\t Church of Romi had ht^n quoted, to fhew, that they went no further and 'de- fired no more than this ? Yet the tn.-^fi.nt fi^^n of the Cr^, without any refpeSt to jvoyfb/py is condemned among us, ^t^s forbiddtn by the Second Coynm.indjntnt ; and that by xh^ f.vne prfon and in the /f>^e- page. But it is u'fed as a medium in God^s Wjr[b/p, Is our « JVorfJjip direfled to it ? or, do -we knee/ before it, as Mr. B. allows men may do before a Crucifix ? Do we declare that we are excited by it to worfliip Gqd ? No ; alLthefe are rejsfted by our Church. How tlien is it a medium in God*s JVorjhip ? Why forfbotll, , it is not a, meer cir cum fiance hut an outahtrd act of Worjhip. Wliat, as much as kneeling before a Cru- cifix? and yet that is lawful! according to Iiim, fup- fo(ing the mind he onely excited by it. Suppole then weonlyufe the Jign of the Crofs to excite mens con- fideration in the aB of IVor/Jjip ; what harm were in it upon Mr. B.'s grounds ? But our C/^/zr^/^ allows not ; lb muchs only taking it for a lavfull outxvard Ctre- mony^ which hath nothing of JVorjhip belonging to it ; how comes it then to be a medium in God^s wor- • fjip? For Mr, B. faith, in the fame place, thtre is a t'xofold medium in God's IVorfljip. i. Medium ex- - citans, th^t raifes our minds to JVorpjip God^ as a Crw- cifx^&c. 2, Medium terrainans ; or ashe calls it ter- -- mhzus^'ng^emre caufx f.^alis^z worfllipped mediun^or the ttrmin^^yOr the thing ivhich we nvyjhip mediately y . on pretence of reprefentingGod^ and that ire rw^rjhip him in it ultimately*. And J his he. takes to be the thing for- \. - bidMn.-. L'ddz// dire: fly in the fecond Commmdmtnt^ viz. to 'mrjhlp! ACre^iture ( with mind or bodyy in the Act of Diuim IVoijljip, its rcpreftnting Gody or as the medi* ate t'crm.ofour Wor(hip^ by which ive /end it unto God, . as if[ ttwere m:)rt acctpt^hUto him. So that it is lav^ pill] faith he, hy the ftght of a, Crucifix to be provoked tj ivoy[b>p God J b\^t it^s nnl.t vfill to offer him tfjxt Wor^ (h'p^ hy offering it to the Crncfx fiyfl^ ^sthifign, wxy^ or m ans offeri'l-ng it to God, Obferve here a ftrange piece of parciaiity. i. It is allowed to be la f till to pr ty htfore a Cr/t.-^px^ 3.3 ^ m:diu'i txct.wSy as a;i oh]^ci thit fl^rs tip in 'tis a ivorfljippifTJ affect: on ; and fo all thof^ Pxpifis are excured froin Idolatry who profefs they ufea- Cr/^j/Xc for no othtr eni^ although thev perfbnn all Acis o^ a (oration before it; and it wilibecoTiea very hard QiuftionwheLhe; the mind in 1:5 cjnrideradon, uniting the Imt^e with the Ob- ject^ itkiv not giv^e the fime A:ls ofJVor/hip to one as to the o:her, bit in diTcrent rerpe£ts. For the l/T^tae being allowed to excte th^^mmd to conf deration of the oh'jtcr to be ivorjh ppedj the objdSl is con (tiered in thcn^-fidcis rpt)r-f:nted by tin Imaoe^ and confeqjent- }y isfo worfllippeJ; and why then may not /-/^.^ jj?:?/ - jbtp be as wed directed to the Im ge . peared. There is one thing yet remaining in Mr. B. about this matter to be confidered, viz. That according to Defcncof - the Rfde of our Churchy the crofs in Baptrf>yf hath a ^'^^ '"'^-^^ L z Cixcrc ^4?. Sacrament aI efficacy attributed to it ; for, faith he, . As th Heater of Bdptifm worketh morally^ by fi^gni- fying the wajhing of ChriJPs Body ; fo the Crofs is to operate mar ally y by figr^ifyi^g ChriJPs Crncifixior?^ the bepefits of his Crofs and our Duty. And tjien he adds, That tt is the common Doctrine of Prote- ft ants that the S^icraments are not injiituted to give Grace ph y fie ally j but only morally ; %W that even the ivifeft Papifls themflves do maintain onely fuch moral Canfality tn Sacraments, And fb by this mearfs he would make the ftgn of the Crofs to have the nature of a Sacrament with us. But < that he hath mifreprefented or mifappUed both the PopifJj and Proteflant Docfrine about the efficacy oi Sacraments to ferve his purpole, I fhall now make appear. t; Concerning the Popifh D^^r/;^e ; that which overthrows the ftrength of ail that Mr. B, faith ^.. is, that it is unanirnoally agreed among them as 5f<^* a matter of faith ^ that the Sacraments do confer grace^ ex opere operato, rvhere there is no' actual impedime?2t y and that it is no kfs than here fie to ajfcrtj that they are bare outward." profeffing fignsy co-j:\ F'o- ^' ^- That they are meer Ceremonies. This not one renr. ie:>et. of them^ whoni I ever faw, either denies, or dif- Tndent ^''^' putes ; and it is exprefly determined in the Coun- s'ff.n. ' r/7^of Florence nnd of Trent. But then they have ccn.d. a very nice and fubtle queftion among them about t4ie manner how the Sacraments do confer Grace, whether phjfisally or morally. By phyficalJy^ thty mean, when a. thing by its. own immediate aclion hath influence on producing the e-ff'eEt ; by morally^ tliey mean that which doth effeciually concurr to the (357) the pyoduc!/ig the efftSf^ but -nfter anothev manner^ as hy ferfvafiof^y hy intrtaty, Src. As he that riim the [word into amthers bowels^ kills him phyfi- cally ; he that per/ivades and incoiiraoes htm effec- tually to doe it, is as really the cctnfe, of his death as the other ; but then they jfay, he is but a mo- ral and not a phyfical cauft of the murther. They all agree, that the Sacraments do efftciually con- vey ine Grace immediately folIo\is. And about this indeed they are divided, ^ome fay, there is no mceffty of ^ afferting oiore than a bare moral caitfality ; be- caule this is fufficient for the infallible dficacy of the Sacraments, fublato obice, as Gamach^r^s a Gamachr. late Profeffour in the Sorbon delivers their Doc- ra"*.*^. T.^* trine : and of this . opinion, he reckons Bona- ^- s- I'enture^ Altiffidore^ Scotuo\, Durandtis^ Canm^ Lr< defma^ and many others: and with this he clofes, becaiife this is fufficient^ and the other is to make Miracles without caufe'j as Icng as the effecl follows certo^ infalUbiliter & ex ope re cperato^ as he there {peaks. And for the fame reafbn Card, Ae Lugo Zz2 yields (358) ugod;^^" yields to it, although he there feith, that a Sa- 'suiT!'n^^2, crament is (ignnm practicum infallibile Gratia. So that thofe who do alTert onely this Tmral Caufor- lity Q^ Sacraments, do not •Tuppofe any uncerta'tnr a\ tyin ths efftci, any more than the otiiers do, but d onely diiTcr about the n'^7 of producing it. Yet yijmbert. Tp.fnhtrtm^ another late Profeffour of the Sorbon d( sacram. proves the Doctrine of a Phyfical efficiency to be 2;^^4>r%. i^uch more agreeable to x\\z finfe of their Church'^ and that the argument i* oT no force againft it, - hecauft It is fo hard to he under ft ood^ for then- they mull quit many other Doftrinesbefidesthis. ^joh, Baptrfla^ Go'/iet^ a late learned Thomift, not one- fy conrends earneftly for this opinion, but faith, T/S^'S n-O' *^ greater part of their Divines a ffert itj and thofe^ ^ m/fi»rn,'i. of great efi reputation^ as Rfiardus Tapper yV'ega^ Saf- ai}p.:^,art,2, yn^s^ Tfamhert^ps^ SfureZy Valentia, BeUarmin^ Regi- naldm^ Mccratim^ Ripdda and many more. And • Qoqnetiti'S, he faith, reckons uf Fifty three eminent Divines n-ho hold the phyfical Caufaltty of the Sacra- ment So that Mr. B. is both very much miftaken in the common Docirine o^ th^ Roman Schools^ and- in applying the moral caufality of the Sacraments^ as it is afferted by their Divines^, to the ftgnifcancy- of OdT Ceremonies^ 2. As to the Proteftant DoclrineL he reprefent^ that in very ambiguous terms; for,^ he faith. That proteftants . commonly maintain that the Sacraments are not inftituted to give Grace Phyfically^ hut onely (. morally. If it be their Z)^c:7r/>?e, that the Sacra- - ments are inftituted for the conveying of Grace at' all, which he feems to yield; (and if he did not, mightbe. fully proved from the Teftimomes of the* m.oft: ^. I (f59) moft eminent Reformers abroad, as well as at home ) This is fufficient to fhew that the /?^» of the Cro/s can never be advanced to the d'tqntty- of a Sacr^t- ment among us ; fince in no fenfe it is held to be an Infirtiment appointed for the conveying of Qr^r.e^ And fbthis Vhrcxfe of a New Sacrament h'Si thing onely invented to amufe and perplex tender and injudicious perfons ; There being not the leafb' ground for it, that I candifcern; and yet fiich pretences as thefe have ferved to darken People's minds, and have filled them with ftrange fears and' fcruples; yea, fomeVho have conquerM their pre- judices as to other things, have not been able to get over this mighty ftumbling-'hlock ; which 1 have there- fore taken the more pains to remove out of their way. And yet after all, Mr. B, declares, That if it he a^ jiny it is the Minifier'^s and not the Perfcns who offers di'k Aorv the Child to he baptized; and another maris fmfidl Ecclef. Cafes mode will not jufiife. the negleci of our duty. And '%49'P-82iJ. therefore fuppoling/Z/ey/^;^ oftheJCrofs to be as bad as feme make, it, yet it can be no pretence for. S,^ fa- ration. Sect. i2\ But Mr. J, hath a farther blov/ at oi-r churchy for Mowing worf/jipping tovard the Altar ^ Mi^hiefof- theEafi^and at the found of the w.or d ^ efii^s \ which^ Impanr. Pre^ he faith, <;ire made the Motive oflVorfhrpj if not forne- "*^'^' thing elfe. The lawfulnefs of thele things, (b far- asthey are required. by our Churchy I had formely defended againfl.the Papijis, and now Mr. J. bor- rows > Ckrifciaa (^60) rows their Weaporfs from them ; although he doth not manage them with that skill ^nd dexterity which T.G.uled. I had faid, that bowing at the mme ofjefii^'y was no more than going to Chnrch at the loll of a Bell, the IVorjhip bing not given to the Name^ but to Chriji at the found ot his Name. ■JVfy may not^ Gith he, an Image give warning to the Eye, when to worjhip God, as well as a Bell to tht Ear? I will tell him fince he needs it, becaufe an Lnage is a might v df/paragement tO an infinite and invifihk Being; it is direSily contrary to his Law toworffjip him by an Image ; it is againfl: th^fenfe of the Chnflian Church in its beji and pur eft Ages ; tliis one would have thought I had proved fo much againft the Papifts^ that I had little realbn^ to expert (uch a queftion from a P rot eft ant. But fiich men do too much difcover, whole part they are willing to take againfl the Qhirch of Engl-tnd. He grants the Papfts go too far in preferring an Image higher thm ■ to be Motiv^um Cult s, but the Q^ ft ion is^ whether th^y do not fin in applying it to this lower nfe^ to make it an cr- denary ftated Motive to Worship. When F read this, I began to pjty the man, being- in fome fear left fbniething had a little diiordcred his fancy. Tor where do we ever allow fuchan ufe of Im.'^ ges in our Chtrch? li he had written againfl: Mr. B. who allows a Qnuifix to be Medium excitans^ he had fbme reafbn to haveanfwcred him, but I have none. But he brings it home to us-^ for, faith he, If men do (in who mike an Image ari ordinary fiated motive of JVorfbip, then how foall we excufe our ovn adorations ? What doth the 'inanmeanV I am yet afraid, all things are not right right fomewherc. We ackno\^dedge ^o adorations^ but what are dae to tlie Divwe Majejly ; and do the/e need to be excufed ? And what conlequence is there from the unlawfulnefs of the Worjhlp of Imaoes^ againft our worfhippin^J^ of God'? Let him firft prove, that we givtadorAtion to any befides the Divim Majtjiy^ before we fliall go about to excufe our adorations. But if mm do not jin in mxking an Im/i^e aftated Motive of Worjhip ( whoever faid they did not? I am lure, not our Church. But let this pals, what follows ? ) then^ faith he, yvhy do we not introduce Images into our Qhurches ? Ask Mr. B, that Qnefiion, and not us of the Church of England. If wx. allowed the JVorfhip of Images to be la vfuU^ this were a pertinent Que- ftion; but fince we deny it, what makes all tfiis againft us? which tf our Church-men ^ all venture upon ; I pray ftay till they do, before you charge us with it. Are not thefe men hugely to feek for Arguments againft om Church that talk at this rate ? But, he laith, they may doe tt with equal reafon. Here is fbmething now fit -to be proved. We utterly deny that we may worjfjip Images on . the fame Reafon^ that we perform external aiora- tion to God by bowing the Body ; or to T^y^ at the mention of his name. Hold now to this, anJ prove it. Inftead of that, he fliews the diiTerence betv\xen going to Church at t\\t found of a Bell, ^id bo, ring at the name of Jefi^^^s ; viz. That the Bell tolls o.'it of IVorf/jip to bring thtm to it\ but the found of the word Jefus u in the- m^dle of JVorJhip, when mens minds /ho:/ Id be intent on de- votion^ and not fit liflening and watching^ as Whit- tingtonV Cat watcht the Monf^. {thtre "'tis for you^ fviz. what he hath laboured for all this while) for thd cifiid flartmg of a, tvord, mcl tht dro[^**)tny of t'vo fylUbks. But the Queftion is not a|?out the ftafonMemfs of doing this when we are in other Acts of devofion and immediate Application • to God J which no body contends for, that I know of;, but about the Uxfulnefs Q>i doing it in the time oi Divme Service^ when we heir the name of Jefi^ repeated in the Lejfo/is^ or the Oee^; and the Cam;^ which requires it refers to the for- mer C/iffor/^jZnd in the In'ymciions of Queen Eli- z^abeth^ t\\t Leffo/ts'^xnd Sermons are mentioned psir- ..ticularly ; and although it be laid, or otherwifi tn the Church pronotmced^ yet by the manner of fhewing this Reverence^ viz. with lo.vncfs of ccwttfn and im- covering of heads of mankind \ it fup.'^oleth them at that time not to be impbyed in any other Atl of Devotion. And fb it giv^es no iaterruption to the intention of it ; nor obliges men to lie at tlie c^tch for the coming of the wordy as though all our Worfhip confiftediiit ; but fince our Ch.rch ap|)roves it as a laudable dremany^ we ought not to refute it at /e^/S- nable times ; unlefs it can be proved iwla if//Hin k felf. Which I fay, can never be done, as long as the IVorjhip isdirC'Sted toa^r//e (9^/>r?, viz,, the Ptrfon ofChrifi; and the mention of his nurr.e, onely expreffes the time^ as the tolling tlie Bell doth of going to Church. Neither doth it figniiie any thing to this purpofe, whether Per- fonsbein the chr/-ch or out of it ^ when the Bell rinis ; for in the flime page he mentions the Nhfs-hell\ which (bunds to the Pfi?//; in the Churchas well asoutof it ; and if the Ob]e^ of their Worjhipv^'tro, true, as it is falfe, that w^o jld make him better underftand the parallel. " • But, But, faith he, // // k a duty to give external Reve- rence to Gody when ever the word Jefi^ is mentioned^ there is more need of it in our ordinary converfes^, and the fecular affairs of the world ; andfo^ he adds, this word might do the fer vice of the Maf-bell going about the fireetSy at which all are bound to fall down and wor- ship. Now, what a ftrange piece of crojnef is this, to difpute the larvfulnefoi doing it at churchy becaufe we do it not at the Market-place ? My^ bufinefs is to defend what. our church requires, if he will allow that, and thinks it convenient to do it likewife in common converfation^ let liim defend his own ndwin- vented -ways of Reverence ; as for us, we thinl^-there are proper ye^yS/?/ for Divine Worfhip^ and that it is not enough to do what is lawful^ unlets it be done at its convenient time^ but there are fbnie men,- who know no mean between doing nothings and over-doing. But is this becoming a Protejiant Divine to parallel the Worfhip we give to the Eternal San of God, as our C^//r^/^ declares. Can. i8. and that -which the Papifts give to the Hofl^ when it is carried up and down the llreets ? At laft, he commends the moderation of the Ca- non ^ 1640. about bowing towards the Eajl or Altar ^ that they which ufe this Rite^defpife not them who ufe it not\ and they who ufe it not^ condemn not thofe that ufe it : but he would fain know why the fame moderation (Ijould not be u fed in other Rites, as the fignofthe Crof^ and knee lingat the Lords Supper ? It had been much more to his pur- pofe to have proved any thing unlawful which had been required by our Church. But the cafe was not the fame as to thofe things which were required by our church, ever fince the Reformat ion ^-^Vi^. as to fbme cu- ftomes^which although in themfeiv^es Uivfil^ yet were never ftriftly enjoyned,but left indifferent. And there- A a a fore fore the moderation uled in the Canon^ 1640. was very f uitable to the principles of our Church\hut how doth it . ioWow ^that becmftfome things are left at liberty ^therefore nothing jhoidd be 'determin^d]or being determind ought not to be obeyed^ It was the great Wifdom diov^x Church not to make more things neceflary. ( as to praftice) than were made fb at the fettlemeht of our Reformat tion\hut whether there hzfujficientReafon to alter tho(e terms di Communion \^\\\<:}ci were thehfetled. Tor the fake of fuch whofe Icruples are groundlefs and endlefs, Ido not take upon me here to determine.But as far as I can perceive by Mr. A. he thinks the Jpo files Rule of forbear ance^O\x\, i^.tobe of eq^al force in all ages^ and as to all things ^about which Chriflians have different appre- henfions ; arid then the Vafifls come in for an equal fhare in fuch a toleration, hnd fb thofe who do ?jot worship the Hofl^or Images^ or ufe Auricular Confefflonj rnuflnot cenfure thofe that do^ uniefs he will fay, that the Papijls have no fcruplt oiConfcience^ as to fiich things ; but if notwithftanding thefe fcruples, our Laws put a juft reftraint upon them, then the Rule of Forbear ance^o^. 1 4. is no obligatory Lav to Chriflians in all ages-; and confequently, notu^ithftanding that, om Churchm2iY juftly require the obftrvation ot fbme things , though it leaves others undetermined;, ■ But he faith/^f/S Cufiomes though left indifferent ^ are. (till obferved among us , and praclifed by all the leading Church-men ArA what thenrare they lawful^ox are they, not ? If not, why are they not proved to be unlawful f And if that were proved , what is all this to the point oi Separation, unlefs they were enjoyned to all People , and made terms of Communion ; /. e. that perfbns were not allowed to joyn in all Acis of Communion with us ^ unlefs they did them. However, he thinks this this rvill prove ( What, that they differ from us in any fuhfiAntidl part ofWorfljtp f No, he dares not fay that : but what theo ? ) that we differ in more than a circum- fiance , even at leafl tn a circumflantial part ofWorfhip^ yet wemuflbefuppofedtohe agreed. To convince the Reader, what an admirable faculty of proving- this man hath , jet him but look on the thing he under- . took to prove. I had laid , that we were agreed in the fithfiantial parts ofWorfljip ; this he undertakes to dif^ prove , for two or three leaves together, and the con- clufion is , that at leafl we differ in a circamflantialpart ofWorfhip^ and his confequence mufl- be,therefore we differ in a///^/^;?^/W , or-elfeitisidleand impertinent talk. T. G. w^ould have been afhamed to have ar- gued after this fafhion ; but they are to be pitied, they both do as w^ll, as their Cauie will bear. Yet Mr. J, cannot give over , for he hath a very good, wall at proving fomething againft our Church , although he hath very ill luck in the doing of it. My argument was, " Ifit be lawful to y?/?^r^/e upon pre- /^ tenf e oi greater purity , where there is an agreement ^^i^docirine^ 2inA the fubHantial parts ofWorjhip,t\\tn2i *^ bare difference in opinioa,as to Ibme circumftanttah ^' inWorflnp and the befl conftittitionojQhiirches will be " a fuiBcient ground to break communion and to fet up . " new C^//rr//e/. Hitherto we have confidered his deni- al of the Antecedent ; and the charge he hath brought againft our Church , about new fubfl ant ial parts ofWor- (hip ; we now come to .his denying the Confequence , viz. that although it be granted that there is an agree- . mmt inDocirine andthe fubfiantial parts of Worfljip\ yet he Will not allow it to follow that a hare difference in opinion as tofome circumflantials will he fuffic lent ground to break communion and to fet up new Churches, ' To Aaa.2 * un- underftandtheconfequencewemuftfuppofe, i. An dgretment mthtfuhjlantial parts of Worjhip. 2 . A Sepa- ration^hr greater purity ofWorfhip. And what then can juftifiethis Separation^ but a difference o{ Opinion as to Ibmer/V^/^^^^/^z/Wj- in Worfhip ? Hold^ faith he, the confequence is not good^for there are certain middle things^ between fuhjldntial parts of ivorfhip and hare circum- fiances ^about which it will be lan>futto divide ^though other- wife we agree in doBrine^ andthe fubjlhntial parts of Wbr:- (hip. So that here 2iSeparationis juftified (i.) on the account of fiich things, which are confeflTed to be nei- ther fiihflantial nor circumflantial parts of Worfbip. (2.) Although there be an agreement in the fnhflantial farts of Worship ; and confequently, although thefe middle kind of things be not m2iAtfrdfiantial parts of tvorfhip. For that he charged us with in the Antece- dent ; and now allowing the Antecedent and denying the Confequence^hQ mufl: grant, that it is lawful to fepa- rate on the account oi Ceremonies^ although they be rnade no parts of worfhip at all. For if they be neither fobflantial nor circumflantial parts ofworpjip^ they can be none at all; and yet he faith, it is lawful to divide about them. And which is more pleafant, when he goes about to prove the lawfdnefoi feparating for the Jake of tliefe things,he doth it by undertaking to fhew, that they are made fubfl ant i alp arts of WorjJjip. For thus he argues. The Church (p/^England hath exalted thefe things^ i. e. Ceremonies J to a high preferment in worfhipy to (igni fie the fame things with the Sacramental Elements y to make them neceffary to falvation as. far. as man can. make them ; and therefore they conclude them (infuL If their preferment in Worfliip makes them finful, then they muft be either fubflantial^ or circumflantial parts of Worfljipj and thQir f par at ion is not upon the account of of their hcmgCere?920?^ies, but that thole Ceymo}2kj are fuppofed tD be made Parts oUVorflji^^ M'hich I have anfwered aheady. But after all our arguings about thele matters , j^. ^ j; Mr.^^ iaich,//^e Controverfiejtmds (Idl^whcrc itdidthefe himdni years ^ and more : I Utterly deny that, for the Nonconformijis have advanced more towards Separa- tion thelelaft ten years, than they did.in a hundred . . years before; as appears by the foregoing difcourfe. However, they are ft ill unfitisfied in Conjcience about • theft matters >f andfo long they cannot joy n with m^ and our Church excommunicates thofe who condemn our ceremo- nies ; fo that there appears fror/i hence a necefjlty offepara- tion ; and if it he necejjary it cannot he denied to he law- ful. This is the faireft remaining Flea for Separati- on^ which I fliall confider both ways, (i.) As it refpefts the Churches cenfures, (2.J As it refpecls the judgement of Confcience. I . As it re(pe£i:s the Churches cenfures. This Mr. B, i . often infifts upon. The Canons^ faith he, excommunicate . Anfwer to ipfo facto,^// that fay the impofed Conformity is unlawful, ^f-^^' ^' 4^' If this he unjuft^ is itfiparation to hefo excommunicated ? Plea for And who is the Schifmatick here ^ Would you have excom- ^'^"^^j P- ^ 3 ^ municate men communicate with you? And tf 7nen he . ^^' • vprongfdly excommunicate^ are they therehy ahfohedfrom allpublick Worfhipping of God ? or do they lofe their Rioht to all Church-communton ? To this I anfvv^er, That the [Excommunication denounced, is not againft fuch as modeftiy rcruplethe/^rr///&e/of ^/6i;^^^j- impofed^ but agl5nft thofe who obftjnately affirm it ? The words of . the Canon are not, as Mr. B. quotes them, If any one do hut affirm any thing in tin Liturgy^ Ceremonies ^ &c. to be unlawful: .C~i'i' r.'yu'aivfulare excommunicate^ iplb fa^to ; but ivho/oevet^ fhdll Jffirm the Ceremonies of the Church' of Enghnd efia- l?ltjhedby Law^to be impious^ Anti-Chri(iian^or fuperjiiti- Qiis^kt him he ExcommunicAte ipfbfafto.Mr. B's words bear quite another lenfe from thofe of the C^;^c?;^;for to iky^ifany n^m do hut affirm^ Sec. it impUes that a bare fino^k Jfcrmation incurrs excommucication ipfb faQ:o;but when the Canbnikiith^if any fljalUffirmy &c. it impUes thefe circumi3:ances which according to the common fenfe of mankind do defer ve excommumcationyvizxhsit Jug. ds vera, it be done /^//^//^/t/y and ohftmately: (both which the Reisi.c.6. word 4/5?^^^ will bear.) For, ^sS.AuguJiin very well laith, every npans err our is horn rvith^ until he either finds an accuftr^ or he ohjlinately defends his opinion. Tarn diu ftifiinttur feccatum aut error cu]ujlihet^ donee aut accufaio- rem inveniat^ aut pravam opnionem pertinaci animofitate defendat: Pi][ excommunication doth ixi^^o^Q precedent admonition y according to the Rule^ If he rvtii not hear i^-the Church )et him he as an Heathen ^or a Puhlican.Th^rQ- ioxt general excomrnun/cationszhhough they be lat^e/en- tentU as the Canonifsi!^^^ , do not affeo: particular perfbns, VintAthQevidenceh^notoriof^'j not only of the hare fail but of the contumacy joy ned w ith it. Befides , fuch excommunications which are dejure & latAJenten- t/^^2irQ rather to be looked on as Com/ninations^ than as De vita. fpir. . formal excommunications^ OX Gtrfon putting-the quefti- • u'^ropT, * on^n^hat the'cfecl of fuch excommunications is ? he an- fwers, that it is no more than this .^th at there needs no new judicial pro cefsjbut upon ^ roof or confeffion the Judge ?nay . tr onoimce the fentence, Which ^\t faith, helearmfromhis Maftcr^ who was Pet, de Aliaco the fariKJus Cardinal of Camhraj.rS.vA if it requires a newfentence., then it dftth Y.l^c!^-n!^' "Ot actually excommunicate :&ut of this the k^rntd Jrch- 22,23,24,2 5. biJJjop ofSpalato hath -dif courfed at large ; to whom I refer refer the Reader. As to the praflice diCunon Law In ^^ . ct>;t(iit. r. . E^^gLwd^Ly^dwood ikithjthsit a declaratory fentence of tent.7pfT'' the Judge is necefTary^notwithftanding the excommu- f^cfo. . nication ip/ofaffo. And it is a Rule in our Churchy that can.<^5. Per fans excom?mmicate are io be puhltckly denounced ex- communicate in a Cathedral or Parochial Church every fix months ythat ethers may^ have notice ofthe?n;^nd until the fentence be thus declared, I do not know how far par- ticular perfons can think themfelves obliged to forbear Communion on the account of a^e;^er^/ fentence of e^- communication,'Ci\o\x^ it be faid to be iffo facio. For al- though the fentence feem peremptory, yet iffo facfoy doth fiippofe a faci, and Rich as delerves Excommuni- ration in the fenle of the Church ; of which there muft be evident proof brought, before ih^ fentence can take hold oithQ.Perfon. And to make the fentence 'valid as to the perfon^ there muft be due execution of it ; and the queftion in this cafe then is, whether any Perfbn - knowing himfelf to be under fuch qualifications which incur ^fentence of excommunication , be bound to execute this fentence iTpon himfelf? which he muft do, if he thinks himfelf bound to fe^arate from our 'Church on the account of this general ex- communication. And fb Mr. B. himfelf feems to refblve this point ; Although ^ faith he, iveareexcom- Plea for municated I'p^o hcto y yet rve are not bound our fives to P^^^^jP'^SS^ execute their fentence ; but ' may flay in Com.munion till they prove thefaH^ and do the execution on m themfelves byrefufmgm^ And fb he hath fully anfvvered jiis own objection^ But can thofe be called Schifmaticks for ?20t communicatingrvith a Churchy rvhoare firfi ex- communicated by that Church ? Yesjnthefe cafes they mayi( i . ) When there is a juft and fufficient caufe for that fentence. For, otherv/ife, /^^aC/^z/rr^ could con- demn ()7o) dcnin any excommHnicM^d Terfons for Schifm \ if it de- clared before hand , that all thofe who held fuch Do- ctrines , or condemned fuch /?r/?c7/Vei,niould be excom" mtmicatediTo make this plain by Inftances ; Suppofe the churches of Akiv England declare the fentence of excommunication ipfo facto againft all that oppofe in- fant-B>ipttfm ; R. Williams and his Comptny O'^^o^q it ; they upon this are actually Excommunicated ; may the Churches o?Ne}v England Q2i\\ thefe men Schifmdticks or not ? If they are Schifmaticks notwdtloftanding . the fen- ■ tence of excommunication\t\\cn. the denouncing this fen- tence before-hand doth not excufe them from the guilt TMicipJe of Schifm. By the conflittition of the Churches oi France, ^rm ar^^ every Mini ft tr that refufes tofuhfcrihe to theOrders among them is to be declared a Schifmatick :, Would this make fuch a one not to bea6V^//M?^//V/',becauIe this amounts to an excommunication Jpfo facto ? So in Scotland 1641 . Siihfcriftton to the Presbyterian difcipline was required un- der pain of excommunication \ if any had been excommu- nicated on tliis account , w^ould this excufe them from the charge of Schifm , in the judgment of the Cove- , nanters f By the Conftitutions of Geneva j any one that ^ ohpofcs 5 or contemns the Authority of that* Church for a year together y is liable to the fentence of bannifrment for a v:hole year ; 2sCalvin hi m.felf relates it. Sup- caivhEp'ji, pofc this wcrc meerly excommunication for {o long; ^pflxi. would not Calvm have thought them Schifmaticks for all that? For he fully declares his mind in this p-i22.^ cafe, on occafion Df a certain Non-conformifi in an Epijlle to Fnrtll \ where he advifes that, he jhould he ' fyfc fammoned before the Magiflrate ; if that did not prevaif they fjjould proceed to excommunication of a pn-fn who by his- 'obfvraacy 2iflurhed the order of the Church; which ^ faith he , is agreeable to ancient Co:m- (J70 Councils and the mind of Cod in Serif ture \ there/on let him that will not fuhmit to the Orders of a Society, he cafi out of it. Here we fee excommunication jufti- . fied againft iuch as refute to obey the Orders of a Church ; and much more certainly, if they publickly affirm them to be Impiou^s^ Anttchnjlian or Super fi- tious as 8. Canon expreffeth : and no Church in the world, but will think excommunication reafbnable up- on the like grounds ; and therefore if there be fuch a tiling as Schifm^ they may be guilty of it flill, al- though excommunication be denounced againft them on iuch accounts. (2.) If they proceed to form • new churches ; as will appear evident to any one that reflects on the former inftances ; and let him judge, whether all perfbns {o excommunicated, w^ould not have been condemned much more for Schifma- ticks ^ if they had fet up new churches in oppofitlon to theirs. S. ^//^//y?//? puts the cafe oi good men un- DsveiaReL jufily excommunicated^ and he faith, they are to hear ^* ^' it With patience, for the peace of the Churchy and fuch will fill maintain the true faith ^ fine uUa Conventi- culorum fegregatione, without running into fepar ate Meetings ; although they do believe thernfelves unjuflly excommunicated^ Such as thefe, faith he, the Father which feeth in fecretj will reward and crown in fecret. This kind feems very rare^ but there want not injian- ceSj yeay there are more than can be believed. 2. hsto the judgement of Con fciences. Tht Author 6. 54, of the Letter out of the Count rey lays the Foundation oith^' feparationvi^orxt\\Q forct of Scruples, mighty letter out of Scruples^ Scruples oi a long ftandtng^ and of a large ^^e Country. extent. Scruples that tlnre is no hopes to remove^ with- *^' ^' ' out fome very overpO'X-ering impreffion on mens minds, I am fomuch of another mind, that 1 think a little B b b impar- ifnpArtiditj^ znAdiie co^fideratien would do the biifii- neis; but as long as men read and hear and judge only of one fide, and think it a temptation to ex^ amine things as tliey ought to do, and cry out, they arefdtisfitd already, there is not much hopes of do- ing good upon fuch, but I think they can have no . great comfort in fuch Scruples. Men that really fcru- p\c things onto? tender ^efe of Co^fcieffcey are fincere- ly willing to be better informed, and glad of any light thit brings them fatisfaftion, and do not fly out into rage, and violent paffionagainftthofe who offer to remove thQii' Scruples. Hath this been the temper of our fcrupu/ous Brethren o? late? Let their Scruples be touched never fb tenderly, they cannot bear it, and take it extremely ill of thole who would Anfw. p. 8 1, better inform them. Mr. B, freely tells me, that he that thinks his oivn^ or others reafonings will ever change all the truely hone (I Chrifiians in the hand ( as to the unLiwfulnefs oi the thinos im poled) knowethfo lit- tle of matters^ or of men^ or of Confcience, as that he is mmeet to he a Btfjop or a Prieft, What is the rea- fbn of liich a fevere faying ? Where .lies the Jlrength and evidence of thefe Scruples ? Why may not ho- neft men be cured of their errors and miftakes, as I am perRvaded thefe are fuch which they call Scru- ' pies ? Is there no hopes to bring the People to a better temper j^iVid more judgement ? For I know nothing more is neceilary for the cure of them. Here is no depth of learning, no fubti!ty of reafbning, no endlefs quota- tion of Fathers necefTary about thefe matters. The difputelies in a narrow compafs, and men may lee light if they will. But what if they will not ? Then we are toconfider, hovj fz,r 2iwilfull mifiaktox wrot of Confcience , will jujlifie ?nen < h I fay it doth, not^ cannot juftifie them in Mngevily2sA that I am fore fiirc break ing^ the Peace of the Church fot the fake of fiich Scrttflts^ isy And this I had faid in my Ser- mon, which I take to be very material (oi our fcru- ftdoHS perfons to confider. For fuppofe they fhould bemiftaken, doth this error of Con/aemc juftifie their fepdratwny or not ? If not, they may be in an ill con- dition, for all their Scruples^ or their confidence. And • fb \Ai. Baxter hath long fmce declared, that if we ons^clfamrdi do through rveakmfs^ or ferverfenefs take lawful things . Gov.p.48?. tOi^ be unlawful^ that will not txcife m in our difobedi- tHtt. Our error is our //;? , and one fin will not ex- cfife another ftn.^ But Mr. A. faith ( i . ) That I do iti. to put together wilful Error and mi fake of Co?ifci- ifflpV.p.- 2. ence^ when I fay they do not excufe from fin^ fmce there is fo great a difference bettveen a wilful Error and a mtftake offtmpk ignorance. What flrange cavilling is this ? When any one may Ice that I joyn wilful both to Error and Mi fake. And is not a miftakt or error diQonfcience all one ? If I had laid a ml fake of (imple ignorance doth not excufe from fin^ I had con-, tradifted the whole defignof that difcourle, which is to fhew that there muft be wilfulmfs in the error or miftake which doth not excufe. For I fay expreC-. . ly, if the error be wholly involuntary, it doth ex- S cufe. This is but a bad beginning in a Difcourfe dbowtConfcience, 2. If no error will excufe from fw^ why is the Qjie- ft ion afterwards put by me^ What error will excuft f I anfwer, ( i. ) It is an exercife of patience , to be troubled with a cavilling adverfary. ( 2. ) Do not I fay as plainly, as words can exprefsit, that a wil- ful error doth not excufe from fin ? And the que- ftion afterwards put, concerns the fame thing; and the Anfwer I give to it is, if the error be wholly Bb b 2 inv'o-^ (574) involuntary, it doth excufe, but if it be wilful it doth not. Is this mans confcienoe full of Scrmks that writes at this rate , with fo little regard to the plain meaning and words of him whom he pretends to tonfute ? P^^g, 5. He faith, I put om of the wildeji c'tfes that ever rv/ts puty viz. If A mm think himfdf hoimii to divide the Church by finfid Sep ay at ion , that fepjiration is ne- ver thelefs a fin for his thinking himfdf bound to do it. Par ( I . j it may be ]nfily qiiejUoned^ whether it be pof- pble for a man in his Wits to think himfelf bound to di- vide the Church by (in ful Separation. What Soph'fflers arguments are theft ? As though we did not com- monly fpcakof the thing ^ it is^ and not as the Ftr- fon apprehends it, S. Paul did think himftlf bound to a {infulperfecution^ although he did not think it fb, when he did it. The ^ervs thought themftlves bound to kill the Apoflks^ which M^as wilful murder.. and yet they were men in their wits. 1 he fdfe Apofiles thought themfelves bound to divide the Church by zfinful Separation. How th?n comes this to be thought fb impoffible a cafe as to the thing it felf ? for I was not fb foolifh to put the caft concer- nmg men, who thought themfelves bound to com- mit a fin, knowing it to be a fin. (2. ) He much quefiionSj whether ever any did think himftlf bound to div'de a Church , he maypofsibly think himfelf bound to avoid it. If he may think himfelf bound to do that which x^^k^sdivifions m2i Churchy it is fufficientto my purpoft. And did not the falfe Apofiles do fb,^ and have not others followed their examples? And thus , after other trifling Cavils to the lame pur- pofe , after his manner, he yields all that I fay^ and faith, It is freely granted by all the vporldy that wilful Error, Error doth not cxcufi fromfi/i. And after many words about the cale of an erromoi^ confii^me^ he P- ii- concludes that / deliver nothing but the commando- Eirintof xllCa,fuifis\only he thinks it not pertinent to the. matter tn hand. Why fb? was not the matter in hand about the duty q{ complying with an eflMijhed Rule ? And was it not very pertinent to this, to fhew how far an erromom confctence may, or may not ex- cule from fin ? But Mr. A. faith, it fljoM have been about the Power ofQonfcience^ concerning an ejlablifljed Rfde of mans making ; and fuch for which they have neither general nor particular warrant from Godfo to make, * Is not this indeed to the purpofc ? Firfl: to fup- pole an unlawful rule impofed, and then to enquire what confcieme is to do about it. My bufinefs was to ftiew, that men were not in doubtful cafes to fat isfie themfelves with this, that they followed their confci- ences ; becaufe their confciences might err, and if that Error happened to be wilful ^ being contracted for want of due care, what they did, might not only be fmful in it felf ^ but imputed to them 2iS fms. Which all men w^ho pretended any regard to confci- ence ought to have an eye to : for why do they pre-^ tend confcieme^ but to avoid fin ? And if under a wil- ful error ofconfcience they may fl:ill be guilty of great )&?/, asthe 'jews andS. Paul'WQXQy then men ought not to fatisfiethemfeives barely with this pretence, that they do as thdr confciences direft them. This , was the plain defign of that part of ^^^ Sermon; and I leave any one to judge, whether it were not pertinent. But he faith, the Errors of the Di [[enter Sy if they htfuch^ are wholly involuntary^ and caufed by invincible ^'"^^^ Ignorance. If they prove fb, it will be the better for j^eijft. I hope they have better arguments in their r- OWH: own breafts for it, than what appears in fbme of their late Books ; for neither a peevifb, ai^ry, fcornful, pirOvoking way of writing about thefe matters ; nor a light, icurrilous, cavilling, Sophiftical Anfwer to a ferious difcourfe, are any great Cgns of fuch an im- partial endeavour after /^to/if^;^;?;, asMr. ^. boafts of. I cannot tell how much fhey have read the Scri- ptures^ and ftudied this Controverfie ; nor how earnefily they have prayed for dtreBion ; but I have fcen enough of their unfriendJyMhates , which give me no great fatisfaftion in this matter. But I leave this to God and their own ^(?;?/?/V^re/ to judge ; being very wil- ling to hope and believe the befr. ^ ^. To return to ^^ Author of the Letter, Themain^i force of what he laith, lies in this, that thofe who can-^ not conquer their fcruples as to communion with our Churchy muft either ret urn to the Sate of Paganifm^ or fet up new Churches hyjoyning with the ejt^ed Minijters. This is new doctrine^ and never heard of in the dayes of the old Puritans ; for they fuppofed men obliged to continue in the Communion of this Churchy although there were fbme things they y?r//;^/f^, and could not^ conquer thofe fcruples. And this they fuppoled tobe" far enough from a State of Vaganifm. ,p.8. JS'^^ they fcruple the Vfeofthe Sacraments with us * and much more living under fome of our Minifters. I ne- ver heard this laftalledged for a ground of feparation till very lately, and it hath been confidered already^^j And it is a very hard cafe with a Churchy li People muft fly into ^S'e/'^r^/^/^/^jbecaufe all their Minifters are not fuch as they ought to be. But if they do fcruple \oyning in communion with our Churchy I would fain know, whether as often as men ^o fcruple joy ningwith others^ thQiv Separation be lawful i" If it be, it is a; vain vain thirtg tOt^lk b(\h^ ''fettled ConfUtUtiou'of a Church ; whether Epifcopul^ Presbyterian^ or Indepen^ r/^/e overthrows them all. I will inftance particularly in the laft, as moft favourable to fuch kind of Liberty. And I need not liippofe a cafe, fince fuch hath already happened feveral times in NewEn^rUnd. R. Williams is one remarkable In- {k2inCQ,'who/crupled many things in their Churches, and therefore could joy n no longer with them ; and thought himfelf bound to let up z/eparate congregation among them; and the People who fcrupleda^ wtllas he.chofi him for their Pafior. What is there in this cafe, but is every whit as juftifiable, as the prefint feparation ? But did the Churches of New England allow this for aj//y?C4///^e?fo far from it, that/?.. W^/7//^;^x publiffi- ttlmer!'' ed grievous complaints to the world, of the perftcu- Bloody Te- tion he underwent for it. Mr. Baxter mentions ano- "^"'^* ther Inftance fince this from the moutliof Mr. Nor- Defence of ton^ an eminent Mintfter of Ahw England^ viz. of a rhe Cure of Chitrchthitfeparatedfrom a Churchy on the account ^y^ ^'^i^- ?• 124. their Preachers having human learning ; and upon aH the applications and endeavours that could be ufed towards themytheir anfver was^ That is your judgement^ and this isours^i.Q. they could not conq-ier their Scrupks^ and therefore muft perfift mfeparation^ or returnto Pag a- . mfm* Mr. Cobbet of New England mentions athird ^ inftance ; one O^^J/^/^ Holmes being unfatisfied Vvurh o^^^r'sAp. the proceedings of the CA/zr^rA of Rehoboth, ^vitl>: Pj^^f^j^.^^^'- draws from their C(?;^;w^;;/<9;^, andfets up another Af pjwcr, p 51. femblym the To.vn ; and upon his obftinate continu- ance therein, was folemnly excommunica ted by them . And what the late differences among them concern- ing the Subject ofBaptifm and Confociation of Churches may come to, time will difcover. Twould only^ know, whether if Mr. Davenport and the Ai^enting party (7 38) .pmy there from the determination of their Syp^o^, fhoald proceed to Separatw^^^ this Scparatwf^hc Juftifiable or not.^ This is certain, that the Dijfen- FirflPrinci- fersth^xt do charge their Brethren with Innovation EngUnd by ^^d Apoftafiefrom their fir ft principles ; and fay, their /. iiathir, confciences cannot comply with their Decrees : and if they ^ ^ '^ ^' proceed, thofe Churches may be broken in pieces, by xh^^Qpri^riplts of Separation, As the Separate Congre-^ gat ions in the Lor^) Countreys^ moft of them were by miv Scruples, which the People could not conquer ; for the Anahaptifts commonly railed Scruples among their members^ and carried away many of them. And fo they had done in iVejv En^land^ and dilTolved thofe Churches before this time, if this principle had been allowed there, 1//^. that where People cannot conquer their fcrupleSy they may proceed to Separation. No, they tell them, they muft preferve the Peace of their Chur-^ ches^^ind if they cannot be quiet among them, the world is wide enough for them. So they fent R. Wtl- //^^j- and others out of their Colonies ; notwithfland- ing the far greater danger of Paganifm among the . Indians, This I only mention, to fhew that m Jetted Church doth allow this liberty of Separation, hecanfe men cannot conofuer their Scruples, And upon the fame ground, not only Anabaptifts and Quakers, but the Pa- pifts themfelves muft be allowed the liberty of fitting upfeparate Congregations^ For, I fuppofe this Gen- tleman will not deny, but they may have Scruples too, m.iny Scruples^ and of lo^fg ftanding, and among great numbers^ and they have Priefls envigh at liberty to at'- tendthtm. And by that time all thefe havefet up among us, fhall we not be in a very hopeful way to preferve the Protcftant Religion ? Thefe conlequences do flow fb naturally from fiich principlesjtliat I wonder that none of thoie w^ho liave un undeitaken to deteiid the C/ru/e oiStf.ir'Atmi\ have ta- ken any care to put an}^ ftop to it, or to let us know, where we may fix and iee an end of it ; wliat fcnipks are to be allowed, and what not ; and whether it be lawful to ftparate as long as men can go on in fern- plingj and fay thty cannot conquer their Scruples. Are there no 6Vr-///?/ei- air.ong us, but only 2.^2^m^ the fign of the Crofs, and God-fathers am God-mothers in Bap- tfm^ and kneding at the Lords Supper ? Are there none tildit fcr Zip le the unlaw f dm fs cfilnfant-baptifm amongus? Are there none that fcruple ^/^e very ufeofBaptifm and the Lords <^V//?;^er, faying they are not to be literal- ly underftood?. Are there none that fcruplc giving common refpect to others 2.Sd.fort of Idolatry'^ Are there none tlwifcruple the validity of our Or din at ions j ^ndrd.y,\vtcd,nluvc no true Churches, becaufe we re- nounce Communion with the Pope? What is to be done with ail thefe, and many more fcrupkrs, who profefs they cannot conquer their Scruples no more than - others can no theirs about our ceremonies, and fuch weighty things as the uleof Godfathers and God- mothers. This I mention, becaufe this Gentltman feems to r - r look on it, as a more dreadful thing than thefign of the ^ Crofs. For, having fpoken of that, he addcs,AW/i- p,^. 0- ^^ it in itfelfof lefs freight ( perhaps* t is of much greater ) ' ^ ' that in Baptifm the Parents are not fuffered to he Spon- for s for thttr Childre.n, but others mufl Appear and under- take for them \ which he repeats fbon after. And P-S. yet f. C, who f^iw as much into thefe matters, as any that have come after him, in the ^^;?iJ/^;;j- decla- red, that this was a thing arbitrary ^and left to the difcre- tion of the Church, And in his firft Anfiver he faith, r. c/s firfi ¥or the thin^ itfelf, confidering that it is fo oenerally re- Anfwcr to ■ Ccc aivei mnu-i-n,. 49. 43' Aniw.^ Flea for Peace,/?.: 107. Defence of his plea. p. 25. Plea for Pc:lcc,^z49. Fratr. c, 3. Sea. 2. (380) ceived of all the Churches^ they do not mi [like of it. So that, on the fame ground it feems, all other Frote- jlmt Qhurck's may be fcrupled at, as well as ours ; and yet not only this Gentkmxn^ but Mr. J5. feveral times mentions this, as one of xS\^ grounds of the unUwful- nefs of the Peoples joyning tn Qommunion with tis : nay, he calls this, h/s greatefl oh]e^ton\ and yet he confef- feth, that if the Sfonfors dohiit refrefent the Parents^ our Baptfm is valid and UnfuL Now where is it,that our Church exckidesfuch a reprefentation? Indeed hy Canon 2(^, the Parents are not to be compelled to he prefent^ nor f offered to anfwery as Sufceptors for their Children ; but the Parents are to provide fuchas are 6 5^?^'» ^'^f''^^- fit to u ndertake that Office. In the Bohemian Churches^ there feems to be an exprefs compaci between the P^- rents and the Sponfors ; but there is no declaration oS our Church againft fuch an implicit one, as may be reafonably inferred from the confentofthe parties. For the Parents defire of the Soonfors undertaking fuch an 0/^reforhisC/'/7<^is in effeft transferring his own Right to them; and fb they may be laid to re- prefentthe Parents^ If our ChurchhSidi appointed the Sponfors without or againft the confent of the Pa- rents ; then none could it\ reafbn fuppole, that there was any implicit compaci between them. But fince they are of the Parents chooftng, what they do in that office^ is fiippofedtobe with their///// confent. ViBa- ptifrnW^XQ folemnly celebrated as of old, at fbme cer- tain feafons only, and indifpenfable occafions requi- red the Parents abfcnc e^might not they appoint others to be Sponfors for their Children upon ?nutual confent and ^:(7ree/?^e;^r among themlelves? Our Churches not per-rujting the Parents themfelves to hQ Sponfors is but like fuch an occafion of abfenc^; and the inten- ticn of our Church is not to fuperiede the obligation of (?8i) of Parents, but to fuperinduce a farther obligation upon other Perfbns for greater fecurity of perfor- mance. If men be negligent in doing their duty, muft the church bear the blame, and this be pleaded for a ground oi Separation from her Qommumon ? But there is fbmething beyond this, which lies at • the bottom of this fcruple ; v\z, that the chiUs Right to Baptifm defends on the. Right of the Parents^ md therefore tfthe Parent she e x elude d^md only Sponfors ad- mittedythe Children fo baptized have no right to Baptifm. For Mr. B's firft Quejiion is, which iv/ny the Child cometh D^f. of tlic to have right to Baptifm^ any more than all the Infidels Plea. ; . 26. Children in the world r* And his next is, whether the Church of England require any ground of title in the Infant^ he fides the Sponfion of the fort-defer the dG'od-f a- thers^ and Gods general promife ^ I anfvver, (i .) The church by requiring Sponfors doth not exclude any Title to Bapt/fn^which the Child hath by the Right ofthe Parents. For the sponfors may 0 be fuppofed to appear in a threefold Capacity. 1 . As reprejenting the Parents in offering up the Child to Bap- tifm ; and fb whatever right the Parents have, that is challenged, when the Child is brought to be b.tptized. 2. Asreprefenting the Child in the An f vers that are made in Baptifm ; which is a very an:ient and univer- ^ fal praftice ofthe Chriftian Church ; for it was not ^ only obferved in the Latine Churches in S. Augnftins ^,,^. ^p. jg. time ; and in the Qreek Churches in S. chryfoftoni'Sj ckryjofl.m and hath fo continued ever fince ; but the Jkthiopick ^^'^^•''^• and Armenian Churches do ftill obferve it. 5. In their own capacity ; when they promt fe to take care of the good education of the Child in the princifks ofthe Chri- ftian faith ; in the charge given to tire m, after Bap^^ tifm. So that fince one of thefe capacities doth nc^t deftroy another,they aJlfucceeding each other,therf;is Ccc 2 no (380 ^0 reafonto fay that the Chiirch doth exclude the right which comes by the Parents. G ( 2 ) If the Parents be Iiippofed to have m right ^ yet upon the Spnfwn oiGod-fathers^ the chnrch may have right to adminifter Baptifm to Children, Not, as though their Sponfwn gave the right y but was only intended to make th^m par ties to the Covenant in the Childs name and Sureties for performance. To make this clear, we mufl: confider, that adminifiration of Baptifm, is one cohfiderable part oi the Power of the Kjyesy which Chriji firft gave to the Jpojf/es, and is ever fince continued in the Officers of the Church. By vertue of this Power, they have Authority to give admiflion into the church to capable Subjects. The Church oiChrifty as far as we can trace any records of Antiquity y hath alwayes allowed Children to be capo,- . hie Subje^s of Admiffion into the Chrijhian Churchy but left the church fhould fail of its end, and thefe Chih ■dren not be afterv\^ards well inftrufted in their Duty, rfnLdsB:ip' it required 6/>^^/ J- for them, who were not only to take care of them for the future, buttoftandastheir Sureties to ratifie their part of the C^^i^e;^^^^ which -'i-Baptifm implyes. And the ancient Church went no farther as to the rigk of Baptifmthdin t\\is ^ for fince the Pover of the Kjys was in tht Church to give ad- mifsion to capable Subjects ; fince the Catholiek Church did alwayes judge Infants capable , ther^ feemed to be no more ncceffary for their admifsion than the undertaking of Sponfors in their name. All this appears from S. Augufimes Epifikj ad Boni- facuim ; where he faith f i.) That the childs bene- fit by Baptifm doth not depend upon the intention of thofe that offer him. For Boniface put- the queftion to S,A-iguflin about fbme who offered. Chil- lier ^n to Baptifm ^ not for any fpir it ual benefit ^ but for 'cgrpord corporal health ; notwithftanding this^ faith S. Jw gnkine^ if the due form of Baptifm be obfervedy the fpiritual tffeci of it is obtained, (2 .) That the Churches right is chiefly concerned in the baptifm oi Infants, For^ faith he, the Children are offered to Baptifm and. the Spiritual Grace to be received thereby y not fo much by thofe in whofe arms they are carried (^for fb the Sponfors ufed to carry tliem in their right ar?ns) af by the )vholt Society of the Faithful, Tot a ergo mater Eccltfia qu^ infanclis t(l facit^ quia tot a omnes^ tot a fingulos par it : to that it is by the Churches right ^ that he fuppofeth them to receive baptifm and the bene- fits by it. (?.) That there is no n^c^ffityy that the Parents themfelves offer their Children. For he calls it amiflake to think that Children receive the benefif in Baptifm^ as to the remiffion of Original Guilty ort the account of their Barents offering them. For many are offered to Baptifm by fir angers ^ and (laves fome- times by their Majlers, And when Parents are dead^ Children are offered by fuch as take pity upon, them ; andfometimes Children are expofed by Farents^andfome-- times 06 they are taken up by holy Virgins ^ which nei- ther have children^ nor intend to have any. (4.) That • the Anfivers made by the Sponfors in Baptifm in the name of the Chi Id ^ areapartofthefolemnityofBa.-, ptifm. Not as though the Child did really believe^ yet ^ it is fat d to believe on the account of the Sacrament • which fuppofeth faith. For the Sacraments becaufe of the refemblance between them and the things repre- fented by them^ do carry- the name of the things repre- fented\ as^ fahh he, the Sacrament of Chri (Is body af- » ter a certain manner is called his Body -^ and the Sacra- ment of his blood is called his blood \ fo the. Sacrament of faith is called faith ^ i. e. the Bd-ptifiricil Covenant ■ fuppofing believing on one part^ the Church fupphes that that part by the Spa^forsy which cannot be perforra- td by the Children, Thence he {aith, ipfa reffonfw 4d cekbrationem pertimt Sacram:rnti , {b that then the church looked u^onthQ Sponfors Anfvering^ asane- ceflfary part of the fokmnity of Baptifm^ Thence stm.wi.ii S. Ai^gitjitn. elfewhere faith, that the fid€-juj[oresov Tim^ort. Sureties dU in the nxmi of the Children renounce the Devil and dlhis Pomp and Works ; and in another place he declares, that he rvould not baptize a Child without the Sponfors anfvering for the Child that he litis &- /> a token ^' ofrefpeci- ; I fay for that reafon I ought not to do" ^' it. For, how do I know when you will have ^^done with your tokens of refpeci ? It is true , you "require no m.orenow, butlconfider what r<^//;;^/y " do^ and for all that I know , the next thing you " may require me will be to p/it off my Shoos before ^\yoH^ for that is a token of refpecf in Ibme Countries ; ^' next you may require me to kifs your Toe , for " that is a token of reffeEi ufed fbme where ; and ^' who knows what you may come to atlafl: ? and " therefore I am relblved to ftop at firft, and will '^ rather leave your Hotfj than be bound to/?/// off ^' my Hat in your Prefence, Let any one judge whe- ther this be a reafonable ground for fuch an objii- nxte difobedience to tlie Command of his Father. Or f i^ippole a L^jr were made to diftinguifn the fever al Companies in London from each other , that they fliould have fbme Badoe upon their Livery Go.vns , that may reprefent the 7;^.f^eand C^;^/^.r;^r they are - of ; would this be thought a juft excufe for any mans refufing it, to fay, " What do I know how ^^ far this impofng Poorer m^ay go at laft ; it is true, " the matter is finall atprefeiir, but I confider, it ^^ is 2LBadgef\t is a moral pgni fie ant ceremony^ adan- *^ gerous teeming thing, no man knows what it may ^' bring forth at lalt ; for how can I or any man li- " ving tell, but at laft I may b^ required to wear a ^ ' Fools Coat ? Would fuch an unreafbnable jealoufie Ddd as as this juftifie fucli a mans refra^orinefs^ in rathe? choofing to lofe the privikdge of his Company^ than jiihrnitting to wear the Bado^e of it ? So that tliQ fears of what may be required is no ground for aci^ual difobedieme to what is required. f2.) There can be no re^;^4;^/ey/(//'/f/<9;^ that our C^/zr^^fhould impole any other Ceremonies^ than what it hath al- ready done, fuppofing that it miglit do it, on the • lame ground : Becaufe the Church hath rather re- trenched ihzndncreafedCeremonies ;zs will appear to any one that compares the firft and fecond Lttur- giesofEdw.6, Andfince that time no one new Ce- remony hath been required, as a condition of Cem-- munion. But befides, our Chureh gives a pariicu- krre-ifcn againftthe multiplying oi Ceremonies: be- Preface to the QSiuihthe very number of the?n, fuppofing thern lawful^ braver. ^^ ^ burden \ ofrvhich S, Auguftin complained in his time J and others had much more caufe fince ; and there- fore for that caufe many were taken away.. And withall, it is declared th/it Chrifls Gofpel was not to be a Ceremo^ nialLaw. So that for thefe reafbns there can be no juft fears that our Church fhould contradiO; her own doctrine^ which it mufl: do, if it increafed our Ceremo- nies^ fo as to make a new argument againft them, from the number of them. (3.) There is not xX\^ fama Reafonhx introducing the things mentioned by Mr.^^. as for the Ceremonies in Vfe among us. For, (i .) As • to theVfe of Images^ our Church hath fully declared againft any Religiom Vfe of them, in xht Homilies about the Peril of Idolatry ; and that from fuch rea- Ibns, as cannot extend to our Ceremonies : viz. from the exprcfs Law of God^ ^nd the general fenfe of the Primitive Churchy \v\iid\ allowed and praftiftd the fign of the Crofs^ at the fame time when it difputed ixigft vehemently againft Images , (2.) For circum- ctfion^ (•5Sp) €/fio^j which he tells us, ^»ay he ufid as ftgnifytn^ tht circHmcifwn of the heart. He knows very well that our Church joins [{^mficamy and decency toge- ther in the matter of Ceremonies ; and no man can imagine that fuch a kind of fignificancy as that he mentions, fliould be Iiifficient to introduce fuch a pra£i:ice which is fb repugnant to Decency 2imong us. Befides that S. Paid makes it fo great a hadge of the obligation to the Law^ that he faith, If ye be circum- cifedj Chrifi frofteth yon nothing : which was never faid of any of our Ceremonies. And whereas he - faith, it is ohferved in Abaflia a^ a my ft teal Ceremony ; he is much mifl:aken, if their Emperour Claudim fay true, for he faith, />/i only a National Cuflom without ^ r^ «. , , any rejpect to Religion^ like the cutting of the face in cUudu Regit fome parts of JEthiopi^i and Nubia, and boring the ear ^thiopu. among the Indians. And Ludolphm proves it to be no other, becanfe it is done by a woman in private^ without anywitneJTes. (^.) Jsto his Pafchal Lamb in memory of Chrift Gttr Pajfover that is facrificed for m ; We owe greater Reverence to Gods own Inftitutions that were intended to typifie Chrift to come, than to pre- fume to turn them quite another way to reprefent what is paft. Efpecially fince chrift is become the great Sacrifice for the fins of mankind. And he might as well have mentioned the Scape-Goat and the Red Heifer as the Pafchal Lamb ; iince they were all T^pes o( tllQ great Sacrifice o( Propitiation, But why ♦ are things never uled by the Primitive Church {for a^s tchisftory of Innocent 2. be it true or falfe, It is no- thing to us) brought to parallel our Ceremonies^ \\ hen the great /^e^^;^ of our Churches retaining anyCe^'e- monies was declared from the beginning of the Refor- mat ion tohtoiKO^ Reverence to t lie Ancient Churchy wliich obf^rved the fame kind of Ceremonies'? t)dd2 The ^. j8. The only remaining pretence for the pn/ep^t Sep^- ratiorty is, th.tt there is a parky of reafon^ a^ to their Separating from tis^ arid, our Separating from the Church of Rome. For lb Mr. A. urgeth the argument^, <ed : which fuppofeththe perfons to be baptized r.^- pabk of performing thefe things themfelves. And; then comes a Quefiwn^ by way of objection ; why then are Infants baptized^ &c. to which the fenfe of the ^/^/i'rer is, that although by reafon of their Age they are uncapabUoi performingxh^ Acts oi Repentance and, Believing ; yet the CA//rr/; doth alio w 6^6//^/ to en- ter into Covenant for them ; which dotfi imply a Pro- mife on their parts for the Children^ and an obligation lying on them to perform what was then promifed. And now let the Reader judge, fincethis horrible^e- cret is come out, whether this ought to be ranked in an equal degree as to the juftifying Separation with tllQ: (390 \\\Qm:??.llroii^ dfird7{.n6. tmreafonable doctrines of the llomkn Church, And I know nothing can do them greater Service, than fuch ParalUls as thefe. (2.) We charge theni with thofe Reafom for Sepa- rat!o;^iy\v\\id\t]\QScrift/ired\\o\vSj fuch as Idolatry^ perverting the Gcfptl and Injlitutions oiChrifi^ and Ty- ranny over the Confciencts of men, in making thole things ^eceffarytofalvatiori, which Chriji never made fb ; i3ut not one of thefe, can with any appearance of Reafon be charged on the CW J:? of England, fince we profefs to give Religions Worjhip onely to God ; rrr ViV^jhiv no Imagts 'j ive invocate no Saints ) we adore no Ho [I ; w^ creep to no Crucifix ; tve kifs no Re licks ; We eg^//^/ no /r^^V//^;^/ with the Gofpel; we lock it not up from the People m an unknown language ; we preach no other terms o/ifalvation than Chrifl and his Anoftles did ; we let up no Monarchy in the Church to under- mine Chrtfis^ and to diipenle with his Laws and Injli- tutions. "Wq mangle no Sacraments ^ nor pretend tOi know what makes.more for the honour of his Bloud than he did himlelf. We pretend to no skill in expia- ting mens (ins when they are dead? nor in turning the bottomlefs pit into the Pains of Purgatory by a charm of words Tind a quick motion of the hand. We do riot cheat mens fouls with falfe bills oH exchange^ called lndjdoencis\ nor give out that we have the Treafare of the Church in our keeping, which we can apply as we fee occafion. We ule no piotf^s frauds to dehide the People, no\ pretend to be intallible^as they do when they have a mind to deceive. Thefe gre things which the Divi'nes oi om Church have with great clearnefs and ftrengihofRealbn made good againft ihtCh-irch oi Rome ; and fince they cannot be r>^/c7:7e^ againft our C^vr^/^, with what face canmen fiappole the r.^y^jof thofe whoy^/vrr.^re from each of them to be parallels 00 As . Cm) ■ i-^^j.) As to the Ceremonies in the Romm C/jfn-chjind • j ours, there are thele confidcrable differences, (i .) They have a miojoty mimbtr^ as appears by their Rituals and Ceremonials^ and the great volume Sj written in explication of them ; we, very few ^ and thole fbveryeafie and plain; that it requires as great skill not to underftand ours,as it doth to underftand theirs. 1^2,) They ^\2iQ^ great hoimefs in theiis, as appears by the Forms' Monfeigneur, DEux vojage's que j^ay ete oblige de faire, ' rnont empeche, de repondre auf/i toft que je Paurois fouhaiti a U lettrc dont Votre Qran- dear ntafait U grace de n^ honor er. Comme jetokfur le point de vopi^s en [aire desexcufes^ Monfteur de L^ Angle eft arrive en cefle ville^ qui m^ les a fait encoi^ differ tr^ dansi^efperance^ quit voudroit bien fe charger de ma refonfe^ (jr qu^etle four.ro it far ce moien vom etreplus fidelkmtnt rendue . II eft vray^ Monfieur^ que ji fen cro)-- ois mon deplai[ir, je la remettrois encor a une autre fois ; car je nepeux voti^ ecrire fans un extreme douleur^ quand jefonge a la maticrefur la quelle vom me commandes de vous dire mon fentiment: 'Je croy que vom le fgaves dtja bienj& que vom ne me fait es pas l^honneur de me le defnander comme^ en ay ant quelque forte de douteT; vom mefaitesplm dejuftice que cela ; d^* vom ne me comp're- nez pa6 au nornhre de ceuXy qtn vnt touchant . CEglife cd Angkterre tine ft rhechante opinion. Pour moy^ je n^en avois pj^ une fime'chante cdaucim veritable AngloiSy & je ne po uv ois pets fne perfuader quil yen eut unfeul^- qui crut qiion ne pent eftre dans fa communion fins ha- • farder fon propre falut, . Pour ceux qui font engages dans k.parti de l"^ Eglife Romaine, fenjfigeois tout autre-* ' ment< Us oHt des maximes particular s.^ d^ ^g^ff^'^^ P^^ Eec aautres •Wautns Inter ejis. Mavs four cenx quit! ontmcune Hat- fon avec RomCyC^eJi am chofe bkn fingulkre de Its voir pajfer jufqu^ a ceUe exiremite ^ue de croirt qnc dans PEglife Anglic me on ne pent f aire fon faha. Ceji ^ Avoir gueres de comijfance de U Confeffion defoy^ que tout te mondt Pr(}refim.t a fi hmtement approuveey ^ qtti mtrtte en effeB ks tomnges de tout ce qi^jLy ade hons Chr eft tens. Car on nefotivoit rien farre deplt^fage que cette Confef/tonj & jamais ks ar tides de foy tfom ets recpteillis avec tm difc^ifrnmrnt ph^s jnjhy & flus raifonnahle que dans cette exccllente piece.. On a raifon de la garder avec tant de veneration dans la Biblio- thcque d'* Oxford, dr le grand Juel/i/s pour P avoir fi dig- nement defenduey ejl digne d^'une louange immortelle^ Ceji. £elle Aont Ditufefervit dans le commencement deU Reformation ,d^Angleterrey & fi elk r!avoit pas etc commefqn ouvragey il ne Catiroit pas hi nit dHune fa con fi advantageufe, Le ftcces qt^ die out^ dtvroit fermer iabouche, a ceux qui font ks plus animes^ d^ l^ avoir veiie trionpher de tant d^Obftacks devroif faire recon- noitre a tout le mondey que dieu s^ejl declare en fafa- veuTy -qtiil eft. vifihkment meU defon etab/tjfement, 3^ qu^elk A I A verite ^ la ftrmete de fa parole^ a qui elk doihj en effect fa natjfance, & fon origine. Elk eft 4U]0urdhuy ce quelk etoit quand elk etoit formeey c^ on -ne peut pas reprocher a M^ffkurs les^ Evequesquils y ayent depuis cette tefme li^ apporte quelque change- ment. Et comment done s^tmaginer qiielk ap change £ttfage ^ & peut on rien voir de plus inique.^ que de direy qiiun Inftrument que Dim employ a autrefois fqur Pinftrti^ion de tant de gens de hien y pour le falut de tant de peupks , pour Ia confdUtion tant de fidelks foit Aujourdhuy devenue quelque chofe defuneft^y & pernicieufe. Si votre Confeffion de foy tft purey ^ innocentey'VCtre fervice divin Peft auJJi, Car Car on ify voit rim At tout ^ui iende a Ltdohtrie ; *vous t^^dores que Dieu feul ; dant votrt cultt il^ ffy A rien qui ft ttrmint a U creaturty & fi Pony trouve^ qutlques certmomes qui ne ft rtmontrtnt p/U Mlkurs^ c^ejl faire froftf/ion JHunt ttrriblt Theologity avoir dtfouille toutt char it c^ nt ff avoir gutrt ce que vaknt ks anitSy ne conoitre point la nature de chofis' indifferent es^ que dtcroire qt^ elks font capabks deterdre tterneikment ctux qui s^y veukntajfujettir, C^efl, avoir une meme durtte que de croire que votre difcipl'me cc- 4;kfiafHque efi capabk de iamner ks hommes. Car on a i*on jamais vu que pour- des articks de Difcipline k falut des hommes fe trotfve intereJfS^ (ir de chafes qui nt regardent que k dehors-^ & Vordre de VEglifc^ ^ qui ne font quecomme Vecorce^ & ks envekpes de la a propos pour . 'd&s ftmmckttesy & tres ehsgai cCun (jpnt' '(jui m cln r- the que. U confoUtion dr t^tdi fiction dtjcs audutu?s, Se Cantofwer O* fair un fchifm po:tr avoir U I btrt'e dc ^debiter de telUs vanith ejl nm fort maavcvfi' coh- duite ; c^ ks patpks pjiroifftr/t bitn foiblvs de q'litttr kur rrnUiitLUs- ajfemb/ees pour de chojts q'ti ma'ittnt fi 'peu Iciir cftinjCj O" leur preference, ^e .rP^flime p.: ^^ qu\n joit tn obllgAtion- de [(Tuffrir \ce dere'f^l^mjyj-. \ 11 efi vray quMttnfois on Jhujfroit les J[fi?7d/e::s d^ A'GvktieMS k Rome CT ^ ConJiantinaplVj & qnt le. Dv- riAtiftes a voient en Li premitre pLice qn^lq-n forte de li- brtK Mm o^tjioit Its 'Eflr angers^ C?* ceLi me me ne dftrit p.is 'long temps et coinme il [y &n avoitpc^/y celt ■ m tiro.'t pajin^confq-ience. ALiis c eft nn autre fait en . AngUtetre^ et comme k bien de CEjiatj- & de I^Egiije dtpend^ abfolumifjt de C anion di peupie fur le poiuti de *lx Religion^ on rPy pourroit trop prejfer une union, un.- ' vcrfelk. Mais il la faut procurer par les bonnes voyes-, et csrnme Meffieurs Its Evi^qiies fmt de perfonn.s a une grande experience, d^un Scavoir extrAordrnaire\ £u?i zcle^ et d!une boni'e^ cnvcrs leur peuple.s vtritable?next pater nelle ffefpire qu ds P,<.mployero fit act grand Ovrage ■ A'w'ec t but e. la prude ?7ce et h charite qui font neaffains pCHir fare reufjlr are ft louable entreprif\ , Vous parti- culierementy Monfigneur, dont la moderation 'et la ca- Jaciie font re conn' es de tout le'7nonde; il fmkle que r$- Joit un dtfftin refrve pour votre grander Sage jf , d" ji ^ z'ous ny reufciftespas^Apparemment que tous les autre s '^y travailleront inutikment , I* our mor^ je ne puis con- - irlbuer dHuy que dx njoeus, et que de- priens ;. 'ai.jfi -z o;iS puis bien prctejltr (ffte fen fais tous les jours d^- fort ^(fmrts pour la.prcfpeme dePEgl^fe A^tghcane, & poi^r- (4^1) ^H^U ptaife 4 Dknfain m forte ^ que tous ks Prott- JlanPs ^ Angktefr^ m foymt a Hvmir qtfuncomr^<:^ f^um Ame, Je ^rk Vofire Grandeur d^efj efln hien ferfuade^&decroirequU n^eji fas fofjlhk d'*ejlrc avec fins dfi r effect qmjekfms^ .Monfeigneur, Votre tres humble & tres •Obeiffant Serviteur, A Leyden 3 Sep- temb. 1680. ' Le Mq)?/^- Firft (4oO FirftLctter* Si^^^'^^-n ^Le^/cr /roA'zMonfieurleMoyne, Trofcjfor of Diyinky at Leydeii , to my Lord l^tj7?op of London 5 concerning the nature of our prefent Differences , and the unLiwfuInejs of Separation from the Church of England. My Lordy TWo Journeys that I have been obhged to take, have hindered me from anfwering the Letter, with which your Lordfliip did me the favour to honour me, (bfbonas I cojid have wifhed. Juft as I was about to excufe my felf to you for it, Monfieur de H Angle came to this Town, which made me defer it longer yet , in hopes that he would charge himfelf with my anfwer , and that by that means it might be brought unto you more fafely. It is true, my Lord, that if I fliould hearken to my own unwillingnefs , I fliouId put it oTftill to another time ; for I cannot write unto you without being extreamly grieved , when I tliink upon the matter, of which you command me to tell you my opinion. I believe that you know it already, and that you do not do me the honour to ask it of me, as if you had any kind of doubt of it. You dom^ more right than (b ; and you do not account me of the number of thole that have fb ill an opinion of the Church of Englmd, For my part I had not fb ■Fff bad C404) bad a one of any true En^Hflj man^ and I cauld not have perCw aded my felf that there had been fb much as one, which had believed that a man could not be of Jier communion, without hazarding his own ial- vation For thofe that are engaged in the party of the Church of Rome^ I judged quite otherwife of them ; they have particular Maxims, and a£l by drher interefts. But for thofe that have no tye to Rome^ it is a very ftrange thing to lee them come to that extream, as to believe that a man cannot be fa- ved in the Church of England- This is not to have much knowledge of that Confeffion of Faith, which all the Proteftaru: World has fo highly approved, and w^hich does really delerve the praifes of all good Chriftiansthat are. For there cannot be any thing made more wife than that Confeflion, and the Ar- ticles of Faith were never collected wdth a more juft and reafonable difcretion than in that excellent piece. There is great reafbn to keep it with fb much veneration in the Library of Oxford ; and the great Jea-e/I deferves immortal praiie for having fo w^orthily defended it. It was this that God made ufe of in the beginning of the Reformation of England, Ai]d if it had not been as it were his w^ork, he had never blefTed it in fo advantageous a manner. The fuccels that it has had, ought to flop the mouth of thofe that are the moft paflionate, and its having trium-phed over fb many obftacles, fhould make all the World acknowledge that Godhasdeclared him- felfinfavourof it, arid that he has been vifibly con- cerned in its ed'ablifliment ; and that it has the truth and confirmation of hisword^ to which in effect it ow-es its birth and original. It is the fame at pre- ■ fent as it w^as wh.en it was made, and no one can re- proach the Bifl:ops for having made, any change in it fioce. fince that time. And how tlien can it be iinagincd, that it has changed its ule ? And can. there be any thing more nnjull:, than to iay, that an inftru- n^ent which God has heretofore cm. loyed for the inftruftion of ib many people, for the confola- tion of ib many good men, for the lalvation of lb many bchevers, is now become a deftruftive and pernicious thing ? If your Confemon of Faith be pure and innocent, your Divine Service is ib too : for no one can dilcover any thing at all in it that tends to Idolatry : You adore nothing but God alone ; in your Worfliip there is nothing that is terminated on the Creature : And if there be fbme Ceremonies there, which one ihall not meet with in IbmiC other places ; this were to make profeffion of a terrible kind of Divinity, to put off all Charity, not to know much what fouls are worth ; not to underftand the nature of things in- different, to believe that they arc able to dcliroy thofe eternally, that are willing to fiibmit themfelves iintotlrem. It is to have the fame hardnels to be- lieve that your Ecclefiaftical Difcipline can damn any. For where has it been ever itcn^ that the fah vationof men was concerned for Articles of Difci- pline, and tilings that regard but the ont lide, and order of the Church, and are but as it were the bark and covering of the truth ? Can thefe things caufe death, and diflil poyfcn into a foul ? Truly tliele are never accounted in the number of effen- tial truths ; and as there is nothing but thefe that can lave, fo tliere is nothing but thefe that can exclude men from falvation. For the Epifcopal Government, what is there in it that is dangerous, and may reaib- nably alarm mens confciences ? And if this be ca- pable of depriving us of eternal pjory, and fhutting Fff2^ " . . the the Gates of Heaven, who was there that entred there for the fpace of fifteen hundred years, fince that for all that time all the Churches of the World had no other kind of Government? If it were con- trary to the truth, and the attainment of eternal happinefs, is it credible that God had ib highly ap- proved it, and permitted his Church to be tyran^ nized over by it for fo many Ages ? For who was it that did govern it ? Who was it that did make up its Councils, as well General, as particular ? Who was it that combated the Herefies with which it has been at all times alTaulted ? Was it not the Bifliops ? And is it not to their wife condufl:, to which next under God, his Word is beholden for its Viclories and Triumphs ? And not to go back fb far as the birth and infancy of the Church ; who was it that intheiaft Age delivered EnoUnd from the error in which (lie was inveloped ? Who was it that made the truth to rife fb miraculoufly there again? Was it notthezealandconftancy of the BifliopSj and their Miniftry that difengaged the Englifh from that op- prefTion under which they had groaned fb long ? And did not their Example powerfully help forward the Reformation of all Europe? Li truth I think they m.iglit makethefiimeufeof this, ^.sGrezory Nazian- z.^n did heretofore at Conliantinoplt. When he ar- rived there he found that Arrianifin had made a very great progrefs in that place ; but then his courage, his zeal, his learning did fb mightily weaken the par^ tv of the riereticks, that in a little time the truth ap- pe ired there again more beautiful than ever ; and the Church where he had fb ftoutly upheld it, he would have to bear the name of Amflafu ; becaufe he had hrough.t tlie truth as it were out of the earth, and deared k from titc error that lay upon it^ and by Ixis ( 407 ) his continual cares had caiifed it, as it were, to come out of the Grave to a glorious Refurreclion. It is this too that the Bifhops of En^y^Urd have done ; they fiivv not only one truth, but almoft all the fun- damental truths buiied under a formidable number of errors ; they faw tlie yoke of Rornt heavier among them, than it was any where elfe : The dif- ficulty that there was of fucceeding in the Refor- ixatioh, was enough to dilcourage perlbns of an ordinary capacity and zeal. Neverthelefs nothing turns them from 16 generous a defign ; the ene- mies without, and thofe within as terrible as they feem, do not fright them ; they undertake this great work, and do not leave it till they had brought it about, and raifed up the truth, and placed it again upon the Tlirone, in fiich a man- ner that they might every where have monuments of this miracle, and jultly have called all their Churchesby the name of ^/?.?j?.i://.'Z or Relur region. But if their Churches have not that title, the thing- it lelf belongs unto them ; and you fliall hear no- thing dilcourled of in thefe, but leftures and: prailesof the pure truth. Which ought to oblige all good men not to ieparatefrom it ; but to look upon the Church of Englmd^ as a v^ry Ortliodox Church. Thus all the Proteftants of France A()^ thofe of Qenevci^ thofe of Svitz^erlnnd and Qer/n'-i^r^ and thofe of HciLmchtoo\ for they did tiiemfeivc-s a very great honour in having fbme Divines of /■>/- ^^/^/^.-i in, their Synod of Dort^ and file wed plainly that they had a profound veneration for the Ch irch of England, And from whence does it then coric, that Tome £/7^///fe.e;^ themfelves have fb ill an opi- nion of her at prefenr, and divide raflily from her, as they do ? Is not this to divide from all the anri'^ euc (4o8) ent Churches, from all die Churches of the Eafi:, from all the Proteftant Churches, which have al- wayes hid a very great refped for the purity of that of En^LnA ^ Is it not horrib'e iinpudence to excommunicate her without mercy, and to make tliemlelves believe ftrangely of her, for them to imagine that they are the only men in £;2^Z.^;^i, nay, in the Chriftian World, that are predeftinatcd to eternal happinefs, and to hold the truths neceflary to (alvation, asthey ought to beheld ? Indeed one might make a very odious Parallel betwixt thefe Teachers and Pope l^iclor^ that would needs ex- communicate the Churches of A^ia^ becauie they did not celebrate the Feaft of E.ifttr the fam.e day tliey did at RG7nz. Betwixt them and the Audems that divided from the Chriftians, and would not en- dure rich Bifliiops. Betwixt them and the Donatijh^ that would have no communion with them that had been ordained bylapfedBifhops, and imagined that tbeir Society was the true Church, and the well-be- loved Spoule, tliat fed her flock in the Soutli. . Be- twixt them and thoie of the Romra Communion, v\-ho liavefb good an opinion of their own Church, tliat out of her they do not imagine that- any one can ever be iaved. For my part, as much inclined to Toleration as I am., I cannot for all this perllvade mv ielf, that it ought to be allowed to thofe that have lb little o^i it for other men ; and who, if they w-ere Mafters, Vv'ould certainly give but bad quarter to tliofe that depended upon them. I look upon theie men asdillurbers of the State and Church, and who are doubtlefly animated by a Spirit of Se- . cjition. Nay, Icanfcarce believe, that they arc jufl ilichasthey fay they are ; and I fliould be fbme- thins: afeid, thatvcrv dangerous enemies miiiht be ^ ' ' hii ( 409 ) hid unaer colour of thele Teachers. Societi-es com- pofed of fiich pcrfbns , would be extream dange- rous ; and they could not be fuftered without open- ing the Gate to dlforder, and advancing towards ones own mine. There are fbme of thcfe that are compofed of more realbnable men, but I could wifh they were reafbnablc enough not to feparate from thofe of which the Church o{ England is compofed. Efpecially in the cafe we are in, they flioulddo all for a good agreement : and in the prefent con- i'unfture of affairs , they fhould underftand that there is nothing but a good re-union , that can prevent the evils with which England is threatned. For to fpeak the truth , I do not fee that their Meetings are of any great ufe, orth.it one maybe more comforted there , than in the Epifcopal Churclies. When I was at London almofl Five years ago, I went to feveral of their private afTem.blies, to fee what way they took for the inftru£lion of the people, and the preaching of the Word of God. But I profefs I was not at all edified by it, I heard one of the moit famious Non-Conformifls , he pi cached in a place where there were three men and three or fcurfcore women : he had chofen a Text about the building up the Ruines oi'Jerufalt?n, and for the explication of it , he' cited Plmy and Vitrtivim a hundred times , and did not forget to , mention a Proverb ia It dim ^ Dura con dura ?ion fa, muro. All this leemM to me nothing to the purpofe, and very improper for the por women , and very far from a Spirit that fought nothing but the comfort and edification of his hearers. To. cantonize themfelves, and make a SchifiB , to have the liberty to veot fuch vanities , is very ill con- duft.> (4io) duft, and the people feem very weak to quit their mutual Aflemblies for things that fb little deferve^ tlieir efteem and preference. I do not think that any one is obliged to fiiffer this irregularity. It is true, that the Affemblies of the Novatims were fbmetimes fuffered at Romt'^wA Conftmtmopk^ and that even the Donatifls had fbme kind of liberty in the firft of thefe places. But they wem only ftran- gers ; and that neither did not endure any long time ; and as there were but few of them , that is not to be drawn into example. Rut it is another cafe in Englmi ; and feeing the good of tlie State and Church depends abfolutely upon the union of the people in the point of Religion, one cannot there prefs an univerfal union too much. But it ought to be procured by good means ; and flnce the Bifliops are perfbns of great experience, of an extraordinary knowledge, of a true fatherly zeal and goodnefs towards their people, I hope that they wi'l employ themfelves in this great VN'ork with all the prudence and charity that arc neceCfary to the fiiccecding of fuch a coTimenda- ble undertaking. You particularly , My Lord, .whofc moderation and capacity are acknowledged by all the World ; it looks as if it wctq a defign refcrved for your grcjt Vv'ifdom ; and if you do not fiicceed, it is clear, that a'l others will labour in ii: but in vain. For my part, I can contribute no- thing to it Vv here I am, but Vovvxs and Prayers ; and of thefe I can protcft that I make very fincere ones every day for th.e profpcrity of the Enolijjj Church ; and that it would pleafe God to order things in fuch mannt-r, that all the Proreiiants of Ef^gUnd for the future, misrht be of one lieart and of one foul. I beg ('4") beg your LordOiip to be well atTured of this » and to believe that it is impolTible to be with more relped than I am, My Lord J Ley den Sept. 3. I 6 8 o. Tour moji Hiimble and moji Obedient ftr^ vant y Le Moy ne. <3 g g Monfeigneur> (412-; '?^l*V AParisr3z,d^Oaok MonlJigneur, le/; m vou^ a deu paroijlre (I tftrange ny fi- |-^ incivil que mon ft knee fur U kttre que voas 1 ^^^ me fifies Phonneur dem'efcrire il y a environ trois mois ; II eft f our t ant vray que je n^ay rien a me reprocher fur ceUy (^ a fin que z>ous le croyiez comme moy ^ vot^ voulez bien me permettre de njom dire comment U chofe s'eft pajfee. jQuand on ^nap- prta V oft re kttre , feftois retomhe dans une grande ' (^ violente fiebvre dont Dteu ma afflige durant quatre ou cinq mois^ & qui rn^a mene jufqua deux doits de Ix mort. Je priay un de me.s amis ,. qui eftoit alors dans ma chambrej de Pouvrir dr de me dire le mm de celuy qui me Pefrivoity mais il fe trouva que vom aviez oublte de la figner^ fur quoy je me t*a fs apporter^ pour voir ft je r^en connoiftrois point le car a^ ere ; Et ce fut encore inutilement , par ce que jufqu alors je ri' 4vois rien veu de voftre main : Cela me fit croire quelle avoit efte efcrite par celuy la rnefme qui Pa- voit apportee, pour niattrapper dix ou douze fous d^. port ; car cq petit ftratageme eft ajjez commun en cette ville : (dr aprez ala^ jt ne mt mis fas fort en peine dik C4I3) de ce qntUt dcvkndroit. Elk fe conftrvA potirtrnt dans tnon cabinet far k fins granii hazard da monde^ C^ mejlant heureufeme/it tombee fans la main ^ il y a deux ou trots jours , je U reUis ; c^ Paiant trouvie trop /age c^ trop grave pour avoir ejle efcrite par un homme tel que je me Pejlois imagine ^ je la monjlray a Monfteur Claude qui y reconnut d^abord voflre efcri-- ture y et qui me dit que vous en eftiez, PAuteur,^ jTe penje Monfeigneur que cela fuffit pour me jujlifier au- prez, de vom di un filence ^ qui hi en que je n en /bis aucunement coupahle , ne laiffe pas de me donner quelque e/pece de con/ufion. Mais pour venir au cont^nu de vojlre lettre , je ne vous puis exprimer avec quelle douleur j'*apprens que vos divifions continuenty en un temps au" quel il y a des raifons fi prejfantes de /e reunir ; Ce que vous me dites /ur tout des e/crits que P on public a cette heure^ pour /aire croire que la communion avec PEgl./e Anglic ane e/l illegitime , et que Its Mini fir ts ne la peuvent per?nettre aux particuliers /ans crime , -me paroifl une chofe ft derai/onnable en elle me/me 5 et fi /ort a contre-temps , que faurois peine a la croire ft elle ne rr?e/loit attcfice par tme per/onne de voflre mhite et de vo/lre poids. Vous /avez hien Monfeig- neur quels font et quels ont toujour s e/l 3 mes fenti- mens /ur cela , et la maniere dont fen uzay ils y a deux, ans dans mon voiagedH Angleterre^ en freq(<-cntant vos ajfemblees , et en prefcb.tnt mefme dans un trou- peau qui e/l fous la Jurrfdicfion de V Egli/e Anglicane , mon/lre ajfez que je /ais bun eloigne de croire que /a communion foit illegitime \ Et cela m^fme prouve d'une maniere bien evidente , que mon font tme nt a cet eqard e/l celuy de nos Egli/es , parce qu^il n.cfv pas imngf^ nable que j'^euffe voulu fane ^ /ans neceffUe ^ une chofc q^ii nieu/l jittire P indignation de mes f^ ins y a qut^ G g g 2 a k : n ( ^Af 'd mon retOHTj meufi expofe a leurs reproches ou a, kurs ttnfurts. Pleuft a Dieu , Monfdgmur , qut tout ce qutl y A de Qhrefiiens egaxez, dans k monde vou- Iftffent recevoir voftrt Reformation^ qut je repandrois *de hon cceur tout ce que fay de fang four kur procurer un fi grand hkn. Et que je fuis ajjeure de la joye ex^ trejme avec laquelk nos Eglifes entreroknt dans kur Communion , Si en efiant dans la purete de vos fenti* mens pour ks dogmesy ils ne differ oient pltM cH avec nom : que par des Surplis^ par des Qeremonies innocentesy.^ par quelque diverftte d^Ordres dans k gouvernement de fEglift. Et cela Monfeigmur vous fait ajfez, comprendre , ce qne fay a refpondre a v afire fee onde -queftionp^ Car puis que l^Eglife Anglicane eft une ve-^ ritahk EgUfe de noftre Seigneur ^ Puis que f on Culte dr fes Dogmes font purs , & n^ont rien de contraire a h par ok de Dieu , Et puis que quand la Reformation y a eftereceue^ elky a efte receue avec PEpifcopat, Et en y eftablifsant la Liturgie c^ ks Ceremonies qui y font aujourdkuy en uzage , il eft fins doute du devoir^' de tous ks Reformer de Voftre Royaume defe tcnir in-- ^ feparablement unis a Cette Eglife ; Et ceux qui ne k font pas^ foHS ombre qutls defir er oient j plus de (imp li- cit e dans ks Ceremonies j &moins d^inegalite cntre ks Mimflres commettent afseurement un tres grand piche. Car k fchifme eft k plus redout able mal qui puifse arriver a P Eglife ; Et pour t'eviter la charitei Chreftienne oblige tous ks gens de bien. a fnpporter tn kurs fr ere s des chafes bien mains fuppor tables que m k dotvent paroiftre celles dont il s^agity aux yeux de ceux U- mefmes qui ks ont k pltts en averfwn : Et c'^eftoit la fi bien k fentimentde noftre Grand c!r Excellent Calvin que dam fon traitte de la neceffite de la Re for mat. ion^^ I ne fait point dedifjkulte de dire^ Que (a15 ) ■ jQue s^il ft troiivoit Jits gens afsez deraifirinMu four refufer U Communion £tme Eglifi pure dans fon culte &dms fes Dogmes^ dr pour ne pas fe foumtttre a'vtc r effect a fon Gouvernement , fous ombre qii^elle aUroit ifetemi PEpifcopat cond'it tonne commt le vofire^ il n^y auroit point de cenfure ny de riguetir de dijci- fline quon ne denfl exerccr contre eux^ ^ Taleill no- "^ Calv. Edit, bis Hierarchiam fiexhibeant, in qua fic emineant Amji.i.tom.j Epifcopi ut Chrifto fubelTe non reculent , ut ab ^* ^ illo tanquaai ab unicacapite pendeant & ad ipfum referantur , in qua fic inter fe fraternam Ibcieta- tern colant ut non alio modo quam ejus veiitate fint colligati, tumvero nultononanathemate dignos fatear, ii qui erunt qui non earn revereantiir, liim- maque obedientia obfervent. £/ Bez>e mefme , qu n approuvoit pas en general le gouvernem':nt Epifcopdy fait une telle diflinciwn du voflre , et eft fi eloigni de croire que Con puijje , . ou que Con doive en prendre fujet de fe feparer de voflre Eglife y qi^U prie Die^ ardenment quelle puiffe toujour s de rneurer dans Pbeu- ■ reux efiat ou elk avoit efle mife et confervee , par le fangy .par la purete dt la foy , et par la fage conduite de fesExcellens Evefques. "^ Quod fi luinc Anglicana ''^Bez. comn Ecclefia infi:aurata fuorum Epifcoporuin & Archie- ^^'^^'^'^g'^'^f pifcoporum authoritate perfiftat , quemadmodum pag^27o^Ec:itl hoc ncftra memoria contigit, ut ejus ordinis hoini^ Francof. nes non tantum infignes Dei Martyres, fed eiia?m ^""-^ ^'^ pratifiantiiTimos Paftoies & Do3:ores habuerit, fru- atur fine ilia fingulari Dei beneficentia , qujs uti- nan illi fit perpecua. Mais^ Monfeigneur ^ quoyque les premiers Autenrs de la feparation. qui vous trouble- foient extraordinairement coupabks 5 . et que ceux qui la continuent et qui la fortifimt par Iturs efcrits de r^ifonnable.s et emportez le fount auffy extrimiment, rU il eji ntAnmoins certain que dms la multitude q!ii. Us 'Jiiit , -il y a une mfimte de bonnes gens dont la foy efi pure et la pete fmccre ; et qui ne demeurent eloigner de vous que parce que leur fimj>licitc ejl, f^r- frtft , et qiion ks a effrayez. par ces grands mots de Tyrannie, (^ Opprefjion^ de fuppojls de P Antechriji dont on leur hat perpetuelkment ks oretlles : Je les mets au rang de ces foibles qui difoient quils nefloient point du corps et dont St. Paul dit quils efloient du corps pourtant ; Et il me femhle que les bons et charitahks Evefques comrne vouSj en doivent dire^ qucy quen un fens tin peu different , ce quOptat de M/let'e difoit des Donatijfes de fan temps , Si collegium Epifcopale noiunt nobifcum habere, tamen fratres funt : Au nom de Dieu done Monfttgneur faitcs tout ce qui 'Vous fera pofjible pour ks ramcner a leur devejr par 'la douceur et par la CharitS qui feule eft capable diopcrer de grandes chojes en ces occajions. Car ks homines qui ont toujeurs de Corgueil^ Je foukvent ordi^ nairement contre tout ce q>ii kurparoft nagir que par la feule Author it '^^ mais lis m riianqnent prefq-ne jam its de fe rendre au fnpport et a la cond^./cenrlance , Man- fuems liO-iTO , cordis eft medicus. je ne prctens^ pas Monfcigneur ?ningercrde vous dcnner la deffi^j aucun corjfeil particulier'^ Vous qui voicz ks chojes de prez> , et qui avez, le ca-.ir tout p^' net re de la char it e 'Chreftienne jug^ez ?ri'eux que firjonne des remides qui font les plus proprcs a un ft grand mal ; £^76 Jias njjeure que s^il ne failoit pour le gnerir qie s"" ah ft en' r de quelques exprejfions , que quitter qnelques ceremo- nies.^ et que changir la coukurde quelques habits^ votis 'n.)oti4 y nfoudrtez avcc grand, fla fr^ et aq-ielque chofe de plus d^Jpcik. 11 me Jennie ?nefme avoir leu tn. -milque e'ndrou ^'cj*- Yindiciae de Monfitur le Doien de ^ . - -; • ■ * Wirsfor Winfor que ce furtnt I a les fentimens charaabies. que fit faroijire CEgl'tfe Anglic ane far Li houche dt trots oic qtutre de fas Evtfques dans une Conference qui ce fit fur Its moiens de r i union ^ en la prcmi'^re annie.dii' rtjlablijjcmcnt de fa Majefi' Britanniqtie , (i^ quil ne ^ tint qti^a qnelquts Minijlres de ceUx quon appclle Pref byteri^ns que la chcfe ne paffafi plus avant. 8^y quil en Joit je prie D/eu de tout mon cceur qiHU ouvre ks yeux des uHs pour leur faire connoiflre la foibkffe des raifons fur lefquelles tls fondent une fefaration fi affligeante^ Et qui I conftrve & quil augmtnte de plus XTi^'flns dans les autres^ la pJte , le zekdr la charite dont tls ont befoin pour travailltr heuretftment a une reunion qui rejonira les hommes dJ" les Anges^ c^ qui attirera ?nille benedictions de la terre & d/^ Ciel fur ceux qut y auront le pliM contribiie : Et je voi^s avou'e Monfagneur que je ne fervis pas confolahk fi je voiois quon ne ffl p. is au mo ins qtelque r^ouvei effort -pour reuffir dans un ouvrage fi faint d" fi important dans un temps qui my paroifi fi propre. Car outre que les interefis de Foflre EJiat c^ de Foflre Eglfe le dtman- dent extraordi?ktiremint , J' apprens que par une admi- rable b'enediclion du Cief. toutes vos Chaires Epf co- pales font maintenant remnltes par £Exce liens ^ervi- teurs de Dieuy qui aiment J(f^' Chriji S" [on Egl/fy. Cr qui ont tous les qualitez, de la tifh et du cz^ur qui font necejfa/res- pour pouvoir eP pour- ^vonloir contmhuer a cette bonne cewzre. Et a en jnger par voiis Men- fiigneur ^ et par Monfeigneur i^ Arch tvc [que de Canter-- bery y^ et Monf eigne ur PEvifque dH Oxford que fay en. rhonntur de voir durant mon sejour en Anglet.erre ^ je- nay; p.ts de peine a me le perfuader. Mais fay ptur de "jous avoir ennuye par cette longue lettre , je voi^- m dem4nd^ tres himblement pardon , Et je voa^s.fup-- flte d^ efire hkn prfuAdi qne je cor^fefve tonjours um extrefme recomoijfa^ce de P amiPii dom vous m^h is unlawful, and that the Minifters cannot permit it to private perfbns without finning, feems to me a thing fo unrealbnable in it felf, and lb ve- ry unfeafonable now, that I fhould fcarcc believe it, if it were not attcfted by a perfon of your merit and confideration. My Lord, you know well what my fentiments are, and always have been in this matter; and the way which I uledtwo years ago, wh'-^n I was in E^^e^^^^-^r in frequenting your af- femblies, and preaching too in a Congregation that ^ i5 updpr tl),^, juri(ciiQ:iQa of. the Church of England^ :, :\ fufficiently C4i^ ) fufficiently fhews that I atn very far from belie-, vrng that her Communion is unlawful. And this alio proves very evidently that my opinion in this matter is the fame that isholden by our Churches; becaufe it is not imaginable that I would with- out any neceOTity, have done a thing which would have drawn the difpleafure of my Brethren upon me, and which at my return would have expo- fed my felf to be blamed, if not to be cenfured by them. My Lord, I would to God that all tl:e miflaken Chriftians that are in the world would receive your Reformation ; I would with all my heart fpend all the blood I have to procure them (b great a good. And I am furc with what an exceeding Joy our Churches would enter into their Communion^, if being pure in their opinions for Doftrine , they differed no more from us , than by Surplices, and innocent Ceremonies ; and fbme diverfity of Orders in the Government of the Church. And by this, my Lord, you may perceive what I have to anf\ver to your fecond queftion. For fince the Church of En^lmd, is a true Church of our Lord; fince her Worfl^ip and Poftrines are pure , and have nothing in them contrary to the word of God ; and fince that when the Reforma- tion was there received, it v/as received together with Epifcopacy, and with the eiTabUfhmentof the Liturgy, and Ceremonies, which are there in ufe at this day ; it is without doubt the duty of all the Reformed of your Realm, to keep themfelves infeparably united to the Church. And thofe that do not do this, upon pretence that they fhouldde-. file more fimplicity in their Ceremonies, and lefs of inequality among the Minifters , do certainly Hhh 2 com- C4") commit a very great fin. ForSchifiti: is themoft formidable evil that can befal the Church : anil for the avoiding of this, Chriftian charity obliges all good men to bear with their Brethren in Ibme things much left tolerable than thofe, of which the difpute is, ought to feem, even in the eyes of thole that have the moft averfion for them. And this was fb much the opinion of our great and excel- Calvin opera lent Ca/vi/f , that in his Treatifeot theneceffity of Edit.Amfld. xho, Reformation he makes no difficulty to fay; 7m 8.^ c. n[Y\2it if there lliould be any fb unreafbnable as to refufe the Communion of a Church that was pure in its Worfhip and Doctrine , and not to fiibmit himlelf with relpefl; to its Government, under pre- tence that it had retained an Epifcopacy qualified as yours is ; there w^ould be no Cenfure nor ri- gour of Difcipline that ought not to be exercifed upon them. Talem nobis HierarchUm (i exhibeanty, in qua fic eminemt Epjfcopi ut Chrijio fubejfe non recu--^ jint , ut ab illo tanquam ab unico Qafite pendeant^ c^ adjpfum refer ant ur ; in qua fie inter fe fraternam focie- tatem coUnty ut non alio modo quam ejus veritate fint colligati ; turn verv nulla non Anathemate, dignos fa- tear , fi qui erunt qui non eum revereantur^ fummaq; abedientia obferven't. And Beza himfelf, who did not in the general approve of the Epifcopal Go- ., vernment, makes fiich a diftinftion of yours, and is fo far from believing, that one may, or that Qm ought to take occafion from thence to fepa* ' rate from your Church, that he prays earneftly to- ^27^& contra '^^^ ^'^^^^ ^^^ ^^7 ^Iways remain in that happy slrrav.ad ca^, cftate in wliich fhe had been put and preferved, I'Tldu!'^' ^y ^^^^ blocd, by the purity^ of the Faith, and by Franrrfam thf wilc conduft of her excellent Bifhops. jQuod K^G.i. fi i2unc Anglicana Ecclefia inflaumta fuorim Epifcvpo-^ rum.. rnm d^ Ar chief ifcorum author it ate ferfijiat^ querndd- moiium hoc noftyi memoria contigit^ ut ejifs or dinii ho- mines , non tmtum infignes Dei Mar tyres ^ fed etlam fr^flantiffimos Paftores dr Doff ores habueritj frtiatur fant ijla fingulari Dei beneficent i a , ^//^ uti»am illi Jit perpetua. But, my Lord, although the firft Authors of the Separation, vvhieh troubles you , be extraordinari- ly to.blarne, and though thofe that continue it, and ftrengthcn it, by their unreafbnable and paffi- oaate Writings, be extreamly lb too ; it is certain that yet among the multitude that follows them, there is a very great number of good men, whofe faith is pure, and whofe piety is fincere, and who remain leparate from you only becaufe their fim- plicity is furprized, and becaufe they have been frightned with the bugbear words of Tyranny ^ Op- ureffiony Limbs of Antichrifi which are continually beaten into their ears. I rank thefe with thoie weak ones who laid tliey were not of the Body ; and of whom St. Faul faid they were of the Body for all that. And it feems to me that the good and charitable Biflhops, fiich as you, ought to fay of them, though in fbmething a different fenfe, as Optatus Mikvitanm laid of the Donatifts of his time. Si Collegium Eprfcopale nolunt nobifcurn hab^e^ tamen Ffatres fint. In the name of God then, my Lord, do all that pofTibly you can to bring them back to their duty by fweetnefs and charity, which is only able to do great things on thele occafions. For men, who have always fbmething of pride, dor commonly oppofe every thing that feems to them to aft by bare Authf^iity only: but they fcaice ever fail to yield themlelves up. to forbearance and coadefcenfion. Manfuetm homo corAis eji medicu^. I do (4M) I do not pretend, My Lord, to thrufl: my felf in to give you any particular advice in this- cafe ; you that lee things near at hand, and that have a heart deep- ly affeftcd with Chri'iian Charity, will judge bet- ter than any man, what remedies are the moft pro- per for fb great an evi ; and I amfurethat if there w^ere nothing wanting to cure it, but the abftaining from fome expreflions, the quitting fbme Ceremo- nies, and the changing the colour of fbme habits, you would refblve to ao that, and fbmething more difficult than that, with great pleafure. And I think I have read in fbme part of the VindtcU of Mr. Dean of Windfor^ that thefe were the charita- ble fentiments which the Church of EngUnl de- clared by the mouth of three or four of her Bi- ihops, in a Conference that was held concerning the means of re-union, the firflyear that hisMaje- ily was reftored ; and that nothing hindered the matter from going farther, but fome of thofeMini^ flers they call Presbyterians. However it be, Ipray God with all my heart , that he would open the eyes of the one to make them fee the weaknefs of the reafons upon which they ground fuch an afflifb- ing Separation ; and that he would prcferve , and increaie more and more in the other, that piety, that zeal , and that charity which they have need of for the happy proceeding to a re-union, which will rejoice men and Angels, and bring down a thoufand bleffings of Heaven and Earth upon thofe that fhall contribute the moft unto it. And I affure you. My Lord, I fhould be paft all Comfort if I fhould fee that fome new attempt at leaft were not made for the fuccefs of a work fb holy, and of fuch confequence, in a time tliat feems to me fb proper for it. For befides that the (4m) the intereft ofyour State, and Church do require it in luch an extraordinary manner ; I hear that by a won- derftil blefling of Heavren, all your Epifcopal Sees are, filled at this time with excellent lervants of God, who love Jefus Chrift and his Church, and who have all the qualities of the head and the heart, which are neceflary to make them able, and willing to contribute to this good work. And to judge of it by you. My Lord, and My Lord Arch-biiliop of Canterbury^ and My Lord Bifhop of Oxford, whom I had the honour to lee during my flay in England^ I am eafily perfwaded of it. But I am afraid I have tired you with this long Letter ; I humbly beg your pardon for it ; and I befeech you to be very well aflured that I alwayes preferve a very grateful acknowledgement of the Friendfliip with which you honour me, and that I am with all the refpedthat I owe Mjf Lord, Tour mojl Humble and mofi Obedient Str^* vant^ De L' Angle, MonH Monf. Claude my cyicdknt CoUcgue, to whom I have fliewed this Letter, has prayed me to tell you, with aflurance of his moft humble fervice, that he would fubfcribe this with all his heart, and that he is abfolutely of my Opinion. Monicigneur, C:*27 ) T^hc Tliird l^ttcrrftom Monficur Claude on the fame Subjedl. A Paris 29. Novemb. St Ho Novo. Monfeigneur, MOnfieur de /'Angle ma\aut rendu la Lettre citiil vous a plu mecrire.j ay efle furpris d'y voir que vous maviez fait thonneur de rnen ecrire une autre que je nay point rece'iie^ & a laquelle je neujfe pas manque de faire repcnfe, f^ous me faites leaucoup d'honfieur de vouloir hien que je vous dije ma penjee fur le different qui vous trouble depuis. longtemSy entre ceux quon ap- pelle Epifcopaux, & ceux quon nomme Tresbyteriens. Quoy que je m^en ffis deja diverfes fois explique & par des Lettres que j'ay faites fur ce fujet a plujieurs per- fonneSy &* dans men livre mefme de la Defenfe de la Reformation , ou par Ian t de la diflintiion de I'Evefque & du Preftre, fay dit formellement que je ne blame pas ceux qui lobferv^ent comme une chofe fort an- cienne, & que je ne voudrois pas qu on sen fill un fujet de querelle dans les lieux ou elle fe trouve etablie, /. 366. fe* quoy que d'ailleurs je me conno- iffe ajfez pour ne pas croire que mon fentiment doive eft re fort confidere, je ne laijferay pas de vous temoigner dans cette occafion, comme je feray toujour s en toute autre y mon ejlime Chretienne , mon refpetl, & mon obeiffance, C'ejl ce que je feray d'autant plus queje ne vous diray pas /implement ma penfee particuUerCy mais le fentiment du general de nos Eglijes. • I i i Pre- Prevnierenient done , Monfeigneur , nous fommes fi fort eloignez de crmre quon ne pHijfe en bonne confii- ence nj'ivre fous vojlre difctpline, & fous voftre Gou- uernement Epifcopal, que dans nojlre pratie[ue ordinaire fivus ne fatfms nulle difficulte, ni de donner nos ch aires, ni de comr/ieitre le fiin de nos troupeaux a des Miniflres receus & ordinez par Mejfieurs vos Evefques, comme il fe pourroit jufliji-er par un affez grand nomhre d'exem- ples, & ancienSy & recens, & depuis peu /Jfr. Duplef- ils or dine par Men fie ur tEvcfque de Lincoln a efie efia- hli, & appelle dans une Eglife de cette Province, & Monfieur Wicart, que vous , Mcnfeigneur, avez receu an S, Minijiere nous fit Thonneur iln^y-a que quelques mois de Prefcher a Charenton a tedijication univer- felie de tout nnjlre troupeau. Ainfi ceux qui nous irapu- tent a cet egard des jentimens eloignez de la paix & de la ccncorde Chretienne, nous font afjurement in- jujiice, Je dis la patx \S la concorde Chretienne , €ar , Monfeigneur y nous croyons que l obligation a conferver cette paix & cette concord e i rat ems lie, qui fait t unite exterieure de f" Eglife ^ efl d'une neceffite f indifpenfable que S. Paul na pas fait Aifficulte dela joindre avec Pu- nite interieure d^une mejme foy, & d une rnefme rege- neration, non feulement comme deux cbojes qui ne doi- vent jamais ejirefeparees, mais aujfi comme deux chofes dependant es tune det autre, parce que fi I' unite exteri- eure eft comme la file de t interieure, elle en eft aufi la confervatrice, Cheminez, dit il Ephef 4. comme ii eil convenable a la vocation dont vous eftes sppellez, avec tout€ humilite, & douceur, avec un efprit pa- tient, fupportant fun Fautre en charite. Ellant foigneux de garder I'unite de reiprlt par la lien de k paix. pa'ix. Z)V/« cote il fait dependre cefte cfjarite frafer* tielle^ qiit nous joint Us uns avec les antr^s^ de nojire commune vocation^ ^ de l^ autre il nous en feign e quun des frincipaux moyens de canferver en fin entier cette commune vocation quit appelle [" unite de lefprit^ eji de garder entre nous la paix, Selon la premiere de ces fnaximes nous nepouvons avoir de paix^ ni de Commu* nion Ecclejiajiique avec ceux qui ont tellement degener} de la vocation Chretienne quon ne peut plus reconnoitre en euxune veritable (^ falutaire foy^ principalement lors qua des erreurs mortelles ils ajoutent la tjrannie de lame , c>^ quits voulent contraindre la confcience^ en impofant la necefflte de croire ce quits croyent & de pratiquer ce quits pratiquent. Car en ce cos le fondement d^ la veritable caufe de la communion exterieure n eji ant plus , la communion exterieure ceffe aujji de droit ^ id'' iUn y-en peut plus avoir de legitime, Selon la ficonde maxime nous ne croyons pas quune fimple difference de gouvernement^ ou de difciptine^ ni mefme un difference de ceremonies innocentes de leur nature^ foient un fujet fuffifant pour rompre le facre lien de la communion* C'eji pourquoy nos Uglifes ont toujour s regarde d^ cokr fldere la vojire^ non feulement comme une foeur^ miis comme une foeur aifnee pour qui nom dev on s avoir des iendreffes accompagnees de rcfpeal df de veneration^ d* pour qui nous prefentons fans ceffe a Dieudes voeux tres' ardens. Nous nentrons point dans la comparaifon de vojlre ordre , avec celuy jous lequel nous vivons. Nous favons quil-ny-en a^ ni ny-en peut avoir aucun entre les hommes^ qui par noflre corruption naturelle , nefoit fujet a des inconveniens^ le nojire a les flens comme le vojire^ d^ tun d^ r autre fans doute ay ant leurs avantU' ges d^ leurs defav ant ages a divers egards ^ alter nis vincunt 8c vincuntur. II nous fuffit de favoir que U I i i 2 mefme (43o) tftefme TraviJence Divine qui f^r me meeftte inJifpen- fable ^ ^ p^r la conjonilure des chofeSy m it au com- mence mevt de la Reformation nos Eglifes Jo us celuy du Preshyteraty a m'u la vofire fous celuy de I'Epifcopat, & que comme nous fommes ajfurez que vous ne meprifez^ point noflre Jimplicite, nous ne devons pas aujfi nous e lever <:ontre voftre dignite, A in ft , Monfeigneury nous defapprouvons entierement, & vojons avec douleur, de certeines extremitez ou fe jet tent quelques uns de part (0 d' autre , les uns regardant I Epijcopat comne m ordre fi ahfolument nec'effaire que Jans lay ilf^y peut avoir ni de fociete Ecclejiafiique, ni de legitime voca- tion ni d'efpe ranee de falut, & les autres le regardant avec indignation cor/ime un rejle d Antichriftianifme. ^ Ce font egalement des chaleurs ^ des exces qui ne viennent point de celuy qui nous appelle, & qui pechent contre les loix de la fagejfe & de la charite. Voyjlhy Monjeigneur, nos veritable s ?S finceres fen- timens communSy pour ce qui vous regarde, & puifque vous defirez que je defcende un peu plus particuliere- ment a Pet at ou Je trouve vojlre propre Eglife, par les divijicns intejlines qui la travaillenty Permettez moy ■ que je ne vous dife mes penfees qt^en vous expliquant mes fouhaitSy & les defrs de mon coeury fur une chofe aujft irnportante que I'eji ceUe la, Je foubaitero'is done de ' toute mon ame que ceux qui Jont allez jusqu a ce point que defonger a rompre les liens exterieurSy & la depeu- dance mutuelle de vons troupeaux, pour doner a chaque Eglije particuliere une efpece de Jouveraignte de gou- vernement , conjiderajfent hi en fi ce qui Is pretendent /aire n'eji pas diretiement contraire a tefprit du Chri- jlianifme qui ejl un ejprit d' union y (£j de fociete y ^ mn de divijton, Q^ils conjrderaffent o^ue Jous pretexte (431) que le principe des Refcrmez efi etavoir en horretcr la domination huma'tne fur la foy, & fur la confciente, comme une chofe dejlruilive de la Religion^ H ne faut pourtant pas n't resetter tout frein de difcipline, ni Je- co'uer tout joug de Gouvernementy n't fe priver des fe- cours que nous pouvons ttrer de tunion generate pour nous affermir dans la vraye fojy ^ dans la vraye pieth Qilils confidera^ent enfin que la mefme raifon qui leur fait defirer f Independence des troupeaux, peut ejlre auffi employee pour etahl'tr { Independance des perfonnes dans chaque troupe au. Car un troupeau n'a pas plus de droit de vouloir eJlre Independant des aatres troupeauXy quune perfonne en auro'it de vouloir eJlre Independant e des autre s perfonnes. Or ce feroit aneantir toute di- fdpVine , jetter I'Eglife entant quen nous feroit dan^ une horrible confufion ; & expofer I'heritage du Seig- neur a fopprohre de fes adverjaires. Pour ce qm regarde ceux qiion appeUe parmy vous Preshyteriens, comme je fuis perfuade quits ont de la lumiere, de la fagejfe^ & du Zele^ je jouhaiterois auffi de tout mon coeur qu'ils gardajfent plus de mefure dans le fcandale quits croyent avoir autrefois receu- de tordre Epifcopat, (v quits diftinguaffent les perfonnes d\w€C le Min'ijlere. Les perfonnes qui occupent les charges non feulement ont leurs defauts, mais il peut mejme quelquefois arriver que les ptusfaintes, & les plus emi- nent es charges Joient pojfedees par des mechans, & en ce cas la raifon C^ la piete vout'ent egalement quon ne corf- fonde pas le M'lnijtere avec le Miniftre. A prejent que Dieu p.ir fa grace a ote ce fcandale de devant' leurs yeux, (0 quit leur a fait vctr dans tes perfonnes de Meffieurs les Evefques de la piete, du Zete, &de lii fermete, pcur L confervation- de la Religion^ fefpere que qne cela mefme fte contrihuera pas pen a ladonci/fer^cfjt ^ des efprits, D'aiUeurs je fonhaiterok qui I leur plnfi de confiderer qji& ji dans le Gopcvernement Epijcopal //-j^ a des inconveniens facheux^ comme je nt donte pas qiiiUny-en^yt^ iUy-en-a aujji d^ de tres-facheux da»s le Vresbyterien^ comme je lay deja dJt. NhI ordre dofit texercke ejl et2tre les mains des kommes tien efi ex- empt^ [egalite a fes vices^ d^ fes exces a craindre^ dt mefme que la fnperiorite. Le plus fur d^ le plus fage 71 efi done pas de voUiger de tune a ranfre^ ni de rjf- qiter de faire un ebranlement general^ fnr Vefperance d'ejlre mieux^ quand mefme on feroit en an tor tie d* en pQUvcJr de le faire. La prudence^ la JHJiice^ d^ la cha* rite Chretienne ne pcrmettent pas d'en venir a ces eclat" t antes d^ dangerenfes extremitez^ pour une (ttnple dif- ference de G Oliver nment, Le plus fur & le plus fage efi de tacher d'apporter qnelqne temperament poitr evi^ ter^ Oil pour dimirmer ant ant quit fe pent les inconve* mens quon apprehende^ d^ non de recourir a des reme^ des vio lens, Je ne craindray pas (XappeUer de ce nom cehiy de jaire des ajfembUes a ptrt^ de fe feparer des ajfemblees comrmnes^ d^ de fe foujiraire de vojire gotivernement. ll-ny-a perfonne^ui ne voye que ce feroit nn veritable fchifme^ qui en luy-mefme d^ de fa nature ne pent ja* mais ejire quodieux a Dieu^ d^ anx hommes^ d> dont les mteurs^ d^ les proteBenrs ne fauroient eviter quils ne rendent conte devant le Tribunal de nojire commun Muitre. ^uand S, Paul nous a defendu de delaifler noftre commune aiTembiee, il a non feulement condam- ne ceux qui ne fy trouvent point en dcmeura^it dans leur particulier^ mais ceux aujji fans doute qui en font d'autres oppofees aux communes^ car cefi rompre le lien dela (433) de la ckarite Chrcthrjne qui ne vous joint fas feukment avec qudques ims de vos freres^ mais avec tons nos freres^ pour recevoir d'eux de tedi^cation^ C^' pour leuf tn donner de nojlre part^ en vivant enfemble dans une mefme focietL Et il ne ferviroit de rien de pretexter que la conjcience refifte ajfe irouver dans des ajJcmhUes qui fe font foits ttn Gouvernement qnon napproitve pas^ & que ce feroit appronver exterienrement^ ce qne ton condamne intericurement. Car outre quit faudroit lien examiner la quejlion (i ces refijiances ne vicnnent pas dune con [den ce trompee^ par un jugement precipitin puifque les plt0 gens de lien font fouvent fujets ajefor^ mer de tels fcrupules qui an fond nefont pas tout a fait hgitimes. Outre cela^ il faut dijiinguer trois fortes de chofes^ les unes que la confcience approuve^ d^ recoit^ d^ aufquelles elle acquiefce pleinement^ les attires qiCcUe re- garde comme infupportahles^ d^ comme dejiru&ives de la glorre de Dieu^ de la vraye fo)\ ou de la vraye Pieti^ (j^ de lefperance du fahtt^ d^ les autres enfh qui ti^ ennent Ic milieu^ ccji-a-dire quon napprouve pus a la ^erite pleinen/ent^ mais quon ne croit pourtant pas mor^ telles a la vraye piete d^ au falut^ enjm mot quon re* garde comme des t aches d^ des infirmitez fupportahles. yavcue que quand on trouve dans des affemhUes des chofes dc ce fecond ordre^ on que la confcience les juge telles^ on ne pzut y affijrer^ d^ toute la quefiion fe reduit il f avoir ^ (i Con ne fe trompe pas^ fir quoj il faut bien prendre garde de ne pas faire de jugemens iemer aires. jMais de J 'imaginer quon ne puiffe en bonne confcience affifier a des afftmhlees^ que lors quon y approuve plei- nement d^ generalement toutes chofes^ cefl affurement ne pas connoitre ni lufige de la charite^ ni les lo'ix dc la fociete Chretienne, Ce principe r^nverferoit toutes lesEglifes^ car je ne fay fH-y-en a aucune dont le Gou^ vernement^ ( 434 ) mernetnent, la Difcipline, la forme exterieure, lesufa- ges, & les pratiques foient dans me telle perfeclion^ quil n'y-ayt ahfolurnent rien a redirCy ^ quoy quil en foit comme les jugernerts des hommes font fort diffe- rens, ce feroit ouvrir la porte a des feparattons conti- nue lies, & alolir les affemhlees, II eft done conflant que la confcience n oblige point a fe fouflraire des affem- llees, wais quau contraire elle nous oblige de nous y tenir attachez, lors que les chofes qui nous y choquent font fupportableSy & quelles nempechent pas I'eficace falutaire de la parole, du culte divin, © des Sacremem. Et cefi a la faveur de ce fupport de la char it e qu'ejl couverte faffJftance que nous donnons a des chofes que nous napprouvons pas entierement. Voyez ce que S, Paul dit a fes Philippiens, chap, 3. Si vous (entez quelque chofe autrement, Dieu vous le revelera auffi, Tou- tefois cheminons en ce a quoy nous (bmmes perve- nus d'une mefme regie, 8c lentons une mefme chole. Cela eft bien eloigne de dire, des que vous aurez le moindre fentiment contraire feparez vous, la confcience ne vous permet pas de demeurer enfemhle, Confilia fcparationis, dit S. Auguftin contre Parmenian, ina- nia funt & perniciofa, & plus perturbant infirmos bonos, quam corrigant animofos males. Quels fu- nefies effets ne produiroit pas une telle feparation fi elle f 'etablifjbit au milieu de vous ? De la manicre ijue les efprits des hommes font faits, on verroit licn- tct naitre de la la difference des interets, celle des partys, celle des fentimens a tegard mefme de la fcciete civile, la hayne mutuelle, ^ tonics les autres trifles fuites que la divificn, qui nefl plus temper ee par la char it e, pro- duit nature llement, Je laijje a part le fcandale qu^en recevroient toutes les Eglifes refonpees de l^ Europe, la jpye quen auroid^t leurs adverf aires ^ & les avantages qu'ils qtiils ^n YttiYtroknt , qiti ftlon toutcs ks Apprf-enccs ne j'troknt pas pet its. J"* ay trop bonm opinion de ces^ Miffiturs qui croyent cjtte la Qo'ivtrncmefit Presbyte- rkn eft prtftrabk ei r Epif copal y pour neftre pets per- fnade qu lis font de fagQS tt de farienfis reflexions fur toiitts ces cho/ts , tt fur tant ^ autre s que kurs lumi- eres leur fotirnilfcnt , et que U confcknce^ et P amour de la Religion Proteftante ks impc^chera toujoiirs de rien faire , qui puijje eft re blame dtvant Dieu^ et de- uant ks hommes. Car enfn je ne faiirois croire quil- y-en-ayt aucun par my enx , qui re garde ni z'oflre Epi- fcopat , ni I'ofire Difcipline , ni qnelqiies Ceremonies que vous obfervez , comme des tach:s et des erreurs capitaks , qu^ impechent quon ne puijje faire f on fa- int -^ et mefme avec faciliti dans Z'os AJjeTr^hlees' (t fous voflre Goirjernement. 11 ne s'^agit icy ni de /'effe, ni du bene effe , mais feukmtnt du melius efle , qiiils difputent avec votis ^ et cela eft ant ainfi la juftice^ la chatiteyCamOur de la paix^ la prudence^ et le z£k pour k general de la Religion ne confentiront jamais quils fe 4etachent de vo$^s, Mais , Alonft'igneur / puifque "johs mavez mis la plume a la main fur ce fuft , Pardonnez je vous ftp- plie a ma liber te (i elk va jufqii* a vous dire ce que je croy que vous aufti devez faire de voflre part. J^efpere done que dans ces occafwns que Dieii' vous prefente vous ferez voir a toute la terre^ et en convaincrez ks plUs incredulez que vous^ aves de la piete , du zcle , et dt la crainte de Dieu , et que vous efltz de dignes ouv- riers , et de dignes ferviteurs de J ejus Chrift. Ceft deja k temoignage que vous rendent ks gens de bien , et que nitl quelque mal intent lonni quil foit , rt^ofe con- tredirt ^ et je ne. doute pts que' vous ne touffiez voftre Kkk ' Tocatioh "vocation jufqunn bout. Mais outre ceU , Monftigneury jlefpere que vous ne defaudrez. point aux devoirs de U cfwite , et de Pefprit de paiXy et que quand il m s.Agir.% que, de . quelqnes temper amens , ou de quelques Ceremmies qui fervent d^achoppement ^ et qui en elks ?nefmes ne font rien en comperaifon d^une entiere reu- nion de vofire Egltfe fous vojire faint Minijlere^ vom ferez, voir que vous aymez PEfoufe de vojlre AUitre plus que voti^s mefmes^ ^ que ce neft pas tant de vo- fire 'grandeur , ejr de vojlre dignite Ecclejiajlique que vous deftrez tirer vojlre gloire et vojlre joje , que de vos vert us Pajlorales , & des Joins ardens que vous nvez> de vos trouj?eaux, J^efpere aufji que ceux que vous avez choi(is , et apfelltz au S. Minijlere , d^ ceux que deformais vous y appelltrez avec- un -prudent dfcernement , reglez rion feulement par la donceur\y. ?nais auffi par la fever it c de la Dfcipliney quand la fe- ver it e Jera mccjfaire , marcheront fur vos tr aces ^ et fui- ront heureufement Fexemple que vousjiur donnerez^.. pour eftre euX'rmjmes en^ exemple , et en edifcation aux Eglifes qui leur font commifes. Je finis j Mon- fetgneur , par des prieres tres-ardentes que je prefente a Deu de tout mon cceur ^ a fin qt^ll luy.plaife de vouS' conferver a jamais le Jlamheau de fon Evangile ^ de repandre fur tout, le corps de vojlre Minijlere , une ahondante mefure, de fon. oncHon et de fa benediction celejle^ dont celle de Cancien A^iXQn.n^eJidit que P om- bre ^ afn quelle foit non Pemhleme et P image de la Concorde Jraternelle comme cette ancienne , mais quelle en foit la ca^^fe et le lien. "Je leprie quilveuille de plm en plus ramener le cceur des enfans aux peres^ et des ptres aux enfans , apn que vojlre Eglife, foit h^ureuje , et agreable comm^ un Eden de Dieu* Je k prie. enfin quil vous- conf&ve ^ vous, Monfeigneur , (437), en pArfm ct longut fante pour fa, gloirc^ et pour k hien et Vdvxntxge de cette grande tt conftdtrxbkpertie defon champ qu^il vou^s a donni cultiver^ et que vous cuUivezfi heureujtment. Je vous dtmande aujfi k ftcours de vos faint e 5 priercs, et la contmuation de P honneur de vofire affect on , en vous P rot eft ant que je fray toi^te ma 'vie avec tout le reffeB que je vous doiSy Moniei^neur, Voftre tres-liumbfe & tres- obeilTant Serviteur , &• Fils in JeHis Chrift, . CLAUDE. K k k \ 'Tans* (439) Paris NovemL 29. Stilo Novo. My Lor d^ MOnfieur dtiJ Angle having given me the Letter which you have been pleafed to write me , I was (urprized to fee by that, that you had done me the honour to write me another which I have not re- ceived, and to which I liad not failed to make an- anlwer. You do me ^ great deal of honour to defire that I fhould tell you my thoughts of the difference that has troubled you lb long, betwixt thole they call EpifcopAlj and thofe they name Presbyterians. Although I have already explained my felf about this divers times , both by Letters which I have written upon this Subje£t to feveral perfbns, and in my Book too of the Defence of the Reformation , whefefpeak-' ing of the diftinftion betwixt the Bifhop and the Prieft , I have faid exprefly , That I do not blame tholethatoblerve it as a thing very ancient, and that I would not that any one fhould make it an occafion of quarrel in thole places where it is eftabUihed -, ^^^.'166. And though lotherwaies know my felf fuificiently not to believe that my opinion fliou'd be much confidered^ I will not forbear to affure you upon this occafion, as I fliall atwayes do upon any other, of my Chriftian-efteem, myrefpe'S, and my obedience. This I fhall do the rather, becaufe I fhall not fimply tell you my private thoughts, but the opi- nion of the generality of our Churches, Firft, (44o) . Firftthen, my Lord, we are lb very far from 'be- lieving that a man cannot live with a good Confa- ence under your Difcipline and under your Epilco- paJ^Government , that in our ordinary praftice we rn^re no diScnlty , neither to bedow our Chairs, nor to commit the care of our Flocks to Minifters received , and ordained by my Lords the Bifhops ; as might be juftified by a great number enough of Examples both old and new : And a little whik fince Mr. Dupk(/iy that was ordained by my Lord Bifliop of Lincoln !ias been eftabhflied and called in a Cliurch of this Province. And Monfieur Wican^ .whom you, my Lord, received to the Holy Minifte- ry , did us the honour, but fbme Months ago, to • prc2iQhztCf;are^toptto the general edification of our Flock. So that they who in this refpeft do impute untcrus any Opinions diftant from peace, andChri- ftian concc-:!, do certainly do us wrong. I fay Peace and Chriftian Concord : for, my Lord, we believe that the Qbligation to prelerve this Peace, aiad thisBi^otheriy concord , which make up the ex- ternal unity of tlie Church, is of a nccellity fb indK- pehlable, that St. Pa///ims made no difficulty to join It: with the internal unity of the lam€ Faith, and the lame Regeneration ; not only as tv/o things which ought never .to be.feparatcd , but likewile as-two tluags depending the one upon the other ; becaufe if tiie external unity be as it were tlie Daughter of the jnternal , flae is likewife the preferver of it. ■iVdikj f .yeS'lie, Eplicf. 4. ivorthy of the cdlmg ivherC" ivith ye are called^ ivith all loivlmefs and meeknefs^^ mth iong-fufftrin'y^ , forbearing one Another in love "^ linie^ivourmg to keep the unity of the f fir it in th bond (44n offexce. On the one fide he makes this brotherly love, which joyns us one with another, to depend upon our common vocation , and on the other fide he teaches ys that one of the principal means topre- ierve our common vocatipn entire, whi-Ji he calls the unity of the (pirir, is to keep peace among our lelves. . According 'to the. firft of theie Maxims we cannot have peace, or Ecclefiaftical communion with thofe that have fb degenerated from the GhrilHan vocation, that one cannot perceive in them a true and faving Faith ; efpeciajly when with mortal crrours they joyn tyranny over the5oul, and that they will force tlie Confcience , by impofing a necelTity to believe, that which they believe, and to practife that which- they praftife. For in this cafe the foundation and true caufe of external communion being no more, the external communion to it (elf ceales of right , and tliere is not any that is lawful to be had any more .with fuch. According to the lecond Maxim we do not believe that a fingle difference of govern- ment or dilcipline, nor even a ditference of Ceremp^ nies innocent in their own nature is a fufficlent ccca- lion to break the (acred ^ bond of Coiiim'union- Wherefore our Churches have alwayes looked upon and confidered yours, not only as a^ifter , but as an Elder Sifter, for which we ought to have a kind- nels accompanied with ■ rcfpev^ andweneration , and for which we do prefent nioft ardent prayers unto Cod without ceafing. We do not enter into t\\^ compariion of your Order, with that under which we live. We know that there is not, neither cai-i there be any amongft men, which by rcafon of our natural corruption, is not fubjeS to inconveniencies ; ours has hers, as well as yours; and the on^and the other ( 44^ ) otlier without doubt have their advantages, a*nd dlf- ad vantages in divers refpeGts'; alter ms vmctmt^ & umcuntur. It is enough for us to know , that the lame Divine Providence which by an indifpenfable neceffity, and by the conjuncture of affairs , did at the beginning of the Reformation , put our Churches under that of the Presbyterte , has put yours under that of the Epifcopacy ; and as w^e are allured that you donotdefpife our fimpUcity , fb neither olight we to oppofe our felves againft your preeminence. So that, my Lord, w^e utterly difapprove and fee with grief, certain extreams whereinto fbme of the one fide , and the orher do caft themfelves. The one looking upon Epifcopacy as an Order fb abfblutc- ly neceflary, that without it there can be no Eccle- fiafHcal Society , nor lawful vocation , nor hope of Salvation : and the other looking upon it with in- dignation as a Relique of Antichriftianifm. Thefeare equally heats and excefles which do not come from him that calls us, and w^hich do offend againft the Lav/s of Wifdom and Charity. . Thefe, my Lord, are our true andfincere common opinions. For what concerns you , fince you defirc that I wcuy defcend a little more particularly into the ftate tliat your own Church is in, by reafbn of the inteftine divifions that trouble it ; give me leave not to tell you my thoughts, without declaring my wifixs, and the defires of my heart ^ upon a matter fb important as this is. I could wdfli tlien with all mylbul, that thofe that are gone fb far as this point, to thidk to break the external bonds , and the mu- tual dependa nee of your Flocks, to give every parti- cular Church a kind of Sovereignty af Government, would ( 443 ) would confider well whether that they^ pretend to do, te not direftly contrary to thefpiritofChrifti- anity, which is a fpirit of union, and fbciety, and not of divifioo. That they would confider that un- der the pretence that tl^ principle of the Reformed was to abhor mens domineering over Faith, and Confcience, as a thing deftruftivt; of Religion , we ought not for all that to rejefl: the bridle of Difciplinc, nor to fhake off the whole yoke of Govern nent , nor deprive our felvesof thefuccourswe might draw out of a general Union , for to ftrengthen us in the true Faith , and in true^ Piety. That they would confider, in fine, that the fame reafbn which makes them defirethe Independency of the Flocks, may be likewife employed to eftablifh the Independency of the perfbns in every Flock. For a Flock has no more riglit to defire to be Independent upon other Flocks, j:han a perfbn might hive to defire to be Inde- pendent upon other perfohs. But this would be to bring all difcipline to nothing, to throw the Church, as much as in us lies, into a horrible confufion, and to expofe the heritage of the Lord to the reproach of its adverfaries. For what concerns thofe which amongft you they call Presbyterians, as I am perflvaded that they have lighr, and wifdom, and zeal, fb I could wifli with all my heart, thnt they would obferve more modera- tion in the fcandal they believe they have heretofore received from the Epiicopal Order , and that they would diftinguifli the Perfbns fi-om the Miniflry. The perfbns that polTefs the places have not only their faults, but it may happen too fbmetimes that the moft holy, and m.oft eminent places may^be pol- Lll ieilld ^444) ^clled by wicked men; and in that cafe rcalbn- and piety do equally require that we fiiould not con- found th^ Miniftry with the ^4inifter. Atprefent that God by liis grace has taken away this fcaridal from before their eyes, ani made them iee piety, zeal, and conftcincy for the prefervation of Religioa in the perfbns of the Bifhops, I hope that this will not a little contribute to the fweetntng of their Ipirics. Befides, I colild wiflh that they would be pleafed to confider that if there be fome unpleaiant inconvenien- cies in the Epifcopal Govjernment, as I do not doubt but there are , there are too feme very unpleafant ones in the Presbyterian, as I liave (aid already. No order whole execution is in the hands of men, is ex- ernpt from them; an equality has its faults and ex- cefies to be feared, as well as a fliperiority. There- fore it is not the moft fafe and wife way to leap from the one to the other,- nor to hazard themakiftga ge^ neral concudion , upon the hopes of being better ^ though one fhould be in authority and power to do, it. Chriftian prudence, juftice and charity do not permit us to proceed to fuch daring and dangerous extreams, for a fingle. difference of Government. It is moft fafe and wife to endeavour to provide fbme kind of temper to avoid, or tolelfen as much as may be, the inconveniencies that are feared, and not have.- recourfe to violent r.emedies. I fhall not be afraid to give that name to the: holding of affemblies apart, and leparating from the publickafremblies,and withdrawing themlelves from under your Government. There is no man that does not fee that this would be real Schifm , which in it felf and of h> own nature cannot choole but be al- wayes C445) wayes odious to God and men , and of which tli^ Authors and Patrons cannot avoid the rendring a^ account before the Tribunal of our common Ma- iler. When Saint Pml forbad us to forfake tlie affembling of oiir felves together , he did not only condemn thofe that did not come thither, but flayed at home ; but thofe too without doubt that held other affepiblies in oppofition to the pubhck ones. For this is to break the bond of Chriftian -charity which does not only joyn us wdthfbme of our bre- thren , but with all our brethren , to receive from them, and to give them edification by living toge- ther'in the feme communion. And it would be to no purpofe to pretend that our confcience did oppofe our being prelent at thole aflembhes that are held under a Government that we do not approve ; and that that would be to approve outwardly ^ w4iat we inwardly condemn. For befides that it would be neceffary to examine well the .queflion, whether thefe oppofitions do not proceed from a confcience mifta- ken by a precipitate judgement ; fince that the beft men are often fubjeS; to frame to themfelves fiich fcruples, as are not altogether lawful at the bottom. Further than this it is neceffary to diftinguifli three kinds of things ; the one thofe w^hich the confcience approves, and admits of, and in which it does fully acquiefce ; the orher which Qle looks upon as into- lerable , and dellructive to the glory of God , and the true faith, or true piety, and the hopes of falva- tion ; and others lalliy which are between thefe , that is to fay fuchaswedo not fully approve as to the truth, but yet w^e do not believe them mortal enemies to true piety and falvation ; in a word, flich as we look upon as flainS; .and tolerable infirmities. LI I 2 lafSr.n' I aSrm that when we find things of this fecond rank in any Aflemblies , or thofe which the ConFcience judges fuch, we cannot be prefent there; and the whole queftion will be reduced to. this, to know, whether v/e be not miftaken , where we ought to take gcod heed that we do not makearafh judge- ment. But to imagine that we cannot with a good Confcience be prefent at Affemblies , but only when we do fully and generally approve of all things in them, it is certainly not to know neither the ufe of charity, nor the laws of Chriftian fbciety. This principle would overturn all Churches, for I cannot tell whether there be any, v/hcfe government, dif- cipline, outward form, ufages; and pradices be^of (iich perfeftion, that there is nothing at all in them to blame ; and hov/ever it be, as the judgements of men are very different ,' this would be to open the gate to continual reparations , and to abolifh all Af (emblies. It is therefore certain, that Confcience does not oblige us to withdraw from the Affemblies , but on the contrary , it obliges us to jcyn witli them, when the things that offend us ?jc tolerable, and do not hinder the falutary efficacy of the Word , of the Divine Wcrfliip, and of the Sacraments, 'lis the favour of tliis charitable patience that juftifiesour be- ing prefent at thofe things which we do not perfeftly approve. See what St. Paul fayes to the FhiUffians^ . chap. ^. If in any thing yz be otherivayes mindtd, God (ball rtved even this unto you, Ntverthekfs\^ n'hercto tve have already attained^ let us walk by the fd?nt ruk^ let us mind the fame thing. This is very far from fay- ing, as foon as ye have the leaft contrary fentiment leparate your felves, Conscience will notallov/ you i:o remain together, ConfiliaJ^.parationis^ fayes St.Jj- (447) guftin againfi: Parmeman , injtn'u funt & pQrnkwfa , C^ plus ferturh^nt infirmos honos , qium corrigmt ani- mofos males. What deadly effecis wo ild not fuch a reparation produce if it were eftabUfhed amongd you ? As the dilpofitions of men are, o«e fhoiild qjickly fee to fpring from hence a difference of interefts, of parties, of opinions, even in refpett of the civil fb- ciety, mutual hatred, and all the other fad confe- queaces which a divifion nbt tempered with charity does naturally produce. I let alone the feandal which all tlie Reformed Churches of Europe would receive by it, the joy which their Adverlaries would ]iave , and the -advantages which they would draw from" it, which in all appearance would not be final). I have too good an opinion of thofe Gentle iien w! o believe that the Presbyterian Government is to te preferred before the Epiicopal , not to be perfwa- ded that they make wile and fcrious reHeftions up- on all thefe things, andmanymiore which their Qwn knowledge furnifhes them with ; and that confcience^ and the love of the Proteftant Religion will alwaycs hinder them from doing any thing, that maybe bla- med before God and men. For in fine, I cannot be- lieve, that there is any one amongft thtm that looks upon your Epiicopacy, or your Difcipline, or certain Ceremonies which you oblerve, as blots, and capital errors, wdiich hinder a man from obtaining falvation, even with facility in your Airemblies,and under your Government. The queftion here is not about the £//?-, or the bene Efjej but only about the mtliHT' Fljfe, tliat they difJDute with you ; and this being lb, iuftkc, cha- rity, the love of peace, prudence, and zeal for Religion in the general will never allow thatiliey fliouM di- vide themfelves from you^. But, (448; But, my Lord , fince you have put the Pen into my fiand upon this fubjeft, I befeech you pardon my freedom if it go fo far, as to tell you what I think you aUb ought to do on your part. I hope then that on thele bppprtunities that God prefents unto you, you will make all the World lee, and convince tjhe moft incredulous , that you have piety, zeal, and the fear of God, and that yoii are worthy labourers, and worthy fervahts of Jefus Chrift. This is the teftimony which all good men do already give you, and none how fpightful fbever he be, dares to con- tradi^i it , and I do not doubt ,' but that you will carry on your calling to the end. But befides this my Lord , I hope you w^U not be wanting in th^ duties of charity , and the fpirit of peace, and tha when the difpute fliall be only of fbme tempera- ments, or of fbme Ceremonies that are a ftumbling- block, and which in themfelves are nothing in com- parifon of an entire reunion of your Church under your holyMiniftry, you will make itfeen that you love the Spoule of your Mafter more tlian your felves ; and that it is not fbmuch from your greatnefs , and your Ecclefiaftical dignity, that you defire to receive j/our glory , and your joy , as from your Paftoral vertues, and the ardent care you take of your Flocks, I hope too that thole you have chofen and called to the holy Mini ftry , and thole which hereafter you ilrill with a prudent diHretion call unto it, beinggo- verned not only by fweetnels, but likewife by feverity of dilcipline, when leverity flial! be necefTary, will tread in your fteps, and happily follow the example which you fliallgive them, that they may be them- felves for an exaTnple, pnd edification to the Churches ■that are committed to them* t coil- ( 449 ) I conclude, my Lord , with very earneft prayers which I prefent to God with all my heart, that it would pleafe him alwayes to preferve unto you the light of his Gofjjel, and to pour out upon the whole body of your Minillry , an abundant meallire of his unftion and heavenly benediOiion, of which that of the old Jaro^ was but a fhadow ; that it may be not the emblem , and image of brotherly concord , like the undion of o'd , bat tlie caufe and bond of it. I pray him that he would more and more bring back the heart of the Children to the Fathers, and of* the Fathers to the Children, that your Church may be happy and pleafant as the Paradife of G:d. Laftly, I pray that he would preferve you , my Lord, in perfeft and long health, for his glory, and the good and advantage of that great and confide- rable part of his field which he has given you to cul- tivate, and w^hichyou do cultivate fb happilji. I de- fire too the help of your holy prayers, and the conti- nuance of the honout of your affeftion, protefting to you, tliat I will be all my life with all the refi^^ecl that, loweyouj My Lord, Tour ?n^fi humblt • andmofi obedient Servant md Son in "Jefns Chrifiy CLAUDE: ■ F J N I s^ A Catalogue of fbme Books Printed for He^ry Mort- lock at the Fhcenix in St. Paul\ Church- Yard. AFa-ioTjal Accmtrt of the Grounds of Protefiant Eeligiort ^ being a l^indication of the Lord yirehbijljof c/Cantcrbii- ty*/ Rclathon of a Conference , &C,' from the frctended ayfirer of T. C. wherein the trite grounds of Faith are cleared y a^d the falfe difcovered\ the Church of Englaod Vindicated from the Imputation ofSchifm , dnd the n-^ofi hnponam particular Contro- verflss between 14^ and thofe of the Church of Komc^ thronghlyex- ^annned. The Second Edition corrcBed -^ by Edw. Stilhn^Seet, ' D.D. FoliO. Sermons preached Hpon feveral occafionSy with a Dfccurfe an' nexed concerning the True Reafonofthe Sufferings cfChrifi^ where- in Crellius^/j Anfxir to Grotius is confidered^ by Edw. Stilling- liect, D. D. Folio. Ircniciim : A Weapon Salve for the Churches Wonnds ^ by Edw. StillingQeet, D, D. Quarno. A Difccnrfe concerning the Idolatry FraBifcd in the Church cf Rome, and the haz^ard of Salvation in the communion of it ^ in An- fwer tofom?Pap€rs of a RevoUedRroteJlant^ with, a particular Ac- count cf the Fanaticifm and Divifions of that Church, by Edw. Stillingikct, JD. D. Odavo. An An fwer to ftveral Late Treatifes occafwned by a Bcch^ en» tituledii Difcou/itfc concerning the Idolatry pniEiifed i}i the Church of Rome, and the haz,ard of Salvation in theCommunio;2,ofity by Edw. StilJingfleet, D. i? the firfi part, 0^?[wo. Afecond Difcourfe in vindication of the Frctifia-at Grounds of F^hhf againft. the pretence of Infallwility in the Kormn Churchy m Anfwer to the Guide in Contr over fie s^ by R,*tL Irotefl-ancy with'' out Principles J and Reafon and Religion^ e?^ the certain Rule of Faith y by E. \V. with a particnlar enquiry '4j9to the Aliracles of r/?^ Roman Churchy /'jEdw. Sriilingfleet, D^.D. Odavo. A Defence of the Difcourfe concerning th'. Idolatry pra[itfed in the Church ^/Rome , in Anfwer to a Book^ enti tided Catholicks no Idoitf.terSy ^ Edw. Stilliiigfleet, D. D, Dem cfSS^xxVs^ find Chaplain in Ordinary to His Majefty, THE END. % ,y-\ A\ *t> >^>N^>