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
That they thought it altogether unlawful to separate from a Church for the sake of stinted Forms and Liturgies This is not only frequently affirmed by Mr. Ball (g) (g) (g) Trial p. 121 129 140 156. but little less even by Mr. Norton (h) (h) (h) Resp ad Apol c. 13. who saith It is lawful to embrace Communion with Churches where such Forms in Publick Worship are in use neither doth it lie as a Duty on a Believer that he disjoin and separate himself from such a Church And they give this reason for it that then they must separate from all Churches So Mr. Baxter c. Is it not a high degree Sacril desert p. 102. Defence Part 2. p. 65. Balls Trial p. 138. Rogers 7 Tr. p. 224. of Pride to conclude that almost all Christ's Churches in the World for these thirteen hundred Years at least to this day have offered such Worship unto God as that you are obliged to avoid it and that almost all the Catholick Church on Earth this day is below your Communion for using Forms and that even Calvin and the Presbyterians Cartwright Hildersham and the old Non-conformists were unworthy your Communion I know there are several Objections against Forms of Prayer but I know also that these are answered by them But since the most common is that of quenching and stinting the Spirit I shall briefly give their sence of it They say 1. To say that Persons should use no set Form but Roger's 7 Tr. Tr. 3. c. 4. p. 223. Balls Tryal c. 5. p. 83. pray as moved by the Spirit is a fond Error 2. They say that the Spirit instructeth us what to ask not in what phrase of speech It stirreth up in us holy Desires but giveth not ability suddenly and without help to express and lay open our Hearts in a fit method and significant words Ability of Speech is a common Gift of the Spirit which the Lord bestoweth upon good and bad c. 3. That the measure of the Spirit standeth not in Ibid. p. 91. Words and Forms but in fervent Sighs and Groans 4. That there is nothing letteth but that in such Rogers Ibid. Forms the Hearers Hearts may profitably go with the same both to humble to quicken and to comfort And Dr. Owen cannot deny but that they may Disc of Prayer p 222 231 232. be for edification and that Persons in the use of them may have Communion with God 5. They say that the Scriptures insisted upon in this Case are grounded upon Mistakes and are misapplied as Mr. Tombs in particular hath clearly manifested Theodulia p. 164 238. Fourthly I shall consider what their Opinion is as to the English Liturgy or Common-Prayer both as to the Liturgy it self and Communion in it As to the Liturgy it self it 's acknowledged 1. That the Matter for the most part is good sound Bryan's dwelling with God Serm. 6 p. 312. Baxt. Def. pa. t 1. p. 29 59. Crofton Refor no Separ p. 25. T. D. Jerubbaal p 35. and divine and that there is not any Doctrinal Passage in any of the Prayers that may not bear a good construction and so Amen may be said to it as Dr. Bryan with others do maintain 2. That as no Church for this 1400 Years has been without its Publick Forms so ours is the best So the old Non-conformists Compare the Doctrines Leâ—ter of the Minist in Old-Engl p. 12. Prayers Rites at those Times throughout in use in the Churches with ours and in all these blessed be the Name of the Lord we are more pure than they And it 's not much short that we find in Mr. Baxter in the name of Second Plea for Peace p. 101. the present Non-conformists 3. That which is accounted faulty is tolerable and hinders not but that it 's acceptable to God and edifying to pious and well-disposed Persons Tolerable So Mr. Corbet The Worship contained Plea for Lay-Communion p. 2. V. Ball 's Tryal c. 9. p. 58. in the Liturgy may lawfully be partaked in it being sound for substance in the main and the mode thereof being laudable in divers Forms and Orders and passable in the most though in some offensive inconvenient or less perfect Acceptable to God So the old Non-conformists Letter of the Minist in Old-England p. 13. In them that join with the Prayers according to Christ's Command and liberty of absence from Christ hath not been shewed notwithstanding the Corruptions we hold the Prayers to be an holy acceptable Sacrifice to God c. Edifying to well-disposed Persons To this purpose Mr. Hildersham Mr. Rogers c. Treat 3. c. 4. p. 224l And accordingly Mr. Corbet professeth his own experience (a) (a) (a) Corbet Plea p. 3. Though I judg their Form of Worship to be in many respects less perfect than is desired yet I have found my Heart spiritually affected and raised towards God therein and more especially in receiving the Lord's Supper I judg this Form may be used formally by the Formal and spiritually by those that are Spiritual It is my part to make the best of it being the established Form As to Communion in the Liturgy it is granted 1. That there is no cause to renounce it or the Communion of the Church for it and that so to do is a Sin (b) (b) (b) Gifford's plain Declaâ—ation Ball 's Trial c. 7. p. 121. Sacril desert p. 105. 2. That all the Reformed Churches in Christendom do commonly profess to hold Communion with the English Churches in the Liturgy if they come among us where it is used (c) (c) (c) Mr Baxter's Def. of Cure p. 68. 3. It 's declared on the part of the old Non-conformists That they ordinarily and constantly used the communion-Communion-Book in their Publick Ministrations (d) (d) (d) Ball 's Tryal p. 121. c. 8. p. 155. and that the People generally were in their days satisfied in it (e) (e) (e) Let. of Ministers of Old-Engl p. 14. And for the present it 's declared We can lawfully not only hear Common-Prayer but read it our selves (f) (f) (f) Mr. Mead's Case p. 7. M. Humphry's Healing Paper p. 5. Mr. Baxter's Disp 4. of Church-Gov p. 364. Mr. S. Fairclough's Life p. 157. I shall not trouble the Reader with the several Objections against the Liturgy and the Answers return'd to them by the old and present Non-conformists but shall content my self with that which it seems was much Trial. c. 8. p. 152. insisted upon in the days of Mr. Ball and their Reply to it The Liturgy in the whole Matter and Form thereof is Object too like unto the Mass-Book If the Liturgy be Antichristian it is so either in Answ respect of the Matter or of the Form Not of the Matter for that which properly belonged to Antichrist the foul and gross Errors is purged out Not of the Form for Order and Phrase of
Olive-Tree into the old Olive-Trees Stock If some of the Branches saith * * * Rom. 11. ◠he unto them be broken off through Unbelief and thou being a wild Olive Branch was grafted in amongst them and with them partakest of the Root and Fatness of the Ancient Olive-Tree boast not against the Branches so cut off but if thou boast remember that thou bearest not the Root but the Root thee and afterwards If thou wert cut off from the Olive-Tree which is wild by Nature and wert grafted contrary to thy wild Nature into a good Olive-Tree how much more shall these unbelieving Jews which be the natural Branches be re-grafted into their own Olive-Tree From this Comparison it is plain that the Jewish and Christian Church are the same in the Root and Stock And from this radical Argument that is betwixt them it proceeds that St. John in his Symbolical way of Writing in the Apocalyps calls the Christians Jews Behold I will make them of the Synagogue of Satan which say they are Jews but are not Rev. 3. 9. 2. 9. Indeed as Judaism was nothing but mystical Christianity so Christianity is nothing but reformed Judaism which made our Saviour who was the Reformer of it say unto the Jews Think not that I am come to destroy the Law and the Prophets I am not come to destroy but to perfect and fulfil And unto his Disciples who under him were to be Master-Builders of his House he said That a Scribe or Doctor rightly instructed unto the Kingdom of God was like a Man that is an Housholder who bringeth out of his Store-house things both new and old Thereby shewing as Irenaeus observes that he must be a L. 4. c. 21. 43. very skilful Scribe in the Old Testament that was fit to make a Workman of the new The Old Testament and legal Oeconomy was to be his Magazine and Storehouse out of which he was to fetch many serviceable pieces for the new Building and accordingly our Saviour tho' in reforming the House of Moses he was fain to pull it down that it might be enlarged yet both he that began the Reformation and his Apostles who finished it like Men that were House-holders used much of the Old Timber and Materials and conformed it too as much as they could after the manner of the old * * * Dr. Hammond of Infant-Baptism They introduced as much of Judaism into the Christian Religion as the nature of the Reformation would well bear and adhered as much as they could to the old both in the Matter and Form of the new Oeconomy and laid by few Jewish Rites and Customs but such as were fulfilled in Christ and Christianity as the Antitype and Substance of them or else such as were inconsistent with the Nature of the Church-Christian as it was to be a manly free and universal Church These were the two reasons for which Christ and his Apostles so much altered the Face of the Church from what it was under the Mosaical Oeconomy First because very many of the Jewish Rites and Ceremonies were †††Ac primò ita his in rebus comparatur ut antitypus in typi locum succedat eumque adeo loco moveat ut simul atque antitypus adsit nullus deinceps typo locus nullus usus reperiatur Outramus de Sacrificiis Lib. 2. c. 16. p. 204. fulfilled in Christ and Christianity and Secondly because many of them were inconsistent with the nature of a manly free and universal Church such as Christ intended his should be First Then many of the Ecclesiastical rites and usages of the Jews were laid aside at the time of Reformation because they were fulfilled in Christ as the Antitype and Substance of them as is plain from the words of the Apostle Col. 2. 16. Let no man judge you in Meat or in Drink or in respect of an Holyday or of the New Moons or of the Sabbath days which are a Shadow of things that are to come to pass but the Body is Christ that is to say Let no Man impose upon you the Doctrine of Mosaical Abstinence or condemn you for eating and drinking things prohibited by the Jewish Religion or for not observing their Feasts New Moons and Sabbaths which are but Types of Christianity and therefore ought to be laid aside The like he doth shew in his Epistle to the Hebrews concerning the Temple Priesthood Altar Sacrifices and the whole Temple-Service as is plain from many Passages whereof I shall recite some The Priesthood being changed there is made also of necessity a change in the Law Chap. 7. 22. The Holy Ghost this signifying thereby that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest while as the first Tabernacle was yet standing which was but a Figure for the time then present in which were offered both Gifts and Sacrifices that could not make him that did the Service perfect and cleansed as pertaining to the Conscience which stood or consisted only in a certain use of Meats and Drinks and divers Washings and other carnal Ordinances imposed on them as Types until the time of Reformation by Christ Chap. 9. 8 9 10. So vers 24. Christ with the Blood of his Sacrifice is not entred into the Holy Places made with Hands which are the Figures of the true And after all Chap. 10. 1. the Law having only a Shadow of the good things to come and not the Solidity of the things themselves can never with those umbratical Sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the Comers thereunto perfect It would make a Book of it self to recite all the Types and Shadows of the Old Testament which are applied to Christ and Christianity by the Writers under the New Besides what occurs in the Apostles Writings there is much to the same purpose in the Epistle of St. Barnabas which is very ancient the Dialogue of Justin Martyr with Trypho the Jew and the Fourth Book of Irenaeus who after insisting upon many typical things and persons in the Old Testament at last concludes in the 38th Chapter Nihil enim vacuum nihil sine signo that almost every thing in it was typical and had a mystical Reference to something under the New But Secondly as many of the Ecclesiastical Rites and Usages of the Jewish Church were taken away because they were fulfilled in Christ and Christianity so many others were annulled as being inconsistent with the nature of the Church-Christian as it was to be a manly free and universal Church First As it was to be a manly Church in opposition to the legal Pedagogy of the Jews as St. Paul called it in saying That the Law was but a School-master to bring them unto Christ Gal. 3. 24 and that the Jews were under it as Children are under Tutors and Governors until the time appointed by the Father the Fulness of Time when God sent forth his Son Chap. 4. 1 2 3 4.
allowable but if any man desire further satisfaction as to this point he may have it abundantly in the case of indifferent things to which I refer him it being more my business to shew here that Infant-Baptism is at least a lawful and allowable thing To prove this I need but desire the Reader to reflect upon the State of the two first Questions For if Infants be as capable of Baptism under the Gospel as they were of Circumcision under the Law and if Christ have not excluded them from it neither directly nor consequentially Otherwise if Baptism be an Institution of as great Latitude in its self as Circumcision its Fore-runner was and Christ hath not determined the administration of it to one Age more than one Sex Once more if Children may be taken into the Covenant of Grace under the Gospel as well as under the Law and Christ never said nor did any thing which can in reason be interpreted to forbid them to be taken in In a word If they are capable of all the Ends of Baptism now that they were of Circumcision then and of having the Priviledges of Church-Membership and the Blessings of the Covenant consigned unto them and Christ neither by himself nor by his Apostles did forbid the Church to satisfie and fulfil this their capacity Or last of all If Christ hath only appointed Baptism instead of Circumcision but said nothing to determine the Subject of it then it must needs follow that Infant-Baptism must at least be lawful and allowable because it is an indifferent and not a forbidden or sinful thing But upon this supposition that it were left undetermined and indifferent by Christ it might like other indifferent things be lawfully appointed by any Church from which it would be a Sin to separate upon that account For in this case Churches might safely differ in their practice about Infant-Baptism as they do now in the Ceremonies of Baptism and those who lived in a Church which did practice it ought no more to separate from her for appointing of it then those who lived in another Church which did not practise it ought to separate from her for not appointing thereof Thus much I have said I hope with sufficient moderation upon supposition that all I have written upon former Questions doth but satisfactorily prove that Infant-Baptism is only lawful and not highly requisite and necessary but then if it be not only lawful but highly requisite and necessary so that it ought to be appointed then it must needs be much more sinful to separate from a Church which appointeth Infants to be Baptized Now as to the requisite necessity of Infant-Baptism supposing that my Reader bears in memory that I have said upon the last Question to make it appear with the highest degree of credibility that Christ instituted Baptism for Infants as well as grown Persons and that the Apostles and their Companions Practised Infant-Baptism I must here entreat him further to observe that there is a two-fold necessity in matters of Christian Faith and practice one which proceeds from plain dictates of natural reason or from plain and express words of the Gospel where the sense is so obvious and clear that no sober man can mistake it or doubt of it and another which proceeds from the general Scope and Tenour of the Gospel or from doubtful places in it so or so understood and interpreted by the unanimous voice and practice of the ancient Catholick Church The first degree of necessity is founded on oftensive certainty and demonstration wherein there is no room left for Objection And the Second is founded upon violent presumption where the Objections on one hand are insufficient to move or at least to turn the Ballance if put in the Scale against the other which is weighed down Mole universatis Ecclesiae with the authority of the Universal Church And because this Rule like others is not so intelligible without an Example I will add some Instances of things which are necessary to be believed and practised by every good Christian under both these Notions of necessity that they may be better understood According to the First Notion of it it is necessary to believe that Jesus Christ is the Messias and the Son of God because it is delivered in express words of Scripture And according to the Second Notion of it it is necessary to believe that he is of the same substance with the Father and equal unto him and that there are three distinct and coequal Persons in the God-head which are all but one God because these Doctrines though they are not to be found in express words in the Gospel yet they are to be collected from several places of it which were always so interpreted by that ancient Catholick Church Again according to the First Notion of necessity it is necessary for all Men to believe the Word of God whether spoken or written because natural reason teacheth us so to do And according to the Second Notion of it it is necessary to believe the Books contained in the New Testament to be the Word of God and no other how Divine and Orthodox and Ancient soever they may be because they and they only have been received for such by the ancient Catholick Church In like manner as to matter of Practice by the First sort of Necessity it is necessary for Christians to assemble together to Worship God because Reason and Scripture plainly teach them so to do And by the Second sort it is necessary that they should assemble themselves periodically to Worship God on every first day of the Week because the Observation of the Lords Day appears to be a Duty from several places of the New Testament as tehy are interpreted to this sence by the universal Practice of the ancient Catholick Church To proceed according to the First Notion of Necessity Church-Government is necessary because it is enjoyned by the Dictates of Common reason and most express places of Scripture And according to the Second Notion of it it is necessary to believe the Books contained in the New Testament to be the Word of God and no other how Divine and Orthodox and Ancient soever they may be because they and they only have been received for such by the Ancient Catholick Church In like manner as to matter of Practice by the First sort of Necessity it is necessary for Christians to assemble together to Worship God because Reason and Scripture plainly teach them so to do And by the Second sort it is necessary that they should assemble themselves periodically to Worship God on every first day of the Week because the Observation of the Lords Day appears to be a Duty from several places of the New Testament as they are interpreted to this sence by the universal Practice of the Ancient Catholick Church To proceed according to the First Notion of Necessity Church-Governmenr is necessary because it is enjoined by the Dictates of Common reason and
a Table for us and set before us the bread of life we will not come and feed upon it with joy and thankfulness THE END A Catalogue of Books and Sermons Writ by the Reverend Dr. Tillotson Dean of Canterbury Viz. 1 SErmons Preached upon several Occasions in two Volumes in Octavo 2. The Rule of Faith c. 3. A Sermon Preached on the 5th of November 1678. at St. Margarets Westminster before the Honourable House of Commons upon St. Luke 9. 55 56. But he turned and rebuked them and said ye know not what manner of Spirit ye are of For the Son of man is not come to destroy mens lives but to save them 4. A Sermon Preached at the first General Meeting of the Gentlemen and others in and near London who were Born within the County of York Upon John 13. 34 35. A new Commandment I give unto you that ye love one another c. 5. A Sermon Preached before the King at White-hall April 4th 1679 upon 1 John 4. 1. Beloved believe not every Spirit but try the Spirits whether they are of God c. 6. A Sermon Preached before the King at White-hall April 2d 1680 upon Joshua 24. 15. If it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord chuse ye this day whom ye will serve 7. The Lawfulness and Obligation of Oaths A Sermon Preached at the Assizes held at Kingstone upon Thames July 21. 1681 upon Heb. 6. 16. And an Oath for Confirmation is to them an end of all Strife 8. Sermon Preached at the Funeral of the Reverend Mr. Thomas Gouge November 4th 1681 with an account of his Life upon Luke 20. 37 38. Now that the Dead are raised even Moses shewed at the bush c. 9. A Persuasive to Frequent Communion in the Holy Sacrament of the Lord's Supper Preached in two Sermons upon 1 Cor. 11. 26 27 28. For as oft as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew the Lord's Death till he come c. 10. A Sermon Preached at the Funeral of the Reverend Benjamin Whichcot D. D. and Minister of St. Lawrence Jewry London May 24th 1683 upon 2 Cor. v. 6. Wherefore we are always confident knowing that whilst we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord. Sold by Brabazon Aylmer at the Three Pigeons against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill and William Rogers at the Sun against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleetstreet Advertisement of Books THE Works of the Learned Dr. Isaac Barrow late Master of Trinity College in Cambridge Published by the Reverend Dr. Tillotson Dean of Canterbury in two Volumes in Folio The First containing Thirty two Sermons preached upon several Occasions an Exposition of the Lord's Prayer and the Decalogue a Learned Treatise of the Pope's Supremacy a Discourse concerning the Unity of the Church also some Account of the Life of the Authour with Alphabetical Tables The Second Volume containing Sermons and Expositions upon all the Apostles Creed with an Alphabetical Table and to which may be also added the Life of the Authour Sermons preached upon several Occasions by the Right Reverend Father in God John Wilkins D. D. and late Lord Bishop of Chester Never printed before Printed for William Rogers at the Sun against S. Dunstan's Church in Fleetstreet THE CASE OF KNEELING AT THE Holy Sacrament STATED RESOLVED PART I. Wherein these QUERIES are considered I. Whether Kneeling at the Sacrament be contrary to any express Command of Christ obliging to the observance of a different Gesture II. Whether Kneeling be not a Deviation from that example which our Lord set us at the first Institution III. Whether Kneeling be not Unsutable and Repugnant to the Nature of the Lord's Supper as being no Table-Gesture The Second EDITION LONDON Printed by J. C. and Freeman Collins for Fincham Gardiner at the White-Horse in Ludgate-street 1683. THE CASE Whether it be Lawful to receive the Holy Sacrament Kneeling THe Resolution of the most weighty and considerable Doubts which may in point of Conscience arise about this matter and do at present much influence the minds and practices of many honest and well-meaning Dissenters will depend upon the Resolution of these following Queries 1. Whether Kneeling in the Act of Receiving the Holy Sacrament according to the Law of the Land be not contrary to some express Law of Christ obliging to the observance of a different Posture 2. Whether Kneeling be not a deviation from that example which our Lord set us at the first Institution 3. Whether Kneeling be not altogether Unsutable and Repugnant to the nature of the Sacrament as being no Table-Gesture 4. Whether Kneeling Commanded in the Church of England be not contrary to the general Practice of the Church of Christ in the first and purest Ages 5. Whether it be Unlawful for us to receive Kneeling because this Gesture was first introduced by Idolaters and is still notoriously abused by the Papists to Idolatrous ends and purposes 1. Whether Kneeling in the Act of Receiving the Sacrament in Obedience to the Law of the Land be not a Transgression against some express Law of Christ which obliges us to observe another Gesture For satisfaction in this Point our onely recourse must be to the Holy Scriptures contained in the Books of the New Testament wherein the whole body of Divine Laws delivered and enacted by our Blessed Saviour are collected and recorded by the Holy Ghost And if there be any Command there extant concerning the use of any particular Gesture in the Act of Receiving the Lord's Supper we shall upon a diligent enquiry be sure to find it But before I give in my Answer I readily grant thus much by way of Preface Whatsoever is enjoyned and appointed by God to be prepetually used by all Christians throughout all Ages without any alteration that can never be nullified or altered by any Earthly Power or Authority whatsoever When once the Supreme Lawgiver and Governour of the World hath any ways signified and declared that such and such positive Laws shall be perpetually and unalterably observed then those Laws though in their own nature and with respect to the subject matter of them they be changeable must remain in full Force and can admit of no Change from the Laws of Men. It would be a piece of intolerable Pride and the most daring Presumption for any Earthly Prince any Council any Societie of Men whatsoever to oppose the known Will of the Soveraign Lord of Heaven and Earth In this Case nothing can take off the Force and Obligation of such Laws but the same Divine Authoritie which first passed them into Laws Thus much being granted and premised I return this Answer to the Question proposed God hath been so far from establishing the unalterable use of any particular Gesture in the Act of Receiving that among all the Sacred Records of his Will there is not any express Command to determine our practice one way or other We are left perfectly at our
this Church But your way of arguing is as if a Man should say It is a Divine Law to obey Civil Magistrates but there is no Divine Law that all the World should obey the King of England France or Spain therefore French or English Subjects are not bound to obey their own Prince Oh what comfortable Doctrine is this to some Men You proceed But you will say which I think is not much to the question that he ought to Communicate if Communion may be had Yes I do say this and I believe by this time you see or at least others will see that it is much to the question But then Query whether the Dissenters may not reply that they are ready to Communicate if the Communion be not clog'd with some things which are no part of the Divine Covenant Yes they may replie so if they please or Anonymus for them but whoever does it the replie is very weak and impertinent It is weak because Obedience to Authority in all lawful things is in a large notion part of the Divine Covenant And it is very impertinent because the Supposition of Communicating where Communion may be had supersedes that Query For Communion cannot be had where there are any sinful Terms of Communion and though I assert that the Church must be founded on a Divine Covenant I never said that nothing must be enjoyned by the Church but what is express'd in that Covenant A Corporation which is founded upon a Royal Charter you know may have Authoritie to make By-Laws which shall oblige all the Members of it and so are Terms of Communion with it and yet it is the Charter not these By-Laws whereon the Corporation is founded I was not concerned to Examine the Terms of Communion that is and will be done by other hands but supposing nothing Sinful in our Communion whether all Christians that live in this Church are not bound to live in Communion with it Q. 3. Your next Query concerns the Derivation of Church-Power from Christ himself without any immediate Derivation from other Church-Governours which does not at all concern my Doctrine of Church-Communion for whether it be so or so still we are bound to maintain Communion with all sound parts of the Catholick Church so Church-Authoritie be Derived from Christ any way it is well enough but then we must be sure that it is so and if Christ have appointed no ordinarie way for this but by the hands of Men who received their Authoritie immediately from himself I know not who can appoint any other way But may not a Lay-man preach the Gospel and gather a Church in a Heathen Country where there is none of the Clergy to do it I suppose he may and if you please to consult the Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Stillingfleets Unreasonableness of Separation p. 331 c. you will finde this case largely debated But it seems it doth not satisfie you that this be allowed onely in case of Necessity for then up start two other Queries 1. Whether this will not put the being of our Church upon a very hazardous issue and oblige your self to prove that it was a true Church before the Reformation Ans This is no hazard at all for the Church of England was certainly a true though a corrupt Church before the Reformation as the Church of Rome is at this day A true Church is that which has every thing Essential to the being of a Church though mixt with such other Corruptions as make its Communion dangerous and sinful as a Diseased Man is a true Man and remove these Corruptions and then it is not onely a true but a sound Church as the Church of England is at this day And if you will not allow this I doubt Sir all private Christians will be at as great a loss for their Baptism as the Church will be for Orders But the case of a True Vindicat. p. 64. c. and Sound and Catholick Church if you please you may see Stated in the same Book to which I referred you before And thus your second Query is answered that though this Church was Antichristian before the Reformation yet there was not the same Necessity for private Christians to usurp the Ministerial Office without a regular Authoritie as there is for a Lay-man in a Heathen Nation because an Antichristian that is the most corrupt Church retains the Power of Orders as well as of Sacraments As for that Independent Principle that Christ has instituted a Power in the Church to ordain her own Officers you may see it Examined in the Defence of Dr. Still Vnr of Sep. p. 306 c. But what now is all this to me I don't charge our Dissenters with Schism from the Invalidity of their Orders but for their causeless and sinful Separation Let us suppose that they have no need of any Orders or that such Orders as they have are good or that they had Episcopal Orders and were Governed by Bishops of their own as the Donatists were yet they would be never the less Schismaticks for that while they separate from the Church of England and from each other If Orders be necessary and they have no Orders then they are no Churches at all if they have true Orders and are true Churches but yet divide Christian Communion by Separating from any Sound part of the Christian Church they are Schismaticks 4. Q Whether from the Supposition that there ought to be but one Church-Covenant throughout the Catholick Church that there cannot be one true Church within another and that the Nature of Catholick-Communion is such that one ought to be ready to Communicate with any Sound Church from which one is not hindred by reason of the Distance of Place it do's not follow Ans Fair and Softly let us first consider the Suppositions before we consider what follows from them for you have so mis-represented so curtailed these Propositions and so mixt and blended things of a different Nature that it is necessarie to restore them to their true Sense and proper Place again before we can tell what follows I asserted that the Christian Church is founded upon a Divine Covenant and since God hath made but one Covenant with mankind in Christ Jesus therefore there can be but one Christian Church throughout the World Resol of Cases p. 8. founded on this one Covenant Having explained the general notion of Church Communion which signifies no more than Church-Fellowship and p. 10. Society that to be in Communion with the Church is to be a Member of the Church I came to enquire what made a Separate Church For if there be but one Church and one Communion of which all true Christians and Christian Churches p. 19. are or ought to be Members then those Churches which are not Members of each other are Separate Churches And for a fuller explication of this I observed several p. 20. things 1. That there must be but
of Schism or to discover on which side the Schism lies or to avoid it without renouncing all Communion with the Church which course soever they take I leave all such Cases to God who knows when it is fit to dispence with his own Laws and will take care of my own Duty according to Scripture-Rules and not hope to justifie the ordinary breach of known Laws by some extraordinary Cases And yet the Case which you propose is not so unanswerable a difficulty as you imagine Several Councils in Palestine in Rome in Pontus and other places Euseb b. 5. cap. 23. Determine the Celebration of Easter on the day of the Resurrection not on the Fourteenth Day of the Month which was the Jewish Passover which dispute you call a Mistake in Arithmetick but for what reason I know not the Bishops of Asia at the same time decree the observation of Easter on the Fourteenth Day whatever Day of the week it fell on according to the Ancient Observation of the Asian Churches Pope Victor upon this writes to several Bishops very bitterly against them and was very desirous to have them Excommunicated and did as much as in him lay denounce the Sentence against them cap. 24. But this was ill resented by other Bishops in Communion with him and particularly Ireneus wrote a Letter to him about it and earnestly disswades him from it and did prevent it from taking effect if we will believe Eusebius So far is it from being true as you assert that Pope Victor in a Council Excommunicated the poor Asians what he did was only his own Act which was displeasing to other Bishops and which he was forc't to undo So that here was a great deal of Heat and Warmth and tendency towards a Schism but no Schism followed upon it among the Catholick Churches But suppose Pope Victor had Excommunicated the Asian Churches and this Excommunication had taken effect this could not make the Asian Churches Schismaticks for there is a great deal of difference between being cast out of the Communion of a Church and forsaking the Communion of a Church The first is matter of censure the second is our own choice the First is an Ecclesiastical Punishment the Second when it is causeless is Schism So that had the Church of Rome Excommunicated the Asian Churches unless the Asian Churches upon this had made a Separation from the Church of Rome this Excommunication could not make them Schismaticks and therefore any one might safely Communicate with them without partaking in a Schism Nor was it a just reason for the Asian Churches to have renounced the Communion of the Church of Rome though they had been Excommunicated by Victor for this had been to do as ill a thing as Victor had done for no other reason but because Pope Victor had set them an example And therefore we find Saint Cyprian of another temper when he and the African Bishops were threatned in the same manner by Pope Stephen upon occasion of that warm Dispute about rebaptizing Hereticks At that very time in his Epistle to Jubaianus he declares his resolution not to break Communion with any Church or Bishops upon that account and therefore not with Pope Stephen himself notwithstanding his rash and furious Censures And concludes that Patience and Forbearance was the best Remedy in such Cases and therefore upon this occasion he says he wrote his Book de bono Patientiae Well but if the Asiatick Churches were not Schismaticks yet Pope Victor had been a Schismatick had he Excommunicated the Churches of Asia or withdrawn Communion from them And this had made the case of the Roman Christians very hard for they must either have suspended Communion with both these divided Churches and lived without the comfort and advantages of Christian Communion or they must have rejected the Communion of their own Bishop and Churches or have rejected the Communion of the Churches of Asia or have maintained Communion with them both that is with two Separate Churches which according to my Principles is to Communicate in a Schism If they Communicate with their own Schismatical Bishop this is to Communicate in a Schism by Communicating with a Schismatick if they Renounce his Communion when he imposes no new unlawful Terms of Communion upon them this is to Separate from a Sound and Orthodox Church for the sake of a Schismatical Bishop If they Communicate with the Churches of Asia this is to break Communion with their own Bishop who has Excommunicated them if they separate from the Churches of Asia for no other reason but because they are unjustly Excommunicated this is to Separate for an unjust cause which is a Schism if they communicate with both they Communicate with two Separate Churches and therefore must be Schismaticks on one side or other If you can find any more difficulties in this matter you may And yet after all this I do believe the Christians of Rome might have Communicated both with the Roman and Asian Churches without Schism and this I believe upon these Principles which I shall briefly explain and confirm 1. That the Personal miscarriage of the Bishop in the exercise of Ecclesiastical Censures cannot involve his whole Church in the guilt of Schism though it may make him a Schismatick and certainly since Bishops are but Men and Subject to the like passions and infirmities that other men are it would be a very hard case if his personal Schism should be imputed to the whole Church Though the Bishop have the chief Authority in the Church yet it is hard to say that every abuse of his Authority is the Act of the whole Church and therefore the Church may not be Schismatical when the Bishop is and it is possible to Communicate with a Church whose Bishop is a Schismatick without Communicating in the Schism And therefore though Victor had Schismatically Excommunicated the Asian Churches the Christians of Rome at that time might have Communicated with the Church of Rome without partaking in Victors Schism For tho a particular Church-Society consists in that Relation which is between the Bishop and his Clergy and People yet it is possible that the Bishop in the exercise of his Authority may violate the Fundamental Laws of Communion on which the Christians of such a Church unite into one Body and Society and when he does so it being an abuse of his Episcopal Authority it is his personal fault which cannot affect the whole Church The case is very plain where there is an Established constitution in a Church as it is in the Church of England which obliges the Bishops as well as People For should any English Bishop require any thing of his Clergy or People which is contrary to the Establish't Laws and Canons of the Church or should exercise any Authority in Censures and Excommunications which is not allowed him by those Canons this can in no sense be called the Act of the Church nor is any one bound
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
Religion but make nothing at all of his Priesthood and Sacrifice If Christ be our great High Priest and we must hope for Salvation only in vertue of his Sacrifice There must be some way appointed to apply his Merits and Salvation to us and this will convince us of the necessity of Church-Communion and a visible Confederation by Sacraments See Vindic. of the Def. cap. 3. of divine appointment But if Christ came only as a great Prophet to instruct us more perfectly in the Rules of Vertue and to give us more certain Hopes of a future State there can be no more necessity of a Church now than there was in a State of Nature Christians may associate if they please for Acts of publick worship and they may break Company when they please without any danger and the Evangelical Sacraments can be only significant Ceremonies which may be used or let alone as every one likes best At this Rate you every where discourse and I believe so well of our Dissenters that though they would be glad to be excused from the guilt of Schism yet they will not thank you for excusing them upon such Principles as tend to undermine Christianity and I believe so well of you that though you affect to talk in the modish way yet you do not understand whither it tends and I hope this timely Caution may prevent your embracing those Principles whereon your Conclusions are Naturally Built Another thing I would warn you of is that these loose Principles of Church-Communion do not tempt you to Schism and State-Factions which usually go together You pretend indeed to be in constant Communion with the Church of England but according to the Principles of your Letters no Church in the World can have any hold of you every Man is a Communicant at his own pleasure who thinks he may part without Sin And it is much to be suspected that no Man who is a hearty lover of the Church of England can make such a Zealous Defence for Dissenters who has not some private reasons for his Zeal and when Men are not Endeared to each other by one Communion it is to be feared they are linked together by some other Common Interest Now should you prove a Schismatick to say no worse it will not excuse you how many Fine Questions soever you can ask about it And that which will greatly endanger you is that great Opinion you have of your self for some men are so wanton as to espouse a Schism or Faction only to shew their Wit in Defending it and to make themselves considerable by espousing a Party I will not so much wrong you as to say that you have shewn any great Wit or Judgment in this Cause but it is evident to every impartial Man who reads your Letters that you have betrayed too great a conceit of both and that is a great deal the more dangerous of the two for true Wit and Judgment will secure Men from those mischiefs which a vain conceit of it betrays them to And now Sir all that I shall add concerns your way of Writing which neither becomes a wise Man nor a fair Disputant you have not offered any Argument to disprove any one thing I have said you have no where shewn the weakness of my Arguments to prove what I undertook but have at all Adventures askt a great many Questions and generally nothing to the purpose Now it had been easie to have askt you as many cross Questions which had been as good an Answer to your Questions as your Questions are to my Discourse and thus People might have gazed on us and have been never the wiser For to raise a great many difficulties onely tends to Scepticism and will never end a Dispute I am loth to mind you of the Proverb because I do not think the application belongs to you but yet it should make any Man of Wit ashamed of such Methods of Dispute wherein he may be out-done by a Man of no Wit I confess I have with some regret stole time from better Employment to answer your Letters but do not think my self bound to do so as often as you think fit to give a publick Challenge This Controversie if you had pleased might have been ended more privately which had been less trouble to me though it may be you thought it might have been less glorious to your self which I presume was your reason of first spreading your Letter in Writing and then of Printing it I shall not envy your Glory I had rather continue mean and obscure in a humble Obedience to Church and State than to raise the most Glorious Triumphs and Trophees to my memory by giving the least disturbance to either And that you and all sober Christians may be of the same mind is the hearty Prayer of SIR Your very Humble Servant W. S. FINIS BOOKS Printed for FINCHAM GARDINER A Continuation and Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Stilling fleet 's Unreasonableness of Separation in Answer to Mr. Baxter and Mr. Lob c. Considerations of present use considering the Danger resulting from the change of our Church-Government 1. A Perswasive to Communion with the Church of England 2. A Resolution of some Cases of Conscience which respect Church-Communion 3. The Case of Indifferent things used in the Worship of God proposed and Stated by considering these Questions c. 4. A Discourse about Edification 5. The Resolution of this Case of Conscience Whether the Church of Englands Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it unlawful to hold Communion with the Church of England 6. A Letter to Anonymus in answer to his three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about Church-Communion 7. Certain Cases of Conscience resolved concerning the Lawfulness of joyning with Forms of Prayer in Publick Worship In two Parts 8. The Case of mixt Communion Whether it be Lawful to Separate from a Church upon the account of promiscuous Congregations and mixt Communions 9. An Answer to the Dissenters Objections against the Common Prayers and some other parts of Divine Service prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England 10. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament stated and resolved c. The first Part. 11. Certain Cases of Conscience c. The second Part. 12. A Discourse of Profiting by Sermons and of going to hear where men think they can profit most 13. A serious Exhortation with some important Advices relating to the late Cases about Conformity recommended to the present Dissenters from the Church of England 14. An Argument for Union taken from the true interest of those Dissenters in England who profess and call themselves Protestants 16. Some Considerations about the Case of Scandal or giving Offence to Weak Brethren 17. The Case of Infant-Baptism in Five Questions c. 1. A Discourse about the charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion
before Luther 2. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is meant by it and what Tradition is to be received and what Tradition is to be rejected 3. The difference of the Case between the Separation of Protestants from the Church of Rome and the Separation of Dissenters from the Church of England 4. The Protestant Resolution of Faith c. THE CASE OF Lay-Communion WITH THE CHURCH of ENGLAND CONSIDERED And the Lawfulness of it shew'd from the Testimony of above an hundred eminent Non-conformists of several Perswasions Published for the satisfaction of the Scrupulous and to prevent the Sufferings which such needlesly expose themselves to The Second Edition corrected by the Author LONDON Printed for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard M. DC LXXXIV TO THE DISSENTERS FROM THE Church of England Dear Brethren YOU being at this time called upon by Authority to join in Communion with the Church and the Laws ordered to be put in Execution against such as refuse it It 's both your Duty and Interest to enquire into the grounds upon which you deny Obedience to the Laws Communion with the Church of God and thereby expose our Religion to danger and your selves to suffering In which unless the Cause be good the Call clear and Mr. Mede 's Farewel Serm. on 1 Cor. 1. 3. the End right it cannot bring Peace to your selves or be acceptable to God Not bring Peace to your selves For we cannot suffer joyfully the Mr. Read 's Case p. 4. spoiling of our Goods the confinement of our Persons the ruin of our Families unless Conscience be able truly to say I would have done any thing but sin against God that I might have avoided those Sufferings from Men. Not be acceptable to God to whom all are accountable Continuat of Morn Exer. Ser. 4. p. 92. for what Portion he hath intrusted them with of the things of this Life and are not to throw away without sufficient reason and who has made it our Duty to do what we can without Sin in Obedience to that Authority which he hath set over us as you are told by some Read Ibid. in the same condition with your selves To assist Persons in this Enquiry I have observed that of late several of the Church of England have undertaken the most material Points that you do question and have handled them with that Candor and Calmness which becomes their Profession and the gravity of the Arguments and which may the better invite those that are willing to be satisfied to peruse and consider them But because Truth and Reason do too often suffer by the Prejudices we have against particular Persons to remove as much as may be that Obstruction I have in this Treatise shewed that these Authors are not alone but have the concurrent Testimony of the most eminent Non-conformists for them who do generally grant that there is nothing required in the Parochial Communion of the Church of England that can be a sufficient reason for Separation from it The sence of many of these I have here collected and for one hundred I could easily have produced two if the Cause were to go by the Poll So that if Reason or Authority will prevail I hope that yet your Satisfaction and Recovery to the Communion of the Church is not to be despaired of Which God of his infinite Mercy grant for your own and the Churches sake Amen THE CONTENTS THE difference betwixt Ministerial and Lay-Communion Pag. 1 The Dissenters grant the Church of England to be a True Church p. 4 That they are not totally to separate from it p. 12 That they are to comply with it as far as lawfully they can p. 16 That Defects in Worship if not Essential are no just reason for Separation p. 23 That the expectation of better Edification is no sufficient reason to with-hold Communion p. 39 The badness of Ministers will not justify Separation p. 48 The neglect or want of Discipline no sufficient reason to separate p. 59 The Opinion which the Non-conformists have of the several Practices of the Church of England which its Lay-Members are concerned in p. 64 That Forms of Prayer are lawful and do not stint the Spirit ibid. That publick prescribed Forms may lawfully be joined with p. 66 That the Liturgy or Common-Prayer is for its Matter sound and good and for its Form tolerable if not useful p. 69 That Kneeling at the Sacrament is not idolatrous nor unlawful and no sufficient reason to separate from that Ordinance p. 71 72 That standing up at the Creed and Gospel is lawful p. 73 The Conclusion ibid. THE NON-CONFORMISTS PLEA FOR Lay-Communion With the CHURCH of ENGLAND THE Christian World is divided into two Ranks Ecclesiastical and Civil usually known by the Names of Clergy and Laity Ministers and People The Clergy besides the things essentially belonging to their Office are by the Laws of all well-ordered Churches in the World strictly obliged by Declarations or Subscriptions or both to own and maintain the Doctrine Discipline and Constitution of the Church into which they are admitted Thus in the Church of England they do subscribe to the Truth of the Doctrine more especially contained in the thirty nine Articles and declare that they will use the Forms and Rites contained in the Liturgy and promise to submit to the Government in its Orders The design of all which is to preserve the Peace of the Church and the Unity of Christians which doth much depend upon that of its Officers and Teachers But the Laity are under no such Obligations there being no Declarations or Subscriptions required of them nor any thing more than to attend upon and joyn with the Worship practised and allowed in the Church Thus it is in the Church of England as it is acknowledged by Mr. Baxter to whom when it Defence of the Cure part 2. pag. 29. was objected that many Errors in Doctrine and Life were imposed as Conditions of Communion he replies What is imposed on you as a Condition to your Communion in the Doctrine and Prayers of the Parish-Churches but your actual Communion it self In discoursing therefore about the Lawfulness of Communion with a Church the Difference betwixt these two must be carefully observed lest the things required only of one Order of Men should be thought to belong to all It 's observed by one That the Original of all Our Mischiefs A Book licensed by Mr. Cranford sprung from Mens confounding the terms of Ministerial Conformity with those of Lay-Communion with the Parochial Assemblies there being much more required of the Ministers than of the People Private Persons having much less to say for themselves in absenting from the publick Worship of God tho performed by the Liturgy than the Pastor hath for not taking Oaths c. Certainly if this Difference were but observ'd and the Case of Lay-Communion truly stated and understood the People would not be far more
old in their calm mood who declare We testify to all Brownists Apol p. 7. An. 1604. Men by these Presents That we have not forsaken any one Point of the true ancient Apostolick Faith professed in our Land but hold the same Grounds of Christian Religion with them See more in Baily's Disswasive cap. 2. p. 20 33. and Dr. Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness of Separation Part 1. § 9. p. 31. The Presbyterians if I may so call them for distinction sake do own it So Mr. Corbet The Doctrine of Faith and Sacraments by Discourse § 21 p. 43. Law established is heartily received by the Non-conformists So Mr. Baxter As for the Doctrine of the Church of England Preface to 5 Disp p. 6. the Bishops and their Followers from the first Reformation begun by Edw. 6. were sound in Doctrine adhering to the Augustan Method express'd now in the Articles and Homilies they differ'd not in any considerable Point from those whom they called Puritans The like is affirmed by the Independents The Confession of the Church of Peace-Offer ing p. 12. See Mr. Baxter's Defence of his Cure Part 1. p. 64. and Part 2. p. 3. and Wadsworth in his Separation yet no Schism p. 60 62. Mr. Throughton's Apology for the Non-Conformists cap. 3. p. 106. England declared in the Articles of Religion and herein what is purely doctrinal we fully embrace 2. As to the Worship they own it for the Matter and Substance to be good and for Edification So the old Non-Conformists as Mr. Hildersham There is Lecture 26. on John p. 121. nothing in our Assemblies but we may receive profit by it c. And again There is nothing done in God's Publick Worship among us but what is done by the Institution Ordinance and Commandment of the Lord. So among the present it is owned by both Presbyterians and Independents by the former in the Morning Exercise Continuat Morning Exercise Serm 4. p. 91. Why may it not be supposeable that Christians may be moved by reasonable Considerations to attend the publick Forms the substantial Parts of them being thought agreeable to a Divine Institution though in some Circumstantials too disagreeable So it is acknowledged That in Throughton's Apol. p. 104. private Meetings the same Doctrine and Worship is used as in the Parish Churches only some Circumstances and Ceremonies omitted By the latter We know full well that we Peace-Offering p. 17. differ in nothing from the whole form of Religion established in England but only in some few things in outward Worship But I shall have further occasion to treat of this under the third General 3. As for the Ministry of the Church 1. It is acknowledged to be true and for substance the same which Christ hath established So Mr. Bradshaw I Unreasonableness of the Separation p. 16. affirm That the Ministry of our Church-Assemblies howsoever it may in some particular parts of the Execution haply be defective in some Places is for the Substance thereof that very same Ministry which Christ hath set in his Church This he speaks as he saith of those that do subscribe and conform according to the Laws of the State 2. That they have all things necessarily belonging to their Office so the grave and modest Confutation maintains The preaching of the whole Truth of God's Word Grave and modest Confutat p. 28. and nothing but it the Administration of the Sacraments and of Publick Prayer as they are of all parts of the Ministers Office prescribed in the Word so they are all appointed to our Ministers by the Law 3. They own That all the Defects in it whether in their Call or Administration do not nullify the Office Thus much Mr. Bradshaw doth contend for So many of our Ministers Unreasonableness of Separation p. 27 37. who in the Book of Ordination are called Priests and Deacons as in all Points concerning the substance of their Ministry are qualified according to the intent of the Laws have their Offices Callings Adminstration and Maintenance for the Substance thereof ordained by Christ And yet I deny not but there may be some accidental Defects or Superfluities in or about them all yet such as do not or cannot be proved to destroy the Nature and Substance of any of them This is maintained at large in the Letter of the Ministers in Old England c. p. 86 87. And the like is also affirmed even by those of the Apologet. Narration p. 6. Congregational Way so the Brethren in their Apology The unwarrantable Power in Church-Governours did never work in any of us any other Thought much less Opinion but that the Ministry thereof of the English Churches was a true Ministry So Mr. Cotton The Cotton's Infant Baptism p. 181. Power whereby the Ministers in England do administer the Word and Sacraments is either spiritual and proper essential to their Calling or advantitious and accidental The former they have received from Christ c. The latter from the Patron who presents or the Bishop who ordains c. Whoever has a mind to see their Ordination defended may consult Jus Divinum Ministerii Evangelici part 2 p. 12 16 17 25 c. Jus Divinum Regim Eccles p. 264 c. Cawdry's Independency a great Schism pag. 116. and his Defence of it pag. 35 37. Thus far therefore we see how far it is agreed that the Church of England is a true Church in its Doctrine Worship and Ministry But when we come to consider what the Church is they own thus to be true there we shall find that they do differ The Presbyterians generally own a National Church and have writ much in the behalf of it as may be seen in the Books quoted in the * * * Jus Divinum Minist Evang. p 12 c. Brinsly's Church-remedy p 41 42. Cawdry Independ a great Schism p. 60 89 172. Margin Others look upon it as a prudential thing and what may lawfully be complied with So Mr. Tombs | | | Theodulia or just Defence § 15 16. Preface c. 9. § 3. It is no more against the Gospel to term the Believers of England the Church of England than it is to term Believers throughout the World the Catholick Church nor is it more unfit for us to term our selves Members of the Catholick Church nor is there need to shew any Institution of our Lord more for the one than the other But those that will not own it to be a true Church in respect of such a Constitution or that speak doubtfully of it do yet assert as much of the Parish Churches It 's acknowledged by all that the Distribution into Parishes is not of Divine but Humane Institution but withal its thought by some * * * Crofton's Reformation not Separation p. 10. and Bethshemesh clouded p. 101 c. Cawdrey's Independ a great Schism p. 132 c. Church-Reformation p. 42. agreeable to the reason of the
they may not lawfully joyn together with whom shall the Faithful joyn at all Is not this to fill the Conscience with Scruples and the Church with Rents Such as these must if they will be true Sacriâ—eg defer p. 95. to their own Principles renounce Communion with all the World and be like those that Mr. Baxter tells us he Defence of his Cure part 1. p. 47. knows That never communicate with any Church nor ever publickly hear or pray or worship God at all because they think all your ways which he directs to Mr. Bagshaw and other Non-conformists of Worship to be bad With this there can be no continuance in any Communion so much Mr. Burroughs doth maintain There would be no continuance in Church-Fellowship Irenic c. 23. p. 163. if this a Separation from a Church for Corruptions in it were admitted for what Church is so pure and hath all things so comfortable but within a while another Church will be more pure and some things will be more comfortable there Upon the mischievous Consequences of this did Mr. R. Allein ground his last Advice to his Parishioners Destroy Godly Mans Portion p. 127. not saith he all Communion by seeking after a purer Church than in this imperfect State we shall ever attain According to this Principle no Communion at all if not in all where shall we rest In all Society something will offend With this lastly there can be no Order Union or Peace in the Church So Mr. Baines a Person of Comment on â—phes c. 2. 15. p. 297. great Experience This seeking the Peace of Sion reproveth such as make a Secession or Departure from the Church of God our visible Assemblies either upon dislike of some Disorders in Administration Ecclesiastical or disallowed Forms and manner of procuring things which the Communion of Saints for full Complement and Perfection requireth This is not in my conceit so much to reform as to deform to massacre the Body and divide the Head c. and will end in the Dissolution Morton's Memorial p. 78 c. Mr. Baxter's Def. of Cure part 2. p. 171. of all Church-Communion if it be followed as is notoriously evident in the case of Mr. R. Williams of New-England that for the sake of greater Purity separated so long that he owned no Church nor Ordinances of God in the World and at his motion the People that were in Communion with him dissolved themselves as we have the account from thence This therefore is one of the Doctrines we are to avoid according to the prudent Advice in a Book above-cited Doctrines crying up Purity to the England's Remembrancer Serm. 14. p. 371. Ruine of Unity reject for the Gospel calls for Unity as well as Purity Fifthly They argue That to separate upon such Arg. 5 an account is not at all warranted in Scripture Thus Mr. Cawdrey It is no Duty of Christ's imposing no Independ a. Schism p. 192. Priviledg of his purchasing either to deprive a Mans self of his Ordinances for other Mens Sins or to set up a new Church in opposition to a true Church as no Church rightly constituted for want of some Reformation in lighter Matters Saith Mr. Blake Vindiciae Foed c. 31. p. 228. We read not of Separation in his way for the sake of Abuses and Corruptions approved nor any Presidents to go before us in it we read a heavy Brand laid upon it Jude 19. These be they who separate themselves sensual not having the Spirit So the Congregations in New-England declare The Faithful in the Church of Platfoâ—m of Discipline in New-England c. 14. § 8. Corinth wherein were many unworthy Persons and Practices are never commanded to absent themselves from the Sacrament because of the same therefore the Godly in like Cases are not presently to separate It should rather have been inferr'd are not to separate for so much must be concluded from the Premises if any thing at all This is accordingly infer'd by Mr. Noyes For Brethren to separate from Temple measured p. 78. Churches and Church-Ordinances which are not fundamentally defective neither in Doctrine or Manners in Heresy or Prophaneness is contrary to the Doctrine and Practice both of Christ and his Apostles Unto whom I shall add the Testimony of Mr. Tombs Separation Theodulia Answ to Pref. § 25. p. 48. from a Church somewhat erroneous or corrupt in Worship or Conversation c. is utterly dissonant from any of the Rules or Examples which either of old the Prophets or holy Men or Christ and his Apostles have prescribed is for the most part the Fault of Pride or bitter Zeal and tends to Strife and Confusion and every evil Work Sixthly They argue That there is no necessity Arg. 6 for Separation for the sake of such Corruptions because a Person may communicate in the Worship without partaking in those Corruptions It was the Opinion of the Presbyterian Brethren at the Savoy-Conference Confer Savoy p. 12 13. Mr. Baxter's Defence of the Cure p. 34 35. that not only the hearing but the reading a defective Liturgy was lawful to him that by Violence is necessitated to offer up that or none And if there was a Possibility of thus separating the substance from the circumstantial Defects in the Ministerial Use of such Worship much more may this be supposed to to be done by those that only attend upon it and are not obliged by any Act of their own to give an explicite Consent to all and every thing used in it 1. This Separation of the good from the bad in Divine Worship they grant possible So Mr. Ball If Trial of the Grounds c. p. 308. some things human be mixed with divine a sound Christian must separate the one from the other and not cast away what is of God as a nullity fruitless unprofitable defiled because somewhat of Men is annexed unto them In the Body we can distinguish betwixt the Substance and the Sickness which cleaveth unto it betwixt the Substance of a Part or Member and some Bunch or Swelling which is a Deformity but destroyeth not the Nature of that Part or Member c. So Mr. Calamy It 's Door of Truth opened p. 7. one thing to keep our selves pure from Pollution another to gather Churches out of Churches 2. They grant that what is faulty and a Sin in Worship is no Sin to us when we do not consent to it So Mr. Corbet My Non-conformists Plea c p. 6. partaking in any Divine Worship which is holy and good for the Matter and allowable or passable in the mode for the main doth not involve me in the blame of some sinful Defects therein to which I consent not and which I cannot redress So another in his Farewel Sermon While all necessary fundamental Truth is England's Remembrancer Serm. 4. p. 94. publickly professed and maintained in a Church is taught and held forth in publick
understood of such things as are Adjuncts to Divine Worship that are not used upon the score of any of the reasons aforesaid then we are not to expect a command nor do we Sin if we act without it As for example a Servant is required to go a Mile upon some service and he useth a Coat or a Cloak takes an Horse or goes on Foot puts a string about his Finger to remember him of what he is to do Or if to carry a Message considers what to say and Writes it down that he may be the better fitted to deliver it In such cases his Master would think him impertinent to ask Directions and it 's no Disobedience nor Supererogation to act as he sees fit without them And this is the case with us as I shall afterward shew This said there is way made for the next inference Conclus 3. If things Indifferent are neither commanded Conclus 3 nor forbidden and things are not unlawful because not commanded it follows that it 's no Derogation from the Sufficiency of Scripture to maintain the lawfulness of using such things in Divine Worship as are not therein commanded It 's somewhat a Specious way of arguing which this Author useth the Scriptures have determined whatsoever may make us wise to Salvation perfect p. 2â— throughly furnished to all good Works Now if the Worship of God be a good work and the right doing of it hath any tendency to make us perfect they must have a sufficiency to direct us in that And he concludes If there be not a Rule for all things belonging to the Worship of God except as before excepted c. then the Scriptures are not able to make us wise c. By this way of arguing and a challenge he immediately subjoyns viz. If our Author can shew us any Act of Worship c. It may be thought he is a Champion for the perfection and sufficiency of Scripture and we the derogators from it And that without any more ado he would have brought unanswerable arguments for that kind of Scripture-sufficiency which we deny If saith he our R. Author can shew us any Act of Worship for the Pag. 29. performance of which in such a manner as God will accept we cannot shew him direction of Scripture Well! where is it Scripture with the addition of such circumstances as are naturally necessary to all Humane Actions or evidently convenient for an action of a grave and weighty Nature for the obtaining the ends of it or appearing to any Common Judgment to be so decent that without them the performance would be sordid Scripture with the practice of the first Guides of the Church Scripture with the light of Nature shining out in every reasonable Soul c. Scripture with the exceptions before excepted in his Book pag. 21 Suppose then we put it to the question Is Scripture alone a sufficient Rule for matters to be used in the Worship of God He readily answers Yes If you take in the Nature of the thing the light shining in every reasonable Soul if you take in Common Judgment convenience and decency Lastly if you take in the practice of the first Guides of the Church that is it is and it is not Now how he hath all this while pleaded for that Sufficiency of Scripture which we deny And why he should so loudly exclaim against all Supplements and Additions to that and against pag. 38. Reason and Authority as a Supply or what difference he hath conceived betwixt Authority the Guides of the Church or betwixt Reason and the light of Nature Shining out in every reasonable Soul so as to deny to pag. 29. the one what he grants to the other I am not able to understand Yet for all this there must be a difference betwixt him and us and somewhat shall be said to make it out For the Sufficiency of Scripture is a very great argument And so indeed it is and it has been an old pag. 28. argument against the practices of our Church and is not to be easily parted with But yet what to give and what to take and wherein the difference is betwixt what we hold and he is forced to grant he knows not or has not been so kind as to discover But however when all this is pastover he concludes as to one part we cannot possibly agree with our R. Brother in this thing viz. That we have no such particular directions for Worship under the Gospel as they had under the Law This indeed I touched upon to shew that the Case of indifferent things pag. 30. faithfulness of Christ and sufficiency of Scripture consist not in giving as particular directions for Worship as they had under the Law and in proof of this I set Baptism against Circumcision the Lord's Supper against the Passover and Prayers against Sacrifices Now let us consider what are the reasons why he cannot possibly agree Certainly if ever controversie was like to be ended we may now expect it because it 's about plain matter of Fact But in this case he strangely fails of performance For whereas the deciding the case depends upon the comparison betwixt the Law and the Gospel he doth not so much as offer any thing about the latter But let us consider what he saith of the former and as much as we can make up his defect in the latter First he saith As to Circumcision what particular pag. 31. direction had the Jews Their Rule extended no further than to the Act and the time Here I must confess there is nothing but the time that is determined But since there is nothing of that kind in Baptism prescribed the Law is herein more particular than the Gospel 2ly As to the Passover he acknowledges they had a Rule but then he adds What Rule had they to determine them to a Kid or a Lamb But was not that a Rule to determine them when it must be a Kid or a Lamb and no other Creature and is not Two to all the Beasts in the world a determination as well as one to two But was there nothing else determined as his cautious way of expressing it would imply Let him consult the Text and he will find that the Creature was not only thus to be one Exod. 12. c. out of two but it was to be a Male kept the 14th day and to be killed at even without a bone broken to be roasted to be eaten in the house and with unleavened Bread with bitter Herbs and none left to the morning And they were to eat it standing as our Author acknowledges p. 32. with their loyns girt c. And with several other rites too long to enumerate But in the Lord's Supper there is nothing specified or required but the Elements and the breaking and pouring out nothing said of the kind of the Bread or Wine nothing required of the time or posture or number c.
which the Power of Religion doth consist is the best way to cure our Scrupulousness about little things This was the Apostle's Advice to the Romans cap. 14. amongst whom eating or not eating some Meats observing or not observing some days had occasioned as much Trouble and Scruple as Forms of Prayer and Ceremonies do now amongst us ver 17. The Kingdom of God is not Meat or Drink but Righteousness Peace and Joy in the Holy Ghost What needs all this Stir and Bustle This censuring disputing and dividing about Standing or Kneeling these are not the great matters of our Faith they are not worth so much Noise and Contention The great stress and weight in our Religion is laid upon the Duties of a righteous and holy Life and a peaceable Spirit and Conversation and then he adds ver 18. For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God and approved of Men. Thus when you betake your selves to your Prayers let it be your greatest care to fix in your Minds a due sense of God's Infinite Majesty of your own Vileness and Unworthiness of your manifold Wants and Necessities and the greatness and goodness of the things you petition for and his readiness to grant them upon your humble Request and the more you do this the less sollicitous you will be about the form or words of your Prayers He that minds those things most on which the efficacy of his Prayers for Christ's sake doth depend will not stand in need of nor require new Phrases every time to stir his Attention or to raise his Affection Thus let Men be very diligent and conscientious in preparing themselves for the Holy Communion let them come thereunto with lively Apprehensions of Christ's Love in dying for us with hearty Resolutions of Amendment and true Charity towards all Men the more concerned they are about these necessary things the less afraid will they be of offending God by kneeling at the Administration or coming up to receive it in one part of the Church rather than another for they will find that they are quite other things in which true Religion consists in a new Nature in a divine temper of Mind in the constant Practise of Holiness Righteousness and Charity which make a Man really better and more like unto God He that places any Religion in not putting off his Hat or sitting at the Sacrament or not standing up at the Creed or Gospel as I before shew'd you hath no worthy Thoughts of God so neither hath he any right Notion of Christianity which consists only in unfeigned Piety towards God and sincere Love to our Brother not in any external Rites or Observances which are in their own Nature variable and mutable and are different in several Churches 3. It would greatly contribute to the removing these Scruples which hinder the blessed Union of Christians amongst us if men were but really willing to receive satisfaction This alone would go half way towards conquering them But when they are grown fond of and nourish their Doubts and Prejudices and converse only with those Men read only those Books and hear those Discourses which are made of their side which serve to heighten and strengthen their Jealousies and Suspicions when they avoid the means of Conviction as dangerous Snares and Temptations and look upon this tenderness or aptness to be offended as a sign of Grace and extraordinary Conscientiousness there can be but little hopes of recovering such Persons to a right apprehension of things Whereas would they come once to distrust their own Judgments to suppose that they may perhaps be all this while mistaken would they calmly and patiently hear faithfully and impartially consider what is said or wrote against them as eagerly desire and seek for satisfaction as Men do for cure of any Disease they are subject unto would they I say thus diligently use all fit means and helps for the removal of their Scruples before they troubled the Church of Christ with them it would not prove so very difficult a Task to convince and settle such teachable Minds If therefore any Man be possessed with Doubts or Scruples against any thing practised or required in our Church let him first read some of those excellent Books that are written with all the fairness and evidence imaginable on purpose to explain and justifie those things that are most usually excepted against let him consult with some of our Church before he leaves it Let him honestly repair to the Minister of his Parish or some other whom he hath in greatter estimation and ingenuously open his Mind to him declaring what it is he most stumbles at and hear what can be offered for the Resolution of his Doubts If consulting with one Person will not do it let him advise with others and try this often before he condemns us and divides from us Would Men do this seriously with earnest desire of instruction without doubt we should have far fewer Separatists and they who after this did still dissent from us would be far more excusable in it than otherwise they are and this is no other than what men ordinarily do in their temporal Affairs When they have any fear or suspition about their worldly concerns they presently repair to those who are best skill'd and most able to resolve them and in their judgment and determination they commonly acquiesce and satisfie themselves Hath any man a scruple about his Estate whether it be firmly setled or he hath a true legal Title to it The way he takes for satisfaction is to advise with Lawyers the most eminent for Knowledge and Honesty in their Profession If they agree in the same Opinion this is the greatest assurance he can have that it is right and safe Thus is it with one that doubts whether such a custom or practise be for his Health the opinion of known and experienced Physicians is the only proper means to determine him in such a Case The reason is the same here When any private Christian is troubled and perplexed with fears and scruples that concern his Duty or the Worship of God he ought in the first place to have recourse to the Publick Guides and Ministers of Religion who are appointed by God and are best fitted to direct and conduct him I say to come to them not only to dispute and argue with them and pertly to oppose them but with all modesty to propound their doubts meekly to hearken to and receive Instruction humbly begging of God to open their Understandings that they may see and embrace the truth taking great care that no evil affection love of a Party or carnal interest influence or byass their Judgments We do not by this desire men to pin their faith upon the Priests Sleeve or to put out their own Eyes that they might be better guided and managed by them but only diligently to attend to their Reasons and Arguments and to give some due regard and deference to their
do any thing in God's Worship but what is so determined it follows that God cannot be worshipped at all unless we could worship him in no Time Place Habit or Gesture nor indeed can I learn how a Christian can with a good Conscience perform any part of God's Worship if this Principle be admitted for true that whatsoever is not commanded is forbid since the external Circumstances of religious Actions without which they cannot be performed are not prescribed or determined in Scripture and so he must commit a Sin every time he prays or receives the Holy Sacrament Besides this Reason would oblige us to separate from all the Churches that ever were or are in the World there being no constituted Church in which there are not some Orders and Injunctions for the regulating the publick Worship of God no where commanded in Scripture We could never upon this Principle have held Communion with the Primitive Churches which undoubtedly had their instituted significant Ceremonies nor is there any Church at this day that hath not by its own Authority determined some of the Circumstances of Divine Service for the more decent and orderly Performance thereof Nay those very Persons that make this Exception do themselves practise many things in the Worship of God without the least shadow of a Divine Command to which they oblige their Hearers and Communicants for conceived Prayers sitting at the Eucharist sprinkling the Infant at Baptism the Minister's officiating in a black Cloak or Coat are full out as unscriptural humane uncommanded as any Gesture Habit or Form used in our Church 2. That is said to be unlawful which hath been abused to sinful Purposes to Idolatry or Superstition so that nothing ought to be retained in our Worship tho it be not forbid by God which was used in times of Popery Hence the ordinary Objection against our Parish Churches is that they are not sufficiently purged from Popery that our first Reformers were indeed excellent and worthy Persons for the Times they lived in that what they did was very commendable and a good Beginning but they were forced to comply with the necessities of the Age which would not bear a compleat Reformation They left a great deal of Popish Trash in the Church hoping by degrees to reconcile the Papists to it or at least that they might not make the Breach too wide and too much prejudice or estrange them from it But we now live under better means have greater Light and Knowledge and so a further and more perfect Amendment is now necessary Thus the Order of Bishops is decried as Popish and Antichristian our Liturgy as taken out of the Mass Book and our Ceremonies as Relicks of Idolatry But the truth of the case is this We must consider that those of the Church of Rome do hold and maintain all the Essentials of Christianity but then by degrees as they found Opportunity they have added a number of impious and pernicious Doctrines to the Christian Faith the Belief and Profession of which they equally require of all that are in their Communion Besides this they have introduced several idolatrous and superstitious Rites and Practises into the Service of their Church never heard of for the first four hundred Years by which they have miserably defaced and corrupted the Worship of God and made it necessary for all those that love their own Salvation to separate from them Now our first Reformers here in England did not go about to invent a new Species of Government to devise new Rites and Ceremonies and a new form of Worship such as should be least excepted against and then obtrude it upon this Nation as was done at Geneva and some other places but they wisely considered that if they did but reject what the Romanists had added to the Faith and Worship of Christians lay aside their novel Inventions Usurpations and unwritten Traditions there would remain the pure simple Primitive Christianity such as it was before the Roman Church was thus degenerated nor have we any thing of Popery left amongst us but what the Papists had left amongst them of Primitive Religion and Worship As we must not receive the evil for the sake of the good so neither must we reject the good for the sake of the evil In our Church we pray neither to Saints nor Angels nor the Virgin Mary our Liturgy is in a known Tongue we deny the Laity no part of the Sacrament nor the reading of the Scriptures we offer no Mass Sacrifice nor Worship Images or the consecrated Bread We have not one Doctrine or Ceremony in use amongst us that is purely Popish But we must be obliged to part with the most sacred venerable and usefullest things in our Religion if this be a sufficient reason of our forbearing any thing because the Papists abuse it This therefore I conclude to be the best and plainest rule for the governing of our Consciences not wilfully to omit any thing that God hath commanded to avoid to the utmost of our Power what God hath forbid and what ever else we have no particular Divine Law about to guide our selves by the general Rules of Scripture the commands of our Superiours and by the measures of Prudence Peace and Charity This one rule and it cannot but seem a very reasonable one would soon put an end to our squabbles and janglings about Forms and Ceremonies and other indifferent things 5. In order to the bringing men to a complyance with the Laws of our Church we must desire them to consider that there never was nor ever will be any publick Constitution that will be every way unexceptionable The best policy whether Civil or Ecclesiastical that can be established will have some flaws and defects which must be borne and tolerated Some Inconveniences will in process of time arise that never could be foreseen or provided against and to make alteration upon every emergent difficulty may be often of worse consequence than the evil we pretend to cure by it Let the Rules and Modes of Government Discipline publick Worship be most exact and blameless yet there will be faults in Governours and Ministers as long as they are but men We must not expect in this World a Church without Spot or Wrinkle that consists only of Saints in which nothing can be found amiss especially by those who lye at the catch and wait for an advantage against it If men will scruple and reform as long as any thing remaineth which they can object against they must e'en come at last as a Reverend Person of our Church hath observed to the state of that miserable Man who left all humane Society that he might not be defiled with other Mens Sins and at last cut out the Contents of Chapters and Titles of Books out of the Bible because they were humane Inventions added to the pure Word of God Men must be willing if ever they would promote Peace and Unity to put candid Constructions and
is apt to breed scruples and perplexities in well meaning but less knowing members of it and by degrees produces a distast or dislike of our Worship and plainly hinders the efficacy of the ordinances of Christ as administred in our Church whilest it creates prejudices in people against them as impure and corrupt and why there should not be a due regard had to those many who are Offended at our Dissenters Conventicle Worship as well as of those who are said to be Scandalized by our Church service I cannot at all guess I shall only say here that irreverent sitting at the receiving the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Mens unmannerly wearing their Hats in time of Divine Worship and oftentimes putting them off but half way at their Prayers their indecent postures and antick gestures at their devotions the extravagancies and follies not to say worse some of them are guilty of in their extemporary effusions the strange uncouth Metaphors and Phrases they use in their Preaching in a word the slovenly performance of Divine Worship amongst the Dissenters is much more Scandalous then all the Ceremonies of our Church can ever be 4. Consider the Scandal that is hereby given to Magistrates and our Superiours by bringing their Laws and Authority into contempt concerning which the forenamed Mr. Jeans in his first Edition of his Discourse about Abstinence from all Appearance of Evil hath these words If saith he it were better to be thrown into the bottom of the Sea with a Millstone about ones Neck than to offend a little one a poor and illiterate Artizan what expression shall we then find answerable to the heinousness of a Scandal given to a Pious Magistrate to a Religious Prince to a Parliament and Convocation to an whole Church and Commonwealth 5. By this Separation from the Church great Scandal is given to the Papists not that they are displeased at it they are not indeed offended in that sense but this serves wonderfully to harden them in their false and Idolatrous Worship it increaseth their confidence that their Church is the only true Church of Christ because amongst them only is found Peace and Unity and this is a mighty temptation to many wavering Christians to turn Papists insomuch that Mr. Baxter hath told us that Thousands have been drawn to Popery or confirmed in it by this Argument already and he saith of himself that he is persuaded that all the Arguments else in Bellarmin and all other Books that ever were written have not done so much to make Papists in England as the multitude of Sects among our selves This indeed is a great Scandal to our Protestant Religion and is that which the Papists are on all occasions so forward to object against us and hit us in the teeth with and by our hearty uniting with the Church of England we may certainly wrest out of their hands the most dangerous weapon they use against the Reformation 6. This tends to the Scandal of Religion in general It prejudiceth men against it as an uncertain thing a matter of endless dispute and debate it makes some Men utterly reject it as consisting mostly in little trifles and niceties about which they observe the greatest noise and contention to be made or as destructive of the Publick Peace of Societies when they see what dangerous feuds and quarrels commence from our Religious Differences and all the disorder and confusion that they have caused here in England shall by some be charged upon Christianity it self Thus our causeless Separations and Divisions open a wide door to Atheisme and all kind of Prophaneness and Irreligion After this manner it was of old and always will be where there are Parties in Religion and one contends that their Separation is lawful and the other that it is unlawful the Common people soon become doubtful and ready to forsake all Religion I might add here that such Separations necessarily occasion breach of Charity they beget implacable enmities and animosities Hence cometh strife emulation envying one Party continually endeavouring to overtop the other watching for one anothers halting rejoycing in one anothers sins and misfortunes constant undermining one another to the disturbance of the Publick Government and endangering the Civil Peace of all which and much more than I can now mention the present distracted condition of our Nation is so great and undenyable an evidence that there need no more words to shew the mischiefs that attend such Divisions and now let any one judge whether the Peace and Unity of the Church the maintaining of Charity amongst Brethren the keeping out Popery and Atheism the preservation of the Authority of the Magistrate and quiet of the Society we are Members of the honour and credit of our Religion Lastly Whether giving Offence to all both Conformists and Nonconformists those only excepted of our own particular Sect and Division nay Scandalizing them also in the true and proper sense of Scandal be not of far greater and more weighty consideration than the fear of displeasing or grieving some few weak dissatisfied Brethren Wo to those by whom Offences come But these things I have very lightly touched because they have been the subject of many Sermons and discourses lately published To sum up all I have said Since they who dissent from the Church of England are not such weak persons as St. Paul all along describes and provides for since we cannot by our Conformity really Scandalize or Offend them in that sense in which the Scriptures use those words since tho we did give Offence to them by our Conformity yet that would not excuse us from doing our Duty and by refusing to Conform we should do both them and others greater hurt and mischief I think I may safely conclude that there cannot lie any obligation upon any private Christian as the case now stands amongst us to absent himself from his Parish-Church or to forbear the use of the Forms of Prayer or Ceremonies by Law appointed for fear of Offending his weak Brethren I end all with one word of Advice First to those who are not convinced of the lawfulness of Conformity Secondly to those who are satisfied that it is lawful 1. To those who are not convinced of the lawfulness of Conformity and therefore urge so hard that they ought not to be Offended by us I would beseech them that they would take some care and make some Conscience to avoid giving any needless Offence to those of the Church of England and this cannot but be thought a reasonable request since they require all others to be so tender of them They ought not therefore to meet in such numbers nor at the same time at which we assemble to Worship God in our publick Churches Let them not affront our Service and Common-Prayers nor revile our Bishops and Ministers nor put on their Hats when at any time they chance to be present at our Service in our Churches nor talk nor read in Books nor make sour
faces at our Devotions and when they observe these and other the like rules they may then with a better grace tho with little reason find fault with our Conformity as Offensive to them I would be loth to say any thing that should exasperate or provoke any of the Dissenters whose satisfaction I design I very well know their weakness that they cannot endure to be told of their faults However I must tell them that there are no sort of persons in the Christian World professing Religion and Godliness that have done such Scandalous things as some of those who call themselves Protestant Dissenters I forbear to name particulars 2. As for those who are satisfied concerning the lawfulness of Conformity I would desire them so to order their return to the Church as not to give any just Offence to those whom they forsake that is to say that they would do it heartily and sincerely that all may see they Conformed with a willing mind being persuaded that it is their duty so to do and not meerly to satisfie the Law or to save their Purses or to get into an Office or to capacitate them to Vote or the like For such a kind of Conformity as some practise and call Occasional Communion which is coming to Church and Sacrament to serve a turn is truly Scandalous to all good Men of what persuasion soever FINIS Books Printed for FINCHAM GARDINER A Continuation and Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness of Separation in Answer to Mr. Baxter and Mr. Lob c. Considerations of present use considering the Danger Resulting from the Change of our Church-Government 1. A Perswasive to Communion with the Church of England 2. A Resolution of some Cases of Conscience which Respect Church-Communion 3. The Case of Indifferent things used in the Worship of God Proposed and Stated by considering these Questions c. 4. A Discourse about Edification 5. 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 6. A Letter to Anonymus in Answer to his Three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about Church-Communion 7. Certain Cases of Conscience resolved concerning the Lawfulness of joyning with Forms of Prayer in Publick Worship In two Parts 8. The Case of Mixt Communion Whether it be Lawful to separate from a Church upon the Account of promiscuous Congregations and Mixâ— Communion 9. An Answer to the Dissenters Objections against the Common Prayers and some other Parts of Divine Service Prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England 10. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament Stated and Resolved c. The First Part. 11. Certain Cases of Conscience c. The Second Part. 12. A Discourse of Profiting by Sermons and of going to hear where Men think they can profit most 13. A serious Exhortation with some Important Advices Relating to the late Cases about Conformity Recommended to the Present Dissenters from the Church of England 14. An Argument for Union c. 15. The Case of Kneeling at the Sacrament The Second Part. 1. A Discourse about the charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion before Luther 2. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is meant by it and what Tradition is to be Received and what Tradition is to be Rejected 3. The Difference of the Case between the Separation of Protestants from the Church of Rome and the Separation of Dissenters from the Church of England 4. The Protestant Resolution of Faith c. THE Charge of Scandal And giving OFFENCE BY CONFORMITY Refelled And Reflected back upon SEPARATION And that place of St. Paul 1 Cor. 10. 32. that hath been so usually urged by Dissenters in this Case asserted to its true Sence and vindicated from favouring the end for which it hath beed quoted by them Give none offence neither to the Jews nor to the Gentiles nor to the Church of God LONDON Printed for Fincham Gardiner at the White-Horse in Ludgate-street 1683. To the Christian-Reader THou art not ignorant I suppose that this Argument hath been handled by a far better Pen an Author that doth every thing he undertakes with that accuracy of Judgement and strength of Reason that becomes a person of his Character and therefore mayest wonder what so mean a Scribe hath to do after him I have but this Answer onely to give thee that it is neither affectation nor conceit of this Paper that is the cause This Discourse was shewed to some persons both friends to the world and the Author who was wholly ignorant that the Subject was undertaken by another and was thought fit to be stay'd till it was seen what that Discourse expected then would be with a design to suppress it wholly had the Method or the Management been near alike which because it was not and because the same thing that hits one fancy may not do so to another or not to all it was determined to venture this to the Publick also Which the Author doth with Prayer for and true Charity unto all that need such Discourses beseeching God that they may honestly and impartially consider what hath been offered to them of late to satisfie all their most material Scruples and Objections and that they may find a suitable effect upon their own minds THE Charge of Scandal And giving OFFENCE by CONFORMITY REFELLED THere are very few things within the Sphere of Christian Religion that more trouble and distract the thoughts of men than how to govern themselves and order their actions with respect to things that are called Indifferent In things that are essentially good or evil or are made so by some plain Command or Prohibition of our great Law giver all Parties are soon agreed and there needs not any question or dispute between them in these The Rule is plain and supposing men honest there cannot be any great mistake about them But in things that are left wholly undetermined by God and neither directly nor by just and natural consequence either enjoyned or prohibited by any Law of his there men sail not by so plain a Compass but have a larger Scope and may more easily mistake their Course It cannot therefore be less than a good service to men to direct them safely in this Unbeaten track and to prescribe to them such Rules to which if they carefully attend they can never fall into any dangerous errour This is our Apostles charitable design in this Chapter to which I shall have a respect in managing this present Argument viz. 1 Cor. 10. and by governing our selves by the measures of his discourse in it we may be able to hit those great Rules of our actions in these things The Apostles discourse is indeed but of one particular instance of these i e. the eating or not eating things that had
which is likely to be so indeed Particular persons and Parties of men may mistake and it is notorious often do call that an Offence and Scandal which is not so But the whole Church is not so like to take cognizance of and be offended publickly with any thing which doth not deserve that name To which we may cast in this consideration to add weight to the other Every offence to a single private person or persons is not the sin of Scandal but no man can offend the Church of God but he sins grievously and is directly guilty of a great Scandal To conclude the sum of all that I would have considered on this Subject is this 1. That the fear of giving offence to weak and uninstructed persons by Conformity to our Church and returning to the Communion of it is causeless and wholly without any just reason Conformity being neither a sin nor causal of any nor any just cause of offence to any persons whatsoever 2. That it is now matter of plain and indispensible duty tied on us by the Commands and Laws both of God and man and therefore carefully to be done whatever may be the consequences of it to others That no snares or possibilities of offence to some men by it ought to supersede our care or can atone the sin of neglecting of it That we cannot forbear it now for fear of offending others without grievously offending our selves and our own Consciences 3. That our refusing to Conform will greatly offend the Church of God and indeed it doth so Not onely our own National Church of England but even all the Reformed Churches abroad too as may be seen in some Declarations of the Great men among them of late who cannot but grieve to see their great Bulwark and the whole Reformation so battered and weakned by this means and such great advantage thereby given to the great Enemy against it And therefore that this consideration ought to preponderate all the scruples and fears and fancied possibilities of giving offence to private persons of our own party by it And lastly that the effect of all this discover it self in a speedy conscientious care and honest endeavour to put a period to our causeless Separations and Divisions which are the onely true Scandal and giving Offence that I know of in this Case That we no longer go on madly to contrive our own Ruine in pulling down those Walls and making those Breaches in our Churches Banks at which the Enemy may and without Gods immediate interposition will suddenly break in as a mighty resistless torrent That we may all of us return to the Communion of the Church whose Doctrine is Orthodox and Government Apostolical and whose terms of Communion none of us dare term sinful In which we may acceptably serve our God and happily save our own Souls live happily and die comfortably and pass into the Communion of that Church Triumphant above which sings incessant Hallelujahs to God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost To whom let us also give all possible praise and Thanksgiving both now and for evermore Amen FINIS BOOKS Printed for FINCHAM GARDINER A Continuation and Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Stillingfleet's Unreasoâ—ableness of Separation in Answer to Mr. Baxter and Mr. Lob c. Considerations of present use considering the Danger resulting from the change of our Church-Government 1. A Perswasive to Communion with the Church of England 2. A Resolution of some Cases of Conscience which respect Church-Communion 3. The Case of Indifferent things used in the Worship of God proposed and Stated by considering these Questions c. 4. A Discourse about Edification 5. The Resolution of this Case of Conscience Whether the Church of Englands Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it unlawful to hold Communion with the Church of England 6. A Letter to Anonymus in answer to his three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about Church-Communion 7. Certain Cases of Conscience resolved concerning the Lawfulness of joyning with Forms of Prayer in Publick Worship In two Parts 8. The Case of mixt Communion Whether it be Lawful to Separate from a Church upon the account of promiscuous Congregations and mixt Communions 9. An Answer to the Dissenters Objections against the Common Prayers and some other parts of Divine Service prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England 10. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament stated and resolved c. The first Part. 11. Certain Cases of Conscience c. The second Part. 12. A Discourse of Profiting by Sermons and of going to hear where men think they can profit most 13. A serious Exhortation with some important Advices relating to â—he late Cases about Conformity recommended to the present Dissenters from the Church of England 14. An Argument for Union taken from the true interest of those Dissenters in England who profess and call themselves Protestants 15. The Case of Kneeling c. The Second Part. 16. Some Considerations about the Case of Scandal or giving Offence to Weak Brethren 17. The Case of Infant-Baptism in Five Questions c. 1. A Discourse about the charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion before Luther 2. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is meant by it and what Tradition is to be received and what Tradition is to be rejected 3. The difference of the Case between the Separation of Protestants from the Church of Rome and the Separation of Dissenters from the Church of England 4. The Protestant Resolution of Faith c. A COLLECTION OF CASES AND OTHER DISCOURSES Lately Written to Recover DISSENTERS TO THE COMMUNION OF THE Church of England By some Divines of the City of London THE SECOND VOLUME LONDON Printed for T. Basset at the George in Fleet-street and B. Tooke at the Ship in St. Pauls Church-yard 1685. Books Printed for FINCHAM GARDINER A Continuation and Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness of Separation in Answer to Mr. Baxter and Mr. Lob c. Considerations of present use considering the Danger Resulting from the Change of our Church-Government 1. A Perswasive to Communion with the Church of England 2. A Resolution of some Cases of Conscience which Respect Church-Communion 3. The Case of Indifferent things used in the Worship of God Proposed and Stated by considering these Questions c. 4. A Discourse about Edification 5. 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 6. A Letter to Anonymus in Answer to his Three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about Church-Communion 7. Certain Cases of Conscience resolved concerning the Lawfulness of joyning with Forms of Prayer in Publick Worship In two Parts 8. The Case of Mixt Communion Whether it be Lawful to separate from
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
Sins are not thus Deadly For in many things we offend all and as for those Sins which the Regenerate commit through Humane Frailty only they are not thereby put into a state of Damnation And though all Sin be in its own Nature Deadly or Damnable yet through the Mercy of God and the Merits of Christ Sins of meer Infirmity are not imputed to true Believers and therefore not Deadly to them But there are some Sins so heinous that he who Commits them is thereby put into a Damnable state and till he recovers himself by true Repentance and Actual Reformation he cannot upon any good ground promise to himself that the wrath of God does not abide upon him And 't is of such Sins as these that this passage is to be understood as appears by Deadly Sin being added to Fornication From Fornication and all other Deadly Sin Good Lord deliver us So that this Petition seems to be of the same Nature with that of the Psalmist Keep back thy Servant also from presumptuous sins let not them have dominion over me then shall I be upright and I shall be innocent from the great Transgression Psal 19. 13. Whereas therefore these Words of the Litany seem to suppose that some Sins are not Deadly we should be very unjust to make such a Construction of them as if they implyed that some Sins are in their own nature Venial and so slight that they will be forgiven without any consideration for as I have shewn we may hold that distinction which the Words suppose and yet retain that Protestant Doctrine that no Sin is forgiven but through the Mercy of God and the Merits and Mediation of Christ Again some are offended with our praying against Sudden Death But why should we not by Sudden Death understand our being taken out of this World when we are not fit to die For sometimes a thing is said to be Sudden to us when we are not prepared for it And in this sense can any good Christian find fault with the Petition But suppose that by Sudden Death we mean what is commonly understood by it that is a Death of which a Man has not the least warning by Sickness Are there not reasons why even good Men may desire not to die suddenly May they not when they find themselves drawing towards their end by their good Instructions and Admonitions make impression upon their Friends Companions and Relations to the bettering of them May not their Counsels be more effectual with them than ever they were before And is it not reasonable to believe they will be so As for themselves may not the warning they have of Approaching Death be improved to make them more fit to die than they were in their perfect health In a Word he that thinks himself to have sufficiently perfected holiness in the fear of God and not to stand in need of those Acts of Self-Examination Humiliation and Devotion by which good Men improve the warnings of Death which Mortal Sickness or Extream Age gives them let him suspend his Act and refuse to joyn with us when we pray God to deliver us from Sudden Death There is yet another Objection which I should not have named but that some of the Dissenters who seem to understand very little of Religion by making it have it often in their Mouths That is when we pray to be delivered by the Mystery of Christs Holy Incarnation c. by his Agony and Bloody Sweat by his Cross and Passion c. and by the coming of the Holy Ghost They say some of them that this is Swearing some that it is Conjuring and I know not what For which sayings favouring of great profaneness they ought to be severely rebuked and that is all the answer they should have were it not that some of them may be grosly ignorant of the true Sense of these Petitions And therefore I say that they might easily suppose if they would give their Minds to it that we pray to be delivered through the Saving Efficacy of Christs Incarnation and Passion c. And yet I do not take this to be the principal meaning or that which was intended For I conceive that to be this that when we say By the Mystery of thy Holy Incarnation and by thy Cross and Passion c. Good Lord deliver us we implore Christ who has already shewed such inestimable goodness towards us by taking our Nature to his Divinity to Die upon the Cross to be Buryed to Rise again to ascend into Heaven and there to intercede with the Father for us and by sending the Holy Ghost to qualifie the Apostles for their great Work of carrying the Word of Salvation into the World I say we implore him who hath already done such mighty things for our Salvation and we plead with him by that goodness which he hath already given us such great demonstrations of by those wonders of Mercy that he hath wrought for us that he would now go on to deliver us by his powerful Grace from these Evils which we pray against And this is so reasonable so devout and affectionate so humble and thankful a way of Praying that I am sorry that any who call themselves Believers should be so ignorant as not to understand it or so profane and unlike what they pretend to be as to deride it Though God does not need to be put in mind of his former benefits towards us yet it is fit for us to mention them in our most earnest Prayers not only because we are to make a grateful acknowledgment of them to him but likewise because by this means we encourage our selves to ask in Faith since he who unaskt hath done such great things for us will not fail upon our earnest and humble prayer which himself also hath required to give us all other good things that we need and to deliver us from all real evils of which we are in danger I proceed next to consider whether there be any just cause to find fault with the reading of the Apocryphal Lessons in our Church And 1. It must be acknowledged by those who allow the usefulness of Sermons and Catechising in the Church that those Chapters may be read in the Church though they are not Divinely inspired Writings since no sober Man will pretend that the Minister Preaches or Catechises by Inspiration But if other good Instructions may be read or recited in the Church besides the Word of God it self why may not some Lessons out of the Apocryphal Books be read which contain excellent Rules of good Life and Exhortations and Encouragements to Virtue and Piety especially since those writings were greatly esteemed by the Church in its purest Ages when they and other Humane Writings were also Publickly read as well as the Holy Scriptures 2. If it be said that those Chapters of Canonical Scripture which are omitted in the Calendar would be more profitably read instead of the Apocryphal Chapters it ought
also to be observed that the Chapters omitted are those of the Old Testament which either recite Genealogies or the Rules of the Levitical Service or which relate matters of Fact delivered also in other Chapters that are read or which are hard to be understood This seems to Apologise for the Churches leaving those to be considered at home by them that have ability so to do and appointing some Apocryphal Chapters to be read which are more plain and in that respect more profitable for the Common People Unless a Man will say that because the Scripture is all of Divine Authority it must be always more profitable to read any part of that to the people than to use any other Exhortation or read any other good Lesson And then I do not know what place will be left for Sermons since as I said before they are no more of Divine Authority than the Apocryphal Lessons 3. If it be said that the reading of these as Lessons is a prevailing Temptation to the Vulgar to take them for God's Word or to think them equal to the Writings of the Old and New Testament I believe there is no sufficient ground for this I never heard of any of our Communion that were led into that mistake It is certain that our Church declareth those Lessons to be no part of Canonical Scripture and in the 6th Article saith That they are read for example of Life and instruction of Manners but that it doth not apply them to establish any Doctrine And herein she follows the Judgment and Practice of the Primitive Church which distinguisheth between the Canonical and Apocryphal Books esteeming those to be of Divine Authority these not so but indeed Godly Writings profitable to be publickly read And why the same use of them may not be retained with the same distinction I can see no good Reason For the Church of Romes receiving the Apocryphal Books into her Canon is not likely to mislead any of our Communion since we are not so forward to take their Opinion in any Matter of Religion But in the last place There is no Apocryphal Lesson read in our Churches upon any Lords day in the year and so there is not this pretence against Communion with us upon the Lords days when it is that we do so earnestly desire the Communion of those that have separated from us And therefore I shall at present say nothing to those Exceptions which are taken from the Matter of some of the Apocryphal Books as that some Relations are pretended to be Fabulous c. For this would engage me to a greater length than I intend But whoever thinks himself capable to judge of this Controversie may receive satisfaction from what Dr. Falkner has said upon it in his Libertas Ecclesiast p. 164 c. To proceed Although the Communion Service for the Gravity and Holiness thereof is preferred by the Dissenters before all other Offices in the Common-Prayer-Book yet that has not past free from Exception The Passages that seem to be disliked are two 1. That Petition in the Prayer before Consecration That our sinful Bodies may be made clean by his Body and our Souls washed by his most precious Blood Here they say a distinct efficacy of cleansing and a greater efficacy is attributed to the Blood of Christ than to his Body inasmuch as the cleansing of our Souls is attributed to the Blood of Christ whereas our Bodies are said only to be cleansed by his Body Now in answer to this I suppose it is plain from those Words at the delivery of the Bread and Wine The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee preserve thy Body and Soul unto everlasting life And the Blood of our Lord c. It is I say plain from hence that our Church teaches the Sanctification and Salvation of our Souls and Bodies to flow from the Body as well as the Blood of Christ And therefore that former Passage is not to be Interpreted as if our Souls were not cleansed by the Body of Christ because they are said to be washed by his Blood For the saying of this does not exclude the other When the Apostle said We being many are one Bread and one Body for we are all partakers of that one Bread 1 Cor. 10. 17. Though he exprest only the Bread of the Eucharist yet no man will say he meant to exclude the Cup as if the Unity of the Church would be argued only from their partaking in that one kind And when he said that we have been all made to drink into one Spirit 1 Cor. 12. 13. he meant not to exclude the Participation of the Bread as if that one Spirit which animated the Church was signified only by partaking of the Cup. Nor will any Man argue from hence that he attributes a distinct efficacy to the Bread to prove the Unity of the Body and to the Cup to prove the Unity of the Spirit I must needs say that this Exception was sought but never offered it self 2. The Ministers delivering the Elements into every Communicants hands with a Form of Words recited to every one of them at the Distribution is blamed also as being thought a departure from the Practice of Christ at the first Institution of this Sacrament For they say our Lord's Words were Take ye Eat ye Drink ye all of this and therefore the People are not to take the Elements one by one out of the Ministers hand nor ought any Form of Words to be used particularly to every one that receives To this I answer 1. That it does not appear from those Words Take ye c. which are spoken in the Plural Number that our Saviour did not speak particularly to every one of his Apostles when they received or that he did not deliver the Elements into every particular Mans hand For the Evangelists may well be supposed to give a short account of the Institution of Christ not of every Word he then said but what was necessary to be related And then what might be particularly said or done to every one would be sufficiently related in being related as spoken or done Generally to all That is if Christ had said Take thou Eat thou to every one of them this were truly related by the Evangelists who tell us that he had said to all Take Eat c. And therefore I do not see how it can be proved that our Practice varies from this Circumstance of the Institution Tho if it did I suppose it might be as easily defended as the Celebration of the Eucharist about Dinner time and not at Supper which the Dissenters themselves scruple not But he that thinks not this Answer sufficient let him consult the aforesaid excellent Book of Dr. Falkner p. 218 c. where he shall find that it is indeed more probable that our way is agreeable to the way of the First Institution in this Matter than that which the Dissenters would have instead
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
declares against in these Words Article 22 d. The Romish Doctrine of Purgatory is a vain thing fondly invented and grounded on no Warranty of Scripture but rather Repugnant to the Word of God As to that of Auricular Confession nothing like it is taught or practised in our Church Her Members are obliged onely to Confess their Sins to God except when 't is necessary to Confess them to Men for the relieving of their Consciences and their obtaining the Prayers of others or in order to the righting of those they have wronged when due satisfaction can't otherwise be made or in order to their giving Glory to God when they are justly accused and their guilt proved in which cases and such like 't is without dispute our duty to confess to Men. Nor have we any such Doctrine in our Church as that of the Dependence of the Efficacy of the Sacraments on the Priests intention but the contrary is sufficiently declared Article 26th viz. that The Efficacy of Christs Ordinance is not taken away by the Wickedness of those that Minister 3. The Church of Rome subjects her Members by not a few of her Doctrines and Practices to Vile Affections and Vices of all sorts As might be largely shewed See Libertas Evangelica Chap. 17. and will be in part under the next Head of discourse But our Church neither maintains any Licentious Principle nor gives Countenance to any such Practice our Adversaries themselves being Judges Secondly The Church of England is at the greatest distance from that of Rome in all those Doctrines and Practices in which she is justly charged with plainly contradicting the Holy Scripture For instance not to repeat any of those ranked under the foregoing head several of which may also fall under this Her Doctrines of Image-Worship of Invocation of Saints with her gross practising upon them of Transubstantiation of Pardons and Indulgencies of the Sacrifice of the Mass wherein Christ is pretended to be still offered up afresh for the quick and dead Her keeping the Holy Scriptures from the Vulgar and making it so hainous a crime to read the Bible because by this means her foul Errours will be in such danger of being discovered and the People of not continuing implicite believers Her injoyning the saying of Prayers and the Administration of the Sacraments in an unknown Tongue Her Robbing the Laity of the Cup in the Lords Supper Her prohibiting Marriage to Priests Her Doctrines of Merit and works of Supererogation Her making simple Fornication a mere Venial sin Her damning all that are not of her Communion Her most devilish cruelties towards those whom she is pleased to pronounce Hereticks Her darling Sons Doctrines of Equivocation and Mental Reservations of the Popes power of dispensing with the most Solemn Oaths and of absolving Subjects from their Allegiance to their Lawful Princes with many others not now to be reckoned up But the Church of England Abominates these and the like Principles and Practices As to the instances of Image-Worship Invocation of Saints and Pardons and Indulgences what our Church declareth concerning Purgatory she adds concerning these things too Article 22 d. viz. That the Romish Doctrine concerning Pardons Worship and Adoration as well of Images as of Relicks as also Invocation of Saints is a fond thing vainly invented and grounded on no Warranty of Scripture but rather Repugnant to the Word of God And as there is no such Practice as Worshipping of Images in our Church so all are destroyed which Popery had Erected among us Nor have we in our Church any Co-Mediators with Jesus Christ we Worship only one God by one only Mediator the Man Christ Jesus And the now-mentioned Practices our Church doth not only declare to be Repugnant to the Holy Scriptures but to be likewise most grosly Idolatrous viz. in the Homilies As to the Doctrine of Transubstantiation our Church declareth her sense thereof Article 28th in these Words Transubstantiation or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine in the Supper of the Lord cannot be proved by Holy Writ but it is repugnant to the plain terms of Scripture overthroweth the Nature of a Sacrament and hath given occasion to many Superstitions The Body of Christ is given taken and eaten in the Lords Supper only after an Heavenly and Spiritual manner and the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is Faith The Sacrament of the Lords Supper was not by Christs Ordinance reserved carried about lifted up or Worshipped As to the Sacrifice of the Mass see what our Church saith of it Article 31st viz. That the offering of Christ once made is that perfect Redemption Propitiation and Satisfaction for all the Sins of the whole World both Original and Actual and there is none other Satisfaction for sins but that alone Wherefore the Sacrifices of Masses in the which it was commonly said that the Priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead to have Remission of pain or guilt were Blasphemous Fables and dangerous deceits As to the Church of Romes locking up the Scriptures and prohibiting the reading of them Our Church hath not only more than once caused them to be Translated into our Mother-Tongue but also as I need not shew gives as free Liberty to the reading of the Bible as of any other Book nor is any duty in our Church esteemed more necessary than that of Reading the Scriptures and Hearing them read As to Praying and Administring the Sacraments in an unknown Tongue as this is contrary to the Practice of the Church of England so is it to her Declaration also Article 24th viz. That it is a thing plainly Repugnant to the Word of God and the Custom of the Primitive Church to have publick Prayers in the Church or to Administer Sacraments in a Tongue not understanded of the People As to Robbing the Laity of the Cup in the Lords Supper in Our Church they may not receive the Bread if they refuse the Cup. And Article 30. tells us That the Cup of the Lord is not to be denied to the Laity for both the parts of the Lords Sacrament by Christs Ordinance and Commandment ought to be Administred to all Christians alike As to prohibiting Marriage to Priests this is declared against Article 32. Bishops Priests and Deacons are not Commanded by Gods Law either to vow the Estate of single Life or to abstain from Marriage therefore it is Lawful for them as for all other Christian Men to Marry at their own discretion as they shall judge the same to serve better to godliness As to the Popish Doctrine of Merit Our Church declares against this Article 11. We are accounted righteous before God only for the Merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith and not for our own Works or Deservings Wherefore that we are justified by Faith only viz. such a Faith as purifies the Heart and works by Love is a most wholsome Doctrine and very
full of Comfort as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification As to the Doctrine of Supererogation this is confuted Article 14. Voluntary Works besides over and above Gods Commandments which they call Works of Supererogation cannot be taught without Arrogance and Impiety For by them Men do declare that they do not only render unto God as much as they are bound to do but that they do more for his sake than of bounden duty is required whereas Christ saith plainly When ye have done all that are Commanded to you say We are unprofitable Servants As to making simple Fornication a meer Venial sin Our Church will endure no such Doctrine For as in the Litany she calls Fornication expresly a deadly sin so hath it ever been accounted in Our Church one of the most deadly even considered as distinct from Adultery As to the Church of Romes Damning all that are not of her Communion the Church of England is guilty of no uncharitableness like it and never pronounced so sad a sentence against those in Communion with the Church of Rome as great a detestation as she expresseth in the Homilies especially of her Idolatrous and Wicked Principles and Practices She is satisfied to Condemn the gross Corruptions of that Apostate Church and leaves her Members to stand or fall to their own Master nor takes upon her to Vnchurch her And as to the remaining most Immoral Principles and Practices of the Romish Church which are all as contrary to Natural as to revealed Religion the greatest Enemies Our Church hath cannot surely have the forehead to charge her with giving the least countenance to any such There being no Church in Christendom that more severely Condemns all instances of Unrighteousness and Immorality Thirdly The Church of England is at a mighty distance from the Church of Rome in reference to their Publick Prayers and Offices Whereas our Liturgy hath been by many Condemned as greatly resembling the mass-Mass-Book all that have compared them do know the contrary and that there is a vast difference between them both as to matter and form Although some few of the same Prayers are found in both and three or four of the same Rites of which more hereafter To shew this throughout in the particulars would be a very long and tedious task I will therefore single out the Order of Administration of Infant-Baptism as we have it in the Roman Ritual and desire the Reader to compare it with that in our Liturgy and by this take a measure of the likeness between our Liturgy and the Mass-Book c. there being no greater agreement between the Morning and Evening Services and the other Offices of each than is between these two excepting that besides the Lords Prayer there is no Prayer belonging to the Popish Office of Baptism to be met with in ours For the sake of the Readers who understand no more of the Language that the Popish Prayers and Offices are expressed in than the generality of those that make use of them take the following account of the Popish Admonistration of Infant-Baptism in our own Tongue To pass by the long Bedroul of Preparatory Prescriptions the Priest being drest in a Surplice and Purple Robe calls the Infant to be Baptized by his Name and saith What askest thou of the Church of God the God-Father answers Faith The Priest saith again What shalt thou get by Faith The God-Father replies Eternal Life Then adds the Priest If therefore thou wilt enter into Life keep the Commandments Thou shalt Love the Lord thy God with all thine heart c. and thy Neighbour as thy self Next the Priest blows three gentle puffs upon the Infants face and saith as if we come all into the World possessed by the Devil Go out of him O unclean Spirit and give place to the Holy Ghost the Comforter Then with his Thumb he makes the Sign of the Cross on the Infants Forehead and Breast saying Receive the Sign of the Cross both in thy Forehead and in thy heart Take the Faith of the Heavenly Precepts and be thy manners such as that thou maist now become the Temple of God After this follows a Prayer that God would always protect this his Elect one calling him by his Name that is Signed with the Sign of the Cross c. And after a longer Prayer the Priest laying his hand on the Infants head comes the Benediction of Salt of which this is the Form I exorcize or conjure thee O Creature of Salt in the Name of God the Father Almighty ✚ and in the Love of our Lord Jesus Christ ✚ and in the Power of the Holy Ghost ✚ I conjure thee by the Living God ✚ by the true God ✚ by the Holy God ✚ by the God ✚ which Created thee for the safeguard of Mankind and hath ordained that thou shouldest be consecrated by his Servants to the People entring into the Faith that in the Name of the Holy Trinity thou shouldest be made a wholesome Sacrament for the driving away of the Enemy Moreover we Pray thee O Lord our God that in Sanctifying thou wouldest Sanctifie ✚ this Creature of Salt and in Blessing thou wouldest Bless it ✚ that it may be to all that receive it a perfect Medicine remaining in their Bowels in the Name of the same Jesus Christ our Lord who is about to come to judge the quick and dead and the World by fire Amen This Idle and prophane Form being recited the Priest proceeds in his Work with the poor Infant and next putting a little of this Holy Salt into his mouth he calls him by his Name and saith Take thou the Salt of Wisdom and adds most impiously be it thy propitiation unto Eternal Life Amen This ended with the Pax tecum God Almighty is next mockt with a Prayer That this Infant who hath tasted this first food of Salt may not be suffered any more to hunger but may be filled with Celestial Food c. Now follows another Exorcising of the Devil wherein he is conjured as before and most wofully becalled And next the Priest Signs the Infant again with his Thumb on the Forehead saying And this Sign of the Holy Cross ✚ which we give to his Forehead thou Cursed Devil never dare thou to Violate By the same Jesus Christ our Lord Amen And now after all this tedious expectation we see some Sign of Baptism approaching for the Priest puts his hand again on the Infants head and puts up a very good Prayer for him in order to his Baptism The Prayer being ended he puts part of his Robe upon the Infant and brings him within the Church for he hath been without all this while saying calling him by his Name Enter thou into the Temple of God that thou mayest partake with Christ in Eternal Life Amen Then follow the Apostles Creed and the Pater Noster But after all this here 's more exercise for our Patience for the Priest falls to his fooling
them should in tract of time creep upon us we should certainly be much the better Christians for the observation of our Holy-days Mr. Calvin saith In Festis non recipiendis cuperem vos esse Constantiores c. I could wish In Epist ad Monsbel-gardenses p. 81 82. that you would be more constant in your not receiving Festivals but so as not to contend and make a stir about all but about those onely which nothing at all tend to Edification and which have a manifest appearance of Superstition c. And he instanceth in those Days which Popery dedicates to the Celebrating of the immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary and of her Assumption on which Holy-days nothing he saith can be said in the Pulpit by a servant of God besides exposing the folly of those who have invented them And in another Epistle Caeterùm cùm Festi dies hîc In Epist ad Hallerum abrogati c. Moreover whereas some of your Country are much offended at the Abrogation of Holy-days among us and 't is likely that much odious talk is spread about it And I make account that I am made the Author of this whole matter and that by the Ignorant as well as Malicious I can solemnly testifie of my self that this was done without my knowledge o desire c. Before I ever came into the City there was no Holy-day at all observed besides the Lords day those which are Celebrated by you were taken away by that same Law of the People which banisht me and Farel And 't was rather Tumultuously extorted by the violence of Wicked Men than decreed legally Vpon my return I obtained this temper or mean that Christmass-day should be observed after your manner but upon the other days extraordinary supplications should be made the Shops being kept shut in the Morning but after Dinner every one should go about his own Business And no doubt the Governours of our Church would be abundantly satisfied with such an observation of most of our Holy-days as Mr. Calvin ordered at Geneva would the People be generally so far conformable And thus I have I hope sufficiently shewed that our Church's Symbolizing in this Rite too with the Church of Rome no otherwise than she doth can be no colour for Separation It may be objected that notwithstanding our having several times cited Mr. Calvin for the unlawfulness of Separation from the Church of England on the account of her Symbolizing as she doth with the Church of Rome yet he calleth her Ceremonies tolerabiles ineptiae tolerable fooleries which would make one think that he was not in earnest in calling them tolerable fooling in the Worship of God being no doubt intolerable In Answer hereto let Mr. Calvin account for his joining ineptiae tolerabiles together but the instances he gives of things he so censured were such as the Liturgy was cleared of in the amendment of it under Queen Elizabeth viz. Prayers for the dead that is that they might have a happy Resurrection not such Prayers as supposed Purgatory Chrism at Baptism and Extreme Vnction And besides he saith he was informed by Mr. Knox of several other Popish Ceremonies that were retained viz. the Use of Wax Candles divers Crossings at the Communion c. which Information was not true And now how happy should we think our selves would our Brethren at length be perswaded to cease fearing where no fear is as also to fear what is really very frightful namely the guilt of so great a sin as that of Schism or making and continuing a breach in the Church by Separation without just cause The greatness of which sin none have more aggravated than Mr. Calvin and several of our old Non-conformists who have also zealously born their Testimony against Separation from the Church of England and accordingly did themselves hold Communion there with generally viz. all the Presbyterian Party to their dying day though they could not Conform as Ministers And there is another very formidable Evil too which I wish more of our Bretheren had a greater sense of viz. the advantage that our Common Enemy is too like to make of our Sad Divisions and being crumbled into so many Sects and Parties and hath already made in order to their final accomplishing their designs upon us The truth on 't is they themselves have had the main hand in those Divisions they so upbraid us with of which we have abundant Evidence having most industriously followed that advice of the famous Jesuit Campanella viz. There is no such effectual Jam verò ad enervandos Anglos nihil tam conducit quà m dissensio discordia inter illos excitata perpetuóque nutrita Quod citò occasiones meliores suppeditabit Camp de Mon. Hisp p. 304. Amstel way to weaken the English as to stir up strife and discord among them and still to feed it This will quickly put into our hands very fair advantages and opportunities Their main spight is at the Church of England as being well aware that it hath ever since the Reformation been their most formidable Enemy and the most impregnable Bulwark in all Christendom against the mighty Power and Policy of their Church of Rome What a madness therefore is it in hearty Protestants to joyn with those People in laying this Church as low as ever they are able And by contending with our Church about innocent if not commendable things upon the account of her Symbolizing in them with the Church of Rome eminently to endanger the opening such a breach as shall let in all her Heresies Superstitions and Idolatries among us Which God in his infinite Mercy prevent by causing us to live more answerably to the happy Means and Opportunities we now enjoy by quenching our as unreasonable as unchristian fierce Feuds and Animosities and by making our Church like Jerusalem of old a City compact together and at Vnity within it self Amen ERRATA PAge 4. line 9. read unction p. 8. l. 14. r. the Mass p. 10. l. 8. r. Homilies especially p. 15. l. 1. r. others p. 32. l. 21. r. dispensation FINIS A DEFENCE OF THE RESOLUTION OF THIS CASE VIZ. Whether the Church of England's Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it Unlawfull to hold Communion with the Church of England In Answer to a Book Intituled A Modest Examination OF THAT RESOLUTION LONDON Printed by J. H. for B. Aylmer at the Three Pigeons against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill 1684. A DEFENCE OF THE Resolution c. SIR I who know the Author of the Book which hath given you this trouble better than any man do conclude that you are not more a stranger to him than he is to you from the Epithets you so frequently bestow upon him throughout your Papers except you do it which I would not be so uncharitable as to think by way of Irony In your First Paragraph you express a Liking of the Complexion of his Book
absolve by commission from God more than declaratively I mean I know no one that maketh the Priest's Absolution to be other in Effect than declarative though it signifies more than if pronounced by a Layman Nor your Fourth That the Natural Body and Bloud of Christ is in the Elements of Bread and Wine really Our Church-Catechism saith that The Body and Bloud of Christ are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithfull in the Lord's Supper And I know no Divine of ours that explaineth this otherwise than thus That Believers feed on the Body and Bloud of Christ in the Lord's Supper as truly and really as they do on the Elements but not after a corporal and carnal manner but after a spiritual viz. by applying to themselves the Benefits of Christ's death by faith And I presume you will neither assert this to be Popish Doctrine nor deny that 't is true Doctrine Nor do I know any one of our Divines that holds your Fifth Proposition for it may not be called a Doctrine viz. That our Conformable Congregations are no better than Conventicles where the Minister reads not the Communion Service at the Altar Which you assert to be tantamount to the allowing of Prayers in an Vnknown Tongue because in multitudes of Congregations the People cannot hear a line from him I say I know of no Divine of our Church that ever asserted that such Congregations as the forementioned are no better than Conventicles There was indeed lately a foolish Book published to Prove them Conventicles but it is strongly conjectured that this Book was written by a certain Layman And what Church he is of I cannot say nor is it a pins matter to know But I may as much suspect him to be a Protestant Dissenter as a Popish upon the score of that his Position it being nothing of kin to the allowing of Prayers in an Vnknown tongue For as there is not One of your Multitudes of Congregations wherein the People cannot hear a line from him that reads at the Communion Table except you mean wherein every one of the People cannot for I doubt not the Major part can in all where the Minister hath a voice to be well heard from the Pulpit so all that is read is known before to those who are not Strangers to our Prayers or at least they may have Books to enable them to go along with the Minister whether they can or cannot hear distinctly one sentence from him Nor do I know any one of our Divines that hath ever taught your 6th Doctrine That whole Christ is under each Element which you intimate is the onely foundation on which the Sacrilegious Romish Practice stands But if I could believe that Doctrine to be true I should notwithstanding judge it an intolerable thing to refuse the Cup to the Laity against the express Institution of our Lord. Nor know I any Divine of ou Church guilty of the 7th particular of your Charge viz. That there are those who interpret the Ten Commandments so as that he who will ever be saved must do a great many works of supererogation And if I did know any one that so interpreted the Commandments as to make any one such work necessary to Salvation I would not call him a Papist for it but an Ignoramus who understands not the word Supererogation Nor know I any one that teacheth Original Sin thereby understanding Corruption of Nature to be rather our Misfortune than our Fault which is your 8th Doctrine Nor consequently that Concupiscence is no sin which is your 9th Nor your 10th That man hath a power in his own will to chuse and doe what is spiritually good i. e. without the Assistence of Divine Grace And with this Assistence I hope you Dissenters do all hold it Nor know I any one of our Divines who teacheth That we are not accounted righteous before God or Justified onely for the Merits of Christ that is that there is any other Meritorious cause of our Justification besides the Active and Passive obedience of Christ Nor your 11th That we are not Justified by Faith alone Understanding by Faith not a dead but a living Faith that purefies the heart and works by love Nor your 12th That good works must go before justification and are not the fruits of Faith but Faith it self For I know no one of our Church that asserts more than this that a sincere Resolution to obey all God's Commandments must in order of nature go before Justification Nor your 13th That there is no Eternal Predestination of persons to life and the means tending thereunto I know of none of our Church that have ever taught this Doctrine as you have expressed it nor any worse than this That Eternal Predestination to life is not Irrespective or Absolute which no Article of our Church saith it is And Abundance of you Dissenters hold this Doctrine as well as Church of England men And thus have I gone over all the Doctrines contradictory to the 39 Articles taught by your Ecclesia Loquens yours I say for she is not ours and I declare again that I know of no Divine of our Church that teacheth or holdeth such Doctrines If you know any as one would think you do very many I pray name them You say we spare any names in these cases but be you entreated not to spare them But if you won't be prevailed with we shall very shrewdly guess at the reason Sir to deal freely with you I cannot but wonder at your adventuring into the World this other Celeusma since the Author of the former had so ill success and must needs have repented him heartily of that Undertaking All that have consideratively read his Answerer I am confident are convinced that after a Great Cry Little Wooll appeared or rather none at all Nor can such be ignorant what foul play was used to make our Divines of the Church of England broach Heresie And I doubt not but you your self have blushed at it if you have ever read the Parallela imparia sive Specimen fidei Celeusmaticae Could you catch us thus dealing with the Books of your Authors as ours have been dealt with by that Author and some others that might be named we should at another kind of rate have been exposed than they have been But Sir for God's sake let us make as much Conscience of vile Calumny than which there is not a more express Transgression of the Law of God nor of the very Light of Nature as of Obedience to Authority in such things as no Divine Law can be produced against and nothing but strained and far-fetcht Consequences And for God's sake also let us at length be perswaded to have so great a concern for our common Religion as to give over exposing it by such unchristian doings to the Scorn and Derision of our Common Enemy But I cannot take my leave of this heavy Charge of yours till I have asked you what you inferr
grant that it ought to have been destroyed or removed out of the peoples sight if the continuance of it in their view were like to be a snare to them and a temptation to Idolatry You reply may not the like be said of what Dissenters plead against But you have been already told that the like may not be said with any colour or shew of reason 6. Our Author saith That if Hezekiah had let it stand private persons might have made use of it to put them in mind of the wonderfull mercy of God expressed by it to their Fore-fathers This you acknowledge but say that the Question at present under our debate is whether Hezekiah might lawfully have let it stand and removed it into the Temple whether his setting it up by the Ark or Mercy Seat would have purged it But for shame Sir do not say that this is the Question in debate between us In your 16th Page you express very great offence at those next words of our Author pag. 36. And much more might they have lawfully continued in the Communion of the Church so long as there was no constraint laid upon them to join with them in their Idolatry But you leave out what follows viz. as we do not reade of any that separated from the Church while the Brazen Serpent was permitted to stand as wofully abused as it was by the Generality And do you find that the pious Jews did separate upon this account Or if they did not will you say that they were guilty of Sin For my part I dare not say so nor that it would be a sin now not to separate from our Church though our Governours were so remiss as not to Excommunicate Idolaters if such were found therein any more than it is so upon the account of Promiscuous Congregations and Mixt Communions As the Worthy person that published the Resolution of that case hath clearly proved and proved too that it is Vnlawfull to separate upon that pretence But you say you can never believe this till some can prove to you that a Wife may lawfully contrary to the command of her Husband stay in a Family of Whoremongers provided that she be not compelled to play the Whore I answer that a Wife may not lawfully though her Husband hath not expresly forbidden it stay in a Family consisting wholly of Whoremongers except to bear her Husband company and in that case it is her duty to stay But where hath Christ forbidden us to Communicate with a Church out of which Idolaters are not ejected though Idolatry be not enjoined You say he hath done it in those words Rev. 18. 4. Come out of her my people but I pray read on and you have an answer that ye be not partaker of her sins and that ye receive not viz. by partaking of her sins of her plagues And moreover I presume you will acknowledge that the Babylon which the Christians were commanded to come out of is the Idolatrous Church of Rome But I need not acquaint you that you cannot continue in this Church except you will your self also be an Idolater But I will not stand to dispute this point with you it being nothing to the business of our Author's Book and all he asserts as to this matter doth amount to no more than this That we are not obliged to renounce Communion in pure Ordinances with such as we know to be guilty of Idolatry when it lies not in our power to keep them away And now you have brought me to our Author's Third Head of Discourse viz. That the Agreement which 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 unlawfull You say Page 17th That if our Author had said all Communion viz. with the Church of England is not unlawfull you had fully concurred with him believing that this Church cannot be justly charged with Idolatry and that some Communion may and ought to be held with any Church that is not so charged If you mean by some Communion a not being divided in heart as you before express it I say again we thank you for nothing the Communion which our Author pleads for being as your self observes in your first Page chiefly Communion in Worship But you proceed saying but as he hath laid it I cannot agree with it I am sure Christ had Communion with the Jewish Church and I believe he had so in all acts of worship of his Father's Institution and I am as sure he had no Communion with them in the Traditional part of their worship as I am that he would not himself practise what he condemned so severely But are you not as sure that our Blessed Lord had Communion with the Jewish Church in all acts of worship instituted by his Father as you are that he had no Communion with them in the Traditional part of their Worship I am sure that in the former part of that saying you are too too cautious and in the latter not so cautious as you ought to have been For you may be sure of the contrary to what you affirm so positively when you have considered that our Lord could not have so freely been admitted into the Temple had he not observed divers Traditions or Canons of the Elders without complying with which none might come thither I shall not stand to instance in particulars but refer you to Dr. Leightfoot's Temple Service pag. 115. to 120. And again you may yet be more sure of the contrary when you have considered how our Lord complied with Jewish Traditions in the celebration of the Passover and such too as altered certain circumstances prescribed in its First Institution Particularly his ordering the Preparation of the Lamb on the 14th day when Moses ordained the taking of it up upon the 10th day His eating the Passover lying along being the posture in which they ate their ordinary Meals according to a Jewish Tradition as you may see in Dr. Leightfoot's foresaid Book pag. 143 144. whereas according to Moses his Institution it was to be eaten with their Loins girded c. and in haste or standing His complying with the Jewish customs of drinking Wine at the Passover and concluding with the Hallel or a Hymn And not these onely but more Traditions than these Dr. Leightfoot will satisfie you were conformed to by our Blessed Saviour But you say Christ condemned severely the Jewish Traditions But I say he did not at all condemn all Jewish Traditions and none but such as by which they made the Commandments of God of none effect And such as they placed special Holiness in and necessary to acceptance with God as is too evident to need my standing to prove it And Sir when you can prove that our Ceremonies are like to those condemned Traditions I will undertake that our Author shall be as zealous against complying with them as he is now against separation from our
the Governed who could never part with their Right in chusing Officers c. But what Right they have you will soon learn from the Reverend Dean Stillingfleet in his Vnreasonableness of Separation pag. 307 c. There you will find they have no Right at all or I am much mistaken From what you say in these two Pages and that which follows in which your discourse is such that 't is hard to say certainly what you would be at I shrewdly conjecture that you believe it Lawfull to separate from the Church of England although she had neither Ceremonies nor Liturgy to scare men away Your Second case is When a Church is turned Idolatrous that then it is necessary to depart from it And here we have no Controversie Your Third is When a Church will not admit a man's abiding in it unless he will doe something which his Conscience tells him is sinfull But Sir will you not acknowledge that it cannot justifie our Separation that something is required which we judge sinfull whilst we will not impartially use all means for the duly informing of our judgments whilst we call it a running into Temptation to read what is offered us in Defence of the Lawfulness of that we have a prejudice against Whilst we so confide in our own judgments or in the judgments of our Party as not to bear to hear that 't is possible we should be mistaken Surely all truly good men will acknowledge this You say in all these Cases Separating is Lawfull if not Necessary For in the two first Cases we ought to Separate And then I hope in those cases it is Necessary and not onely Lawfull to Separate in the last we may prudently and warily depart c. And why do you so mince the matter by changing your phrase when your meaning is that you may Separate And why do you so mince it too in saying in the two first Cases we ought to Separate which supposeth that in this Case you are at your Liberty and that though you may lawfully Separate yet it is not a necessary duty so to doe And why again do you say we judge this no sinfull Separation Why don't you speak out and say 't is a Necessary one Except you think that a man may lawfully act against his Conscience But you have given me sufficient assurance in your Book that this you do not think You say pag. 33. If any others in former Ages or in our own have had any other apprehensions of the significancy you would have said signification of the Terms Church Schism and Separation whom we own to have been Holy and Excellent men till we see their Notions justified from Holy Writ which alone can determine these things we must crave leave to dissent from them and believe that had they lived in our times they would have dissented from their own Apprehensions under a more perfect light c. But 1. What would you have said to us if we had given this Answer to your citing Holy and Excellent men such as Calvin whom our Author hath so often appealed to in his Book and others against our Notions I am sure you would have severely upbraided us with having a wonderfull opinion of our own judgments Especially if our Notions ran counter to all Antiquity and the Judgments of all Holy Excellent men in former Ages and to the generality of such in our own Age and Time But this I dare say may be asserted of your Notions concerning the Terms Schism and Separation and much of your talk concerning the Term Church too 2. How came you to have more light than the Holy and Excellent men in former Ages and in our own Age too which you plainly suppose your selves to have Nay you suppose this as to multitudes of such persons also as are your Contemporaries For you say pag. 7. We are far from thinking that there are not multitudes of Holy and Learned men in our Ecclesia Loquens c. that is Among Conformable Divines of the Church of England 3. This Answer would far better become the Quakers than you they pretending to inspiration which you do not I will now conclude with a Remarque or two on those words with which you begin the concluding part of your Book You say pag. 29. And now how happy should we not onely think our selves but indeed be would our Brethren but leave disputing how far it is lawfull for the Spouse of Christ to have Communion with the Great Whore and onely argue how far we come short of symbolizing with the First and Purest Gospel Churches of which we have Records in Holy Writ To this I say 1. How Unaccountable is this Charge you lay against your Brethren when you know that they are in as perfect a Separation as your selves from the Communion of that Apostate Church which you mean by the Great WHORE 2. It lieth not in your power to shew us a Church which more symbolizeth with the First and Purest Gospel Churches than the Church of England And as for those Churches which you believe do come nearer to the First and Purest it hath often enough been demonstrated with invincible strength that the main thing viz. the point of Government in which you conceive they more agree with these Churches doth speak them far less to agree with them than the Church of England does And speaks them to be therein unlike to the whole Catholique Church of Christ for fifteen hundred years together from the time of the Apostles We do not pretend that the Constitution of our Church is absolutely perfect we do believe that such a Constitution is the peculiar privilege of the Church Triumphant but we bless God that 't is no more imperfect and we who live in complete Communion with this Church are well assured that there is nothing either in the Constitution thereof or in what is required thereby that hindereth us from being as good Christians as ever were in the world We cannot find after all the pains that you and others have taken to prove the contrary that there is imposed upon us any one condition of Communion that does contradict any Law of God that tends in the least to the depraving of our Souls to the gratifying of any one corrupt Affection or the making us unmeet for the Heavenly Happiness And this our Holy Martyrs thought as well as we And gave a Demonstration hereof by their Excellent Lives and Heroick Behaviour under the greatest Torments they not onely patiently but also joyfully enduring them for the sake of Christ Nor do we find any more than they did that we are debarred by our Church of any Helps for the building of us up in our most holy faith And whereas you express such mighty zeal for Purer Ordinances we think that zeal would be much better employed in endeavouring after Purer Hearts And that this contending with your Superiours and your Brethren about some things enjoined hath been infinitely more
prejudicial to mens Souls and contributed unspeakably more to the impurity both of mens hearts and lives than the impure Ordinances you so complain of And therefore all good and pious Church of England men cannot but say How happy should we not onely think our selves but indeed be would our Brethren but leave disputing with such mighty concern about little things and things that are perfectly harmless and innocent Would make no more Sins than God and their Blessed Saviour have made Would be as fearfull of culpably Disobeying Authority as of culpably Obeying it Would be as thankfull that they are in no worse Circumstances as they are full of Complaints that they are in no better Would take as much pains to satisfie themselves how far they may lawfully hold Communion with our Church as how far they may lawfully Separate from it Would be as willing to read those Books that are written in the defence of the things enjoined by our Church as to read those which are written in opposition to them Would as impartially consider the vast distance between our Church and that of Rome as thus dwell upon the most inconsiderable Agreement that is between them which our Author hath convincingly to any unprejudiced person proved to be no justifiable pretence for Separation And if we would well digest those excellent words of the Apostle Rom. 14. 17 18. The Kingdom of God is not meat or drink but righteousness peace and joy in the Holy Ghost For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God and approved of men And if we would follow after the things that make for v. 19. peace and things wherein one may edifie another And lastly if we would at length be perswaded to Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and Eph. 4. 31 32. clamour and evil speaking against one another be put away from us with all malice And to be Kind and affectionate one to another notwithstanding the Difference of Apprehensions tender hearted forgiving one another even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven us I say if we could once be brought to this temper we should be unspeakably more happy than those things you express so passionate a desire of could possibly make us And without this blessed temper we shall be miserable wretches though there were no Agreement in any one Rite between Rome and us and though our Ordinances were as pure as 't is your wish to have them Nor will our bidding the greatest defiance to the Antichrist in the Roman Chair one whit avail us while the Spiritual Antichrist which is the worse of the two continues possessed of his Seat in our Hearts And so Sir I heartily bid you Farewell ERRATA Page 19. Lin. 12. read in their greatest p. 27. l. 30. dele p. 32. l. 1. read is so contrived FINIS Books sold by R. Horne T. Basset R. Chiswell B. Tooke Brabazon Aylmer W. Rogers and F. Gardiner 1. A Persuasive to Communion with the Church of England 2. A Resolution of some Cases of Conscience which respect Church-Communion 3. The Case of Indifferent things used in the Worship of God proposed and Stated by considering these Questions c. 4. A Discourse about Edification 5. 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 unlawfull to hold Communion with the Church of England 6. A Letter to Anonymus in Answer to his three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about Church-Communion 7. Certain Cases of Conscience resolved concerning the Lawfulness of joyning with Forms of Prayer in Publick Worship In two Parts 8. The Case of mixt Communion Whether it be Lawfull to Separate from a Church upon the account of promiscuous Congregations and mixt Communions 9. An Answer to the Dissenters Objections against the Common Prayers and some other parts of Divine Service prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England 10. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament stated and resolved c. In two Parts 11. A Discourse of Profiting by Sermons and of going to hear where men think they can profit most 12. A serious Exhortation with some important Advices relating to the late Cases about Conformity recommended to the present Dissenters from the Church of England 13. An Argument for Union taken from the true interest of those Dissenters in England who profess and call themselves Protestants 14. The Case of Lay-Communion with the Church of England considered 15. A Persuasive to Frequent Communion in the Holy Sacrament of the Lord's Supper 16. Some Considerations about the Case of Scandal or giving Offence to the weak Brethren 17. The Case of Infant-Baptism in five Questions c. 18. The Charge of Scandal and giving Offence by Conformity Refelled and Reflected back upon Separation c. 19. A Defence of the Resolution of this Case viz. Whether the Church of England's Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it unlawfull to hold Communion with the Church of England In Answer to a Book Intituled A Modest Examination of that Resolution THE CASE OF Infant-Baptism In Five QUESTIONS I. Whether Infants are uncapable of Baptism II. Whether Infants are excluded from Baptism by Christ III. Whether it is lawful to separate from a Church which appointeth Infants to be Baptised IV. Whether it be the Duty of Christian Parents to bring their Children unto Baptism V. Whether it is lawful to Communicate with Believers who were Baptized in their Infancy LONDON Printed by T. Hodgkin for Tho. Basset at the George in Fleet-Street Benj. Tooke at the Ship in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1685. THE CASE OF Infant-Baptism The Previous Discourse THE better to prepare the mind of my Reader for what I shall say in this Discourse about Infant-Baptism I think it requisite to premise a short Introduction First Concerning the Original And Secondly Concerning the Nature of the Jewish Church Thirdly Concerning the initiatory Sacrament into it and the Persons that were capable of Initiation And Lastly Concerning the alteration of it from the Mosaic into the Christian Oeconomy or to express my self more plainly in the * * * Heb. 2. 5 6. Scripture-phrase concerning the alteration of the House of Moses into the House of Christ As for the Original of the Jewish Church it is to be referred unto Abraham the †††Rom. 4. 11. Father of the Faithful purely considered as a Church But if it be considered as a Common-wealth or as a Church under such a Political Regulation then it is to be referred unto Moses who was called even by Heathen Writers the * * * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sect. 7. Legislator of the Jews These two Considerations of the Jewish Church purely as a Church and as a Common-wealth or as a Church under such a mixture with a Common-wealth ought heedfully to be distinguished 1. Because there is ground for such a distinction in the nature
not use means to attract the Praeputium which the Jews did often to avoid Shame and Persecution in Gentile Countries odious and ridiculous to all other People upon the account of it and for this reason it would have been a mighty bar to the Progress of the Gospel had the Gentiles been to be initiated thereby Furthermore it alone was reckoned as a grievous burden by reason of the painful and bloody nature of it and for that Reason also was laid aside as being inconsistent with the free and easie nature of the Christian Religion for if Zipporah was so much offended at Moses and called him a bloody Husband upon the account of it we may well presume how much the Gentiles would have been offended at the Apostles and at their Doctrine upon the account thereof No Religious Rite could be more ungrateful to Flesh and Blood and therefore the Wisdom of our Lord is to be admired in changing of it into the easie and practicable Ceremony of Baptism which was of more universal significancy and which * * * Diabolus ipsas quoque res Sacramentorum divinorum idolorum mysteriis aemulatur tingit ipse quosdam utique credentes ac fideles suos caeterum si Numae superstitiones revolvamus nonne manifeste diabolus morositatem illam Judaicae legis imitatus est Tertull. de praescrip haeret c. 40. O nimium faciles Qui tristia crimina caedis tolli flumineâ posse putatis aquâ Pagans as Paganism was nothing but Judaism corrupted by the Devil practised as well as Jews Hitherto I have given the Reasons of altering the Jewish Oeconomy and of reforming of it into the Christian Church but then my undertaking obliges me to prove what before I observed that * * * Verissimum enim est quod vir doctissimus Hugo Broughtonus ad Danielem notavit Nullos à Christo institutos ritus novos c. Grotii opusc Tom. 3. p. 520. See Dr. Hammond in his discourse of the Baptizing of Infants Christ and his Apostles who were the Reformers of it did build with many of the old Materials and conformed their new house as much as they could after the Platform of the old This will appear from Baptism it self which was a Ceremony by which †††Seld. de jure l. 2. c. 2. de Synedr l. 1. c. 3. Lightfoot Horae Hebraicae p. 42. Hammond on Matth. 3. v. 1. and of the Baptizing of Infants Jacob Altingius dissert Philologica Septima de Proselytis Proselytes both Men Women and Children were initiated into the Jewish Church Though it were but a mere humane Institution or as the dissenting Parties usually phrase it a mere humane Invention yet so much respect had our blessed Lord for the Ancient Orders and Customs of the Jewish Church that being obliged to lay by Circumcision for the reasons above mentioned he consecrated this instead of it to be the Sacrament of initiation into his Church and a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith So likewise the other Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was certainly of | | | Mede 1 Book disc 51. b. 11. Christian Sacrifice Grot. Opusc Tom. 3. p. 510. Dr. Cudworth on the Lord's Supper Thorndike of Religious Assembly chap. 10. Dr. Taylor 's great Exemplar p. 1. disc of Baptism Numb 11. Jewish Original as hath been shewed by many Learned Men and the Correspondence of the Bishops Presbyters and Deacons to the High-Priest Priests and Levites doth shew that the Subordination of the Christian Hierarchy is taken from the Jewish Church as St. Jerome observes in his Epistle to Evagrius Et ut sciamus traditiones Apostolicas sumptas de veteri Testamento quod Aaron filii ejus Levitae in Templo fuerunt hoc sibi Episcopi Presbyteri diaconi vendicent in Ecclesia What the High-Priest Priests and Levites were in the Temple that the Bishops Presbyters and Deacons are in the Church according to Apostolical Constitution taken from the Old Testament Hither also is to be referred that wonderful Correspondence betwixt the Priest-hood and Altar of the Jewish and Christian Church as it is most excellently discoursed by the Learned and Pious a a a In his Discourse concerning the one Altar and the one Priest-hood c. Mr. Dodwell To all which I may add many other Institutions as that of b b b Dr. Taylor his great Exemplar Disc of Baptism Numb 11. Lightfoot on 1 Cor. c. 5. v. 4. Excommunication and of the ritual performance of Ordination Confirmation and Absolution of Penitents by Imposition of Hands all which are of Jewish Original Likewise the Observation of the antient Love-Feasts before the Holy-Eucharist which for their extream inconvenience were taken away by the c c c Concil Sext. in Trull c. 24. Churches Authority the use of Festivals and Fasts the Institution of the Lord's day which is nothing but the Sabbath translated In a word the manifold and almost entire Correspondence of the Church in her publick Assemblies and Worship with the Synagogue as it is set forth by Mr. Thorndike in his Book of Religious Assemblies even to the formal use of the Hebrew-word d d d 1 Cor. 14. 16 Rom. 11. 36. Eph. 3. 21. Phil. 4. 20. 2 Tim. 1. 17. Heb. 23. 27. 1 Pet. 4. 11. Rev. 1. 16. Rev. 1. 7. Just Mart. Ap. 2. p. 97. Iren. l. 2. c. 10. Athan. Apol. ad const Imper. p. 683. Amen Hitherto I have made a short Previous Discourse concerning many useful Particulars As First Concerning the beginning or Original of the Jewish Church Secondly Concerning the Nature of it Thirdly Concerning the initiatory Sacrament into it and the Persons that were capable of Initiation And Lastly Concerning the alteration of it from the Legal into the Evangelical Dispensation wherein I have briefly shewed the true grounds of that blessed Reformation and how tender Christ and his Apostles were of Altering or rejecting more than was necessary or of receding more than was needful from the Jewish Church All these things I thought necessary to be discoursed as Praecognita to fit and prepare the Reader 's mind to understand the State of the Controversie about Infant-Baptism as it is proposed in these five Comprehensive Questions 1. Whether Infants are uncapable of Baptism 2. Whether they are excluded from Baptism by Christ 3. Whether it is lawful to separate from a Church which appointeth Infants to be Baptized 4. Whether it be the duty of Christian Parents to bring their Children unto Baptism 5. Whether it is lawful to Communicate with believers who were Baptized in their Infancy The whole merit of the Controversie about Infant-Baptism lies in these five Comprehensive Questions and I shall presently proceed to the stating of them after I have shew'd that Circumcision was a Sacrament of equal Significancy Force and Perfection with Baptism and that Baptism succeeded in the room of it not as the Antitype succeeded in the
most express places of Scripture And according to the Second Notion of it it is necessary that the Church should be governed by Bishops where they can be had distinct from and Superiour to Presbyters because this Government appears to be instituted by Christ from several Passages of the New Testament as they are explained by the uniform Practice of the Primitive Catholick Church Furthermore according to the first sort of necessity it is necessary to administer the Lords Supper because our Saviour hath commanded it in express words And accordlng to the Second which is also an indispensable degree of Necessity it is necessary to administer it to Women though they never were admitted to the Passover or Paschal Postcaenium which answered unto it because we can prove from some probable places of the New Testament that they were admitted unto it as those places are in equity to be interpreted by the universal Practice of the Ancient Primitive Church To conclude according to the former Notion of Necessity it is necessary to Baptize because our Lord hath commanded it in express words And according to the Second It is in like manner necessary to Baptize Infants because we can prove their Baptism from the Scope and Tenor of the Gospel and from many Passages of it as they are interpreted according to the Practice of the Ancient Primitive Church First From the Scope and Tenour of the Gospel which it is reasonable to presume would extend the Subject of Baptism as far as the Jewish Church extended the Subject both of Circumcision and Baptism And Secondly From many Passages in the Gospel whereof I shall recite some Except a Man be Born again of Water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God John 3. 5. Suffer the little Children to come unto me and forbid them not for of such is the Kingdom of God Mark 10. 14. The three noted places which inform us that the Apostles baptized whole Housholds as of Stephanas 1 Cor. 1. 16. Lydia Acts 16. 15. and the Jaylor Acts 16. 33. The Unbelieving Husband is Sanctified by the BELIEVING Wife and the unbelieving Wife is Sanctified by the BELIEVING Husband else were your Children Common or Unclean but now they are Holy 1 Cor. 7. 14. And were all Baptized unto Moses in the Cloud and in the Sea 1 Cor. 10. 2. The requisite necessity of Infant-Baptism may be fairly concluded from these Texts For the First seems to make Purgation by Water and * Alioquin meminerat dominicae desinitionis nisi quis nascatur ex Aquâ Spiritu non introibit in Regnum Dei id est non erit Sanctus ita omnis anima usque eo in Adam censetur donec in Christo recenseatur tamdiu immunda quamdiu recenseatur Tertull. de Animâ cap. 39 40. Pro hoc Ecclesia traditionem suscepit ab Apostolis etiam parvulis Baptismum dare quia essent in omnibus genuinae sordes peccati quae per aquam spiritum ablui deberent Orig. in Ep. ad Rom. l. 5. in Luc. Hom. 14. Propterea Baptizantur parvuli nisi enim quis renatus c. Omnes venit Christus per semetipsum salvare omnes inquam qui per eum renascuntur in Deum Infantes parvulos pueros juvenes seniores Irenaeâ—s l. 2. c. 39. the Spirit equally necessary for all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unless one be born again c. From the * * * Tertullian de Bapt. ait quidem dominus nolite prohibere illos ad me venire This he saith by way of Objection which shews that this Text was in his time understood for Infant-Baptism but then because it was his present Opinion that Cunctatio Baptismi praecipue circa parvulos was utilior he answers Veniant dum adolescunt veniant dum discunt dum quò veniant docentur Second it is reasonable to conclude that little Children are capable of Proselytism or entring into the Covenant after the Jewish manner when they are brought unto it by others First Because they are declared a a a Cassandr de Baptism Infant p 730. capable of the Kingdom of God And Secondly Because b b b Dr. Ham. of Infant-Baptism Sect. 22. 28. the Original words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from whence the Word Proselyte doth come From the Third it is reasonable to conclude That they Baptized the Children upon the Conversion of the Parents after the Custom of the Jewish Church c c c Tertul. de anima c. 39. Hinc enim Apostolus ex Sanctificato alterutro â—exu Sanctos procreari ait tam ex seminis praerogativâ quà m ex institutionis disciplinâ Caterum inquit immundi nascerentur quasi designatos tamen sanctitatis per hoc etiam salutis intelligi volens fidelium filios ut hujus spei pignora Matrimoniis quae retinenda censuerat patrocinaretur Alioqui meminerat From the Fourth it is reasonable to believe That the Foederal Holiness of Believers Children makes them Candidates for Baptism and gives them a right unto it And the Fifth makes it reasonable to conclude from the Type to the Antitype that if the Jews with their Children were umbratically Baptized unto Moses in the one that Christians and their Infants should be really Baptized in the other To all which may be added d d d Rom. 5. Psal 51. 5. Rom. 3. 23 24. Joh. 3. 5 6. 2 Cor. 15. 21 22. 2 Cor. 5 14 15. Job 14 4. Vid Voss hist Pelag. l. 2. part 2. other Texts which have been alledged by the Ancients both * * * Voss hist Pelag p. 1. Thes 6. before and after the Pelagian Controversie to prove the Baptism of Infants necessary to wash away their Original Sin which makes them obnoxious to Eternal Death I say the requisite necessity of Infant-Baptism might be fairly concluded from these Texts without the Tradition of the Ancient Church though without it I confess it could not be demonstrated from them as the Doctrines of the Trinity and the Deity of the Holy Ghost may be fairly and sufficiently proved from those Texts which the Orthodox bring for them without Ancient Tradition though without it they could not be demonstrated from them because they do not assert it in express words But then as those Texts in Conjunction with Tradition do put those Doctrines out of all reasonable doubt So do the other which I have cited in Conjunction with the Practice of the Ancient Church put the requisite necessity of Infant-Baptism out of Question because the Church in the next Age unto the Apostles practiced Infant-Baptism as an Apostolical Tradition and by consequence as an Institution of Christ In like manner as the Intrinsecal Arguments taken from the Style Sanctity Dignity and Efficacy of the Holy Scriptures and the perpetual Analogy and Conformity of the several Books contained in them are by themselves but
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
probably even amongst those of the Apostolical Age it self There are those indeed that would make that Father the first that brought in the use of this Ceremony into the Church having receiv'd it from the Montanists of whom he seems to have been particularly fond But the frequent and familiar mention he makes of the Sign of the Cross in many of his Books renders this Conjecture very improbable Tertullian tells us it was grown so much in use in his time that upon every motion of theirs at their going out and coming in when they put on their Garments or Shooes at the Bath or at Meals when they lighted up their Candles or went to Bed whatever almost they did in any part of their Conversation still they Frontem crucis signaculo terere Tertul. de Coron mil. would even wear out their Forheads with the Sign of the Cross which though he confesseth there was no express Law of Christ that had enjoyn'd it yet Tradition had Introduc'd Custom had Confirm'd and the Believers Faith had observ'd and maintain'd it This doth not look as if it had been a thing newly invented by Montanus and brought into the Church by Tertullian as being himself too great a Favourer of that Sect. Although were it thus indeed yet this sheweth that the Practice of it was receiv'd among the Faithful some Ages before the Depravation and Apostacy of the Romish Church But he is not our single Author in this matter for Origen who Flourisht not much above CC Homil. 2. in Psalm 38. Years after Christ and not XL Years after Tertullian makes mention of those who upon their Admission into the Church by Baptism were Sign'd with this Sign And St. Basil not much above one Hundred Years after him gives this usage the Venerable Title of an Ecclesiastical Constitution or fixt Law of the Church that had prevail'd from the Apostles Days that those who believed Basil de Spir. Sanct. cap. 27. in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ should be Signed with the Sign of the Cross But of all the Fathers St. Cyprian who was before St. Basil and very near if not contemporary with Tertullian himself not only speaks most Familiarly of the use of this Sign but hath some Expressions in this matter that would seem very harsh and unwarrantable now and yet the Authority of that Father hath sav'd him hitherto from being brought under question about it He tells us in one place that in fronte cruce signantur qui Dominum promerentur i. e. they are Sign'd in the Forehead with the Cross who are thought worthy of the Lord and in another place Omnia sacramenta peragit it Compleats every Sacrament and per crucem baptisma sanctificatur Baptism is Sanctified by the Cross I will not stand accountable for the Justifiableness of these passages were they to be allow'd no kind of Latitude but as to the purpose for which they are cited they seem pertinent enough that is to Argue the antiquity of this usage and that in the Sacrament of Baptism too the Phrase so frequently occurring in the writings of those ancient Fathers that fronte signati being sign'd in the Forehead seems a known and usual Periphrasis for being enter'd into the Faith of Christ and the Body of his Church by Baptism After all which what need I Instance in St. Cyril St. Ambrose or St. Austin Who sprinkle their writings with the Common mention of this Ceremony and oftentimes frame Arguments of the Obligation upon Christians to live as becomes them from this very badg they wear upon their Foreheads St. Austin wittily enough glorying in the Confidence of a Christian as to a Crucifi'd Saviour that he willingly imprints the Sign of it upon Nec nos pudet Crucifixi sed ubi pudoris signum est crucis ejus signum habemus August in Galat. 6. 14. that part of himself which is the proper seat of Blushing I shall only add this remark further that after the time wherein this Custom had been so Universally receiv'd into the Christian Church and some of the Fathers had so liberally exprest themselves in it we may observe that the first Christian Emperour Constantine the Great had his Directions probably from heaven it self to make this Sign the great Banner in his Wars with this Additional encouragement that by this he should overcome That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this Dream or Vision call it which we will for Histories mention it differently was from Heaven and a thing of great reality is Evident from the success of that Princes Arms under it The Authors of the Centuries allow a considerable Signification in that Sign as given him from Heaven as the future Standard he should fight under viz that God had admonisht him by that Sign of the Cross and the Motto added to it by this thou shalt overcome concerning the Cent. 4. cap. 13. Knowledg and Worship of the true God and of our Lord Jesus Christ in Memorial of which he took care to have it Painted on his Banner that it might be as the Symbol of the Christian Religion Now we would not suppose that our Blessed Lord would by so immediate a Revelation from Heaven Countenance such a Rite as this already receiv'd and made use of in the Church giving it to Constantine both as a Symbol of his Profession and Pledg of his future Victories if he had resented it before as Superstitious or any way unwarrantable This kind of Standard the Roman Emperours successively had born before them in their Warrs nay it is recorded that Julian himself probably from what he had made some former Observations Theodoret. Hist l. 3. c. 3. of could not forbear defending himself with this Sign upon a mighty fright he was seiz'd with while in the use of Magick Arts he went to have consulted with the Devil Orat. Cont. Julian This Nazianzen calls his craving aid and refuge of him whom he had Persecuted Which by the way might give us the modestly and caution of showing our selves too petulant against what it hath pleas'd our Lord Jesus in a Revelation from Heaven to give the Figure of and the Holy Spirit also to signalize sometimes by very renown'd miracles which those that consult Ecclesiastical Histories of best Authority cannot but be convinc'd of So that we find the use of it very ancient and the Effects of it very Memorable Casaubon himself no very fond Man of Rituals calls it Primitivae Ecclesiae Exercit. in Baronium Symbolum ejus fiduciae quam in Christo cruce ipsius passione ponebant a Symbol the Primitive Church used to denote that Confidence they had in Christ his Cross and Passion I confess it would be a fond thing to endeavour with some of the Romish Church to trace up the Antiquity of the Cross to the first Creation of Man and so all along downward to the Actual Death of our Blessed Lord. They can spy out the Cross in
there are many expressions in the Fathers that may seem more distant from that sense we are willing to take them in and we should be very loth to yield them up as the Authors or Defenders of some dangerous Opinions in the Church of Rome because some phrases of theirs in the rigour of them may be prest to a kind of meaning that may seem to favour them There is a necessary allowance to be given to some schemes of Speech and meaning of words or else we should be in a perpetual wrangle and dispute about them However there doth not need even this sort of Charity for this word dedicated upon which such weight of Argument hath been lay'd For as in all Authors it hath been variously used so is it properly enough apply'd in this Canon for the design for which it was used and the declaration is plain and intelligible enough to the candid and unprejudic'd mind The word dedication as they use it may properly enough signifie a Confirmation of our first dedication to God in Baptism and a declaration of what the Church thinks of the Person Baptiz'd what she doth expect from him and what Obligations he lieth under by his Baptism And as a medium of this declaration the sign of the Cross is made being as expressive as so many words what the Infant by his Baptism was design'd to the Apostle himself having comprehended the whole of Christianity under that term and denomination of the Cross Now that our Church did design this declarative dedication by the use of this sign and none other is very evident in that though the word dedicated is used in the explication of their sense in that Canon yet do they there refer to the words used in the Book of Common Prayer By comparing therefore the Canon and the Office for Baptism together the Canon directing to the Office and the Rubrick belonging to the Office directing to the Canon we may observe what stress is to be lai'd upon the word Dedicated that is how far they were from desâ—gning the same sort of immediate dedication that is made by Baptism and yet how by the Cross we may properly enough be said to be dedicated too As to the Sacrament of Baptism we are all agreed that by that we are dedicated to the Service of Christ and the Profession of his Gospel Now the Church of England both in the Rubrick and Canon do affirm and own that the Baptism is complete and the Child made a Member of Christ's Church before the Sign of the Cross is made use of or if upon occasion it should not be made use of at all It is expresly said We receive this Child into the Congregation of Christ's Flock and upon that do sign it with the Cross So that the Child is declar'd within the Congregation of Christ's Flock before the Sign of the Cross be apply'd to it Beside that in the Office for private Baptism where the Sign of the Cross is to be omitted we are directed not to doubt but that the Child so Baptiz'd is lawfully and sufficiently Baptiz'd the Canon confirming it that the Infant Baptiz'd is by vertue of Baptism before it be sign'd with the sign of the Cross receiv'd into the Congregation of Christ's Flock as a perfect Member thereof and not by any power ascribed unto the sign of the Cross If therefore we be dedicated in Baptism and the Baptism acknowledg'd complete and perfect before or without the use of this Sign the Church cannot be suppos'd ordaining so needless a repetition as this would be to dedicate in Baptism then to dedicate by the Cross again but that which they express by dedicated by the Cross must be something very distinct from that dedication which is in Baptism that is the one is a sign of dedication the other is the dedication it self as distinct the one from the other as the Sign of Admission is from Admission it self and a signification of a priviledg is from an Instituted means of Grace It seems a thing decent and seasonable enough that when it hath pleas'd God to receive a person into his favour and given him the Seal of it that the Church should give him the right hand of fellowship solemnly declaring and testifying he is receiv'd into her Communion by giving him the Badg of our Common Religion So that this is plainly no other than a Declaration the Church makes of what the Person Baptiz'd is admitted to what engagement he lies under when capable of making a visible Profession It expresseth what hath been done in Baptism which is indeed not a sign of Dedication but Dedication it self as I have already said as also the Cross is not dedication itself but a sign of it Which Declaration is therefore made in the name of the Church in the plural number We Receive this Child into the Congregation of Christs Flock and do sign him with the sign of the Cross c. Whereas in Baptism the Minister as the immediate agent of Christ by whom he is Authoriz'd and Commissionated in the singular number as in his Name pronounceth it I Baptize thee in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost As to what is urg'd above that nothing can be more immediate than in the present dedicating act to use the sign and express the dedicating signification they must know it might have been more immediate either to have plac'd this Sign before Baptism or to have appointed some such form of words in applying it as the Church of Rome doth or if it had been pretended to be of divine Institution and necessary to make the Sacrament of Baptism compleat and perfect And thus I presume I have run through the main debate betwixt us and our dissenting brethren as to this Case Wherein I hope I have neither misrepresented their objections nor let pass any material strength in them nor in replying to them used any one provoking or offensive word Would they but read and weigh this and the other Discourses of this kind with the same calmness of temper and study of mutual agreement wherewith I dare say they have been written I cannot think there would abide upon their Spirits so vehement a desire for the removal of these things but it might rather issue in a peaceable and happy closure in the use of what hath been made appear was so innocently taken up and might with so much advantage under the encouragement of serious and good Men be still retained I do not indeed think any of our Church so fond of this Ceremony particularly but that if the laying it aside might turn to as great Edification in the Church as the serious use of it might be emprov'd to our Governours would easily enough condescend to such an overture Instances of this have been given in our Age and our Presbyterian-Brethren in their Address to the Bishops do own that divers Reverend Bishops and Doctors in a Paper in Print Except
Pap. of the Presbyt p. 31. before these unhappy Wars began yielded to the laying aside of the Cross and making many material alterations c. They have not those apprehensions of these things that they are unalterable and obligatory upon all Christians as such or that the laying them aside for the bringing about some greater good would be offensive to God I would to God our Brethren at least would but meet us thus far as to throw off those Superstitious prejudices they may have conceiv'd against them and think that as the laying them aside would not be displeasing to God so the use of them cannot be so neither Forgive the expression of Superstitious prejudices For I must suppose we put too high a value upon indifferent rites when we think that either the use or rejection of them will recommend us to God unless there be other accidents of obedience or disobedience to Authority that will alter the Case Otherwise the Imagination we may have of pleasing or displeasing God in any of these things must look like what the Greeks express Superstition by I mean a causeless dread of God It is a passage 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Calvin that it is equally Superstitious to condemn things indifferent as unholy and to command them as if they were holy It is infinitely In 2 Praecept a nobler Conquest over our selves a proper regaining that Christian liberty to which we are redeemed and would be of far happier consequence to the Church of God to possess our selves with such notions of God and of indifferent things as to believe we cannot recommend our selves to him in the least measure by scrupling what he hath interpos'd no Command to make them either Obligatory or Unlawful FINIS A Catalogue of the several Cases c. 1. A Persuasive to Communion with the Church of England 2. A Resolution of some Cases of Conscience which respect Church-Communion 3. The case of Indifferent things used in the Worship of God proposed and Stated by considering these Questions c. 4. A Discourse about Edification 5. 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 unlawfull to hold Communion with the Church of England 6. A Letter to Anonymus in Answer to his three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about Church-Communion 7. Certain Cases of Conscience resolved concerning the Lawfulness of joyning with Forms of Prayer in Publick Worship In two Parts 8. The Case of mixt Communion Whether it be Lawfull to Separate from a Church upon the account of promiscuous Congregations and mixt Communions 9. An Answer to the Dissenters Objections against the Common Prayers and some other parts of Divine Service prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England 10. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament stated and resolved c. The first Part. 11. Certain Cases of Conscience c. The second Part. 12. A Discourse of Profiting by Sermons and of going to hear where men think they can profit most 13. A serious Exhortation with some important Advices relating to the late Cases about Conformity recommended to the present Dissenters from the Church of England 14. An Argument for Union taken from the true interest of those Dissenters in England who profess and call themselves Protestants 15. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament Stated and Resolved The second Part. 16. The Case of â—ay-Communion with the Church of England considered 17. A Persuasive to frequent Communion c. 18. A Defence of the Resolution of this Case viz. Whether the Church of England 's Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it unlawfull to hold Communion with the Church of England In Answer to a Book intituled A Modest Examination of that Resolution 19. The Case of compelling Men to the Holy Sacrament 1. A Discourse about the charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion before Luther 2. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is meant by it and what Tradition is to be received and what Tradition is to be rejected 3. The difference of the Case between the Separation of Protestants from the Church of Rome and the Separation of Dissenters from the Church of England 4. The Protestant Resolution of Faith c. 5. A Discourse concerning a Guide in matters of Faith c. 6. A Discourse concerning Invocation of Saints 7. A Discourse concerning the Unity of the Catholick Church maintained in the Church of England A PERSUASIVE TO Frequent Communion IN THE HOLY SACRAMENT OF THE Lords Supper LONDON Printed by M. Flesher for Brabazon Aylmer at the Three Pigeons against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill and William Rogers at the Sun against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleetstreet 1684. A PERSUASIVE TO FREQUENT COMMUNION MY design in this Argument is from the Consideration of the Nature of this Sacrament of the Lord's Supper and of the perpetual Use of it to the end of the World to awaken Men to a sense of their Duty and the great Obligation which lies upon them to the more frequent receiving of it And there is the greater need to make men sensible of their Duty in this particular because in this last Age by the unwary Discourses of some concerning the Nature of this Sacrament and the danger of receiving it unworthily such doubts and fears have been raised in the minds of Men as utterly to deter many and in a great measure to discourage almost the generality of Christians from the use of it to the great prejudice and danger of Mens Souls and the visible abatement of Piety by the gross neglect of so excellent a means of our growth and improvement in it and to the mighty scandal of our Religion by the general disuse and contempt of so plain and solemn an Institution of our blessed Lord and Saviour Therefore I shall take occasion as briefly and clearly as I can to treat of these four Points First Of the Perpetuity of this Institution this the Apostle signifies when he saith that by eating this 1 Cor. 11. 26. Bread and drinking this Cup we do shew the Lord's Death till he come Secondly Of the Obligation that lies upon all Christians to a frequent observance of this Institution this is signified in that Expression of the Apostle As often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup which Expression considered and compared together with the practice of the Primitive Church does imply an Obligation upon Christians to the frequent receiving of this Sacrament Thirdly I shall endeavour to satisfie the Objections and Scruples which have been raised in the Minds of Men and particularly of many devout and sincere Christians to their great discouragement from their receiving this Sacrament at least so frequently as they ought which Objections are chiefly grounded upon what the Apostle says Wherefore whosoever
the rest 5. The Sacrament was Instituted to be a means of Receiving the benefits of his Death and Passion and a Pledge to assure us thereof If we do but Consider what invaluable Blessings we expect to receive by our worthy partaking of the Consecrated Bread and Wine at the Table of our Lord such as the forgiveness of all our Sins the plentiful Communications of his Grace and Spirit and a Right and Title to Eternal Life we can't think Kneeling an Unmeet and Unbecoming Gesture in the Act of Receiving the Outward Signs and Pledges of this Inward and Invisible Grace If a Graceful Hearty sense of Gods infinite mercy through the Merits and Sufferings of his Son and of the manifold rich benefits which our Lord hath purchased with his most Precious Blood if a mind deeply Humbled under the sense of our own Guilt and Unworthiness to Receive any mercy at all from the Hands of our Creator and Soveraign Lord whom we have by numberless and Heinous Crimes so highly provok't and incensed against us If such an inward temper and disposition of Soul becomes us at this Holy Feast which I think no Man will deny then surely the most Humble and reverential Gesture of our Body will become us too Why should not a Submissive Lowly deportment of Body sute with this Solemnity as well as a Humble Lowly Mind And this is that which our Church Declares See the Declaration at the end of the Communion-Service in the Book of Common Prayer to be the end and design of her Injunction in requiring all her Communicants to Kneel viz. for a Signification of an Humble and Grateful acknowledgment of the Benefits of Christ therein given to all worthy Receivers 6. They who urge Sitting as necessary and the only agreeable Gesture to the Nature of the Lord's Supper because it 's the Common Table-Gesture must make the Sacrament either the same with an Ordinary and Common Feast or onely like it in some respects and unlike it in others as every like is not the same To make it the same is directly to unhallow and prophane the Ordinance it is to Eat and Drink unworthily not discerning 1 Cor 11 29. the Lord's Body as St. Paul charges the Corinthians For it 's clear from that Discourse of the Apostle that their not distinguishing between the Lord's Supper and a Common Meal or Supper was their great fault which he sharply reproves them for as that which render'd them unworthy Communicants Which will appear to any that will take the pains to examine Vid. 20 21 22. and compare them with 33 34. the matter If the Lord's Supper be not the same with an Ordinary Feast how comes it to pass that the same Gesture must be necessarily used at both If they differ in their whole nature then that which is agreeable to the nature of the one must be Repugnant to the nature of the other If they agree in some respects only and differ in others but not in their whole nature then Kneeling may be as proper and sutable in some respects as Sitting is in others For though the Civil Custom of a Table-Gesture be allowed to strike some stroke in a Spiritual Ordinance where there is Eating and Drinking yet other respects in the Lord's Supper have a stroke too and that the greatest if we duly weigh and consider the ends of its Institution which I have already described And if upon such Examination it appear that Kneeling or an adoring Gesture holds fitting Correspondence with the principal respects and ends of the Lord's Supper then the Banquetting Gesture though Lawful and Sutable in some less respects must and ought in reason to give place at least it ought not to be Insisted on as the onely agreeable and necessary Gesture without which we cannot worthily Communicate Whatsoever Gesture answers the principal respects and ends of this Holy Feast best Sutes to its Nature and consequently ought in reason to be best esteemed of and sway more with us than any other if we will wholly guide our selves by the Nature of the thing And that Kneeling or an adoring posture doth best answer the Nature and Ends of the Sacrament I think is clear and undenyable if the account I have given of the Sacrament be good I am sure howsoever that there is no reason why Sitting should justle out Kneeling as Sinful and Unsutable to the Nature of this Holy Ordinance Let Mr. Cartwright a Learned Advocate Annot. in Luk. 22. 14. for Nonconformists be heard in this matter and determine it A Man must not saith he refuse to Receive the Sacrament Kneeling when he cannot have it otherwise 4. The Primitive Church and Ancient Fathers had no such notion of the necessity of a Table-Gesture as is maintained and urged by Dissenters at present which will appear from those Names and Titles they gave to this Holy Feast And First I observe from the Learned Mr. Mede that for the space of 200 years after Christ there is not the least mention made of the name Table in any of their Writings They call the place on which Can. Apost 2. St. Ignat. in 3 Epistles and Philad Trallen Eph. Justin Mart. Irenaeus the Consecrated Elements stood the Altar and the Eucharist An Oblation and a Sacrifice because at this Solemnity they did Commemorate and Represent that Sacrifice which Christ once offered on the Cross for the Sins of the World Now the Eucharist conceived under the Notion of a Sacrifice and the place on which it was offered of an Altar doth not necessarily require a Table-Gesture there is not that strict Connexion and Relation between an Altar or a Sacrifice and a Common Table-Gesture as is conceived to be between a Feast or Table and a Feast or Table-Gesture 2. The Primitive Christians and Ancient Fathers of the Church did not entertain any such conceits about the necessity of a Common Table-Gesture as our Dissenters do As that Kneeling or an adoring Gesture is against Dispute against Kneeling Arg. 1. p. 6. p. 26 27 28 31 37. the Dignity of Guests and Debarrs us the Priviledges and Prerogatives of the Lord's Table such as Social admittance and Social Entertainment that it is against the purpose of Christ whose intention was to Dignify us by Setting us at his Table and much more of this Nature and to this effect Now the Primitive Church little dreamt of this Dignity and Priviledge of Communicants of this purpose of Christ and of this kind of Fellowship and Familiarity with him as the Phrases they use and the August and Venerable Titles they give the Holy Sacrament even when they consider it as a Feast and Supper and speak of the Table on which it was Celebrated plainly demonstrate They call it as St. Paul doth the Lord's Supper the Kingly Royal and most Divine Supper which Import Deference Distance and Respect on our Parts the Dreadful Sacrifice the Venerable and Vnbloody Sacrifice the Wonderful and
Council or Mr. Prynne Apol. for lib. to tender Con. p. 75. printed 1662. Synod from Christs institution of the Lords Supper till above 1460 years after his Ascension Nor any one Rubrick in all the Liturgies Writings of the Fathers or Missals Breviaries Offices Pontificals Ceremonials of the Church of Rome it self that I could either find upon my best search or any other yet produced enjoyning Communicants to Kneel in the Act of Receiving Thus that inquisitive Gentleman assure us and in the same place backs his Report with the authority of the Reverend Dr. Burgesse whom he stiles the best and eminentest Champion for this Gesture of Bneeling of all others The sum of what Dr. Burgesse delivers concerning this matter is Dr. Burg. Ans rejoy to the Reply to Dr. Mort. gen Defence p. 478 478. this That Kneeling in the Act of Receiving was never any instituted Ceremony of the Church of Rome nor is at this day For this he cites Bellarmine and Durantus who make no mention of Kneeling in the Act of Receiving though they treat particularly of the Mass and the Ceremonies of the Roman Church Instead of this Durantus affirms That the Sacrament ought to be taken Standing and proves it also And so doth the Pope himself receive it Missal Rom. in the Rubr. set out by Pius V. when he celebrates and every Priest by order of the mass-Mass-book is to partake standing reverently at the Altar and not Kneeling there The people which receive not as well as they that do receive are reverently to bow themselves to the Sacrament not when they receive it but when the Priest doth elevate the Patin or Chalice for Adoration or when the Host is carried to any sick person or in Procession And this is that Adoration which was first brought in by Pope Honorius the Third and not any Kneeling or Adoration in the Act of Receiving For these are the very words of the Decree That the Priests should frequently instruct their People to bow themselves reverently at the Elevation of the Host when Mass was Celebrated and Ut Sacerdotes frequenter doceant Plebem suam ut cum Elevatur Hostia Salutaris quisque se reverenter inclinet Idem faciens quum eam deferat Praesbyter ad infirmum Decret Greg. l. 3. tit 41. c. 10. in like manner when the Priest carried it abroad to the sick At the last the Doctor thus resolves upon the Question That Kneeling in the Act of Receiving was never any instituted Ceremony of the Church of Rome nor ever used when it was used by them for Adoration to the Sacrament as is falsly believed and talked of by many And with him a learned Papist agrees who in a Book purposely written for the Adoration of the Sacrament declareth Espencaeus de Adorat Euch. lib. 2. c. 16. That it is not much material in what Gesture it is performed whether Sitting Standing Lying or Kneeling And in the same place further informs us That the Kneeling Gesture had not obtained in the Church of Lyons in the year 1555 and when some endeavoured to obtrude it upon that Metropolis a stop was put to their proceeding by the Royal Authority Nothing needs more be said to give satisfaction in this matter and fix us when we have added what a very great man of our own Church now living hath delivered in writing viz. Although Dean of St. Paul's Unreasonableness of Separation p. 15. Kneeling at the Elevation of the Host be strictly required by the Roman Church yet in the Act of Recâ—iving it is not as manifestly appears by the Popes manner of Receiving which is not Kneeling but either Sitting as it was in Bonaventure 's time or after the fashion of sitting or a little leaning upon his Throne as he doth ot this day And now the matter is brought to a fine pass How outragious have the Adversaries of Kneeling been in their Clamours against the Church of England for appointing a Gesture that was first introduced and used by Antichrist and Idolaters and when the matter comes to be sifted not the least proof is produced to make good the Accusation but on the other side it appears that those two Postures which are so earnestly contended for by our Dissenting Brethren are the very Postures which the man of sin uses at this day himself in the Act of Receiving the Holy Sacrament When he celebrates Mass himself and upon some other Vid. Dr. Falk lib. Ecles p. 484 485. particular and solemn occasions he stands but generally and ordinarily he receives sitting or in a posture very like it And this Dr. Burg. lawful of Kneel p. 67. I desire may be remembred against we come to discourse on the second Head viz. that Kneeling is not therefore sinful because it is used by Idolaters If any should after all put the Question thus to me When is it say you that Kneeling first commenced in the World by whose means and upon what reasons my plain Answer is I cannot cerntainly tell nor can I find any account thereof among the ancient Records But this is no Argument against but rather for the ancient and universal use of this Gesture Novel Customs are easily traced to their Originals but generally the most ancient Usages of every Country are without Father and Mother and we cannot tell from what source they are derived 2. I am so far from thinking as our Dissenting Brethren do that Kneeling owes its birth to the Doctrine of Transubstantiation that I verily believe the contrary viz. Kneeling or an adoring posture used by the ancient Christians in the Act of Receiving did very much among other things conduce to beget and nurse up in the minds of Superstitious and Phanciful men a Conceit that Christ was really and corporally present at the Sacrament which Notion by subtil and inquisitive heads was in a little time improved and explained after this manner That after the Elements of Bread and Wine were consecrated they were thereby changed into the substance of Christs natural Body and Bloud This I am sure of that the Patrons of Transubstantiation did very early make use of this very Argument to prove that they taught and believed no more than what the Primitive Bishops and Christians did For what else could they intend or mean say they by that extraordinary Reverence and Devotion which they manifested when they received the dreadful Mysteries as they called the Bread and Wine if they were bare and empty signs onely and not changed into the very Body and Bloud of Christ which is in effect the very Argument used by Cassa enim videtur tot hominum huic Sacramento ministrantium vel adorantium veneranda sedulitas nisi ipsius Sacramenti longe major crederetur quam videretur veritas utilitas cum ergo exterius quasi nulla sint quibus tanta impenduntur venerationis obsequia aut insensati sumus aut ad intima mittimus magna salutis mysteria Alger
to Idolatry But here a few things must be premised to prevent Cavils and Mistakes 1. I take it for granted that indifferent things may be lawfully See the Case of Indifferent Things used in the Worship of God This is supposed in the present Question for otherwise it would be sinful in us to Kneel whether that Gesture had been ever used or abused by Idolaters or no. 2. I grant that the Worship of God is to be preserved pure See Dr. Fal. lib. Eccles p. 443. from all sinful Mixtures and Defilements whatsoever whether of Idolatry or Superstition and that things otherwise indifferent which either in the design of them that use them or in their own present tendency do directly promote or propagate such Corruptions do in that case become things unlawful To follow Idolaters in what they think or do amiss to follow them generally in what they do without other reason than onely the liking we have to the Pattern of their Example which liking doth intimate a more universal approbation than is allowable in these cases I think with the Reverend Mr. Hooker Conformity Hook Ecles Pol. l. 4. p. 165. with Idolaters is evil and blame-worthy in any Christian Church But excepting these Cases it is not sinful or blame-worthy in any Society of Christians to agree with Idolaters in Opinion or Practice and to use the same Rites which they abuse And consequently our Church is not to be blamed or charged with Idolatry for her Agreement with the Church of Rome in using the same Ceremonies unless it can be proved that the Church of England doth abuse the said Ceremonies to sinful ends or that the Ceremonies used and appointed by our Church naturally tend to promote the Corruptions practised in the Church of Rome and were ill designed or that she did not follow the general Rules of Gods Word the Directions of the Holy Ghost in appointing and enjoyning the use of Ceremonies as being godly comely profitable but overlooking all this had an eye purely to the Example of Idolatrous Papists in what they did amiss Now this I am sure can never be made good against our Church who hath sufficiently vindicated her self by the open declarations she hath printed to the World from all accusations of this nature Let but any man consult the Articles of Religion Art 20. Art 34. Canon 18. the Preface to the Book of Common-Prayer just after the Act of Vniformity the two excellent Discourses that follow it concening the Service of the Church and Ceremonies and the Reasons she hath publisht at the end of the Communion-service for enjoyning her Communicants to receive Kneeling I say let any man peruse these and he will receive ample satisfaction that our Governours in Church and State in appointing the use of Ceremonies did not steer by the Example of Idolaters nor enjoyn them out of any ill design or to any ill ends but were conducted by the light of Gods Word the Rules of Prudence and Charity the Example of the holy Apostles and the Practice of pure Antiquity These things being premised I proceed to prove this Assertion That it is not sinful to use such Things and Rites as either have been or are notoriously abused to Idolatry Or which is all one That to Kneel in the Act of Receiving according to the custom of the Church of England is not therefore sinful because it hath been and is notoriously abused to Idolatry for these Reasons 1. In general No abuse of any Gesture though it be in the most manifest Idolatry doth render that Gesture simply evil and for ever after unlawful to be used in the Worship of God upon that account For the abuse of a thing supposes the lawful use of it and if any thing otherwise lawful becomes sinful by an abuse of it then it 's plain that it is not in its own nature sinful but by accident and with respect to somewhat else This is clear from Scripture for if Rites and Ceremonies after they have been abused by Idolaters become absolutely evil and unlawful to be used at all then the Jews sinned in offering Sacrifice erecting Altars burning Incense to the God of Heaven bowing down themselves before him wearing a Linnen Garment in the time of Divine Worship and observing other Things and Rites which the Heathens observed in the Worship of their false Gods No say the Dissenters we except all such Rites as were commanded or approved of by God and such are all those fore-mentioned But say I it 's a silly Exception and avails nothing For if the abuse of a thing to Idolatry makes it absolutely sinful and unlawful to be used at all then it 's impossible to destroy that Relation and what hath been once abused must ever remain so that is an infinite power can't undo what hath been done and clear it from ever having been abused And therefore I conclude from the Command and Approbation of God that a bare Conformity with Idolaters in using those Rites in the Worship of the true God which they practice in the Worship of Idols is not simply sinful or formal Idolatry for if it had God had obliged the Children of Israel by his express Command to commit sin and to do what he strictly and severely prohibited in other places In truth such a Position would plainly make God the Author of sin 2. This Position That the Idolatrous abuse of any thing renders the use of it sinful to all that know it is attended with very mischievous consequences and effects First It intrenches greatly upon Christian liberty as dear to our Dissenting Brethren as the Apple of their Eyes and I wonder they are not sensible of it At other times they affirm that no earthly power can rightly restrain the use of those things which God hath left free and indifferent and that those things which otherwise are lawful become sinful when imposed and enjoyned by lawful Authority and yet these very men give that power to Strangers both Heathens and Papists which they take away from their own rightful Princes and lawful Superiours An Idolater may yoke them when a Protestant Prince must not touch them And what more heavy and intolerable Yoke can be clapt on our necks than this That another mans abuse of any thing to Idolatry though in its own nature indifferent and left free by God renders the use of it sinful Whether this be not a violation of Christian Liberty let St. Paul determine who tells us that to the pure all things are pure and affirms it lawful to eat of such things as had been offered to Idols and to eat whatsoever was 1 Cor. 10. 25 27 28 29. sold in the shambles And what reason is there why a Gesture should be more defiled by Idolaters than Meat which they had offered up in Sacrifice to Idols and why should one be sinful and idolatrous to use and not the other Certainly St. Paul would never have granted them
sav'd or no being the perfection of all other marks and signs of our assurance of Life and Glory When we are so Edifi'd and Religious we are certain that we are justifi'd and adopted accepted and treated like the Sons of God that we are in Christ and have our wedding-Garments on our proper qualifications for the state of Heaven Such an honest Principle as this makes our Prayers to be heard our Devotions to be regarded our Hopes to be strengthened This is the great intention of Christianity the Holy of Holys of our Temple and all Religion Such a Religion as this being so strongly enjoyn'd and zealously taught in our Church no ways disguis'd by a dress of Phrases or corrupted into soft and lushious sences we need not complain for want of the means of Grace and Edification we need not cross the Seas or run into private corners for it 't is nigh us even at our Doors in the establish'd Government of the Church of England Some use to say that brown Bread and the Gospel was very good Fare but now they are grown as nice and delicate about Religion and Edification as about Sawces and Dresses Thanks be to God 't is a knowing Age I wish it was as good The Corruption of it doth not arise for want of Knowledge and Information if it doth the Cure is near let them value that Church and Government that hath all things in it sufficient to Mens Salvation Let them not think so light of Schism and speaking evil of the Rule and Discipline in our Church so fit and necessary to the preservation of Christianity let them not cry up other Pauls and Apollos's any other Teachers making Divisions among us than this Church hath allowed for their Edification which is so far from Spiritual Edification that it calls such Men Carnal For the desire 1 Cor. 3. 4. of any other Nourishment beside such plain Food is Spiritual Pride and Wantonness and they pamper their Fancies while they starve their Judgments Let us therefore stick to such a manly Religion one great part of which is to preserve Obedience Peace and Order and say of our Church that teacheth it as the Disciples of its Author Thou art he and we seek for no other whither shall we go thou hast the Words of Eternal Life She hath all things in her that are necessary for the perfecting of Ephes 4. 12 13. the Saints for the Work of the Ministry for the Edifying of the Body till we all come in the Vnity of the Faith and of the Knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ. That such a Religion as this in our Church is pleasing both to God and Man we have the Testimony of an Apostle He that Rom. 14. 18. in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God and approv'd of Men. FINIS BOOKS Printed for FINCHAM GARDINER A Continuation and Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness of Separation in Answer to Mr. Baxter and Mr. Lob c. Considerations of present use considering the Danger resulting from the change of our Church-Government 1. A Perswasive to Communion with the Church of England 2. A Resolution of some Cases of Conscience which respect Church-Communion 3. The Case of Indifferent things used in the Worship of God proposed and Stated by considering these Questions c. 4. A Discourse about Edification 5. The Resolution of this Case of Conscience Whether the Church of Englands Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it unlawful to hold Communion with the Church of England 6. A Letter to Anonymus in answer to his three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about Church-Communion 7. Certain Cases of Conscience resolved concerning the Lawfulness of joyning with Forms of Prayer in Publick Worship In two Parts 8. The Case of mixt Communion Whether it be Lawful to Separate from a Church upon the account of promiscuous Congregations and mixt Communions 9. An Answer to the Dissenters Objections against the Common Prayers and some other parts of Divine Service prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England 10. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament stated and resolved c. The first Part. 11. Certain Cases of Conscience c. The second Part. 12. A Discourse of Profiting by Sermons and of going to hear where men think they can profit most 13. A serious Exhortation with some important Advices relating to the late Cases about Conformity recommended to the present Dissenters from the Church of England 14. An Argument for Union taken from the true interest of those Dissenters in England who profess and call themselves Protestants 15. The Case of Kneeling c. The Second Part. 16. Some Considerations about the Case of Scandal or giving Offence to Weak Brethren 17. The Case of Infant-Baptism in Five Questions c. 1. A Discourse about the charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion before Luther 2. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is meant by it and what Tradition is to be received and what Tradition is to be rejected 3. The difference of the Case between the Separation of Protestants from the Church of Rome and the Separation of Dissenters from the Church of England 4. The Protestant Resolution of Faith c. A Discourse OF PROFITING BY SERMONS AND Of going to HEAR where men think they can PROFIT most LONDON Printed for T. Basset at the George in Fleet-street B. Tooke at the Ship in St. Pauls Church-yard F. Gardiner at the White-Horse in Ludgate-street 1684. A Discourse Of PROFITING by SERMONS AS there is nothing that all good Men more desire nothing that they more heartily seek and endeavour than a Happy re-union of all those with us who have Rent themselves from us which we should reckon to be one of the highest blessings that God can now bestow upon us so there is little hope of seeing those desires and endeavours satisfied while the smallest Scruples seem a sufficient cause to hinder many People from joyning with us But among all the Reasons that I have heard alledged for leaving our Churches this seems to me to be the weakest and most ungrounded That our Ministers are unedifying Preachers for they cannot profit by their Sermons Which I am informed is so commonly objected and some lay such weight upon it and it carries with it such a shew of Piety it being a very commendable thing to desire to be the better for every Sermon one hears that it is thought to be worth some body's pains to try to remove this unjust Prejudice which too many have entertained against the most instructive and useful Sermons that perhaps are preached any where in the Christian World This may seem too high a commendation but it is the Judgment of more indifferent persons then we are on either side of
of Popery 2. The Introduction of the Protestant Religion in greater Purity and Perfection than the Church of England is in their Opinion as yet arrived at or can probably attain to by vertue of its present Constitution If there be amongst them Men disturbed in their Understandings by the heat of Enthusiasm if there be amongst them any Men whose Wisdom is sensual and worldly who presumptuously make Heaven stoop to Earth and conceal their private and secular Designs under the venerable name of Pure Religion I do not concern my self with them in this Persuasive to Vnion The former cannot and the later will not be convinc'd For there is no Ear so deaf as that which Interest hath stopp'd And there is a great deal of earnest Truth suggested in the Jocular Speech of James the fifth of Scotland who when his Treasurer desired liberty to be plain with him * * * Melvil 's Memoirs p. 2. drew out his Sword and said merrily to him I shall slay thee if thou speak against my profit The First Branch of the first or Subordinate End of The first Branch of the first End of the Dissenters viz. Vnion in a National Church the Dissenters is the Establishing of themselves as a National Church This is either designed by All of them or by a Party which believeth it self to be most sober and must numerous and most likely to prevail over the rest so far at least as to become the State-Party For All of them to expect to be united in one Uniform Body is to hope not only against the Grounds of Hope but of Possibility For the Parties are very many and very differing or rather very contrary and they cannot frame amongst them any common Scheme in which their Assents can be united What Communion for Example sake can the Presbyterians have with Arians Socinians Anabaptists Fifth-Monarchy-Men Sensual Millenaries Behmenists Familists Seekers Antinomians Ranters Sabbatarians Quakers Muggletonians Sweet-Singers These may associate in a Caravan but cannot joyn in the Communion of a Church Such a Church would be like the Family of Errour and her Daughters described in Mr. Spencer's Fairy-Queen of which none were alike unless in this that they were all deform'd And how shal the Christians of this present Church be disposed of to their just satisfaction They will never Incorporate with such a Medly of Religions and they are such both for their Quality and their number as not to be beneath a very serious Consideration For the Prevalent Party there seemeth to be both Reason and Experience against their hopes of Establishing themselves as a National Church These Reasons amongst others have moved me to entertain this Persuasion concerning them First Such a Party not maintaining Episcopal Government which hath obtained here from the Times of the Britains who in the Apostolical Age received the Christian Religion and which is so agreeable to the Scheme of the Monarchy It is not probable that they shall easily procure an exchange of it for a newer Model by the general consent of Church or State I may add the Body of the People of England whose Genius renders them tenacious of their Antient Customs Again All the Parties amongst us have of late declared for Mutual Forbearance They cannot therefore be consistent with themselves if they frame such a National Constitution by which any Man who Dissents from it shall be otherwise dealt with than by personal Conference which also he must have liberty not to admit if he be persuaded it is not fit or safe for him And such a Body without any other nerves for its strength and motion for the Encouragement of those who are Members of it and the Discouragement of those who refuse its Communion will not long hold together Nor hath it means in it sufficient for the Ends to which it is designed And indeed by this means the Spiritual Power of Excommunication will be rendred of none Effect For what Punishment what Shame what Check will it be to Cross and Perverse Men if being shut out of the National Church they may with open Arms and with Applause due to real Converts be received into this or the other particular Congregation as it best suiteth with their good likeing Furthermore it is commonly said that since the Presbyterians have gathered Churches out of Churches there are not many true and proper Disciplinarians in England If it be so then Independency is amongst Dissenters the prevalent side and I know not how a National Church can be made up of Separate Independent Churches for each Congregation is a Church by it self and hath besides the general Covenant of Baptism a particular Church-Covenant and therefore it is difficult to imagine how all of them can be by any Coherence of the Parts united into one intire Society But be it supposed that the Disciplinarians are of all Parties the most numerous and prevalent yet Experience sheweth how hard a Work it is for all of them to form themselves into a Church of England In the late times of Publick disquiet they had great Power they had in humane appearance fair and promising Opportunities and yet there grew up at their Roots another Party which in conclusion over-dropped them and brought their Interest into a sensible decay it being the nature of every Faction upon Victory obtain'd over their Common Adversary to subdivide In the Year 1640 * * * July 17. 1640. Whitelock's Memorials p. 45. The Commons had a debate about a new form of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction And they agreed that every Shire should be a several Diocess That there should be constituted in each Shire a Presbytery of Twelve Divines with a President as a Bishop over them That this President with the Assistance of some of the Presbyters should Ordain Suspend Deprive Degrade Excommunicate That there should be a Diocesan Synod once a Year and each third Year a National Synod A while after * * * A. 1644. Id. ibid. p. 117. it was voted by them that to have a Presbytery in the Church was according to the Word of God Many other Steps were made in favour of the Discipline The common-prayer-Common-Prayer-Book was removed an Assembly of Divines was Established Their Directory was introduced they were united in the Bond of a solemn League and Covenant There was sent up * * * Iâ— Sept. 15. 1646. Diurnal p. 1313. from the County of Lancaster a Petition signed with 12000 Hands for the settling of Classes in those parts A Petition of the like importance was framed by divers of the Common-Council of London They seemed Whitlock's Memoirs p. 187. nigh the gaining of their Point yet they widely missed of it There was in the Assembly it self a ferment of Dissension Mr. Sympson and some others favoured an Independent Mr. Selden and some of his Admirers an Erastian Interest There was a Party in the Nation who were then called Dissenting Brethren and to these the Directory was as offensive as
the Canons and Liturgy had been to those of the Discipline They drew up Reasons * * * Id. ib. p. 116. A. 44. against the Directory of Church Government by Presbyters They afterwards Printed an open Remonstrance against Presbytery of which the Assembly complain'd to Ib. A. 45. p. 189. the House as of a Scandalous Libel And there were those who Reproach'd the Presbyterians in the same Phrases in which they had given vent to their displeasure against the Liturgy of the Church of England The Ministers of Lancashire * * * Harm Consent p. 20. complain'd concerning them That they had compared the Covenant to the Alcoran of the Turks and Mass of the Papists and service-Service-book of the Prelates As likewise that they said it was a Brazen-Serpent fit to be broken in pieces and ground to Powder rather than that Men should fall down and Worship it Amongst the Disciplinarians some were confident of Success One of them * * * Mr. S. Symp. in Serm. of Reform A. 1643. p. 29. for he was not then gone over to the Part of the Independents expressed his assurance in these most unbecoming Words before the Commons It will said he bring such a Blot on God as He shall never wipe out if your poor Prayers should be turn'd into your own bosoms that Prayer for Reformation A Speech not fit to have been repeated if it were not necessary to learn Sobriety of Wisdom from the Remembrances of Extravagance in former Times Others accknowledg'd their hopes but did not dissemble their Fears Six years ago said a person eminent * * * D. John Arr. in Ser. call'd The Great Wonder c. before the Commons A. 1646. p. 36. amongst them after this Parliament had sate a while it was generally believ'd that the Woman the Church was fallen into her Travel but she continues still in pain Insomuch as they begin to think she hath not gone her full time and earnestly desire she may because they fear nothing more than an abortive Reformation Others did openly confess that their hopes were not answer'd and that the State of Religion was much declined The Ministers of the Province of London * * * Testim to Truth of Jesus Christ subscribed Dec. 14. 1647. p 31. used upon this occasion these passionate words Instead of a Reformation we may say with Sighs what our Enemies said of us heretofore with scorn we have a Deformation in Religion Those Independents who adher'd to that part of the House which joyned with the Army prevailed for a Season but they also were disturb'd by those who went under the Names of Lilburnists Levellers Agitators * * * See Hist of Indep 2 part p 168. Then likewise Gerard Wynstanly * * * In Mystof Godlin c. Anno. 1649. Wynst in Saints Paradise C. 5. p. 54. c. publish'd the Principles of Quakerism discoursing or rather repeating the Dreams of his Imagination in such Expressions as these If you look for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ you must know that the Spirit within the Flesh is the Jesus Christ Every Man hath the light of the Father within himself which is the Mighty Man Christ Jesus Then Enthusiasm excited in part by the common pretence of an extraordinary Light revealed as of a suddain in those days in England brake forth into open distraction Then Joseph Salmon a present Member of the Army publish'd his Blasphemies and defended his Immoralities He justify'd himself and those of his way saying * * * Whitl Memoirs A 1649. p. 430. That it was God who did Swear in them and that it was their Liberty to keep Company with Women for their Lust Wyke his Disciple * * * Id. ibid. kissed a Soldier three times and said I breath the Spirit of God into thee Salmon himself printed a Pamphlet call'd a Rout in which he set forth his villainous self as the Christ of God saying * * * Salmon 's Rout. in Pref. and p. 10 11 c. I am willing to become Sin for you though the Lord in me knows no Sin We love to sweat drops of Bloud under all mens offences We shall see of the Travel of our Souls Enthusiasm tho' not in this rankness of it was now openly favour'd by Cromwell himself who together with six Soldiers prayed and preached at Whitehal * * * On Sund. after East day Ann. 1649. H. of Indep part 2. p. 153. His own temper was warmed with fits of Enthusiasm * * * See View of the late Troubles p. 366. And he confess'd it to a Person of Condition †††E. M. I. C. from whom I receiv'd it as did others yet living that he pray'd according to extraordinary Impulse And that not feeling such Impulse which he call'd Supernatural he did forbear to pray oftentimes for several days together In Process of time his House of Commons and he himself were publickly disturb'd by that wild Spirit in the rasing of which they had been so unhappily instrumental A Quaker came to the door of the House * * * Whitl Memoirs A. 1654 p. 592. and drew his Sword and cut those nigh him and said He was inspir'd by the Holy Spirit to kill every Man who sate in that Convention And he himself was not only conspir'd against by those who call'd themselves the Free and Well-affected People of England * * * See their Declar. in A. 1655. in Whilt Me. p. 606. but openly bespattered by the Ink of the Quakers in several Pamphlets * * * See Ed. Burroughs Trumpet of the Lord sounded p. 2. A. 56. and by their Clamours affronted in his own Chappel where before his face they gave bold interruption to his Preachers †††Whilt Memoirs p. 62. 4. Other Historical Memorials might be here produced relating to the hopeful Rise and mighty Progress and equal Declension of the Disciplinarian Party But in such cases I choose rather to take off my Pen than to lean too heard upon it Yet the nature of my Argument did necessarily lead me to the former Remarks and if useful Truth smarts let Guilt suffer a Cure and not kick against the Charitable Reporter In Sum the longer the Church of England was dissettled the greater daily grew the confusion and the division of Sects was multiplyed not unlike to that of Winds in the Mariners Compass in which Artists have increas'd the Partitions from four to two and thirty Insomuch that the very Distractions which were among us did in some measure prepare the way for the return of the King and the Restitution of the Church men finding no other common Bottom on which the Interests of Religion and civil Peace might be established Now if the Dissenters could not then when so fair Opportunities were in their hands carry on their cause to any tolerable Settlement much less
variety of Cases in Humane Affairs I pray from my Heart for the bettering but I dread the tinkering of Government The Conclusion IF then Dissenters are not likely to obtain their Ends of Establishing themselves of rooting out of Popery and promoting pure Religion by overthrowing the Church of England the Inference is natural they ought both in Prudence and Christianity to endeavour after Vnion with it They will it may be say to me Can Men be persuaded two contrary ways Can they both Assent and Dissent And whilst they secretly Dissent would you force them into an Hypocritical Compliance I Answer thus First Though a Man cannot at the same time wholly Assent and Dissent yet there are means for the rectifying of a false persuasion and he may upon good Grounds change his Mind Secondly No Man's Mind can beforced for it is beyond the reach of Humane Power Thirdly Good Governours do not use Severity to force Men to dissemble their Minds and to make them Hypocrites but to move them after a Tryal of fair means to greater consideration I am not concerned in the Emblem of the Persian Dervi * * * Tavern Pers Trav. l. 4. c. 6. p. 155 156. who whilst they go about their Office of teaching the Law to the People carry a great Club in their hands But neither do I think that the best way to remove pernitious error from Men is never to give them any disturbance in it I have two things only to recommend first to the consideration and then to the practice of such as Dissent First This is a time of Prosecution and a time of Adversity is a proper time for Consideration and Consideration is a means to make us hold fast that which is good and reject that which is evil I beseech you make such advantage of this Juncture Sit down and think once more of the Nature of this Church Confer with the Guids of the National Religion read without prejudice the Books commended by them to you Peruse seriously the Books which Authority hath set forth Some who have spoken against them have by their own confession never read them Examine and Judge Many of your Scruples have arisen from what you have heard and read they would not have otherwise been ingendred in your Minds Hear and Read for your Information as well as your entanglement Secondly Do as much as you can do Do as much as the Dissenters who are most eminent for Learning Piety Preaching Writing Experience and Fame sometimes actually do They have owned our Communion to be lawful * * * See Lawf of hearing the publick Ministry c. by Mr. Nye Mr. Robinson c. and Mr. Corbet's Non-Conformists Pâ—ea for Lay-Communion They have received the Communion kneeling They have bred up Children to the Ministry of this Church They have joyned in the Liturgy They have been Married according to the Form of it Nay one who assisted in making the Directory would have his own Daughter in those times be Married in the way of the Book of Common-Prayer * * * Mr. Marshall in Hist of Indep 1 part p. 80. Do as the antient Non-conformists did who would not separate though they feared to Subscribe Who wrote with such Zeal against those of the Separation that Mr. Hildersham was called * * * See Dr. Willit's Epistle Dedicatory before his Harm on 1 Sam. Schismaticorum Qui vulgo Brownistae malleum The Maul of the Brownists Do more for the Peace of God's Church than for a Vote or Office or Fear of Legal Penalty Come as Christians to the Sacrament and not as Politicians Those who have so done yet break the unity of the Church are said to use the Arts of Jesuits and to be without all excuse by a Dissenter * * * Vox Clam Sect. 6. p. 49 50 c. who writes with commendable temper Do constantly what you do upon occasion No Preaching or Praying which is better liked can ballance the evil of Separation from a Church which imposeth no terms of Communion which are sinful For Peace sake let that be more constant in which your Conscience alloweth occasional exercise A Member who joyns himself to any established Church and also to any Churches which are set up not as legal Supplements of it but as Forts against it seems to be a kind of Wooden Legg if I may represent so grave a matter by so light a Similitude He is tyed on and taken off at pleasure he is not as by natural Ligaments and Nerves knit to such Ecclesiasticrl Bodies If all would do constantly what they can in Conscience do sometimes they would create a better Opinion of themselves in the Governours and move them to all due favour and hinder all the destructive breaches amongst us For the remain of other Dissenters would be so inconsiderable as to abide in the Body of the Nation as ill humors thrown off the extream parts from which there may arise some little pain but no mortal danger Now the God of Peace grant Peace to us always by all fit means The END A SERIOUS EXHORTATION With some Important Advices Relating to the late Cases about CONFORMITY Recommended to the Present Dissenters From the CHVRCH of ENGLAND LONDON Printed for T. Basset at the George in Fleet-street B. Tooke at the Ship in St. Paul's Church-yard and F. Gardiner at the White Horse in Ludgate-street 1684. Books Printed for FINCHAM GARDINER A Continuation and Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Stilling fleet 's Unreasonableness of Separation in Answer to Mr. Baxter and Mr. Lob c. Considerations of present use considering the Danger Resulting from the Change of our Church-Government 1. A Perswasive to Communion with the Church of England 2. A Resolution of some Cases of Conscience which respect Church-Communion 3. The Case of Indifferent things used in the Worship of God Proposed and Stated by considering these Questions c. 4. A Discourse about Edification 5. 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 6. A Letter to Anonymus in Answer to his Three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about Church-Communion 7. Certain Cases of Conscience resolved concerning the Lawfulness of joyning with Forms of Prayer in Publick Worship In two Parts 8. The Case of mixt Communion Whether it be Lawful to separate from a Church upon the Account of promiscuous Congregations and Mixt Communions 9. An Answer to the Dissenters Objections against the Common Prayers and some other Parts of Divine Service Prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England 10. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament Stated and Resolved c. The first Part. 11. Certain Cases of Conscience c. The Second Part. 12. A Discourse of Profiting by Sermons and of going to hear where Men think they can profit most 13. A
serious Exhortation with some Important Advices Relating to the late Cases about Conformity Recommended to the Present Dissenters from the Church of England 1. A Discourse about the charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion before Luther 2. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is meant by it and what Tradition is to be Received and what Tradition is to be Rejected A Serious EXHORTATION With some Important Advices c. Recommended to the Dissenters from the Church of England THE offering friendly Advice and Counsel especially in great and important Cases is tho often a Thankless yet a very Charitable Office a thing agreeable to the best Inclinations of Humane Nature and highly conducive to the Necessities of Men and consequently needs no Apology to introduce it We live 't is true in an ill-Natured and Censorious Age wherein 't is rare to find any one who will not take with the Left-hand what 's offered to them with the Right But I am not discouraged from this Attempt by the Peevishness and Frowardness of many that differ from us Remembring that all Honest Undertakings and such I am sure this is are under the more peculiar Conduct and Blessing of the Divine Providence which can and will succeed and prosper them to an happy Issue if Mens own Obstinacy and Perverseness do not put a Bar in the way to hinder it I do therefore beseech our Dissenting Brethren with all the earnestness that becomes a matter of so much Importance and with all the Kindness and Tenderness that becomes a Christian that they would suffer the VVord of Exhortation and duely weigh and consider the Requests and Advices that are here plainly laid before them which I hope will be found such as carry their own Light and Evidence along with them I. And First We beg of them to believe That they may be mistaken about those matters which are alledged as the Causes of their Separation This one would think were as needless as 't is a modest and reasonable Request For did ever any Man the Bishop of Rome excepted lay claim to Infallibility Do not the woeful Infirmities of Humane Nature the Weakness and Short-sightedness of our Understandings the daily Experience of our selves and the lamentable Failures we observe in others sufficiently convince us how prone we are to Error and Mistake But tho this be granted and owned on all hands yet in Practice we frequently find Men acting by other Measures For how many are there that in the most Controverted Cases bear up themselves with as much Confidence and Assurance censure others with as Magisterial a Boldness condemn the things enjoyned by our Church with as positive and peremptory a Determination as if they were infallibly sure that they are in the Right and all others in the Wrong that differ from them The early Prepossession of a contrary Opinion the powerful Prejudices of Education an implicite and unexamined Belief of what their Guides and Leaders teach them have a strange force upon the Minds of Men so that in effect they no more doubt of the Truth and Goodness of the Cause they are engaged in than they question the Articles of their Creed Wherefore I do once and again intreat them that laying aside all Pride Partiality and Self-conceit they would not think more highly of themselves and of their own way than they ought to think especially remembering that the Matters contended about are confessedly Disputable and that they cannot be ignorant that the Case seems otherwise to others who may at least be allowed to be as wise Men and as competent Judges as themselves Truth makes the easiest Entrance into modest and humble Minds The Meek will he guide in Judgment the Meek will he teach his way The Spirit of God never rests upon a Proud Man II. Secondly We beg of them that they would seriously and impartially weigh and consider as well what is said on the one side as on the other This is a piece of Justice that every one owes to Truth and which indeed every Man owes to himself that is not willing to be deceived To take up with Prejudices which Education or long Custom have instilled into him or wherein any other Arts or Methods have engaged him without strictly enquiring whether those Prejudices stand upon a firm Foundation is to see only on one side to bind up ones self in the Judgment or Opinion of any Man that is not Divinely-inspired and Infallible or pertinaciously to adhere to any Party of Men how plausible and specious soever their Pretences may be without examining their Grounds and endeavouring to know what is said against them is to choose a Persuasion at a peradventure and 't is great odds whether such a one be in the right In all Enquiries after Truth we ought to keep an Ear open for one side of the Controversie as well as the other and not to think we have done enough till without Favour or Prejudice and to the best of our Understandings we have heard tryed and judged the Reasons brought as well for as against it And till this be done I see not with what pretence of Reason Men can talk so much of their Scruples or plead for Favour on the account of their Dissatisfactions Consciences truly tender are willing and desirous to embrace all opportunities of Resolution are ready to kiss the Hand that would bring them better information and are not wont to neglect much less thrust from them the means that might ease them of their Doubts and Scruples We justly blame it in them of the Church of Rome that in a manner they resign up their Understandings to their Guides and Confessors and are not suffered to be truly acquained with the Protestant Principles and the Grounds and Reasons of the Reformation nor to Read any of the Books that are written for their Conviction without a special and peculiar Licence Whether our Brethren of the Separation be under any such Spiritual Discipline I know not sure I am it looks very odly that so many of them are no more concerned to understand the true State of the Church of England and the Nature and Reasons of her Constitutions that so few of them care to Confer with those that are able to Instruct them but Cry out They are satisfied already nay some of them to my knowledge when desired to propose their Scruples in order to the giving them satisfaction have plainly and absolutely refused to do it Little reason there is to believe that such Persons have ever Read and Examined what the Church of England has to say for her self Are there not many that not only Scruple but Rail at the Book of Common-Prayer that yet never heard it nor perhaps ever read it in all their Lives And if this be not to speak Evil of what they know not I cannot tell what is How many incomparable Books
Secession from us and professing you cannot joyn with us as Members and setting up Congregations of another Communion be more properly called Schism You gather Churches out of your Churches and set up Churches in an opposite way to our Churches and all this you do voluntarily and unwarrantably not having any sufficient cause for it And in the same Book they tell us of a Two-fold Schism Negative and Positive Negative when Men do peaceably and quietly withdraw from Communion with a Church not making a Head against that Church from which they are departed the other is when Persons so withdrawing do consociate and withdraw themselves into a distinct and opposite Body setting up a Church against a Church which say they Camero calls a Schism by way of Eminency and further tells us There are Four Causes that make a Separation from a Church lawful 1. When they that Separate are grievously and intollerably Persecuted 2. When the Church they Separate from is Heretical 3. When it is Idolatrous 4. When it is the Seat of Antichrist And where none of these four are found there the Separation is insufficient and Schism Now we are fully assured that none of these Four Causes can be justly charg'd upon our Congregations therefore you must not be displeased with us but with your selves if we blame you as guilty of positive Schism All which is as true now as it was then and as applicable to us and them as it was to them and their Dissenters Admit then there were some things in our Constitution that might be contrived to better purposes and that needed Amendment and Alteration yet I hope every Defect or supposed Corruption in a Church is not a sufficient ground for Separation or warrant enough to rend and tear the Church in pieces Let Mr. Calvin judge between us in this matter Institut lib. 4. Sect. 10 11 12. fol. 349. who says That wherever the Word of God is duely Preached and reverently attended to and the true use of the Sacraments kept up there is the plain Appearance of a true Church whose Authority no Man may safely despise or reject its Admonitions or resist its Counsels or set at nought its Discipline much less Separate from it and Violate its Unity for that our Lord has so great regard to the Communion of his Church that he accounts him an Apostate from his Religion who obstinately Separates from any Christian Society which keeps up the true Ministry of the Word and Sacraments that such a Separation is a denial of God and Christ and that it is a dangerous and pernicious Temptation so much as to think of Separating from such a Church the Communion whereof is never to be rejected so long as it continues in the true use of the Word and Sacraments though otherwise it be over-run with many Blemishes and Corrupons Which is as plain and full a Determination of the Case as if he had particularly designed it against the Doctrine and Practice of the Modern Dissenters from our Church IV. Fourthly We entreat them to Consider Whether it be pure Conscience and mere Zeal for the Honour of Religion and not very often Discontent or Trade and Interest that has the main stroke in keeping them from Communion with our Church Far be it from me to judge the Secrets of Mens Hearts or to fasten such a Charge on the whole Body of Dissenters yea I accuse not any particular Person but only desire they would lay their Hand upon their Hearts and deal impartially with themselves and say whether they stand clear before God in this matter And there is the more Reason to put Men upon this Enquiry not only because Secular Ends are very apt to mix with and shelter themselves under the shadow of Religion but because this has been an old Artifice made use of to promote Separation Thus the Donatists in the Primitive Times upheld their Separation from the Catholick Church and kept their Party fast together by Trading only within themselves by imploying none to Till their Grounds or be their Stewards but those that would be of their side nay and sometimes hiring Persons by large Sums of Money to be Baptiz'd into their Party as Crispin did the People of Mappalia And how evident the same Policy is among our Modern Vid. Aug. Epist 173. ad Crisp Quakers is too notorious to need either Proof or Observation Time was when it was made an Argument to prove Independency to be a Faction and not Edward's further Discovery p. 185. matter of Conscience because Needy broken decayed Men who knew not how to live and hoped to get something turned Independents and became Sticklers for it that some who had businesses Causes and Matters depending struck in with them and pleaded for them that so they might find Friends be sooner dispatched and fare better in their Causes that Ambitious Proud Covetous Men who had a mind to Offices places of profit about the Army Excise c. turned about to the Independents and were great Zealots for them Thus it was then and whether the same Leaven do not still spread and ferment and perhaps as much as ever there is just cause to suspect Whoever looks into the Trading part of this City and indeed of the whole Nation must needs be a very heedless and indiligent Observer if he do not take notice how Interests are formed and by what Methods Parties and Factions are kept up how many Thousands of the Poorer sort of Dissenters depend on this or that Man for their Work and consequently for their Livelihood and Subsistence how many depend upon others for their Trade and Custom whom accordingly these Men can readily Command and do produce to give Votes and increase Parties on all Publick Occasions and what little Encouragement any Man finds from them that once deserts them and comes over to the Church of England There is another thing that contributes not a little to this Jealousie and Suspicion that many of the Chiefest and most Stiff and Zealous of the Dissenting Party are they at least the immediate Descendants of those who in the late Evil-Times by Rapine and Violence shared among themselves the Revenues of the Church and the Patrimony of the Crown and are said still privately to keep on foot their Titles to them And if so what wonder if such Men look on themselves as obliged in point of Interest to widen Breaches foment Differences increase Factions and all this to Subvert and over-turn the Church of England being well assured they can never hope but over the Ruines of this Church to make way to their once sweet Possessions Let Men therefore impartially examine themselves and search whether a Worldly Spirit be not at the bottom of their Zeal and Stiffness These I confess are Designs too Base and Sordid to be owned above Board but be not Deceived God is not Mocked Man looks to the outward Appearance but God looks to the Heart V. Fifthly
Order hereunto they have upon all occasions strenuously promoted the Separation mixed themselves with our Dissenters put on every shape that they might the better follow the Common outcry against our Church as Popish and Antichristian spurring on the people to call for a more pure and spiritual way of worship and to Clamour for liberty and Toleration as wherein they well knew they themselves were like to have the greatest share and that having subverted all Order and beaten people out of all sober Principles they foresaw they must be necessitated at last to center in the Communion of the Romish Church This was a Trade they began betimes almost in the very Infancy of the Reformation Witness the Story of Faithful Commin a Dominican Fryer who passed under the notion of a Zealous Puritan and was much admired and followed by the People for his seeming Piety spiritual Gifts and Zeal against Popery But being apprehended Anno 1567. and accused for an Impostor was examined at large before the Queen and her Council and put under Bail when finding the Climat was like to be too hot for him and having by a cheat brought off his Bail and told his deluded followers that he was acquitted by her Majesty and the Council and warned of God to go beyond the Seas to instruct the Protestants there and that he would come again and having assured them that Spiritual Prayer was the chief Testimony of a true Protestant and that the set Form of Prayer in England was but the Mass Translated and having with abundance of extempore-Prayers and Tears squeezed out of them a Collection of a Hundred and Thirty Pounds for his Journey besides private Gifts away he goes for Rome and acquaints Pope Pius Quintus with what he had done and by what Methods and how odious he had made the Church of England to the Puritans and that it would be a stumbling-block to that Church while it was a Church Upon which the Pope commended and rewarded him with Two Thousand Ducates for his good Service All which particulars are Foxes and Fire-brandâ— Print 1680. p. 7. c. more fully made out from Secretary Cecil's Papers whose Memorials were lately brought to light Witness also that other passage concerning Thomas Heath a Jesuite who much about the same time was sent over into England to Act the same Part which he did not only by Preaching but by crying up Spiritual Prayers and running down all set Forms as being without any warrant from Scripture by Labouring to refine the Protestants as he called it and to take off all smacks of Ceremonies that in the least tended to the Romish Faith For all which he was mightily flocked after and admired every day more and more But Anno. 1568. he was discovered by a Letter that casually dropt out of his Pocket as he was Preaching in the Pulpit at Rochester importing that the Council of their Fraternity had sent him Collections and Instructions for carrying on the Work and that this way of dividing Protestants was the only way for the recalling Men back again to the Mother Church Hereupon he was examined by the Bishop of Rochester and did not much deny the main of the charge and upon the searching of his Lodgings there were found several Books fitted for his purpose as against Infant Baptism c. and in one of his Boots a Licence from the Fraternity of the Jesuites and a Bull of Pius Quintus giving him leave to preach what Doctrine that Society pleased for the dividing of the English Protestants or as he called them Hereticks The issue was that Heath was close Imprisoned set in the Pillory at the High Cross his Ears cut off his Nose slit his Fore-head branded and he condemned to perpetual Imprisonment but soon after he dyed suddenly being suspected to have poysoned himself The whole account hereof being published from the Authentick Register of the Church of Rochester The same Course we need not doubt the Papists held on in the succeeding times these being some of the main Directions which Contzen the Jesuit gives Polit. l. 2. c. 18. Sect. 6. for the reducing Popery into a Country that it be done under pretence of ease to tender Consciences and that Liberty be granted to that end and that as much use be made of the division of Enemies as of the agreement of Friends What a stroak they had in fomenting the differences and distractions that brought on the late Civil Wars and how active they were both in the Counsels and Proceedings of the Parliament Party the World needs not to be told at this time of day great numbers of them both Commanders and others serving in their Armies great industry was used to corrupt the Loyalty and Affection of those of that Religion and private promises and undertakings were made to them that if they would assist them against the King all the Laws made in Octob. 23. 1642. vid. Collect. of the Kings Works Part. 2. fol. 213. L' Historie des troubles c. p. 165. see the short view of the late troubles in England c. 43. p. 564. their prejudice should be Repealed as the late King of blessed Memory tells the World in one of his publick Declarations after the Victory at Edgehil Adding that tho some few of Eminent Abilities for Command and Conduct and of moderate and unfactious dispositions were employed in his Service yet we are confident that a far greater number of that Religion is in the Army of the Rebels than in our own And the King it seems had good reason to say so For as de Salmonet a Secular Priest who wrote in French a History of our late Civil Wars informs us in that very Fight at Edge-hill besides two Companies of Walloons and other Roman-Catholicks that served there that says he which did most surprize every Body was that several Popish Priests were found amongst the Dead that were slain on the Parliament side So plain is it that they served in their Armies were present at their Councils and upon all occasions mix'd with their Parties that they might widen the Breach beyond all recovery Thus was it then And about the See Dr. Stilling-fleet's Preface to the unreasonableness of Separation p. 20. c. time of the King 's coming in a Letter of Advice was written by Seignior Ballarini concerning the best way of Managing the Popish Interest in England upon his Majestie 's Restauration wherein it was advised especially to obstruct the Settlement of the Fundamental Constitutions of the Kingdom to set up the prosperous way of Fears and Jealousies of the King and Bishops to asperse the Bishops and Ministers of the Church of England and to represent its Doctrine and Worship as coming too near to the Church of Rome to second the Factious in promoting an Indulgence and to endeavour that the Trade and Treasure of the Nation might be engrossed between themselves and other discontented Parties And Mr. Coleman himself