several Obligations to a strict constant Conformity to Ceremonies and all and saith To make all sure and prevent all Evasions occasioned by nice Distinctions about the force and obligation of Human Laws He will shew that there is no room for Equity and Moderation in this case pag. 43 44. 2. Seeing we Ministers have by private Subscriptions and Promises by open Deelarations and solemn Oaths to our Diocesan obliged our selves to the constant use of the Ceremonies established by Law I infer That nothing less than strictness and exactness of Duty and a constant close Conformity is required at our Hands and that no Man can dispence with himself and relax the Law in this case p. 45. The Inference is drawn from four Premises 1. The Act of Uniformity p. 42. 2. The Declaration of Assent and Consent 3. The Oath of Canonical Obedience p. 43. And 4. To make all sure c. There is no room for Moderation in this case which he endearvours to prove p. 44 45. Because that which I first except against taking the Pages in order is the last of his Reasons for that Conclusion I shall invert my Order and speak to it last and so take up the second Point in difference in the first place And considering the Premises I say He cannot infer that Conclusion from them for there is more in his Inference than is in the Premises He infers as much as that we are indispensibly bound in all Times Places and on all Occasions to a close strict Conformity and that if we do not constantly observe it in all Points we have broken our Faith If so then what Conformist is not guilty in a high degree of sinning then who can conform Or who can and be blameness Is there such to be found at all times even in Cathedral Churches There are many Occasions for an honest wise conscientious Minister to shew Moderation not only such as our Brother allows to Dissenters in Words and Passion but in Fact or he sins more by a courteous refusal to yield than by a prudent occasional Compliance If not then moderate Men cannot conform but must abide without among Dissenters And our rigid Interpreters of the Laws do furnish them with an unanswerable Argument against Conformity viz. That Conformity which leaves no room for Moderation cannot be submitted to without Sin but such is this rigid Conformity The Proposition is proved because we as Christians and Ministers are bound to let our Moderation be known to all Men and this Moderation is not only a Moderation of good Language and abstinence from Passion but in Fact and Deed. But let us try the strength of the Premises and if they be removed or shaken his Inference and Superstructure will fall with all his Confidence And first let us see if such Words be contained in or drawn from our Subscription to the second Article of the 36 Canon wherein the Subscriber doth promise that he will use the Form prescribed in the said Book in publick Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and no other And no other shall be explained afterwards The Promise is a general Promise and because general is capable of a Latitude and that nothing less than Strictness and Exactness and a close constant Conformity is more than the Canon speaks an Addition to the Law which enjoyns the use of it and no other Form in Competition or Opposition to it That Inference from this Promise of using it is denied and cannot be admitted except the Law-givers declare that to be the meaning of it 2. The second Premise out of which that rigid Inference is drawn is the Declaration of Assent and Consent which is to the use of all things contained in and prescribed by the Book But the Words and Promise are not To the constant close strict use of all things at all times which is more than any Man can promise or perhaps any Man hath perform'd However the Inference is denied because it contains more than is expressed in that Declaration But then this ingenious Person doth confirm his Notion by bringing in the Intention or Scope of that Declaration which is to the intent that Vniformity in the Worship of God may be effected That I may not be mistaken I desire it may be noted we are now come from one Word to another viz. from a close strict exact Conformity to an Vniformity which is the design and scope of that close Conformity To this it is applied 1. The Act doth enjoyn an Uniformity by a Book named in it We declare our Assent to the use of that Book and he that puts that Sence of strict close constant use of all and every thing doth add to the Law and by a rigorous Interpretation of it is as far from an honest Moderation or Equity as he that doth transgress the Law Relaxatione nimia 2. This Uniformity may in a warrantable sense be taken in opposition to a Diversity of publick Forms or a Multiformity that this is not the sense of Knaves or the invention of Church-Moles and Vipers is plain by the Preface as it was called in the Common-Prayer-Book of K. Edw. the IV th and in our Book follows the new Preface Concerning the Service of the Church wherein are these words And whereas heretofore there hath been a great Diversity in saying and singing in Churches within this Realm some following Salisbury some Hereford and some the use of Bangor some of York some of Lincoln now from henceforth all the whole Realm shall have but one Use. If therefore we follow and use the same Book we observe the Vniformity required and explained in that Preface still continued in this present Book which is established by Law and by Consequence this is a publickly allowed and a legal Sence 3. If we take our Uniformity not only oppositivè to a Multiformity of ancient Forms and Uses but appositivè conformable to the Rubricks and Orders which are the Rule of our Uniformity we shall find the Uniformity to be in many Things but general and not particular Therefore the Uniformity required by Law is not a particular close strict Uniformity and by consequence a strict close constant Conformity taking Conformity in the same Sence as Uniformity is not required and therefore not to be inferred as if all Ministers always were obliged to do the same Things which is the Import of the Inference which I oppose And this I conceive will appear in two Instances 1. Of the Prayers and Hymns 2. Of the Ceremonies which the exact Conformist drives at First Sometimes you are directed to One or This in several Offices Now suppose the Minister of St. Ethelbert for instance shall say the Te Deum and his next Neighbours of St. Helen's and Bishopsgate or St. Mary Ax shall say Jubilate Deo the one use one Hymn or Prayer and the other another one should dip and the other sprinkle Where such Diversity is allowed they all conform but do not keep
Things and to these within the Limits of our Ministerial Function only else our Obedience might extend even to wait at their Table or to the holding of their Stirrup both which and many other Things are lawful And therefore our Diocesans cannot call upon us to go beyond the Laws and by consequence that Liberty which the Law allows is our Right and Privilege We cannot see how we are tied to a more strict exact constant Conformity by this Oath than by the Laws and Rubricks of which we spake before Secondly he adds as an Enforcement of the Obligation That the Right Reverend Father the Lord Bishop of London hath laid his Commands upon us punctually to observe the Rites and Ceremonies To which I answer This Obligation lies upon none but him and others from whom that honourable Prelate hath required it What is all this to the Clergy of other Diocesses If that Right-Reverend Bishop hath exacted this other Diocesans have not required it And I could name some of great Name and Age who have expressed a greater Moderation in forbearing to require that punctual Observation of constant strict and exact Conformity as allowing some Scope in some Occurrences and Cases to Ministerial Discretion And now not finding his Inference in these three Premises let us see if we can find it in the fourth which binds all fast and sure 4 thly To make all sure c. I will saith he briefly shew that there is no Room for Equity and Moderation here in this Case And this he endeavours to prove 1. By the Notion of Moderation with respect to Laws 2. The Words of the Act of Uniformity 3. The Sence of the Law-givers that is First the Sence of his Majesty in his Declaration to stand by the Act of Uniformity Anno 1662. And 2. The Vote of the House of Commons Feb. 15. 1662. against Indulgence to Dissenters from the Act of Uniformity p. 44 45. To drive home the Nail and to make all sure that a moderate Man may not be able to stir from the Post of constant strict exact Duty He tells us There is no room for Equity or Moderation in this Case Then first did he leave his Text when he came to his Application in the Latitude of the Apostles sense which must needs be large because the Object All Men is a general Object The Text saith Let your Moderation be known to all Men. The Dissenters are a very numerous Part of the Nation some of the All Men. That which they desire is a Freedom or Abatement or Omission of some things required If we tell them with civil and respectful Language and with tenderness of Affection and Kindness you must conform to all things at all times invariably to the Law and that there is no Moderation to be exercised towards you I pray Sir 1. What kind of Law do you make this to be a Human Law forbidding a Duty to a Divine Law 2. What kind of Law-makers do you represent ours to be that made a Law forbidding the Exercise of a certain Christian Duty For now you know the Law being made it is out of the Law-givers Hand and Power till they in a legal Meeting please to anul it so that now you say as much as that there is a Law that shuts out Moderation such a Moderation as the case of Difference requires for Moderation of Affection and good Words doth not come home to the Dissenters Case which requires a Moderation in Fact and Exercise 3. What Encouragement is this for Dissenters to conform if by their Conformity they must shew no Moderation to the weak and doubting 4. Do not you furnish them with an unanswerable Argument against Conformity But Sir you produce our Subscription and Assent against us and is there no Moderation of Sence and Interpretation of it You may soon know that the Learned Mr. Chillingworth hath given a Sense of our Subscription to the Articles Preface Sect. 40. and it passed with the Approbation of the Vice-Chancellor and Professors of Divinity in Oxford The like is done by Arch-bishop Bramhall's Vindication of the Church of England p. 156. the first Edit And for the Book of Common-Prayer be pleased to cast an Eye upon the last Preface before the now enjoyned Book speaking of the former Book The Authors of it say they were fully perswaded in their Judgments that the Book doth not contain in it any thing contrary to the Word of God or sound Doctrine or which a godly Man may not with a good Conscience use and submit to or which is not fairly defensible against any that shall oppose the same if it shall be allowed such just and favourable Construction as in common Equity ought to be allowed to all human Writings especially such as are set forth by Authority and even to the best Translations of the holy Scripture it self Here is some Equity of Construction and Moderation in reference to the Book of Common-Prayer to which we assent supposing the same applicable to this which is spoken of the former which pretends to no higher Authority than that did And to use your own Words To make all sure you will see the Error of your dogmatical Assertion when you see it proved that Moderation and Equity must be allowed in this Case or else we are grosly abused by them that require Subscription to the Canon and cannot subscribe with Verity and Judgment We subscribe to the three Articles of Can. 36. In the second Article we say that the Book of common-Common-Prayer and of ordering and consecrating Bishops Priests and Deacons contains nothing in it contrary to the Word of God and that it may be so used and promise to use that Form and no other in publick Prayers and Administration of the Sacraments Now that Canon is old as old as 1603 and refers to the Book of common-Common-Prayer then in use and not to this which in several Particulars differs from it We do not now subscribe to that Book as it stood then but to a Book lately changed in which are many things which were not in that If there be no Moderation or Equity of Interpretation of that Canon and by Consequence of our Subscription how can any Man subscribe and promise to use that Form and no other whereas we do not subscribe to that Book then in use to which the Canon relates but to that which is now in use We think now there is and must needs be an Equity and Moderation of Construction in this case 2. He saith in the present Case of Conformity there is nothing but what the Law-givers did foresee and provide against To prove this he repeats some words of the Act which say Nothing conduceth more to the Peace of the Nation Honour of Religion and Propagation thereof than an universal Agreement in the publick Worship of God and to that end in the next Paragraph of the Act it is enacted That all and singular Ministers in any place of publick
Worship shall be bound to say and use the Morning and Evening Prayer Administration of both Sacraments and all other publick Prayers in such Order and Form as is mentioned in the said Book and that Morning and Evening Prayers be openly and solemnly read Here are only general Words enjoyning the use of the Book but not the exact constant strict use of it at all times and of every thing therein wich our kind and merciful Friend would impose upon us as the true and genuine Sence And our Promise in the Declaration against taking Arms against the King And that I will conform to the Liturgy of the Church of England as it is now established is also a general Promise and who but the Law-givers can make the meaning of it to be an exact strict constant close Conformity which I question whether any Man ever did at all times no not the Preacher himself perform but might disconform by over-doing There is another general Word we consent to the Vse of all things but exactly strictly constantly must be the Addition of him who hath no Authority either to add or interpret it being a Rule in the Law Interpretatio ad eum spectat qui condere potest Philip Decius de Regulis Juris To conclude this Particular I make bold to ask any Man 1. Did the Law-givers foresee all Accidents that might happen and conclude all Occurrences of Providence within their fore-sight and to make an invariable Rule for all particular Times and Occasions I believe none of our Law-givers will say so for they know they are but Men. No Law-makers being Men can foresee or set down all Cases that may happen saith Mr. Perkins of Christian Equity 2. Did they foresee that some Ministers cannot maintain Curats or Readers to help them that many Parishes cannot maintain or have not a Minister entire to themselves that we have not Organs to make the Service easy and delightful as some have That in some Countrys Parishes are of a large Extent and the People cannot come together so early as in London and Market-Towns that Catechising and Preaching must take up time and foreseeing the Weakness and Age of Ministers that must do all themselves that many Offices of Baptizing Churching Burying which I have known all to be performed at one Assembly and yet require a strict exact constant Duty of reading all and every word Did they foresee that if the Word be not constantly and duly preached the greatest part of our People will not come to Church some thinking they may be idle and lazy as well as their Ministers and others will go where they may hear and profit and for all this did they require a strict constant exact Conformity of Ministers notwithstanding Age and Infirmities to read perform all Offices and preach besides I will have Mercy and not Sacrifice saith God but what say such hard Masters as these 3. Did the Law-givers foresee that in great and crouded Churches it is either impossible or inconvenient and indecent where the Fashion is for Men and Women to sit promiscuously in Pews for all to kneel at Prayer and yet enjoyn them to kneel at the Confession Absolution and Lord's Prayer c. Did they foresee that Deacons do baptize and yet say in the Margin of that Book Here let the Priest make the sign of the Cross If there be no Equity of Construction a Deacon cannot lawfully use the Cross in Baptism 4. Did they foresee the Resolution of the Dissenters to persist the great Danger to the Protestant Religion by our Divisions and Penal Prosecutions of them of which the Papists have made great Advantage and for all this enjoin a strict constant Conformity or Excommunications and Writs de capiendo c. I might add more Queries but I proceed to his Reserve This Reverend Man thought there was strength enough in his main Body of Arguments to bear down the whole Force of the feeble moderate Party But to make all sure he hath placed two Reserves the Power of the King in his Declaration to stand to the Act of Uniformity Anno 1662. and the other the Power of the House of Commons Vote of Feb. 15. 1662. to grant no Indulgence to the Dissenters from the Act of Uniformity Now against this Reserve we are not afraid to come out with as great an Authority as he argues under and we think we have the better because it is a later and the fruit of twelve Years Experience See the King's Declaration of Indulgence of March 15. 1672. And against the Vote of the Commons of Feb. 15. 1662. we will oppose more than one Vote even a Bill brought into the House of Lords from the Commons in Favour of Protestant Dissenters After that his Majesty had cancelled his Declaration of Indulgence which Bill had certainly passed but for want of Time the Parliament being prorogued till October 27. 1673 before it passed the Lords as it certainly would have done the Bishops then joyning with the Temporal Lords and were willing to take away the Assent and Consent and Renunciation of the Covenant A Bill in 1673. in favour of Protestant Dissenters is of greater Authority and we suppose built upon greater Reasons than a Vote against Indulgence in 1662. We might tell you of a Bill for uniting Protestant Dissenters read December 21. 1680. and other Votes but it shall suffice to have overmatched a Vote of that same House of Commons in its younger days 1662. by a Bill of the same House in its riper Age 1673. And now if I thought this arguing but in this point unconvincing Preacher could answer me I would intreat his Favour to ask him whether the Law-givers of this Act did foresee and provide against a Change of their own Thoughts and Resolutions in reference to this very Case And then whether we are to take the sence and meaning of the Law-giver from his first or from his last and maturest Thoughts and Declaration But if they had remained unaltered the Words of the Act and our Declaration and Subscription being general and not limited by any after-Declaration of the same Power for a rigid Construction we are inclined to interpret them with the Equity and Moderation of a known Rule of Law Benignior Interpretatio semper capienda est I have now done what I designed and taking the defensive Part I shall not pursue the Learned Preacher through the rest of this branch of the Use wherein he speaks more of himself than he doth to his Auditory of any Duty that concerns them but had rather follow him a thousand Paces in the Practice of the Christian Duty of honest Moderation than give him one Contradiction And I do again profess that I am extreamly sorry there is so much matter of just Offence given in a Sermon and from such Deductions of Application more suited to the Times than the Text wherein two sorts of Men are marked with a black Coal the profest Dissenter and the
the Determination of his Majesty's Will and Pleasure is as binding to him as any Act of Parliament since the Conquest 2. The Rubrick in some of those Forms is only this I am sure The Priest standing at the North side c. shall say and not The Priest shall stand at the North side of the Lord's Table and say Then it were a Law if enjoined by Law 3. Do the Printers receive that in Charge from the King or the Arch-Bishop to print that Rubrick Or do they do it for Custom and Form sake 4. I am sure also that in the Form of Thanksgiving for Queen Elizabeth's Inauguration Novemb. 17. there is no Rubrick at all before the Lord's Prayer and Ten Commandments but after the Grace of our Lord Jesus the Lord's Prayer and Commandments follow and other Prayers Therefore it was not so since the Reformation and that Queen's Reign took up a great part of our Time since the Reformation and that Day was as great and solemn a Day as hath been kept to his Majesty's Restauration And whether that Piece of the Rubrick in our late Books came not in with the Innovations I will leave to the Enquiry of others who have a greater Treasure than my poor Collection doth contain And now we may say those that were convinced by this Reason have quietly receded from their Obstinacy and been very easy tender-hearted Converts After all the Triumph he rallies up the prime Churches King's Chappel Cathedrals two Universities and many Orthodox Parish-Churches where the Prayers are so read viz. Dr. Hicks Dr. Sherlock Dr. Dove Mr. Pelling Now whatever their Parish-Churches may be if they be more Orthodox Parish-Churches than ours 't is rare We take it to be no immodest Comparison to say we are sure we are as Orthodox Parish-Ministers as they are And how they can stand at the North side of the Table we cannot understand if their Tables stand Altar-wise as they do or else their Churches are no more Orthodox than ours except standing at the North End of the Table be all one as to stand at the North Side or that their Tables have no Ends but are equilateral and so still their Churches be Heterodox and not Orthodox But if their Tables be of the ordinary fashion they must stand at the North End of the Table and not at the North Side and so they may come nearer to the Table than others do they come no nearer to the Rubrick than their Neighbours And if our Churches are Conventicles which I hope are not proved so to be those Orthodox Churches which he names must come into the Number And to conclude there was greater Reason for reading at the Communion-Table in former Times than now for the Rubrick in the Book of Common-Prayer till of late was this The Collects Epistles and Gospels to be used at the Celebration of the Lord's Supper and Holy Communion throughout the Year before the first Sunday in Advent Book of common-Common-Prayer c. by Rob. Barker 1634. And this was the Rubrick in King Edward the Sixth's Time but in ours now Collects and Epistles and Gospels to be used throughout the Year And therefore then the Celebration of the Sacrament was supposed or for ought I know the Epistles and Gospels were not to be read till the last Rubrick after the Communion was brought in to read so much as was not necessary for the Communion And this seems to be another Evidence that the Rubrick for standing at the North Side of the Table did relate to the Communion-Time or Celebration of the Sacrament because then even the Collects Epistles and Gospels were to be read at the Celebration of the Lord's Supper throughout the Year and if there be no Communion there is no necessity of standing at the North Side of the Table And till I see better Proof I will conclude Parish-Churches are no Conventicles The Conclusion propounding Examples of Moderation ANd now having a few Pages left I will fill them up with Examples to prove that the wisest Men and best Christians that ever were in the World have always been of this excellent Temper of Moderation A Man might summon a Cloud of Witnesses to set their Hands and Seals to the Poet 's Medio tuâ—issimus ibis And doth not Solomon tell the Meaning when he saith Turn not to the right-hand nor to the left remove thy Foot from Evil The incomparable Lord Bacon of whom the wise King James used to say That he knew the Method of doing Things suavibus modis after a mild and gentle manner And another Pen gives him this Character That he had the clearest Prospect of Things of any Man in his Age being moderate in his Inclination peaceable in his Mind and yielding in his Temper His Religion was rational and sober his Wit acute his Memory faithful his Judgment penetrating his Spirits publick obliging to his Friend and civil to his Enemy constant at publick Prayers and frequent at Sermons and Sacraments And yet he tells the Duke of Buckingham That the true Protestant Religion is seated in the Golden Mean the Enemies to her are the Extremes on either hand Herein agreeing with the Royal Martyr That the true Religion established in the Church of England keeps the middle way between the Pomp of Superstitious Tyranny and the Meanness of Phantastick Anarchy That excellent Prelate who preached Bishop Wilkins's Funeral Sermon tells the World That he the said Bishop Wilkins looked upon it as a Piece of Phanaticalness for a Man to be vehement in little and unnecessary things whether for or against them any further than is commanded by lawful Superiours The Pious and Elegant Bishop Hall was a Man of excellent Temper and Moderation as appears by all his Writings especially in the Book called the Peace-maker saying pag. 136. Our Charity should teach us to mince those Errors and Mistakes which we cannot suppress and where we find Extremes there to strain both Parties what we may to meet in the Mean Thus did saith he the twenty four African Bishops assembled in a Synod walk in a middle way and cut a Thread between the Rigor on the one side and the Indulgence on the other and as wise Moderators are wont to do detract something from either Party that they might promote Peace between both He calls Moderation the Silken Cord that runs through the Pearl-Chain of all Virtue And in the Epistle to his Peace-maker saith to his Reverend Brethren of the Diocess of Norwich That it was ever the desire of his Soul from his first entrance upon his Publick Service of the Church with Noah's Dove to bring an Olive-Branch of Peace to the tossed Ark but if his Wings have been too short and the Wind too high to carry him home with it he must content himself with the Testimony of his faithful Endeavours O let not saith he our Studies Prayers Tears Counsels Sollicitations nor Endeavours be wanting to promote Peace no nor if need were our