together Then Seven more Saints Then all the Bishops and Confessors together Then all the Holy Doctors Then Five more of their own great Saints by Name Then all the Holy Priests and Levites Then all the Holy Monks and Hermites Then Seven She Saints by Name Then all the Holy Virgins and Widows And Lastly All the He and She Saints together But the brevity I am confined to in this Discourse will not permit me to abide any longer upon this Argument of the vast distance between these two Churches in reference to their Publick Prayers and Offices Fourthly We proceed to shew that there is also no small distance between the Church of England and that of Rome in reference to the Books they receive for Canonical This will be Immediately dispatched For no more is to be said upon this subject but that whereas the Church of Rome takes all the Apocryphal Books into her Canon the Church of England like all other Protestant Churches receives only those Books of the Old and New Testament for Canonical Scripture as she declares in her Sixth Article of whose Authority there was never any doubt in the Church And she declareth concerning the Apocryphal Books in the same Article citing St. Hierom for her Authority That the Church doth read them for Example of life and Instruction of manners but yet it doth not apply them to Establish any Doctrine And after the example of the Primitive Church no more doth ours and appoints the reading some of them only upon the foresaid Account In the Fifth and Last place The Church of England is at the greatest distance possible from the Church of Rome in reference to the Authority on which they each found their whole Religion As to the Church of Rome she makes her own Infallibility the Foundation of Faith For 1. Our belief of the Divine Authority of the Holy Scriptures themselves must according to her Doctrine be founded upon her infallible Testimony 2. As to that Prodigious deal which she hath added of her own to the Doctrines and Precepts of the Holy Scriptures and which she makes as necessary to be believed and practised as any matters of Faith and Practice contained in the Scriptures and more necessary too than many of them the Authority of those things is founded upon her unwritten Traditions and the Decrees of her Councils which she will have to be no less inspired by the Holy Ghost than were the Prophets and Apostles themselves But Contrariwise the Church of England doth 1. Build the whole of her Religion upon the Sole Authority of Divine Revelation in the Holy Scriptures And therefore she takes every jot thereof out of the Bible She makes the Scriptures the Complete Rule of her Faith and of her Practice too in all matters necessary to Salvation that is in all the parts or Religion nor is there any Genuine Son of this Church that maketh any thing a part of his Religion that is not plainly contained in the Bible Let us see what our Church declareth to this purpose in her 16 Article viz. That Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to Salvation so that whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby is not to be required of any Man that it should be believed as an Article of Faith or be thought requisite or necessary to Salvation So that as Mr. Chillingworth saith THE BIBLE THE BIBLE IS THE RELIGION OF PROTESTANTS So you see the Bible is the Religion of the Protestant Church of England Nor doth she fetch one Tittle of her Religion either out of unwritten Traditions or Decrees of Councils Notwithstanding she hath a great Reverence for those Councils which were not a Company of Bishops and Priests of the Popes packing to serve his purposes and which have best deserved the Name of General Councils especially the Four first yet her Reverence of them consisteth not in any opinion of their Infallibility As appears by Article 14. General Councils may not be gathered together without the Commandment and Will of Princes and when they be gathered together for as much as they be an Assembly of Men whereof all be not Governed with the Spirit and Word of God they may Err and sometimes have Erred even in things pertaining unto God Wherefore things ordained by them as necessary to Salvation have neither Strength nor Authority unless it may be declared that is manifestly proved that they be taken out of Holy Scripture Let us see again how our Church speaks of the matter in hand Article 20. The Church hath Power to decree Rites or Ceremonies and Authority in Controversies of Faith And yet it is not Lawful for the Church to Ordain any thing that is contrary to Gods Word Written neither may it so Expound one place of Scripture that it be Repugnant to another Wherefore although the Church be a Witness and Keeper of Holy Writ that is as the Jewish Church was so of the Canon of the Old Testament by whose Tradition alone it could be known what Books were Canonical and what not so the Catholick Christian Church from Christ and his Apostles downwards is so of the Canon of the New Yet as it ought not to decree any thing against the same so besides the same ought it not to inforce any thing to be believed for necessity of Salvation If it be asked who is to Judge what is agreeable or contrary to Holy Writ 't is manifest that Our Church leaves it to every Man to Judge for himself But 't is Objected that 't is to be acknowledged that if the Church only claimed a Power to Decree Rites and Ceremonies that is according to the general Rules of doing all things Decently and Orderly and to Edification which Power all Churches have ever Exercised this may well enough consist with private Persons Liberty to Judge for themselves but 't is also said in the now Cited Article that the Church hath Authority in Controversies of Faith and accordingly Our Church hath Publisht 39 Articles and requires of the Clergy c. Subscription to them To this we answer that we shall make one Article Egregiously to Contradict another and one and the same to Contradict it self if we understand by the Authority in Controversies of Faith which Our Church acknowledges all Churches to have any more than Authority to Oblige their Members to outward Submission when their Decisions are such as Contradict not any of the Essentials of our Religion whether they be Articles of Faith or Rules of Life not an Authority to Oblige them to assent to their Decrees as infallibly true But it is necessary to the maintaining of Peace that all Churches should be invested with a Power to bind their Members to outward submission in the Case aforesaid that is when their supposed Errors are not of that Moment as that 't is of more pernicious Consequence to bear with them than to break the Peace of the Church by opposing them And as to the fore-mentioned
Repetitions of the same thing in calling upon God from being Vain and that is That our Desires and Affections should be raised to keep pace with our Expressions But this belongs to us to take care of And if we would endeavour to stir up in our selves that Zeal and Devotion of Heart which should answer that Appearance thereof which these Repetitions make this would satisfie us beyond all other Argument that they are not Vain To Conclude this Matter I desire those who do not yet approve our Repetition of the Lords Prayer and the other short Devotions to consider whether it be so easie to spend the time it takes up more profitably than by joining in good earnest with the Congregation in these Prayers In the next place the Responsals of the Congregation are Matter of Offence to some Persons They do not approve the Peoples saying the Confession and the Lords Prayer after the Minister nor their alternate Reciting some Petitions in the daily Service with the Psalms and Hymns and least of all do they approve that part which the Congregation bears in the Prayers of the Litany Now it were well if they who blame our Prayers upon this account would consider what has often been said to shew the usefulness of this way Namely That it is apt to check a wandring Spirit and to help and relieve Attention and withal that it tends to quicken a lively Forwardness and Zeal in Gods Service whilst we invite and provoke one another to Pray and to give Thanks These things we say not without some experience of their Truth and we think they carry plain Reason along with them and I do not find that they have been Contradicted by the Leaders of the Dissenting Party It is True they have declared their dislike of this way but still without taking notice of what may be said for it If I have observed right the main Reason of their dislike is this That the Minister as they say is appointed for the people in all Publick Services appertaining to God and that the Scripture makes the Minister to be the Mouth of the People to God in Prayer And therefore I shall Examine this Reason in the first place And 1. If it were granted that the Scripture maketh the Minister to be the Mouth of the People to God in Publick Worship yet this must by no means be so Interpreted as to make all Vocal Prayer and Thanksgiving in Religious Assemblies unlawful to the People For then they must not declare their Assent to the Prayers which the Minister utters by saying Amen which yet the Scripture approves and is not disapproved by any of those that Object our way against us Nor must it be so taken as if the People were to be excluded from a Vocal Part in Praising God by Hymns and Spiritual Songs For this also is warranted by Scripture and seems to be confessed by our Dissenting Brethren who allow the People to Sing Psalms with the Minister Now he that audibly says Amen to the Prayers of the Congregation makes a short Responsal to the Minister And moreover they that sing Psalms in which there are Passages of Prayer Confessions or Petitions containing matter of Invocation proper for us as the Psalms often do they pray Vocally So that notwithstanding what is pretended concerning the Ministers being the Peoples Mouth to God it shall still be lawful for the People sometimes to joyn Vocally in Prayer as well as in Praise and not only by saying Amen but by expressing the very words of Confession or Petition But 2ly Where is it said in Scripture that the Minister is the Mouth of the People to God or that no Prayer may be Offered up to God in Religious Assemblies otherwise than by the Mouth of the Minister I doubt these sayings are grown so samiliar amongst some People that they believe them to be the Words or very near the Words of Scripture But there are no such Words nor meaning in the Bible that I can find or that they have found for us It is not good to pretend the Authority of Scripture for a Doctrine that is not to be met with there It is true that the Minister is the Mouth of the People to God in all those Prayers which he utters for them and because these are many more than what the People themselves utter he may be said to be their Mouth to God Comparatively but not Absolutely It will be true also that the Minister is appointed for the People in all Publick Services appertaining to God if this be understood for the most part or of All with little exception Some Publick Services there are which are inclosed in his Office and he is appointed for them in behalf of the People that is for Administring the Sacrament Absolving the Penitent and Blessing the People And therefore Prayers that immediately concern these things are to be pronounced by him only And as for the rest the Order of the Church and the Authority and Dignity of the Ministerial Function makes it fit and decent that the Minister should utter most ever of them that in those wherein the People have their part he should ever go before and lead them and guide the whole performance which is all taken care for in our Liturgie I said before that the Dissenters do not utterly debar the People from all Vocal Prayer and Thanksgiving of their own in God's Solemn Worship And therefore it were great pity that they should keep at a distance from us upon Questions of this Nature And I heartily intreat them to consider whether they may not upon their own Principles come up to the Rules and Customs of our Church in this thing 1. If they grant the Peoples interest in Vocal Praise let them consider whether they have reason to Condemn the Peoples bearing a part in any of the Hymns and Psalms by alternate Responses For the plain End of reciting those Psalms in the Congregation is to Praise and Magnifie God's Name and to excite in our Hearts such like devout affections in doing so as those Holy Men felt in themselves who were assisted by God's Spirit in Composing them And therefore the Dissenters are not obliged to demand that the People be silent all this while I have heard some of them say that if these Psalms and Hymns were Sung the Congregation might then challenge to put in their Voices with the Minister But when they are read as they generally are in our Parish Churches they say this ought to be the Work of the Minister only But I cannot see why singing or not singing should make such a Difference I grant it were better if they were every where sung because this is more suitable to the Design of Psalms than bare reciting is But if they be not sung which is customarily omitted in Parish Churches for want of skill as I conceive the next use of them that is most agreeable to their Nature and Design is not
275. Hierom St. Ambrose St. Chrysostom St. Athanasius Gregory Nazianzen and the Third Council of Carthage who all speak of Infant-Baptism as of a thing generally practised and most of them as of a thing which ought to be practised in the Church Furthermore none of the four Testimonies for Infant-Communion speak of it as of an Apostolical Tradition as Origen doth of Infant-Baptism not to mention that the Pelagians never owned the necessity of Infant-Communion as they did of Infant-Baptism All which things considered shew that there is nothing near the like Evidence in Antiquity for the practice of the one as there is for that of the other And as there is not the like evidence for the constant successive and general practice of Infant-Communion that there is for Infant-Baptism So there is not the like Reason for the practice of it First Because Baptism is the Sacrament or Mystery of Initiation of which Persons of all Ages are capable it being instituted chiefly for an initiatory Sign to solemnize the admission of the Baptized Person into the Church and to Seal all the Blessings of the Gospel unto him as a Member of Christ This is the Substance or Chief end of Baptism which as I have shewed upon the Second and Fourth Questions is equally answered in the Baptism of Children as well as of professing Believers Confession of Faith as well as Confession of Sins being but accidental Circumstantials which are necessary with respect to the State of the Person to be Baptized but not to Baptism it self But on the contrary the Holy Eucharist or Communion is the Sacrament of Perfection and Consummation in the Christian Religion being primarily and chiefly instituted for a Sacrificial Feast in remembrance of Christ's Death and Passion which being an act of great Knowledge and Piety Children are not capable to perform But Secondly There is not the like Reason for Baptizing and Communicating Infants because that is grounded upon the Authority of many Texts of Scripture which without the Concurrence of Tradition are fairly and genuinely interpretable for it but this is grounded only upon one Text John 6. 53. Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood ye have no life in you which it is doubtful whether it is to be understood of the Holy Eucharist or no because it cannot be understood of it but in a proleptical sence the Lord's Supper having not been yet instituted by him or if it be to be so understood yet the sence of it ought to be regulated by the Chief end of its Institution contained in those words of our blessed Saviour do this in remembrance of me and this do ye as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of me Wherefore though this Text were literally to be understood of the Holy Eucharist as St. Augustine first interprets it yet it ought not to be strained to Infant-Communion because Infants cannot partake of the Holy Banquet in remembrance of Christ And therefore though the Custom of Communicating Infants prevailed by Degrees in some Ages of the Church yet the Western Churches discerning the mistake upon which it was grounded have long since laid it aside though they still continue the practice of Infant-Baptism as fully answering the Chief end of Baptism and as being founded upon more and clearer Texts of Scriptures and a much more noble Tradition than Infant-Communion is But Thirdly There is not the like reason for Baptizing and Communicating Infants because the Correspondent practice of the Jewish Church in Infant-Circumcision and Infant-Baptism answered as a Pattern unto that under the Law but there was nothing of a Pattern under it which answered so to Infant-Communion because a Child never partook of the * * * Exod. 12. 26 27. Passover before he was old enough to take his Father by the hand and to go up from the Gates of Jerusalem unto the Mount of the Temple and to enquire about the meaning of the Service and was capable of understanding the nature of it as it was done in remembrance of their Deliverance out of Egypt And in like manner when the Children of Christians are old enough to be instructed in the nature of the Holy Communion and to understand that then they may partake of it be it as soon as it will if they are Baptized and Confirmed though it is true that Christian Children are usually much older than the Jewish were before they Communicate which is merely accidental because it requires a riper reason to understand the Mystery of the Holy Eucharist which is done in remembrance of our Spiritual Deliverance by the Sacrifice of Christ both God and Man upon the Cross than to understand the plain and easie meaning of the Passover which was annually kept in remembrance of the Temporal Deliverance of the Jews But to speak yet more fully of Infant-Communion the practice of it is so far from prejudicing the Cause of Infant-Baptism that it mightily confirms it because none were or could be admitted to partake of the Holy Communion till they were validly * * * Theodoret. Therapeut Serm. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptized and therefore the practice of Infant-Communion is a most emphatical Declaration that all the Churches wherein it ever was or a a a As in the Greek Russian and Abyssin Churches and among the Christians of St. Thomas in the Indies still is practised were of Opinion that the Baptism of Infants was as lawful and valid as that of professing Believers can be As for the Original of this custom it is not known when it began probably it came in by degrees from the ancient and laudable custom of administring the Lord's Supper to grown Persons presently after their Baptism and if so many of the ancient Churches were so tender towards Infants as to bring them to the Communion rather than deprive them of the least shadow of right what shall be said in excuse of those uncharitable Men who will rather destroy all the Churches in the World than bring their Children unto Baptism of which they are capable and to which they have a Right so highly probable if not certain and infallible as I have proved above The Second Objection against Infant-Baptism which I took no notice of but reserved for this place is taken from their incapacity to engage themselves in Covenant unto God For say these Men all who enter into Covenant and receive the Seal of the Covenant must contract and stipulate for their parts as well as God doth for his and therefore St. Peter saith That the Baptism which saveth us must 1 Ep. 3. 21. have the answer or restipulation of a good Conscience towards God But how can Infants restipulate or what Conscience can be in them who have not the use of reason nor are capable of knowing what the Covenant means To this Objection I answer as formerly That it is as strong against Infant-Circumcision as Infant-Baptism for the Infants
Scruples satisfied I think most of the Prejudices against the Church of England might be easily removed and we might all joyn in the same Communion to the Glory of God and the Joy and Comfort of all good Protestants and the Confusion of those that design to swallow us up and have no other hopes of prevailing but by the help of those Differences which for that end they have a long time most studiously fomented amongst us Let not our unreasonable Fears and groundless Jealousies encourage their Attempts with too great a probability of Success It would be a sad addition to our Miseries if the Guilt and Shame of them too might be laid to our Charge With what remorse should we reflect upon it when the heat of our Passion was over if the Protestant Profession should be farther endangered and the Agents of Rome get greater Advantages dayly by those Distractions which have been secretly managed by them but openly carried on and maintained by our selves With what face should we look to see our Enemies not only triumphing over us but mocking and deriding us for being so far imposed upon by their cunning as to be made the immediate instruments of our own ruin But God Almighty in his wise and gracious Providence so confound all their Devices that tend to the subversion of the Truth and so Unite and Compose our Differences that hereafter we may have no just occasion to fear either their Treachery o their Force This is a Petition I am sure in which no good Christian can refuse to joyn and if we do heartily desire this let us do what we can to promote it if our Prayer be not unsincere and hypocritical we shall make use of our best endeavours to obtain the thing we have prayed for And now if our Vnion be thus desirable and necessary what should hinder but that at last we might be all most happily united under the Discipline and Government of the Church of England A Church that is already Framed and Constituted that has the Countenance and Establishment of the Laws that has been Protected by a Succession of Wise and Pious Princes that was Defended unto Death by our late Martyred Sovereign that was Restored by His Majesty that now is and has been ever since so graciously Cherished by him as if the Care of it were a Quality inherent and hereditary to the Crown A Church that was Reformed by full and sufficient Authority upon mature and serious Deliberation with a perfect submission to the Rule of holy Scripture and a due regard to the example of the most Primitive times A Church that has constantly rejected all the Errours and Corruptions of Rome that admits of neither their Infallibility nor Supremacy that allows no Purgatory nor Indulgences no adoration of Reliques and Images no Praying to Saints nor Angels that does not think that God can be pleased with idle Pilgrimages or a forced Celibacy or any set number of Ave's and Paternoster's or other formal Devotions exactly computed upon a string of Beads and muttered over in an unknown Tongue that does not rob the Laity of half the Communion nor teach them that strange and contradictious Doctrine that the Elements are transubstantiated into the real Body and Blood of Christ in the Lord's Supper that does not only constantly deny these and many more absurd and erroneous Opinions of the Papists but has always sent forth as stout and able Champions to oppose them as any the Christian World affords A Church whose Doctrine is confessed to be Orthodox by the generality of our Dissenting Brethren and whose Discipline and Order of external Worship has nothing in it repugnant to any Law of God And what imaginable ground can there then be to justifie a Separation from such a Church Certainly the use of a few Indifferent things appointed only for Order's sake will not be enough to do it These are not Forbidden and therefore cannot be Sinful in themselves and where God has not Forbidden our Superiours may Command and in all such cases we are bound to Obey Some indeed there are that will not be satisfied with this They tell us that it is not sufficient that a thing be not Forbidden but that it must be Commanded or else it cannot be used in the Worship of God without Sin But if this Opinion be true I must confess that then it is Unlawful to hold Communion not only with ours but with any Church that is or ever was in the World for I do not believe that One can be found amongst them All that has not required the use of some Indifferent thing that was not Commanded Our Dissenting Brethren themselves will allow that the Time and Place of Religious Assemblies may be prescribed by Authority And if these necessary Circumstances may be thus Determined though they be not Commanded by God then it will be as Lawful to prescribe what particular Gestures and Habits shall be there used For these are things of the same Nature Circumstances as necessary as Time and Place and if we have any respect to the Decent and Reverent performance of the Service of God they may be as necessary to be determined too However it must be acknowledged that some things that are not Commanded may be Lawfully Enjoyned and Submitted to and if some then all that are of the same Indifferent nature unless there can be some sufficient reason assigned why some should be excepted and some not which will be very difficult where the Nature of the things is the same And in our present case it will be hard in the general to conceive how the Command of a Lawful Power should make that Unlawful which was not Forbidden and by consequence was Lawful before But if it should be still insisted on that nothing must be Commanded that God has not Commanded they that are of this Perswasion should be very certain that they have clear proof out of the Scriptures for it before they undertake to Forbid that which God has not Forbidden or else they stand condemned by their own Principle Now the Arguments they bring for this out of the New Testament are very few And those very obscure and no way applicable to the matter in hand without being mightily strained Those out of the Old Testament are not many that which has been chiefly urged and seems indeed the most pertinent and material is this The whole Levitical Service was particularly prescribed by God himself and Moses was strictly charged to make the Tabernacle and all the Utensils that belonged unto it After the pattern that was shewed him Exod. 25. 40. Heb. 3. 5 6. in the Mount And Moses verily was faithful in all his House as a Servant and so is Christ as a Son over his own House that is the Church Therefore as Moses laid down all the particular Rules to be observed in the Worship of God under the Legal Dispensation so has Christ under the Evangelical and it is as
the words are these I believe our Saviour ever since his Ascension hath had in some place or other a Visible true Church on Earth I mean a Company of Men that profest at least so much as was necessary to Salvation and I believe there will be some where or other such a Church to the Worlds end This is his answer to that Popish Question about the perpetuity of the Visible Church whereby it appears that this Company of Men he speaks of are not single and scattered Individuals which are no Visible Church but he means a Formed and Visible Church-Society and his Answer is true though there were never a sound Church in the World For a corrupt Church which retains all the Essentials of Faith and Worship is a true Visible Church and this is the meaning of Mr. Chillingworth's Answer but how this proves that there is no need there should be any Visible Church at all or that Christians are not bound to actual Communion with the sound and Orthodox Church wherein they live is past my understanding At the same rate you defend your self against me in your Preface by the Authority of those two excellent Persons the Dean of Canterbury and the Dean of Saint Pauls Dr. Stillingfleet had asserted That all things necessary to Salvation are plain in Scripture to all that sincerely endeavour to understand them hence S. C. infers That the Governours of our Church have no Authority to teach Truth or to condemn Errours and all the People are become Prophets and all their Articles Answer to several Treatises p. 272. c. Constitutions and Ordinances have been composed and enjoyned by an usurped Authority and if he had added as he might have done with the same reason And all Church-Communion is needless it had been exactly what you aim at in this Citation The Dr. vindicates his Doctrine from such a wild Fanatical inference 1. By shewing the intention of those Principles which was plainly to lay down the Foundations of a Christian Faith living in the Communion of our Church And if this was his design as he says it was certainly he could neither before nor after say any thing which should overthrow the necessity of Church-Communion and then he can say nothing against me nor for you 2. He distinguishes between the necessaries to Salvation and to the Government of the Church that is what is necessary for every Christian considered in p. 275. a private Capacity to know and believe to make him capable of Salvation and what care the Church must take to instruct the ignorant to satisfie the doubting to direct the unskilful and to help the weak and not barely to provide for necessity but safety and not barely the safety of particular persons but of it self which cannot p. 276. be done without prudent Orders setting the bounds of Mens Employments c. i. e. though it is possible for a private Christian who lives alone and has the use of the Bible in a Language which he understands by diligent and honest inquiries to find out so much truth as is absolutely necessary to Salvation yet this does not overthrow the necessity of a setled Ministry and a regular Authority in the Church all this I firmly assent to and yet do as firmly believe the necessity of Church-Communion when it may be had upon Lawful Terms and so does this Reverend Person also and therefore I cannot look upon your alleadging his Authority against me to have any other design than to affront the Dean for his excellent Pains in vindicating the Communion of our Church and shewing people the Evil and Danger of Separation He has sufficiently declared what his Judgment is about Separation and therefore I need not concern my self any farther to prove that he is not my Adversary in this Cause At the same rate you deal with that great Man as you deservedly call him Dr. Tillotson who says I had much rather perswade any one to be a good Man than Preface to be of any Party and denomination of Christians whatsoever for I doubt not but the belief of the Ancient Creed provided we entertain nothing that is destructive of it together with a good life will certainly save a Man and without this no man can have reasonable hopes of Salvation no not in an Infallible Church if there were any such to be found in the World How does this oppose me who assert the necessity of Church-Communion Is the Catholick Church then and the Communion of Saints no part of our Creed and is not Schism destructive to these great Articles of our Faith or is Schism which is the breach of Christian Charity properly so called which is the Love and Charity which the Members of the same Body ought to have for each other and consists in Unity and Communion consistent with a good Life if by that we understand an Universal goodness of which Charity is the most vital and essential part But do you indeed think Sir that the Dean believes a Man may be saved without Communion with any Church when it may be had without Sin when in the very next Paragraph he so earnestly exhorts them to Communion with the Church of England I can easily forgive your usage of me since I find you cannot Read the best Books without perverting them and that you never spare any Mans Reputation to serve your Designes for your Reproaches and your Commendations are but different ways of abuse though I confess I should rather chuse to be reproached by you Your last Consideration is whether it be a good way to convert Schismaticks to prove that Schism is as Letter 3. p. 29. Damning a Sin as Murder or Adultery Truly Sir St. Cyprian and St. Austin and all the Ancient Fathers of the Church thought this a very good way for they insisted very much upon this Argument and if Men will not forsake their Schism though the Salvation of their Souls be endangered by it I am apt to think that no other Arguments will perswade them And if this be true as I verily believe it is and shall believe so till I see the Third Chapter of the Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Still fairly answered I think it the greatest Charity in the World to warn Men of it and if it should prove by their perverseness no Charity to them it is Charity to my own Soul and delivers me from the guilt of their Bloud whether such Doctrine Preach Men into or out of the Church And now for your parting Blow Certainly if our Church required Conformity to its Rites and Ceremonies as necessary to Salvation It could not blame Men for dividing from it Yes certainly upon such a Supposition the Church could and would blame Men for their Separation though it may be they might not deserve to be blamed for no doubt the more necessary the Church judges her Constitutions the more she will blame Dissenters But he who tells us or he
do ye Transgress the Command of God by your tradition For God Commanded saying Honour thy Father Matth. 15. 3. c. but ye say whosoever shall say to his Father it is a gift c. Thus ye have made the Commandment of God of none effect by your tradition And this we condemn in the Church of Rome who do defeat the Commands of God by their Doctrines of Attrition and Purgatory c. 4. If they mean by adding the making of that which is not the Word of God to be of equal Authority with it This our Saviour condemn'd in the Pharisees when they Taught for Doctrines the Commandments of Men and esteem'd them as necessary to be obeyed and to be of equal force with what was Authorized by him nay it seems they had more regard to the Tradition of the Elders than the Commandment of God as our Saviour Insinuates vers 2 3. and has been observed from their own Authors This we also condemn in the Church of Rome which decrees that the Apocrypha and Traditions should be received with the like Pious Con. Trid Sess 4. Decr. 1. regard as the Sacred Writ 5. If by adding they mean the giving the same Efficacy to humane Institutions as God doth to his by making them to confer Grace upon the rightly disposed and by diminishing that the Service is not complete without it This our Saviour condemn'd in the Pharisees when they maintained that to eat with unwashen Hands defiled a Man verse 20. And this we condemn in the Church of Rome in their use of Holy-Water and Reliques and Ceremonies Thus far we agree but if they proceed and will conclude that the doing any thing not Commanded in the Worship of God is a Sin though it have none of the ingredients in it before spoken of we therein differ from them and upon very good reason For therein they differ from our Saviour and his Apostles and all Churches as I have shewed Therein also they depart from the notion and reason of the thing For adding is adding to the substance and making the thing added of the Nature of the thing it s added to and diminishing is diminishing from the substance and taking away from the Nature of it but when the substance remains intire as much after this humane appointment as it was before it without Loss and Prejudice without Debasement or Corruption it cannot be called an addition to it in the sence that the Scripture takes that Word in Nay so far are we from admitting this charge that we return it upon them and do bring them in Criminals upon it For those that do Forbid what the Gospel Forbids not do as much add to it as those that Command what the Gospel doth not Command And if it be a Crime to Command what that Commands not it must be so to Forbid what it Forbids not And this is what they are Guilty of that do hold that nothing is to be used in the Worship of God but what is prescribed for if that be not a Scripture Proposition and Truth as certain it is not then what an addition is this A greater surely than what they charge upon us for all that is Commanded amongst us is look'd upon not as necessary but expedient but what is Forbid by them is Forbid as absolutely unlawful the latter of which alters the Nature whereas the other only affects the Circumstances of things The second Commandment Thou shalt not make unto Object III thee any Graven Image c. is frequently made use of to prove that we must apply nothing to a Religious Use but what is Commanded and we are told that the sence of it is that We must Worship God in no other way and by no other means or Religious Rites than what he hath prescribed The best way to answer this is 1. To consider Answer what is Forbidden in this Commandment and 2. To shew that we are not concern'd in the Prohibition As to the former 1. In this Command it is provided that there be no act of Adoration given to any besides God By this the Heathens are condemned in their Plurality of Gods and the Church of Rome in the Veneration they give to Saints and Angels 2. That the Honour we give to God be sutable to his Nature and agreeable to his Will Sutable to his Nature and so we are not to Worship him by Creatures as the Sun c. for that is to consider him as Finite nor by Images and Eternal Representations for that is to consider him as Corporeal Agreeable to his Will and so we are Forbidden all other Worship of him than what he hath appointed It s in the last of these we are concerned for I believe there will be no attempt to prove that there is any thing in our Worship that doth derogate from the perfections of God and is unsutable to his Nature further than the defects that must arise from all Worship given by Creatures to a Creator And if we come to consider it as to what he hath revealed there can be nothing deduced thence to prove Rites instituted by Men for the Solemnity of God's service to be Forbidden and which for ought I see is not attempted to be proved from this Commandment or from Scripture else where but by crowding such Rites into and representing them as a part of Divine Worship This way goes one of the most industrious in this cause Ceremonies saith he are External Rites of Religious Worship as used to further Devotion and therefore being Ames Fresh Suit part 2. sect 2. command p. 228. invented by Man are of the same Nature with Images by which and at which God is Worshipped In which are no less than three mistakes As 1. He makes whatever is used to further Devotion to be Religious Worship 2. He makes it a fault in External Rites in Religious Worship that they are used to further Devotion 3. He makes External Rites taken up by Men and used for that end to be of the same Nature with Images If I shew that these are really mistakes I think that in doing so the whole argument taken from 2d Commandment falls with it 1 He mistakes in that he makes whatever is used to further Devotion to be Religious Worship The error of which will appear from this consideration that all things relating to Divine Worship are either Parts or Adjuncts of it Parts as Prayer and the Lord's Supper Adjuncts as Form and Posture Now Adjuncts are not Parts because the Worship is intire and invariable in all the Parts of it and remains the same though the Adjuncts vary Prayer is VVorship whether with a Form or without and the Lord's Supper is VVorship whether Persons Kneel Sit or Stand in the receiving of it And yet though the Adjuncts are no part of VVorship they further Devotion in it This those that are for conceived Prayer plead for Their Practice and this also is pleaded by those that
the Ecclesiastical Laws A Humane Law grounded upon a Divine or to speak more properly a Divine Law modify'd or Clothed with several Circumstances of Mans Appointment doth Create another kind of Obligation upon every Subject than a Law that is purely Humane that is to say a Law the matter of which is neither Good nor Evil in it self but perfectly indifferent In the former Case we must yield Obedience to the Law as to the Law of God however it comes Clothed with Circumstances of Mans Appointment In the other Case we only yield Obedience as to the Command of Man and for no other reason than that God in general hath Obliged us to Obey our Superiors To make this a little plainer let us for Instance take the business of Paying Tribute and Custom in this Nation in which Case there is a Complication of a Divine Law with a Humane as it is in the Case we are now upon That every Subject should Pay Tribute to whom Tribute is due Custom to whom Custom is due is a Law of God as being a branch both of Natural and Christian Justice But out of what goods we should Pay Tribute or Custom or what Proportion of those Goods should be Paid this is not defined either by the Law of Nature or the Law of the Gospel but is left to the Determination of the Municipal Laws of every Kingdom But now because Humane Authority doth interpose in this Affair and settles what every Man is to Pay to the King and out of what Commodities doth it therefore follow that if a Man can by Fraud or Concealment detain the Kings Right from him that he incurs no other guilt for this but only the Transgressing of an Act of Parliament and the being Obnoxious to the Penalties in Case he be detected No certainly for all that the Customs in that manner and form be settled upon the King by Humane Law only yet the matter of that Law being a point of Natural Justice between Man and Man the Man that is thus Guilty ought to look upon himself as an Offender against the Divine Law as an unjust Person before God And his willingness to Submit to the Forfeiture of his Goods will not render him less unjust or more excuseable The Case is much the same as to the matter we have now before us It is not a meer Humane Law or Act of Parliament that Obligeth us to keep the Unity of the Church to bring our Châ—ldren to be made Christians by Baptisme to meet together at Solemn times for the Profession of our Faith for the Worshipping God for the Commemorating the Death of our Saviour in the Sacrament of his Supper All this is tyed upon us by the Laws of Christ These things are as much required of us by God as Christians as it is required that we should Pay the King and every Man what is due to them if we would not be dishonest unjust It is true that the particular Forms and Modes and Circumstances of doing these things are not Commanded nor Prescribed by the Laws of Christ in this Instance of Church Communion no more than they are prescribed by the Laws of God in the other Instance I gave But they are left intirely to the Prudence and Discretion of the Governours that God hath set over us in Ecclesiastical matters just as they are in the other But in the mean time these things thus Clothed by Humane Authority as to their Circumstances Yet being for the Matter of them bound upon us by Christ himself we can no more deny our Obedience to the Publick Laws about them than we can in the other Instance I have named And that Man may as well for Instance purge himself from the Imputation of Knavery before God that will contrive a way of his own for the Paying his just Debts contrary to what the Law of the Land hath declared to be Just and Honest As any Man can acquit himself from the Sin of Schism before God that will chuse a way of his own for the Publick Worship different from and in Opposition to what the Laws of the Church have prescribed always supposing that the Worship Established be Commanded by just Authority and there be nothing required in it as a Condition of Communion that is against the Laws of Jesus Christ The Sum of all this is that it is every Mans Duty by the Laws of Christ as well as the Laws of Man to Worship God in the way of the Church so long as there is nothing required in that Worship that can justly offend the Conscience of a Wise and Good Christian And therefore there is more in departing from the Communion of the Church when we can Lawfully hold it than meerly the Violation of a Statute or a Humane Law for we cannot do it without breaking the Law of God Nay so much is it against the Law of God to do this that I think no Authority upon Earth can warrant it So that even if there was a Law made which should Ordain that wilful causless Separation from the Established Church should be allowed and tolerated and no Man should be called to an Account for it Yet nevertheless such a Separation would still be a Schism would still be a Sin against God for no Humane Law can make that Lawful which Gods Law hath forbid There now only remains our last general Head about Conscience to be spoken to and then we have done with our Preliminary Points And that is concerning the Authority of Conscience or how far a Man is Obliged to follow or be guided by his Conscience in his Actions When we speak of the Obligation of Conscience or of being bound in Conscience to do or not to do an Action it sufficiently appears from what hath been said that we can mean no more by these Phrases than this that we are convinced in our Judgment that it is our Duty to do this or the other Action because we believe that God hath Commanded it Or we are perswaded in our Judgment that we ought to forbear this or the other Action because we believe that God hath forbidden it This now being that which we mean by the Obligation of Conscience here we come to inquire how far this Perswasion or Judgment of ours concerning what is our Duty and what is Sinful hath Authority over us how far it doth Oblige us to Act or not Act according to it Now in Order to the resolving of this we must take Notice that our Judgment concernâ—ng what God hath Commanded or Forbidden or left Indifferent is either true or false We either make a right Judgment of our Duty or we make a wrong one In the former Case we call our Judgment a Right Conscience in the latter we call it an Erroneous Conscience As for those Cases where we doubt and hesitate and know not well how to make any Judgment at all which is that we call a Doubting Conscience but indeed
would have ours to be And though there is greater need of Caution against it in such places yet the way of their Confession makes the mistake more difficult to be prevented Indeed we find in the Scripture Examples of Holy Men confessing such Sins as themselves were not guilty of Thus did Jeremiah Nehemiah Ezra c. But this was upon Solemn Humiliation for those known and publick Idolatries of the Nation which had brought Gods heavy Judgments upon them or for Common and Scandalous Transgressions afterward They considered themselves as part of that Community which had provoked God to send them into Captivity and therefore they bore their part in the Common Calamity with such meekness and confessed the Common Sins with such humility as if themselves had offended as greatly in their own Persons as their Countrey-men had done But I conceive there is a great deal of difference between those Confessions of Sin that such extraordinary occasions of Publick Humiliation require and those that are fit for the ordinary Service of God in the constant and stated Assemblies of the Church But it ought not to be forgot that those particular Confessions of Sin which some Men want in our Liturgie are not properly the matter of that Publick Service we are to offer daily unto God in Religious Assemblies but of that Private Devotion which is necessary to be performed in our Closets And if we could be persuaded seriously to enter upon this Work of Examining our selves impartially concerning those Sins which we have more openly or secretly committed and then to humble our selves before God for them with particular Confessions and sutable Prayer for his Grace and Pardon we should then find our Affections prepared to comply with those more General Confessions of Sin which we make with the whole Congregation we should then have less reason to complain that those Confessions are not apt to move us because this way would cure the deadness of our hearts which commonly are most to blame when we find fault with the means that God hath provided for us To conclude this Matter There is great need of Particular Confession of Sins in Religious Assemblies but that of another sort than what I have yet been speaking of and that is the particular and humble Confession which every Scandalous Sinner ought to make in the Congregation for the satisfaction of the Church and the declaration of a true Repentance This is not properly an Act of Worship but of Discipline but alas almost lost in this miserably divided state of the Church a loss never enough to be lamented For so it has fallen out that by quarreling for a Reformation in things of an Indifferent Nature that ought to be left to the Prudence of Governours and the Communion of Christians is broken and the Spiritual Authority which Christ left in his Church is exposed to Contempt which is a Matter of a thousand times more concern then all the Objections against the Book of Common Prayer put together though they were as considerable as our Adversaries seem to believe they are The second Objection I shall take notice of is that against the shortness of the Collects by reason of which it is pretended that the Prayer is often suddenly broken off and then begun again And this is thought not so agreeable to the Gravity wherewith this Duty ought to be performed nor so likely a means of exciting Reverence and Devotion in the People as one continued Form of Prayer that might be as long as all those put together Now in answer to this I say 1. That the meer shortness of a Prayer is not to be found fault with by any understanding Christian since this would be to disparage that Form of Prayer which our Lord taught his Disciples it being not much longer than most of our Collects and not so long as some of them 2. That it will be hard to prove That many of these short Prayers being offer'd up unto God one immediately after another is either not so Grave or not so Edifying as one Continued Form I do not believe the difference to be so great as it is made by those that do not approve our way For the Work of Praying is as much continued all the while as if there were but one Continued Form Indeed in the Book the Printed Prayer breaks off somewhat often and there is a distinction made between the several Collects by a New Title shewing the Matter of the Prayer and by beginning a New Line But I hope our Brethren do not mean that in this there is a defect of Gravity or any hindrance of Devotion and Edification For the abruption of the Printed Forms is by no means an interruption of our Prayer since we still go on in Praying or in giving Thanks to God and without breaking off pass from one Petition or Matter of Invocation to another as immediately as if the Distinct Forms we use together were all brought into the Compass of One. And as there is no Interruption of our Praying caused by the frequent beginning and ending of the Collects so neither can this cause an Interruption of Attention in the People which is rather helped by that frequency of saying Amen which this way requires Nor can it be charged with a tendency to Interrupt that Devout Affection and Godly Disposition of Mind which is the best thing in Prayer But on the other hand this may be kept alive and more effectually secured by calling upon the Name of God and pleading the Merits of Christ so often as we do I know some have said this is done more frequently than is meet But it would be a lamentable thing if there should be any difference about this Matter When the Decence and Convenience of a thing is considered we should attribute much to the Wisdom of Authority and to the Judgment of Prudent and Holy Men such as our first Reformers were and great numbers of Learned Persons since their time were also who thought this manner of Praying to be Grave and Edifying And I believe others would be of the same Mind if they would not altogether dwell upon their Prejudice against our way but attend a little to those considerations that favour it and which discover the advantage and usefulness of it which sort of Equity they that are Wise and Humble will shew to all Men much more to their Governours Now the Invocation of God somewhat often by his Attributes does of it self tend to maintain in our Minds a reverent sense of his Majesty and Presence which we all know is of necessary use to make us Pray unto him as we ought to do I make no question but those that have been blamed for repeating Lord Lord so very often in their Extempore Prayers would think themselves somewhat hardly used if they should not be believed in saying that this was not for want of Matter but for the exciting of a reverent sense of Gods Authority in
I believe those Prejudices of the Lay-Dissenters against the Common-Prayer which I have endeavoured to remove have wrought in them a greater a version to it than the best Divines of that way intended I should be very sorry to find my self mistaken in this And this consideration was some encouragement to me to give a true account of those things they seemed to dislike most of all Which I have endeavoured upon the plain grounds of Reason and Scripture almost wholly avoiding appeals to other Church Antiquity not but that great regard is to be had of it and that we can defend our selves by it but because they are very few in Comparison who are qualified to Examine this kind of Argument And the like I say of the Concurrence of other Reformed Churches with us in those things that are disliked As for the Sign of the Cross in Baptism it is pretended that this is a part of Worship or a Sacrament of Mans making The contrary to which has been so plainly shewn in late Discourses that unless I am called to give an account of it I cannot think fit to trouble you with this Dispute But I heartily desire our Brethren to consider at length that though the use of this Ceremony were not so easie to be defended as I think it is yet that it is no Condition of Communion because the People are not required to Sign with the Sign of the Cross but the Minister only As for Kneeling at the Communion of the Holy Table that is indeed every Communicants Act but of this you may expect a Discourse from another Hand which I hope will give satisfaction to all Sober Persons that are yet unsatisfied about it And now I intreat all those of the Dissenting Party into whose hands these Papers shall fall that they would seriously consider whether it be fit to venture the Guilt of Schism and the sad Consequences of it likely to come to pass upon such grounds as these Let us at length consult for the Honour of this Age with Posterity who will stand amazed to find a Separation of Protestants from this Church carried on so long upon so little occasion given and such weak Objections so strongly insisted upon as to build an opposite Communion upon them Let us Consult the Honour and the Safety of the Reformation and no longer suffer it to be exposed to scorn and dnager to be Laught at and Disgraced by the Papists our dangerous Enemies always but never more dangerous than now If the Dissenters are not yet convinced that the wide breach they have made in the Communion of Protestants will certainly let in Popery if it be not prevented by a timely closing with the Church of England Nothing remains but to wait till they are convinced by the last Extremity I can take no comfort in being assured that at last they will believe it when alas it will be to no purpose to believe it I beseech them to consider whether we are likely to be united in any other Communion but that of the Church of England as it is by Law Established and whether so little account ought to be made of Law and Authority as to say that our Governours may as well come down to them by forbearing to require what they dislike as they come up to the Law by doing what it requires Will our case bear this wantonness Will such Expressions consist with our Duty I beseech them by what is most dear to them by the Honour of God and the Love of Christ and the Care of their own Souls and the Charity they have for the Souls of other Men that they will take pains with themselves to lay aside Prejudice and Anger and all Passions that obstruct a clear Judgment of things that have been disputed amongst us and that they would consider impartially what we have said as in the sight of God who knoweth the Hearts of Men. Can they propound to themselves more beneficial Designs than to check the Prophaneness and Atheism which in this last Age hath been so much complained of than to restore in some measure the Ancient Discipline of the Church for the excluding of vicious Men from the Communion of the Faithful than to transmit the Profession of the true Religion Establisht among us down to their Posterity The most effectual means by which they can contribute to all those good Ends is to return heartily and unanimously to the Communion of the Church of England all the true Sons whereof are ready to receive them with open Arms with joy and thankfulness to God and to them for the good they will do us and themselves by it But as for them that for Worldly and Corrupt Interests encourage and support the present Separation from this Church I cannot expostulate with them in this manner since such Men have not the fear of God before them and 't is impossible they should be touched with tenderness for the Concerns of Religion while they continue as they are All I shall say to them is That when that great day of Judgment comes which they of all Men have most reason to be afraid of then all the dismal Consequences of this Schism which are likely to happen will be fully required at their hands to be sure whilst those that in meer Ignorance and Mistake have contributed to them shall have an easier Account to give especially if they have taken pains to inform themselves better What good Effect our Applications to Men will have we cannot say but if it shall appear that they are not yet prepared for Instruction we have the more reason to turn our selves to God by earnest Prayer that he would please to open the Understandings of the simple and to detect the ill Designs of dishonest Men and to enable us to bring forth more and better Fruits of Repentance that whatever happens to this Church it may not be forsaken of his Favour and Protection Amen FINIS THE RESOLUTION OF THIS CASE OF CONSCIENCE Whether the Church of England's Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it Unlawful to hold Communion with the Church of England The Second EDITION LONDON Printed for Fincham Gardiner at the White-Horse in Ludgate-street 1683. The Case Whether the Church of Englands Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes Communion therewith Vnlawful IN speaking to this Case we will First Premise that there is a wide and vast distance betwixt the Church of England and that of Rome Secondly Shew that a Churches Symbolizing or agreeing in some things with the Church of Rome is no Warrant for Separation from the Church so agreeing Thirdly Shew that the Agreement that is between the Church of England and the Church of Rome is in no wise such as will make Communion with the Church of England Unlawful First We think it necessary to Premise that there is a wide and vast distance betwixt the Church of England and that
of Rome Our Church having renounced all Communion with the Church of Rome this speaks the greatest distance in the general betwixt the two Churches And as their distance particularly in Government is manifest to all from our Churches having utterly cast off the Jurisdiction of the Papacy so it is easie to shew that there is likewise a mighty distance betwixt them in Doctrine Worship and Discipline But we shall not stand to shew this in each of these distinctly but rather make choice of this Method viz. to shew that our Church is most distant from and opposite to the Church of Rome 1. In all those Doctrines and Practices whereby this Church deprives her Members of their due Liberty and miserably inslaves them 2. In all those Doctrines and Practices in which she is justly Charged with plainly Contradicting the Holy Scriptures 3. In each of their publick Prayers and Offices 4. In the Books they each receive for Canonical 5. In the Authority on which they each of them found their whole Religion First Our Church is at the greatest distance from that of Rome in all those Doctrines and Practices by which she deprives her Members of their due Liberty and miserably inslaves them For instance 1. This Church denieth her Members all Judgment of discretion in matters of Religion She obligeth them to follow her blindfold and to resolve both their Faith and Judgment into hers as assuming infallibility to her self and binding all under pain of Damnation to believe her Infallible But our Church permits us the full enjoyment of our due Liberty in believing and judging and we Act not like Members of the Church of England if according to St. Pauls injunction we prove not all things that we may hold fast that which is good if we believe every Spirit which St. John cautions us against and do not try the Spirits whether they be of God which he requires us to do 'T is impossible that our Church should oblige us to an implicite Faith in herself because she disclaimeth all pretence to infallibility Our Church tells us in her 19th Article that As the Churches of Jerusalem and Alexandria and Antioch have erred so also the Church of Rome hath erred not only in their Living and manner of Ceremonies but also in matters of Faith And our Churches acknowledgment is plainly implyed in asserting the most famous Churches in the World to have erred from the Faith that she her self must needs be Obnoxious to Errour in matters of Faith and that she would be guilty of the highest impudence in denying it 2. The Church of Rome imposeth a deal of most slavish Drudgery in the vast multitude of her Rites and Ceremonies and unreasonably severe Tasks and cruel Penances As to her Ceremonies they are so vast a number as are enough to take up as Sir Edwyn Sandys hath observed a great part of a mans life merely to gaze on And abundance of them are so vain and Childish so marvellously odd and uncouth as that they can naturally bring to use that Gentlemans words who was a curious observer of them in the Popish Countries no other than disgrace and contempt to those exercises of Religion wherein they are stirring In viewing only those that are injoyned in the Common Ritual one would bless ones self to think how it should enter into the minds of Men and much more of Christians to invent such things And the like may be said of the Popish Tasks and Penances in imposing of which the Priests are Arbitrary and ordinarily lay the most Severe and Cruel ones on the lightest offenders when the most Leud and Scandalous come off with a bare saying of their Beads thrice over or some such insignificant and idle business But the Church of England imposeth nothing of that Drudgery which makes such Vassals of the poor Papists Her Rites are exceeding few and those plain and easie grave and manly founded on the Practice of the Church long before Popery appeared upon the Stage of the World Our Church hath abandon'd the five Popish Sacraments and contents her self with those two which Christ hath ordained As is to be seen in her 25th Article where she declares that There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel that is to say Baptism and the Supper of the Lord. Those five commonly called Sacraments that is to say Confirmation Penance Orders Matrimony and Extreme Vnxion are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel being such as have grown partly of the Corrupt following of the Apostles partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures But yet have not like Nature of Sacraments with Baptism and the Lords Supper For that they have not any visible Sign or Ceremony ordained of God The Sacraments were not ordained of Christ to be gazed upon or to be carried about c. And in saying that our Church owns not the fore-mentioned Popish Sacraments is implied that she hath nothing to do with any of those very many Superstitious Fopperies which are injoyned in the Offices appointed for the Administration of those Sacraments Again Our Church no whit more imitates that of Rome in her Cruel Tasks and Penances than in her Ceremonies as is needless to be shewed In short in our Churches few Rites she hath used no other Liberty but what she judgeth agreeable to those Apostolical Rules of Doing all things decently and in order and Doing all things to Edification And she imposeth her Rites not as the Church of Rome doth hers as necessary and as parts of Religion but as meerly indifferent and changeable things as we find in her 34th Article where she declares that Every Particular or National Church hath Authority to Ordain Change and Abolish Ceremonies or Rites of the Church Ordained onely by Mans Authority so that all things be done to Edifying And this Article begins thus It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one or utterly like for at all times they have been divers and may be changed according to the diversities of Countrys Times and Manners so that nothing be Ordained against Gods Word 2. The Church of Rome subjects her Members by several of her Doctrines to inslaving Passions For instance that of Purgatory makes them all their life-time subject to the bondages of Fear at least those of them who are so sollicitous about the life to come as to entertain any mistrust or doubting as it 's strange if the most Credulous of them do not concerning the Efficacy of Penances and Indulgences Her Doctrine of Auricular Confession subjects all that are not forsaken of all Modesty to the passion of Shame Her Doctrine of the Dependance of the Efficacy of the Sacraments upon the Priests intention must needs expose all considerative people and those who have any serious concern about their state hereafter to great Anxiety and Solicitude But these Doctrines are all rejected by the Church of England That of Purgatory she
Subscription that is required to the 39 Articles it is very Consistent with Our Churches giving all Men Liberty to Judge for themselves and not Exercising Authority as the Romish Church doth over our Faith for she requires no Man to believe those Articles but at worst only thinks it Convenient that none should receive Orders or be admitted to Benefices c. but such as do believe them not all as Articles of our Faith but many as inferiour truths and requires Subscription to them as a Test whereby to Judge who doth so believe them But the Church of Rome requires all under Pain of Damnation to believe all her long Bed-roul of Doctrines which have only the Stamp of her Authority and to believe them too as Articles of Faith or to believe them with the same Divine Faith that we do the indisputable Doctrines of our Saviour and his Apostles For a proof hereof the Reader may consult the Bull of Pope Pius the Fourth which is to be found at the End of the Council of Trent Herein it is Ordained that Profession of Faith shall be made and sworn by all Dignitaries Prebendaries and such as have Benefices with Cure Military Officers c. in the Form following IN. Do believe with a firm Faith and do profess all and every thing contained in the Confession of Faith which is used by the Holy Roman Church viz. I believe in one God the Father Almighty and so to the end of the Nicene Creed I most firmly admit and embrace the Apostolical and Ecclesiastical Traditions and the other Observances and Constitutions of the said Church Also the Holy Scriptures according to the Sense which our Holy Mother the Church hath held and doth hold c. I profess also that there are truly and properly Seven Sacraments of the New Law instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord and necessary to the Salvation of Mankind although all are not necessary to every individual Person c. I also admit and receive the Received and approved Rites of the Catholick Church in the Solemn Administration of all the foresaid Sacraments of which I have given the Reader a taste I Embrace and Receive all and every thing which hath been declared and defined concerning Original Sin and Justification in the Holy Synod of Trent I likewise profess that in the Mass a True Proper and Propitiatory Sacrifice is Offered to God for the quick and dead And that the Body and Blood of Christ is truly really and substantially in the most Holy Eucharist c. I also Confess that whole and intire Christ and the true Sacrament is received under one of the kinds only I constantly hold that there is a Purgatory and that the Souls there detained are relieved by the Prayers of the Faithful And in like manner that the Saints Reigning with Christ are to be Worshipped and Invoked c. And that their Relicks are to be Worshipped I most firmly assert that the Images of Christ and of the Mother of God always a Virgin and of the other Saints are to be had and kept and that due Honour and Worship is to be given to them I Affirm also that the power of Indulgences is left by Christ in his Church and that the use of them is very Salutiferous to Christian People I acknowledge the Holy Catholick and Apostolick Roman Church the Mother and Mistress of all Churches and I Profess and Swear Obedience to the Bishop of Rome the Successor of St. Peter Prince of the Apostles and the Vicar of Jesus Christ Also all the other things delivered decreed and declared by the Holy Canons and Oecumenical Councils and especially by the Holy Synod of Trent I undoubtedly receive and profess As also all things contrary to these and all Heresies Condemned Rejected and Anathematized by the Church I in like manner Condemns Reject and Anathematize This true Catholick Faith viz. all this Stuff of their own together with the Articles of the Creed without which no Man can be Saved which at this present I truly profess and sincerely hold I will God Assisting me most constantly Retain and Confess intire and inviolate and as much as in me lies will take Care that it be held taught and declared by those that are under me or the Care of whom shall be committed to me I the same N. do Profess Vow and Swear So help me God and the Holy Gospels of God Who when he Reads this can forbear pronouncing the Reformation of the Church of England a most Glorious Reformation 2. As to the Motives our Church proposeth for our belief of the Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures viz. that that Doctrine is of Divine Revelation they are no other than such as are found in the Scriptures themselves viz. the Excellency thereof which consists in its being wholly adapted to the reforming of mens Lives and renewing their Natures after the Image of God and the Miracles by which it is confirmed And as to the Evidence of the truth of the matters of Fact viz. that there were such Persons as the Scriptures declare to have revealed Gods will to the World such as Moses our Saviour Christ and his Apostles and that these Persons delivered such Doctrine and Confirmed it by such Miracles and that the Books of Scripture were written by those whose Names they bear I say as to the Evidence of the truth of these matters of Fact our Church placeth it not in her own Testimony or in the Testimony of any Particular Church and much less that of Rome but in the Testimony of the whole Catholick Church down to us from the time of the Apostles and of Vniversal Tradition taking in that of Strangers and Enemies as well as Friends of Jews and Pagans as well as Christians Secondly We proceed to shew that a Churches Symbolizing or agreeing in some things with the Church of Rome is no Warrant for Separation from the Church so agreeing Agreement with the Church of Rome in things either in their own nature good or made so by a Divine Precept none of our Dissenting Brethren could ever imagine not to be an indispensable duty Agreement with her in what is in its own nature Evil or made so by a Divine Prohibition none of us are so forsaken of all Modesty as to deny it to be an inexcusable sin The Question therefore is whether to agree with this Apostate Church in some things of an indifferent nature be a Sin and therefore a just ground for Separation from the Church so agreeing But by the way if we should suppose that a Churches agreeing with the Church of Rome in some indifferent things is sinful I cannot think that any of the more Sober Sort of Dissenters and I despair of success in arguing with any but such will thence infer that Separation from the Church so agreeing is otherwise warrantable than upon the account of those things being imposed as necessary terms of Communion But I am so far from taking it for granted
not fearing any thing of Humane Weakness but trusting in God Consecrated the Child to the Priest-hood almost as soon as he saw the Light Thou wilt have no need of Superstitious Charms and Amulets for him in which the Devil steals to himself from silly Souls the Honour which is due to God but call upon him the name of the Holy Trinity which is the most safe and excellent of Charms And afterwards a a a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so far the Baptism of those who desire Baptism but what shall we say of Infants who are sensible neither of the gain nor loss of it shall we Baptize them Most certainly if they be in danger for it is better that they be Sanctified without the Sense of it than that they dye uninitiated and unconsigned and my reason is taken from Circumcision which was administred on the Eighth Day unto Infants that had no Reason to which I may add the saving of the First-Born in Goshen by the sign of the Blood on the Lintel of the Door and the two Side-Posts The Brevity which I design in this Treatise will not permit me to recite many more Authorities which are very b b b Vid. testim Veter Script de Baptism apud Cassand Gerhard Joh. Voss disp 14. de Baptismo numerous out of Chrysostom Ambrose Jerom Augustin c. But I shall rather superadd some Considerations which confirm this Ancient Tradition of Infant-Baptism and are sufficient to induce any considerate and impartial Man to believe that so Ancient and universal a Practice was as old as the Planting of Churches by the Apostles and originally derives its Authority from them For first if Infant-Baptism was not the Practice of the Apostles but an Innovation it is very hard to imagine that God should suffer his Church to fall into such a dangerous Practice which would in time Un-Church it while Miracles were yet Extant in the Church The same Holy Spirit that was the guide of the Apostles into all Truth was the Author of Miracles too but the first four Witnesses which I have produced for Infant-Baptism to wit Irenaeus Tertullian Origen and Cyprian do all likewise assure us that Miracles were then not extraordinary in the Church c c c Adversus haereses l. 2. cap. 56 57. Euseb Hist Eccles l. 5. cap. 7. Irenaeus tells us that the true Disciples of Christ did then dispossess Devils and had the Gift of Tongues and of Praescience and Praediction and of healing the Sick and that the whole Congregation meeting together did by Fasting and Prayer often raise the Dead and that many so raised were then alive in the Church Nay he tells us that the number of Spiritual Gifts were innumerable which the Church all the World over then received from Christ and I truly confess it cannot enter into my heart to believe that God should suffer the Church to Embrace such a pernicious Error as Infant-Baptism was if it was not of Apostolical Tradition and fill the Christian World with Mock-Christians while he bore them Witness with Signs and Wonders and divers Miracles and Gifts of the Holy Ghost Tertullian in his a a a Et ad Scapulam c. 2. Apologetic tells us that the Christians had then power to make the Gods of the Heathen confess themselves to be Devils Nay he Challenges the Heathens to bring any one of those that were acted and inspired with any one of their Gods and Goddesses whom they worshipped and if that Daemon God or Goddess not daring to tell a Lye before any Christian should not confess it self to be a Devil then they should shed the Blood of that Christian upon the Place Origen in his Answer to Celsus frequently appeals to the Miracles which the Christians wrought in his Days particularly in the first b b b Cambridge Edition p. 34. Book he saith that they exorcised Daemons healed the Sick and foresaw Future Events And in the c c c p. 334. See also p. 62 80 124 127 376. seventh Book he proves that Christians did not their Miracles by any curious Magical Arts because Idiots or illiterate Men among them did by nothing but by Prayers and Adjurations in the Name of Jesus banish Devils from the Bodies and Souls of Men. d d d In Epist ad Donatum vid. Epist ad Magnum ad Demetrianum p. 202. Ed. Rigalt St. Cyprian tells us that the Christians in his days had power to hinder the Operation of deadly Poisons to restore Mad-men to their Senses to force Devils to confess themselves to be so and with invisible strokes and Torments to make them cry and howl and forsake the Bodies which they possessed These are the first four Witnesses which I have produced for the Practice of Infant-Baptism and let any man judge whether the Church could yet run into a Church-destroying Practice within such an Holy and Miraculous Period as this But secondly If Infant-Baptism was not an Apostolical Tradition or were derivable from any thing less than Apostolical Practice how came the a a a Vid. Vossii hist Pelag. l. 2. pars 2 Thes 4. 13. disp de Bapt. Thes 18. disp 14. Thes 4. Cassand praefat ad Duc. Jul. p. 670. Testim veteru de Bapt. parvulorum p. 687. Pelagians not to reject it for an Innovation seeing the Orthodox used it as an Argument against them that Infants were guilty of Original Sin It had been easie for them had there been any ground for it to say that it was an Innovation crept into Practice since the time of the Apostles or that it was brought up by False-Apostles and False-Teachers in the Apostles Times but then they were so far from doing this which they would have been glad to do upon any colourable Pretence that they practiced it themselves and owned it for an Apostolical Tradition and as necessary for Childrens obtaining the Kingdom of Heaven tho they denied that they were Baptized for the Remission of Original Sin But thirdly If Infant-Baptism were not in Practice from the first Plantation of Christian Churches or were derivable from any other Cause than Apostolical Tradition let the Opposers of it tell us any other probable way how it came to be the uniform practice of all Churches not only of such as were Colonies of the same Mother-Church or had Correspondence with one another by their Bishops and Presbyters but of such as were Original Plantations and betwixt which there was likely none or but very little Communication by reason of the vast distance and want of intercourse betwixt the Countries where b b b Brerewoods Enquiries c. 23 Cassand exposit de auctor Consult Bapt. Infant p. 692. they lived Among these of the latter sort are the Abassin-Church in the further Ethiopia and the c c c Osor l. 3. de rebus gest Eman cit à Vossio in disp 14. de Baptismo Brerewoods Enquiries c. 20.
a a a C. 7. Where arguing for Infant-Baptism he saith Of this we say the same things which our Divine Ministers of Holy things instructed by Divine Tradition brought down to us Dionysius the Areopagite are of no authority as to the first Century when St. Clement and St. Denis lived yet they are most excellent authorities for the third and fourth Century when they were written because they had no interest to write for Infant-Baptism The like I may say of the Testimony which the b b b Quaest respons 56. Where he saith That there is this difference betwixt Baptized and unbaptized Infants that Baptized Infants enjoy the good things of Baptism which those that are not Baptized do not enjoy and that they enâ—â—â— them by the Faith of those who offer them to Baptism Ancient and Judicious Author of the Answers to the Orthodox concerning some Questions gives of Infant-Baptism it is of no authority as for the second Century when Justin Martyr whose name it bears flourished but being a disinteressed writer it is of excellent authority for the third when it was written So much for the Test whereby to try certain and undoubted from uncertain and doubted Tradition and happy had it been for the Church of God if all Writers at the beginning of the Reformation had made this distinction and not written so as many of them have done against all Tradition without any discrimination whereas Tradition as I have here stated it is not only an harmless thing but in many cases very useful and necessary for the Church It was by Tradition in this sence that the Catholicks or Orthodox defended themselves in the fourth Century against the Arians and the Church of Africk against the Donatists and the Protestants defend themselves as to the Scripture-Canon and many other things against the Innovations of the Papists And therefore in answer to the Second part of their Objection against Tradition as detracting from the Sufficiency of the Scriptures I must remind them that the Scriptures whose sufficiency we admire as well as they cannot be proved to be the Word of God without Tradition and that though they are sufficient where they are understood to determine any Controversie yet to the right understanding and interpretation of them in many points Tradition is as requisite as the * * * Lex currit cum praxi practice of the Courts is to understand the Books of the Law This is so true that the Anabaptists themselves cannot defend the Baptizing of such grown Persons as were born and bred in the Church merely from the Scriptures in which the very Institution of Baptism hath a special regard unto Proselytes who from Judaism or Gâ—ntilism would come over unto the Christian Faith Accordingly they cannot produce one Precept or Example for Baptizing of such as were born of Christian Parents in all the New Testament but all the Baptized Persons we read of in it were Jews or Gentiles and therefore they cannot defend themselves against the Quakers who for this and other Reasons have quite laid aside Baptism without the Tradition and Practice of the Church Quest IV. Whether it be a Duty incumbent upon Christian Parents to bring their Children unto Baptism To state this Question aright I must proceed in the same order that I did upon the last First In arguing from the bare lawfulness and allowableness of Infant-Baptism And Secondly From the necessity thereof As to the lawfulness of it I have already shewn upon the last Question That there is no necessity of having a Command or Example for to justifie the practice of Infant-Initiation but it is sufficient that it is not forbidden to make it lawful and allowable under the Gospel Nay I have shewed upon the Second Question that of the two there is more reason that Christians should have had an express command to leave off or lay down the practice of Infant-Initiation because it was commanded by God in Infant-Circumcision and approved by him in Infant-Baptism which the Jewish Church added to Infant-Circumcision under the Legal State Commands are usually given for the beginning of the practice of something which was never in practice before but to justifie the continuation of an anciently instituted or anciently received practice it is sufficient that the Power which instituted or approved it do not countermand or forbid it and this as I have shewn being the case of Infants-Initiation the Initiation of them by Baptism under the Gospel must at least be lawful and allowable and if it be so then Parents and Pro-parents are bound in Conscience to bring them unto Baptism in Obedience unto the Orders of the Church For the Church is a Society of a People in Covenant with God and in this Society as in all others there are Superiors and in Inferiors some that must Order and some that must observe Orders some that must Command and some that must Obey and therefore if the Catholick Church or any Member of it commands her Children to observe any lawful thing they are bound by the Common-Laws of all Government and by the Precepts in the Gospel which regard Ecclesiastical Order and Discipline to observe her Commands Obey them saith the * * * Heb. 13. 17. Apostle who have the Rule over you and submit your selves unto them for they watch for your Souls Accordingly we read that St. †††Act. 16. 4. Paul as he went through the Grecian Cities delivered the Christians the Decrees which the Apostles had made at Jerusalem to keep but I think I need not spend more time in the Proof of a thing which all Dissenters will grant me for though they differ from us as to the Subject of pure Ecclesiastical Power yet they all agree that there is such a Power and that all lawful Commands proceeding from it ought to be Obey'd Wherefore if Infants are not uncapable of Baptismal Initiation as is proved under the first Question nor excluded from it by Christ as is proved under the Second but on the contrary there are very good Reasons to presume that Christ at least allowed them the benefit and honour of Baptism as well as grown Persons then the Ordinance of any Church to Baptize them must needs lay an Obligation of Obedience upon the Consciences of Parents and Pro-parents who live within the Pale of it because the matter of that Ordinance is a thing not forbidden but at least allowed by Jesus Christ But because People when the are once satisfied with the lawfulness are wont especially in Church-matters to enquire into the expediency of their Superiors Commands and to obey them with most Chearfulness and Satisfaction when they know they have good reasons for what they ordain therefore least any one whom perhaps I may have convinced of the bare lawfulness of Infant-Baptism should doubt of the expediency of it and upon that account be less ready to comply I will here proceed to justifie the practice of
Sacraments to them for whom they were instituted As for an Example we may behold Joshua who most diligently procured the People of Israel to Jos 2. be Circumcised before they entred into the Land of Promise but since the Apostles were the Preachers of the Word and the very Faithful Servants of Jesus Christ who may hereafter doubt that they Baptized Infants since Baptism is in place of Circumcision Item The Apostles did attemperate all their doings to the Shadows and Figures of the Old Testament Therefore it is certain that they did attemperate Baptism accordingly to Circumcision and Baptized Children because they were under the Figure of Baptism for the People of Israel passed through the Red Sea and the bottom of the Water of Jordan with their Children And although the Children be not always expressed neither the Women in the Holy Scriptures yet they are comprehended and understood in the same Also the Scripture evidently telleth us That the Apostles baptized whole Families or Housholds But the Children be comprehended in a Family or Houshold as the chiefest and dearest part thereof Therefore we may conclude that the Apostles did Baptize Infants or Children and not only Men of lawful age And that the House or Houshold is taken for Man Woman and Child it is manifest in the 17. of Genesis and also in that Joseph doth call Jacob with all his House to come out of the Land of Canaan into Egypt Finally I can declare out of ancient Writers that the Baptism of Infants hath continued from the Apostles time unto ours neither that it was instituted by any Councels neither of the Pope nor of other Men but commended from the Scripture by the Apostles themselves Origen upon the Declaration of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans expounding the 6. Chapter saith That the Church of Christ received the Baptism from the very Apostles St. Hierome maketh mention of the Baptism of Infants in the 3. Book against the Pelagians and in his Epistle to Leta St. Augustine reciteth Heb. 11. for this purpose a place out of John Bishop of Constantinople in his 1. Book aganst Julian Chap. 2. and he again writing to St. Hierome Epist 28. saith That St. Cyprian not making any new Decree but firmly observing the Faith of the Church judged with his fellow Bishops that as soon as one was born he might be lawfully Baptized The place of Cyprian is to be seen in his Epistle to Fidus. Also St. Augustine in writing against the Donatists in the 4. Book Chap. 23. 24. saith That the Baptism of Infants was not derived from the authority of Man neither of Councels but from the Tradition or Doctrine of the Apostles Cyril upon Leviticus Chap. 8. approveth the Baptism of Children and condemneth the iteration of Baptism These Authorities of Men I do alledge not to tie the Baptism of Children unto the Testimonies of Men but to shew how Mens Testimonies do agree with God's Word and that the verity of Antiquity is on our side and that the Anabaptists have nothing but Lies for them and new Imaginations which feign the Baptism of Children to be the Pope's Commandment After this will I answer to the sum of your Arguments for the contrary The first which includeth all the rest is It is Written Go ye into all the World and Preach the glad Tidings to all Creatures He that believeth and is Baptized shall be Saved But he that believeth not shall be Damned c. To this I answer That nothing is added to God's Word by Baptism of Children as you pretend but that is done which the same Word doth require for that Children are accounted of Christ in the Gospel among the number of such as believe as it appeareth by these words He that offendeth Matth. 18. one of these little Babes which believe in me it were better for him to have a Milstone tyed about his Neck and to be cast into the bottom of the Sea Where plainly Christ calleth such as be not able to confess their Faith Believers because of his mere Grace he reputeth them for Believers And this is no Wonder so to be taken since God imputeth Faith for Righteousness unto Men that be of riper Age For both in Men and Children Righteousness Acceptation or Sanctification is of mere Grace and by Imputation that the Glory of God's Grace might be praised And that the Children of Faithful Parents are Sanctified and among such as do believe is apparent in the 1 Cor. 1 Cor. 7. 7. And whereas you do gather by the order of the words in the said Commandment of Christ that Children ought to be taught before they be Baptized and to this end you alledge many places out of the Acts proving that such as Confessed their Faith first were Baptized after I answer That if the order of words might weigh any thing to this Cause we have the Scripture that maketh as well for us St. Mark we read that John did Baptize in the Desart Mark 1. Preaching the Baptism of Repentance In the which place we see Baptizing go before and Preaching to follow after And also I will declare this place of Matthew exactly considered to make for the use of Baptism in Children for St. Matthew hath it written in this wise All Power is Matth. 28. given me saith the Lord in Heaven and in Earth therefore going forth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Disciple ye as I may express the signification of the Word that is make or gather to me Disciples of all Nations And following he declareth the way how they should gather to him Disciples out of all Nations baptizing them and teaching by baptizing and teaching ye shall procure a Church to me And both these aptly and briefly severally he setteth forth saying Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and the Holy Ghost teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you Now then Baptism goeth before Doctrine But hereby I do not gather that the Gentiles which never heard any thing before of God and of the Son of God and of the Holy Ghost ought to be Baptized neither they would permit themselves to be Baptized before they knew to what end But this I have declared to shew you upon how feeble Foundation the Anabaptists be grounded And plainly it is not true which they imagine of this Text that the Lord did only command such to be Baptized whom the Apostles had first of all taught Neither here verily is signified who only be to be Baptized but he speaketh of such as be of perfect age and of the first Foundations of Faith and of the Church to be planted among the Gentiles which were as yet rude and ignorant of Religion Such as be of Age may hear believe and confess that which is Preached and taught but so cannot Infants therefore we may justly collect that he speaketh here nothing of Infants or Children But for all this
may they now hope to do it For there are now many hinderances which did not then lie cross their way First The Platform of Discipline so highly applauded so earnestly contended for during the Reigns of Queen Elizabeth and King James hath now been in part tryed and the presence of it to omit other Reasons hath abated the Reverence some had for it Secondly There is not at this time such an Union amongst Dissenters as appeared at the beginning of our late Troubles The number of those Dissenters who were not for the Discipline was then very inconsiderable But in a few years they brake as it were into Fractions of Fractions Insomuch that the Ministers of the Province of London expressed the Estate of things in the Year 47 on this manner * * * Testim to the Truth of J. Chr. p. 30. Instead of Vnity and Vniformity in Matters of Religion we are torn in pieces with Distractions Schisms Separations Divisions ano Subdivisions Thirdly Those who then favoured the Discipline are much departed from their former Scheme of Government inclining to Independency which they once denyed to be God's Ordinance * * * Mr. Herl c. and pleading for Toleration which they once called The last and strongest hold of Satan * The Title of Mr. Edwards 's book 1647. See Testim of Min. p. 20. Fourthly At the beginning of our Disturbances many Men of Quality and such who had a Zeal of God favour'd the Settlement of the Discipline in the simplicity of their hearts They had not then seen any Revolutions they had not discovered the secret Springs of publick Motions nor the vile Interests of many men which lay concealed under the disguise of Pure Religion They saw what all Men may see in all times abuses in Church and State and the very name of Reformation was sweet to them Now notwithstanding the sincere zeal and the power of these Men the Discipline could not long be carried on much less could it be perfected by them There is therefore at this time a much greater Improbability of Success in the like design For many consiberable men Piously inclin'd have seen their error and will not be a second time engaged And they will not say of our late changes as the Protector did * * * Oliver 's Speech in the Painted Chambâ—r Jan. 22. 54 at the Dissolv of the Parl. p. 29. 33. That they were the Revolutions of God and not humane designs That they were the Revolutions of Christ upon whose Shoulders the Government was stayed They are not of the same mind with him who told the Commons * * * Mr. Caryl in Ep. Ded. bef Ser. called the Arraign of Unbelief A. 45. That if they acted Faith then the Records of those Times on their side should bear thus to all Posterity the Book of the Wars and Counsels of God Also since those days through the luxation of Discipline during the licence of the War the discovery of great and black Hypocrisies the multiplication of Parties and Opinions the publishing of many lewd and irreligious books from Unlicens'd Presses Atheism hath made very formidable Advances And they say that some undisguised Sceptics and Atheists have some times since the King's Return been much used in the Cause of our Dissenters Now if well meaning zeal could not establish the Discipline it is not likely to be promoted much less settled by the help of such hands of which the outsides are not washed by so much as an External form of Godliness The Second Branch of the first End of Dissenters The second Branch of the 1st End of the Dissenters viz. Vnion by mutual forbearance seems more improbable than the first viz. The settling themselves as several distinct Parties giving undisturbed Toleration to each other This seems not probable upon many accounts First Some Dissenters believe some of the Parties to be incapable of Forbearance as maintaining Principles destructive of Christian Faith and Piety This Opinion they still have for instance sake of Antinomians Quakers and Muggletonians And they formerly declamed against the Toleration of divers others They publish'd here by Authority so called an Act of the Assembly at Edinburgh * * * A 1647. Act of Assemb p. 2. Against Erastians Independents and Liberty of Conscience bearing as they speak their publick Testimony against them not only as contrary to sound Doctrine but as more special Letts and Hinderances as well to the Scottish received Doctrine Discipline and Government as to the Work of Reformation and Uniformity in England and Ireland The Ministers of the Province within the County Palatine of Lancaster in their Harmonions Consent * * * Harmon Consent A. 1648. p. 12. with the Ministers of the Province of London publish'd their Judgments in these zealous Words A Toleration would be a putting of a Sword into a Mad man's hand An appointing a City of Refuge in Mens Consciences for the Devil to fly to A proclaiming Liberty to the Wolves to come into Christ's Fold to pray upon his Lambs A Toleration of Soul-murther the greatest murther of all others and for the establishing whereof damned Souls in Hell would accurse Men on Earth Neither would it be to provide for tender Consciences but to take away all Conscience If error be not forcibily kept under it will be Superior It seems they were not then of the later Perswasion of the Protector who said * * * Protect Speech Jan. 22. 54. p. 28. concerning the People of several Judgments in this Land That they were All the Flock of Christ and the Lambs of Christ though perhaps under many unruly Passions and Troubles of Spirit whereby they gave disquiet to themselves and others And that they were not so to God as to us Again There is no firmness or social influence in the nature of this Union It is the Union of a multitude who meet and disperse at pleasure And he who proposeth this way as the means to knit Men into Christian Communion is like a Projecter who should design the keeping of the stones together in the strength of a firm and lasting House by forbearing the use of Cement The Union that lasteth is that of the Concord of Members in an Uniform Body Moreover It is to be consider'd that there are no Parties in this or any other Nation so exactly poised that they have equal Numbers and Interests There is always one of them which over-ballanceth the rest And one of the several ways must always be favoured as the Religion of the State And it is natural for the strongest side to attempt the subduing of the weaker And though this be not soon effected yet 'till one side getteth the mastery the Parties remain not as distinct Bodies settled in peace within themselves and towards each other but as Convulsions in the common body of the State Some think this Inclination to the swallowing up of all other Parties to be
found almost only in the Romish Church But here is something of it to be discerned I will not say in all Churches seeing I well understand the good Being of our own which suffered Bonner himself to live yet in all Factions and Parties though the inequality of Power makes it not seem to be alike in all of them The Catt hath the same inward Parts with the Lyon though they differ much in size And some such likewise they will find who dissect humane nature and Bodies civil There is this Disposition in Men whether they be the politick or the Conscientious The External practice of all Parties is answerable to this inward Disposition There is this inward Disposition in men who espouse any Faction whether their Ends be designs of State or of Religion Parties who are not otherwise than in shew concerned for Religion will perpetually covet Power after Power And Parties who are serious and Conscientious in their way whatsoever it is will not remain in an indifference of terms towards those who tread in contrary Paths and with whom they do not maintain Communion For therefore they withdraw from them because they believe Communion with them to be unlawful Otherwise they have no Judgment in the price of Peace and Unity if they willingly part with it when they may without sin enjoy it and if they esteem their way sinful and believe those persons who remain without their pale to be so gone astray as without Repentance to be eternally lost Charity it self will urge them to use all means probable towards the reducing of them And they will be apt to think that the suffering of them in their Wandrings declares them to be contented with their condition External Practice of all Parties do's shew plainly what is their inward Disposition All would do what is good in their own eyes but I do not perceive that any are willing to let others do so Where there is Power their is little Forbearance And the same men as their Conditions alter speak of Mercy or Justice Amongst those of the Party of Donatus whose Schism opened so dangerous a Wound in the Churches of Africa all pleaded earnestly for Forbearance whilst their Power was in its Minority Yet S. Austin remindeth one of them * * * Petil. ap S. Aug. cont Petil. l. 2. Absit Absit à nostra Conscientia ut ad nostram fidem aliquem compellamus c. of a Practice contrary to their Profession whilst they turn'd against the Maximianists the edge of the Theodosian Laws and abus'd the Power which they had gotten under Julian in oppressing as far as in them lay the Catholick Christians Amongst those of the Protestant Perswasion the Heads of the Discipline were plainly unwilling that any should have leave to make a separation from their body And one of them * * * Mr. Calamy in Ser. called The great danger of Covenant refusing A. 46. p 3. with a mixture of Grief and Expostulation thus discoursed before the Commons The Famous City of London is become an Amsterdam Separation from Our Churches is countenanc'd Toleration is cried up Authority lieth asleep Every one would have Power to rowse up it self and maintain his Cause And indeed it is and has been too often in Religion as it is and was in Philosophy Where the divers Sects do not contend meerly for the enlarging the bounds of Philosophical Arts in a sincere and solid inquiry * * * Lord Bacon's Pref. to Adv. of Learn but for the Translating the Empire of Opinion and settling it upon themselves The same men who pleaded for Forbearance in this Church and remov'd themselves into New-England as by themselves was said for the Liberty of their Conscience or Persuasion when once they arrived there and made a figure in that Government they refused Indulgence to the Anabaptists and Quakers and us'd them as to this day they do with great severity Those Commons who in the Year 47 * * * Whitlock's Memoires p. 276. made an Order For the giving of Indulgence to tender Consciences did at the same time make another Order That this Indulgence should not extend to tolerate such who used the Common-Prayer Some who do not well understand the Policy of the Dutch do believe it to be otherwise in those Netherlands But by their Constitution none have liberty to speak against any publick Error or Corruption on which the States shall stamp their Authority And Episcopius * * * Episc Exam. Thes Cap. Op. vol. 1. par 2. p. 185. complain'd that the Calvinists would tolerate none whom they had power to punish There are now great numbers of his own Remonstrant Party who when any juncture of Affairs gives them encouragment are apt to contend for Superiority The Parties in their Sermons and Writings speak with bitter Zeal against each other And where the ordinary Conversation of Men of different Judgments is peaceable amongst them divers who mind Traffick more than Religion seem rather to be an Heterogeneous body frozen together by a cold indifference than a Society united by Christian Love In the Church of Rome the several Orders who at present mortally hate one another if they were not restrain'd by the force of the common Politie they would soon devour one another We are not without a remarkable Instance in this kind published by a Dominican Bishop and a Capuchin Fryer Certain Dominicans * * * See Lettres Sinceres Trois partie Sixieme Lettre p. 111. had seated themselves nigh the River of Plate in Paraguay where there are Gold Mines in the Earth and Gold Sands in the Rivers Of this the Jesuits who have long ears had good intelligence They desired to go thither in order to the further instruction of the American-people and the education of Youth They obtained leave procured Letters of Credence were furnished with Money for the Voyage After having gotten sure footing they soon removed the Dominicans and Spanish Laity and established themselves Among the Socinians the great Asserters of Liberty in Religion both in thinking and speaking though they cannot impose because they have not yet been any-where that I know of the prevailing Party yet they shew sometimes what Spirit they are of Gittichius was beyond all good manners troublesom to a Socinian of better temper I mean Ruarus * because Ruari Epist par 1. p 415 416. he had chosen to fast one day in a week and had taken Friday for the day though without any fixed purpose Among the Quakers themselves whose Principle seems to be the Guidance of each man by his personal persuasion there want not signs of that fierce heat with which their Light is accompanied When some had form'd them into a Society and gotten the Governance into their hands they Excommunicated others they suffered them not to Marry or Bury in their manner who would not be guided by what they called the Light of the Body and the Light