the rest as any other member of the Congregation if they shall all sin scandalously either in the execution of their Office or in any other ordinary manner then the Congregation that chose themfreely hath as free power to depose them and to place others in their room if the Congregation shall erre either in choosing or deposing of her spiritual Officers then hath the Civil Magistrate alone power and authority to punish them for their fault to compel them to better choice or to defend against them those officers that without just causes they shall depose or deprive The same Doctrine is desended by Dr. Ames Medul Theol p. 1. cap. 35. 5. They hold that insufficient Ministers obtruded upon Churches were not to be acknowledged for Ministers and if their lawful Ministers were without just cause ejected by any Superiour Powers Engl. purit ch 2. pos 8. they did still retain the Right and Honour of being their Pastors They hold that the Congregation having once made choice of their Spiritual Officers unto whom they commit the Regiment of their Souls they ought not without just cause and that which is apparently warrantable by the word of God to discharge deprive or depose them but ought to live in all Canonical Obedience and Subjection unto them agreeable unto the word of God and if by permission of the civil Magistrate they shall by other Ecclesiastical Officers be suspended or deprived for any cause in their apprehension good and justifiable by the word of God then they hold it the bounden duty of the Congregation to be continual Suppliants to God and humble Suitors unto Civil Authority for the restauration of them unto their Administrations which if it cannot be obtained yet this much honour they are to give unto them as to acknowledge them unto the Death their Spiritual Guides and Governours though they be rigorously deprived of their Ministry and Service And Chap. 3. pos 9. They hold that the People of God ought not to acknowledge any such for their Pastors as are not able by Preaching to interpret and apply the word of God unto them aud therefore that no ignorant and Sole-reading Priests are to be reputed the Ministers of Jesus Christ who sendeth none into his Ministry and Service but such as he adorneth in some Measurewith Spiritual gifts and they cannot be perswaded that the faculty of reading in ones Mother Tongue the Scriptures c. which any ordinary Turk or Infidel hath can be called in any Congruity of Speech a Ministerial gift of Christ And posit 12. They hold that it is as great an injury to force a Congregation or Church to maintain as their Pastor with Tythes and such like Donations that Person that either is not able to instruct them or that refuseth in his own Person ordinarily to do it as to force a man to maintain one for his wife that either is not a Woman or that refuseth in her own person to do the dutios of a Wife unto him 6. They hold that the Holy Scriptures are a perfect Rule of Doctrine Worship Discipline and Ceremonies and that to add new Ceremonies of mens own invention was a breach of the second Commandment With this Mr. Parker begins his Book of Ecclesiastical polity that we are to deduce from Scripture all that concerns the Church of Christ Thus the Protestation We deny no Authority to the King in matters Ecclesiastical but only that which Christ Jesus the only head of the Church hath directly and precisely appropriated unto himself Protest pos 22. and hath denied to communicate to any other Creature or Creatures in the world for we hold that Christ alone is the Doctor of the Church in matters of Religion and that the word of Christ which he hath given unto his Church is of absolute perfection containing in it all parts of the true Religion both for substance and Ceremony and a perfect Direction in all Ecclesiastical matters whatsoever unto and from which it is not lawful for any Man or Angel to add or detract Thus Mr. Bradshaw in his Addition to the 12th Argument against Ceremonies argues All Inventions and Devises of man grounded only upon the will of man and not upon any necessity of Nature or Civility set apart to Gods outward Worship are contrary to the second Commandment These Ceremonies are such Ergo See more in the place 7. They held Ceremonies enjoyned by our Lyturgy unlawful The Cross in Baptism was condemned by all Mr. Parker and Mr. Bradshaw in particular wrote against it The Surplice was rejected by most Kneeling at the Lords Supper was disliked by all but yet thought Tolerable and that it might be submitted unto by some of the most Learned The Protestours declare themselves thus We refuse Obedience only to such Canons as require the performance of such Acts and Rites of Religion as are rejected and abandoned of all other Reformed Churches as Superstitious disorders Protest pos 21. such as are special Mysteries of the Romish Antichristian Idolatry such as have been controverted in the Church ever since the last breaking forth of the Light of the Gospel out of the Cloud of Popery in Luthers time such as all Protestant writers and defenders of our Faith beyond the Seas and most of our own Countrey-men have either in general or particular condemned as vain idle and unprofitable such as all the faithful and painful Pastors of this Realm and in a manner all States and Degrees of the same would be content were removed and swept out of the Church and for which few or none are zealous but the Prelates and their Adherents Mr. Bradshaw wrote Twelve Arguments against the Ceremonies with as much vehemency as any have done since 12 Gen. Arg. against Cerem Arg. 1 'T is Will VVorship therefore sinful Arg. 2. 'T is a sinful Compliance with the Papists in derogation from the honour of the Reformed Churches to use them Arg. 5. 'T is Schismatical maintaining differences at home and abroad when the Authors acknowledge the things imposed indifferent and that they might without sin or inconvenience be let alone Arg. 6. That it is Communicating with the Papists in Idolatrous and Superstitious worship especially those Papists that live amongst us and see how much we symbolize with them Arg. 9. Because these Ceremonies are Sacraments of humane institution Arg. 10. Because they that use them do thereby acknowledge homage to an usurped authority in the Church Arg. 12. Because they are the occasion of the damnation of great numbers viz. the Papists who are hardened by them and ignorant Protestants who place all their Religion in them and because the usual excuse for these and all other humane impositions which the Dr. also makes frequent use of is that they are not imposed as things necessary to Salvation but as matters of Order Decency and the like Mr. Bradshaw draws his Eleventh Argument from hence That the Ceremonies are therefore unlawfull because made
till his coming in the flesh Gal. 5.1 Acts 15.10 Gal. 4.1 2 3. John 1.17 Therefore esuch Ceremonies were utterly unnecessary since the full discovery of the Gospel yea they disparage the Gospel as if that was not plain and sufficiently apt to teach Faith or Holiness without their help And besides they take off mens minds from the Worship of God partly by pleasing their eyes and fancies with an external shew and partly by busying their thoughts about the meaning of them and how to improve them if they be serious in the use of them They also bring the People again into bondage and fill the Church with carnal Ordinances and beggarly institutions and men are sensibly taught to content themselves with outward forms and modes of Service and to think God is content with them also and further the use of the Surplice in Divine Service kept up too much resemblance betwixt our Ministers and the Priests of Rome and the ignorant might be tempted to think there was very little difference betwixt our Church and Rome seeing we came so near them in their Service and in the manner and circumstances of the Service also Nevertheless they accounted it not unlawful to have continued the use of the Surplice till the People were weaned from it and accordingly many did use it it being not in it self unlawful as the use of the Crosse was 3. Against Kneeling at the Lords Supper they pleaded that it should by no means have been retained in our Church being brought into the Church at first only upon the opinion of Transubstantiation and worshiping the Sacrament and very apt to continue the same opinion in the People It is also certain our Saviour neither used nor appointed that gesture nor gave his Church Authority to enjoyn any other then what he used as a standing precept for thereby he and his practice should be taxed as not using the most fit gesture nor is this gesture at all proper to this Ordinance but thwarteth the two main ends of it viz. Free Communion with Christ in the participation of his benefits and the Renewing of Love and Strengthning Communion among the People for it is a gesture of great awe reverence and distance not fit for Meditation on the promises or consideration of the death of Christ or the incomprehensible love that he manifested theerein Also by Kneeling the People were severed from each other and could not be at the Table many together very unlike to a feast of Love nay the presence of many would be an hindrance and not a furtherance of Affection and Devotion Both these inconveniencies were greatly increased when the People were forced to come up to the Table at the upper end of the Chancel and there to kneel before the rails a few at a time for they must come to but one side of the Table for this was much more unlike a Supper of Love betwixt Christ and his Spouse and betwixt fellow Members of the same body yet they accounted not this gesture in it self unlawful but that they who would might use it and it might be retained in the Church till the People could freely leave it off but that it was unfit to be imposed and purposely kept up much more to be enforced with the highest penalty upon those that were dissatisfied with it The Non-conformists were much strengthened in their dissatisfaction with the Established Church way because instead of obtaining any redress and reformation all the impositions were continued and things made worse and the imposers went backward rather then forward notwithstanding the Non-conformists increased in number both in Ministers and People and at length became a very considerable part of the Church whose complaints ought therefore to have been considered and redressed There is a passage in the 20th Aritic to be subscribed by all Ministers that the Church hath power in matters of Faith This the Non-Conformists disliked unless more explained Therefore the Parliament in the 13 Eliz. which established those Articles by Law caused that passage to be left out Bishop Laud confesseth that it was not to be found in the Original of the Articles of that year B. Laud's Speech in the Star Chamber viz 1570 yet the Bishop continued the passage in the Articles and required subscription to it Also that Parliament ennacted that if any Minister was admitted into our Church having other Ordination than what was established amongst us he should declare his Assent and subscribe to all the Articles of Religion which only concern the Confession of the True Christian Faith 13 Eliz. Cap. 12. and the Doctrine of the Sacraments By this they gave indulgence to those that were not satisfied with the Episcopal Ordination and could not subscribe to the 39 Artic. absolutely because the approbation of the Homilies and Book of Consecration with the fore-mentioned passage were included in them being content that they subscribed to the Doctrine of Faith Artic. 35.36 and of the Sacraments contained in the Articles but the Bishops would not allow this indulgence at least not long nor generally but urged absolute subscription to the great trouble of many Non-conformists Nor could any amendment of the Liturgy ever be procured but on the contrary some passages left out that reflected much on the Papists as that Petition in the Letany from the Tyranny of the Bishop of Rome good Lord deliver us and a whole Prayer in the office for Gun-powder Treason expung'd by B. Laud wherein it was said that the Religion of Papists is Rebellion their Faith faction and their practice the Murthering of Souls and Bodies Nor were any of the Ceremonies taken away or their imposition remitted but rather more added to them by the Bishops Cannons though not by Parliament The Cross in Baptism was confirmed and inforced Can. 30. Under K. James and the explication there given increased the suspition of the unlawfulness of it they also brought in bowing at the name of Jesus Can. 18. And their dipping of Children in Baptism turning the Communion Tables into Altars bowing towards them or towards the East for they agree not what it was they bowed toward were brought in by B. Laud and pressed with great Rigour though never established by Law In Q. Eliz. Reign they were content that Ministers Read the Service Book without declaring their judgment concerning it only it was said in the 39 Articles viz Artic. 36. That the Book of Consecration contained nothing that was in it self superstitious or ungodly But Arch Bishop Whitgift devised a subscription of his own and imposed it upon all to be ordained after that time which was at length turned into a Cannon Can. 36. Artic 2. In these words that the Book of Common Prayer and of Ordaining Bishops Priests and Deacons containeth nothing in it contrary to the Word of God and that it may Lawfully be used and that he himself will use the form in the said Book prescribed in publick Prayers and Administration of
the Sacraments and no other The Bishop knew that the Non-Conformists thought the Cross in Baptism prescribed in the Common Prayer Book unlawfull and against the Word of God and that some of them thought the order of Bishops unlawfull also and all of them the order of Deacons as prescribed by that Book and yet here they must subscribe not only that they will use the book and no other form in publick but that it contains nothing contrary to the Word of God This subscription was not only imposed on those that should hereafter be ordained but it is also decreed that no man shall be suffered to Preach or Catechize or be a Lecturer or read any Lecture in Divinity in the Universities Cathedral or Colligiate Churches or in City Market Town Church or Chappel whatsoever within this Realm unless he first subscribed to this Article with two others contained in this Cannon and by means hereof many worthy Ministers were quickly turned out of their Livings though the Lawyers generally declared that it was against the Laws of the Land that any man should be turned out of his Free-hold such as Ministers Livings are without an Act of Parliament and to make all sure they ordained Cannon 55 that Preachers before all Sermons Lectures or Homilies should only invite the people to pray naming a few heads of Prayer which respect the publick only and none concerning the people in particular so that now no other Prayer must be used in publick but those in the Service Book which made the Burthen more intolerable Moreover in this Book of Canons they ordain that Ministers shall admit none to the Lords Supper that will not kneel or that come not to the Prayers or that speak against the Book of Common Prayer or Ceremonies or the book of Consecration of Bishops Can. 27. c. Till they acknowledge their Fault in word or writing if they can That Fathers shall not be God-Fathers to their own Children nor so much as urged to be present at their Baptism In a word all that the Bishops knew that the Non-Conformists were dissatisfied with Can. 29. in the Service Book were established by these Cannons and they rigorously prosecuted upon them from that time viz 1603 to 1640. For the Government of the Church by Bishops and administration of that Government by Lay-Chancellours Commissaries c. in Q. Eliz. time the Governours were contented with a peaceable submission from the Non-Conformists but under K. James the Cannons fore-named enjoyned all Ministers to subscribe that there was nothing in the Book of Consecration of Bishops Priests and Deacons contrary to the Word of God And now B. Billson and B. Andrews pleaded for the Divine Right of Episcopacy and B. Laud imposed an Oath commonly called the Oath Caetera upon the Clergy whereby they should promise not to endeavour to alter the Government of the Church as it was established by Arch-bishops Bishops Deans c. And thus all the moderation that had been used by the former Bishops in pressing things scrupled was turned into the most rigorious imposition of them yea and of additions to them also as if Rohoboam's success should terrify no man from acting according to his answer to the People that he would add to their burthens and change their Whips into Scorpions and this leads to the next reason of the Dissent of those former Non-Conformists Rea. 6. The Tyrannical Imposition of the Lyturgy and all that belonged to it was a great means to increase their dissatisfaction There had been a passage in the Preface of the Common Prayer book that the first Reformers had gone as farr as they could in reforming the Church considering the times they lived in and they hoped those that came after them would as they better might do more And indeed this was the Ground of the submission and patience of the Non-Conformists viz a perswasion that the first Reformers at least the best of them did not intend their moddle as a ne plus ultra and therefore they still hoped that by Patience and peaceable endeavours things might by begrees be brought to a better pass accordingly they presented an admonition to the Parliament Anno 1570. And again a Petition to K. James called the Millinary Petition for ease and redress but alas as that passage of the Reformers is left out of the Preface to the service book so the expungers of it fixed a just contrary mark to themselves which they aim at to this day in all their proceedings viz that there was no necessity of any farther Reformation then what was established by Q. Eliz. and that all must be compelled to approve of that as sufficient and to submit to the Rules of it The better to prosecute this design they have ever laboured to set the Princes against the Non-conformists and themselves have used the Spiritual Sword chiefly against them they did what they could to prejudice that Excellent Princess Q. Eliz. against them so that in her Reign especially when Whitgift was Arch-Bishop the Non-Conformists were turned out of Universities as Dr Sampson Dean of Christs-Church in Oxford Mr Cartwright Margarite Professour at Cambridge and many others many were turned out of Livings some worthy men imprisoned and Mr John Vdall Minister of Kingston upon Thames was sentenced to dye for high Treason against the Queen in Defaming her Government which saith Dr Fuller was somewhat hard being but a remote consequence for all that was alledged against him was that in a Preface to a certain book he had sharply taxed the Remissness of the Bishops Government And now such was the Rigour of Prosecutions against the Non-Conformists and the remisness of Discipline toward the ignorant and scandalous both Ministers and People that it gave occasion to many to separate from and renounce the Church of England as no true Church who were then called Brownists when K. James came to the Crown the Bishops so quickly incensed him against the Dissenters that in the conference at Hampton-Court appointed on purpose to hear their exceptions he would scarce give them leave to speak he sent them away with taunts and threats and often declared that were men never so able and pious yet the Church had better want their labours then have her Orders broken by their Non-Conformity which maxime I am sorry to find Dr Stillingfleet to espouse Under K. Charles the 1st the Bishops had so wholly engaged the civil power in their cause that it was almost the only concern of the Government how to bring all the Non-Conformists in England to submit or to leave the Land and to bring Ireland to the same plat-form with England and to set up Bishops Lyturgies and Ceremonies in Scotland and now Ministers and People were driven many thousands into New-England Holland and other Forreign Parts they were suspended silenced deprived of their Livings imprisoned fined set in the Pillory stigmatized had their ears cut off banished into remote Islands and many
of men appointed by David by Divine inspiration for this work and so the manner and method also was appointed by God and Art and rules of Musick were then acceptable and part of the Ceremonial worship But there being such Offices nor such service appointed in the Christian Church this is no warrant for our Responses Neither do the Scriptures give any warrant or example for observing dayes as sacred in the honour of Saints Or of instituting new Offices in the Church or new Ceremonies of worship but on the contrary our Saviour declares that men worship in vain that teach for Doctriens the Commandements of men Matth. 15.9 It seems then That Decency and Order which men purposely devise to add significancy or comliness to gods worship is abominable in his sight he hath no need of mans service and therefore will accept of nothing but what is appointed and carried on by his own Spirit Neither do the Scriptures appoint or warrant any superiority of Bishops above ordinary Ministers at least not such as that they should have sole power of governing the Church The high Priests of old had no such power of the Priests as this Learned Doctor hath proved in his Irenicum They had some peculiar things appropriated to their office but were themselves subject to the Sanhedrim The Apostles were all of one Order and had no authority over each other and governed the Church only by consent Gal. 2.9 Nor is there any distinction made betwixt ordinary Ministers except what they see needful to make amongst themselves for the good of the Church This all our old Bishops acknowledged and therefore pleaded for Episcopacy only as an humane constitution And those who of late wrote for its Divine-right do yet the most learned of them acknowledge that it cannot be proved from Scripture unless perhaps from the angels of the Church of Asia which this Dr. hath solidly confuted It was alwaies objected to the Non-conformists that the Scriptures do not forbid those things though they do not command them But they replyed that the Non-command of any thing in Gods worship and Church is a prohibition except of those things only that occasionally become necessary or that are naturally necessary circumstances of such actions as are commanded for it would argue great imperfection in the Law if it should omit things that are constantly or generally necessary for the good of the Church And as Moses closed his Law with this command that none should adde or diminish it so Christ having given his Law to his Church and appointed Officers with power to make govern and cast members out of it as there was need without giving them liberty to adde or alter He also did virtually prohibit such additions or alterations till he shall come again and their Commission being only to teach baptize and to teach all that Christ commands to the end of the world Mat. 28.18.19 This doth sufficiently restrain them from making or teaching cammands of their own all their authority being grounded on that Commission 2. From Antiquity the Non-Conformists alledge that the primitive Churches for many hundred years had no stated Liturgies prescribing the words as well as method of worship Justin Martyr in his second Apoligy designedly gives an account of the Christian worship viz the order and method of praying preaching admitting of Members administring both Sacraments but hath no word of a prescribed form but he saith the Minister prayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he was able Tertullian giving the same account in his Apol. Cap. 39. saith likewise sine monitore quia de pectore oramus they prayed by heart and therefore had no prompter much less a book We read that Constantine the great Euseb de vit constant l. 4. cap 19.20 having abolished idolatry composed a form of Prayer for his Heathen Souldiers wherein t hey should pray to one God the Creatour of all things but we read of no form imposed on Christians There are indeed Lyturgies that goe under the names of the Apostle James Basil Chrysostome and Ambrose but they convince themselves to be forged by later men and so are an argument that there were no such things in the primitive times but when the Church was over-run with errours and superstitions it was appointed in Africa that the Ministers should either receive a form of Prayer from their Bishops Cansil Milevet 2 dum Can. 12. or shew their own Prayer to them for their approbation but this was above 400 years after Christ the usurpation of Bishops Lazines and ambition of Ministers ignorance and superstition in the people bred Liturgies and they grew up together Nor is their any mention of Responses in the Antient Church a superstitions story of a vision of Angels singing an Hymn in that manner by turns is pretended to be seen by Ignatius dead long before nor had the antient Church days holy to Saints for 300 years and upward we find only mention amongst them of Easter-day and yet that caused such division and contentions that it might have been a warning to after ages for contending about things that God hath not commanded The Apocryphal Books were indeed read in the Christian Church very antiently though they never were amongst the Jews but it was more excusable in them then in us because it was long e're the books of the Scripture especially the books of the New Testament were gathered into one Volumn or it was agreed among the Churches which were Canonical and which Apocryphal for some of the Apocryphal were read in some Churches as Canonical and some of the Canonical were by some Churches rejected The Cross in Baptism was so long unknown to the Church that it is hard to say when it came in though the sign of the Cross was commonly used amongst them upon their Cloaths in their Hats to distinguish them from Heathens and as a token that they were Christians the Montanists began to make a superstititious use of the Cross and so did many others soon after Constantine himself can scarce be excused if Eusebius be credited but that it was annexed to Baptism and made a symbole of mens embracing Christianity there is no record Kneeling at the Lords Supper was not enjoyned till transubstantion was established above 1200 years after Christ nor is any general example for it pretneded in former ages The Surplice was much Elder then the Cross in Baptism or kneeling at the Supper yet for 200 years and upwards there is no mention of it nor is it known when or how it came in many Rites Customs and Ceremonies were used in the Primitive Churches some being derived from the Jews some from the Heathens by the converts of both sorts yet not imposed upon others the Apostles Rule being yet observed that no man should judge another in meats or drinks Col. 2.16 Rom. 14. or in respect of an holy day i. e. the Jewish Festivals which were once of divine institution Nor did the
first Churches pretend to make new Officers or constitute any Government other then Christ appointed Presbyters and Deacons are the Church Officers which they owned indeed there is frequent mention of Bishops in Antient Authors but Augustine 400 years after Christ saith that a Bishop was but titulus honoris a name of honour given to one Minister above the rest but that they were all alike and his contemporary Hierome olim Ecclesiae Communi Presbyterorum concilio regebantur that Churches were governed by the common consent of the Presbytery and of the practise of his own time he saith quid facit Episcopus excepta ordinatione quod non facit Presbyter nothing but Ordination was appropriated to the Bishop the Presbyters did every thing else as well as he Jerom. Epist ad Evag. divers learned men never yet answered have proved that all antiquity acknowledged Bishops and Presbyters to be but one order of Ministers and our Dr thought it once impossible certainly to state what was the Government of the Primitive Church but this is certain that in Cyprians time Anna Christi 250 the Bishop did nothing in the Government without the consent of his Clergy and approbation of the people and to them Cyprian ascribeth even to the common people the cheif power of choosing and refusing their Bishops Epist 4. and of withdrawing from them that were unworthy so that all that hath been said in the defence or excuse of our prelacy with sole power of government administred by Lay-men is nothing to the purpose when we dispute whether Christ appointed or the Primitive Church had Bishops seeing all sides agree that That Church never had such Bishops and such Discipline or any Bishops at all but what were chosen by the Clergy and people for near a Thousand years 3. Nor do the Reformed Churches retain those things which our Non-conformists scruple They all wholy laid aside both the substance and the Form of the Roman service Their Lyturgie Responses short prayers repetitions Ceremonies and use of the Apocryphal writings also their Government and Discipline except the Lutherans who retain many of their Ceremonies and Holy-dayes with some of their errours in Doctrine The Protestants have generally composed short Lyturgies of their own containing some few forms of Prayer together with a Method of Publick worship and directions for Visitation of the sick c. But they neither put in things that may be serupled nor imposed forms of words on their Ministers as our Lytourgy doth in all Offices Publick and Private The Waldenses our first Reformers and a Noble race of Confessors and Martyrs governed themselves by the Common consent of their Pastours and Elders chosen out of the People Hist Waldens lib. 2. cap. 2. 4. as do all the Reformed Churches at this day except the Lutherans The Bohemians indeed and some Waldenses in Austria thought a Bishop necessary by Divine Institution but that he was to doe nothing in the Church of himself but all by the consent of the Presbyters Commend Exhort and witthe approbation of the people which is Cyprians Bishop not an English Prelate The Lutherans have their Superintendents or Bishops but by humane Constitution and such as deprive not the Ministers of their Office Now seeing Scripture Antiquity and the practise of all Reformed Churches doe so much favour their cause The Non-conformists thought they had a great deal of reason to persist in their desire of further Reformation in the Church of England and in their dissent from those things for which nothing material can be soberly pleaded but the command of the Magistrate So that all the blame of want of Perfect Reformation and of keeping up divisions in our own Church and turning its Ceesures against many of its best members is from age to age laid wholly upon the Kings and Parliaments by those who would yet be taken for the greatest maintainers of reverence of Authority CHAP. V. The Reasons of the present Non-conformists in Particular for their dissent THe Non-conformists of the present Age viz. such as cannot conform to the Lyturgy of the Church of England according to Act of Uniforty made 1662 have all the same reasons for their Non-conformity that their Predecessours had and some new ones peculiar to themselves for both all the same things in the Lyturgy and Government which were a burthen to their Fathers are imposed on them without the least abatement amendment or alteration and also new impositions are laid upon them to make the yoke more intollerable These are such as follow 1. That they were denyed all Reformation of the Lyturgy and Government of the Church It was now somewhat above an hundred years that there had been continued desires of amendment in the Lyturgy and Government but none could be obtained King James in the beginning of his Reign made a shew of hearing the Non-conformists objections in the Conference at Hampton-Court But the issue was only to make a greater pretence to enjoyn Conformity more strictly as having heard all their Reasons against it and found nothing worthy consideration in them In like manner the present Non-conformists were dealt with for as we are told in the Preface to the Act of Uniformity First some Divines both Conformists and Non-conformists were by Commission appointed to review the Service book and to make necessary amendments in it next a Convocation of the Conforming Clergy was called to re-view the book last of all his Majesty had seen and re-viewed what they had done and the issue of all this was that the Epistles and Gospels should be read in the new Translation and to amend two or three words which by the fault of the Printers had crept into the Book and spoiled the sence and nothing considerable and then the Book passed an Act of Parliament requiring more rigorous Conformity then ever before The Parliament not once reading the book but with an implicite faith as a Member of the House of Commons said passed and confirm'd under the highest penalties next to death it self that which they never saw nor examined And yet now the Reasons for Non-conformity were stronger then before There had been sufficient time to wean the people from the Modes and Ceremonies in dispute yea and the body of the people were now sufficiently weary of them and the greater number of Learned and pious Ministers desired they might be laid aside above all they had been laid aside about sixteen years and the people were well content nor was there any decay of knowledge or piety amongst them upon this alteration Now was there a fair occasion to have amended any thing amiss and for the Bishops to have there Non-conforming brethren gratified in any reasonable things who were now as considerable as themselves for Number and interest with the People and yet offered to consent to any reasonable terms of accomodation surely all this did neither encourage nor oblige the Non-conformists to submit to that new Act of Uniformity
2. But instead of amending any thing amiss or disliked in the Liturgy some things were added to make it more offensive viz Sundays are more expresly reckoned as Church-Feasts than in the former book the new book saith thus a Table of all the Feasts that are to be observed in the Church of England through the year all Sundays in the year The former book thus these holy days to be observed and no other all Sundays in the year The word Holy-day which was somewhat suspicious is now changed to Feast-day and Sundays put in the number of Feast-days without any distinction which makes it more evident that they are accounted but Church Festivals The 29 of September in the old book is appointed a Festival to Michael the Arch-Angel the new book adds and to all Angels so that this is a Festival in the honour of all the Angels as the First of Novemb. is in honour of all the Saints also two new Holy-days are added never before enjoyned by the former book viz St Pauls Conversion and St Barnabas Moreover in the book of Consecration several passages are added declaring Bishops to be a distinct order from the Presbyters and the 36th Artic. is appointed to be understood of this book herein they contradict the Law and the Judgment of all our first Reformers in K. Edw. and Q. Eliz. days and the very book of Consecration it self 3. Nevertheless all Ministers are to approve this book and that by a publick declaration in the Congregation when they first enter upon their Ministry in these words and no other I vid. Act. of unif Ann. 14 Can. 2. A B do here declare my unfeigned assent and consent to all and every thing contained and prescribed in and by the book entituled the book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church according to the use of the Church of England together with the Psalter of Psalms of David pointed as they are to be sung or said in Churches and the form or manner of making ordaining and consecrating of Bishops Priest and Deacons It is said in excuse of this imposition that it is only a consent to the use not an approbation of the truth and goodness of all contained in the book because the words immediate foregoing are that Ministers should declare their unfeigned assent and consent to the use of all things in that book contained and prescribed Be it so and that the words Assent and Consent signifie the same things after the manner of Lawyers though some doubt it and those words to the use c. are not expressed in the form of a Declaration which they ought to have been yet we must observe First That this was a further alteration of the Case of Conformity to make it more intollerable Q. Eliz. Act of Uniformity only required that Ministers should be bound to read the book of Common Prayer and no other Liturgies or forms of prayer in publick The Canons went further and did require they should subscribe at their Ordination before the Bishop that the book of Common Prayer and of Ordination hath nothing in it contrary to the word of God that it may be lawfully used and that he himself will use that and no other but this new Declaration is to be made publickly before the Congregation on forfeiture of their Ministry and place that so there may be no favour shewed to any Also it requireth unfeigned Assent and Consent which cannot mean less then an hearty approbation of the use of what is enjoyned which is much more then barely to judge that nothing is contrary to Gods word and that they may be Lawfully used This Assent and Consent is to be made to all and every thing contained in and prescribed by the book of Common Prayer c. and then the particulars are specified viz the Prayers the Administration of Sacraments and of other Rites and Ceremonies and the book of ordering Bishops Priests and Deacons and the Psalter or Psalms of David as they use to be said in the Church of England Here is nothing omitted of all those things the Non-Conformists used to object against some as unlawfull and others as inconvenient and not for edification yet now they must from their hearts allow the use of them each one in particular not omitting the corrupt translation of the Pslams contradicted by our own allowed Bibles which how they could do who long contended that many of these things ought to be reformed let all that have Conscience judg The Non-Conformists think no form of words could have been contrived more spitefully either to keep them from conforming or to make them lay wast their Consciences if they did conform besides that they know from the mouths of the compilers that they did design it for these ends that they might either root out every branch of Conformity out of mens judgments or every Non-Conformist out of the Church 4. The Act requires this Assent and Consent not only of all that should hereafter enter the Ministry but of all those likewise that were already Ministers and were either Pastours or Lecturers in any Congregation and this Declaration to be made together with the subscription hereafter to be mentioned by a certain day viz before the 24th of August Anno 1662 whereas it is generally known that the book of Common Prayer came not out of the press abroad till within two or three days of that said 24th of August so that it was impossible that it should be seen much more that it should be considered by half the Ministers in England before that day and those that were resolved to keep their Places did a great part of them subscribe before they had read the book which practise doth manifest a further design to root out all that made any Conscience of what they said or subscribed seeing they must doe it without consideration or loose their places however to devise and impose new Terms of Communion upon men that are in the quiet possession and practice of their ministry is very unjust and contrary to all peace and by this practise men shall never be at quiet for though they have conform'd to all things enjoyned they know not how soon a prevailing faction will enjoyn them more nor what that will be especially the things enjoyned in the Declaration and Subscription being such as was known before hand many of the Ministers in place could not subscribe to with safe Consciences It is apparent that their design was not the peace of the Church but to remove them out of the Church 5. It is further required that all should have Episcopal Ordination who should in any sort exercise the Ministry had this concerned only those that should thereafter come to be ordained it had been more tolerable though it would have been contrary to Q. Eliz. moderation and reflecting upon all other reformed Churches An. Eliz. 13. who have not Episcopal Ordination
disown and disparage that Reformation which they had been engaged in for twenty year and to make themselves transgressors to reproach their Brethren that were dead to disparage all the Providences of God in their behalf and to villifie the success of their own Ministry and the growth of Religion and Sobriety in the Nation which they had seen and been instruments of and moreover to engage them against all endeavor of Reformation for the future and all those principles which their pious Predecessors had delivered to them And therefore they think he that can do this is a servant of men and not of Christ They do not justifie all proceedings in the endeavours for Reformation never any such thing was attempted without many infirmities in the best and transvers designs in selfish men There were never more Heresies Schismes and Superstitions in the Church then were in the Apostles dayes and those that immediately succeeded proportionable to the number of Christians the Gospel being then but setting up in the world But the Reformation it self being good and necessary and the effects of it as to Religion manifest they cannot revile or renounce without condemning those principles which animated them to bring in the King without regard of their own peersonal peace or interest It is said that Reformation wanted Authority it did so such as should make it National but selves and Rulers ought to protect them in it and not to trouble them for it or force them from it CHAP. VI. The Judgment and Practise of the present Non-conformists concerning Communion with and Separation from the Church of England HAving given the Principle Reasons why many Ministers both formerly and in this present Age cannot conform i. e. approve and subscribe to the Lyttergy of the Church of England as it contains all things belonging to Publick Worship It is needful that we set down what are their thoughts concerning their present case and what their practise ought to be in reference to the Church of England that their friends may not mistake and think they maintain principles of Anarchy and Confusion which if they did they would long since have come to nought and that their ill-willers may not have oportunity to slander them by misrepresenting them as enemies to all Government and as inconsistent with themselves as this Dr. hath done Therefore 1. The Non conformists conceive the case betwixt them and the Conformists Clergy to be much the same as betwixt the Lutherans and Calvinists in Germany or betwixt the Papists and Protestants since the Council of PTrent i. e. differences are come to the highest extremity under blood and that only because it is not in Clergy mens power and are utterly irreconcileable The Lutherans formerly had some men amongst them of some moderation and the things in question betwixt them and the Calvinists wer disputed and debated and men left to their liberty both in judgment and practice but when they got strength enough then they imposed their subscriptions deposed and imprissoned the Calvinists enveighed against them with all bitterness will admit of no treaties of Reconciliation and finally are so obstinately fixed in their own way as that they will much rather go three steps backwards to Rome then come one forwards toward the Calvinists the Papists also though they earnestly opposed the Reformation yet they maintained disputes and debates held conferences and consultations with our first Reformers and forbore violence at least by means of the Princes a good while so that there was hopes the Church might have been reformed without any fatal breach hCharles 5th then Emperour and Francis the 1st K. of France and others carnestly endeavouring to bring it about but when after all the Councill that had been desired on both sides met at Trent and excluded the Protestants from voting amongst them and established all the errours and corruptions of the Church of Rome which the Protestants condemned and cursed all the Doctrines and Practises of the Protestants point by point that they should have heard and examined And finally ordered all that should be ordained to the Ministry to subscribe to this Council There was now no more hope of Reformation of the Church or of pacification betwixt dissenting parties Thus the Non-conformist being of the same date with the Conformists Bishop Hooper Bish Coverdale Mr. Rogers Mr. Bradford with others of the first Reformers being dissatisfied with the established Lyturgy and still more and more successively in after Ages were at first treated like brethren and though the Lyturgy was established by Law by K. Edw. and Q. Eliz. yet they required not subcriptions to sit or approbation of it being content with a silent practise of what was enjoyned and very frequently passed over with silence the omission or non-practise of the Ceremonies and other things enjoined till Arch-Bishop Whitgifts dayes all which time the Non-comformists had still hopes things might have been accommodated and they appplied themselves to Princes and Parliaments to that end At length the Canons in 1605 made by the whole Convocation but with as fair play as those at Trent and ratified by the King established all things that the Non-comformists complained of and that not in the gross but point by point and fortified them with the Censures of the Church against all Dissenters and finally required all Ministers to approve the Lyturgy by subscription Whereupon many werer turned out at present and many kept from the Ministry nevertheless these subscriptions were private before the Bishops and Ordinaries who might and did frequently either omit the subscription or qualifie it with such interpretations that many who were in their Judgments Nonconformists could and did still get into and continue in places and those who were driven out of one Diocess were frequently suffered to preach in another and they who could not be ordained by Bishops would procure Ordination in other Protestant Countreys so that here was a little alleviation There was also one ground of hope elft viz. these Canons were not Law another King yea the same that approved them might have altered them and therefore the Non-conformists stretched their patience to the utmost hoping that at last their afflictions might be looked on by them that had power to remedy them and some appearance of it there was under the long Parliament especially when the King and they were upon terms of pacification But behold the Conclusion We have at length the private subscription to the Common prayer Book turned into a Publick solemn Declaration in the Congregation and that in prescript form of words that there may be no moderation And this to extend to the unfeigned approbation of the use of every thing contained in the Book And these Episcopal Canons turned into a standing law which equally extends to all parts of the Realm and to all times and ages successively as much as men can oblige them so that there can easily be no alteration And besides all this they must not only
just liberty is on the Non-Conformists side in these points 3. Whether the Non-Conformists both Ministers and People are not greatly strengthened both in their Non-Conformity to the Lyturgy and also in their practise of holding Communion together for self preservation by what hath followed in an un-interrupted course ever since the ejection of Ministers viz the horrible and general contempt of Religion general corruption of manners great neglect of preaching to the people most Dignitaries having many Parishes in their hands which they supply by ignorant boys the great growth of Popery with a certain and manifest design of bringing it into the Land again if his Majesty who now letteth were taken out of the way the great corruption of Doctrine as well as manners in our own Clergy neither of which are minded by the Rulers of our Church so as man be conformable that it is now in the Church of England as in that of Rome men may be of any opinion live in any vice or be of no Religion so they own the Pope and his Church and be no Protestants so here men may be Arminian Socinian Papists Atheists and what they will so they externally conform to the Lyturgy and be no Presbyterians so that it is now manifest that nothing was intended by the contrivers of the Act of Uniformity but to cast out of the Ministry those whom they knew could not then conform and for ever to keep out and intangle the most understanding and conscientious men and to let none into the Church who should scruple any of her commands or practises Are such things any motives to the Non-Conformists after 18 years suffering all the indignities and injuries that Julian's wit and malice thought fit to lay upon the Christians of his time and supposed them more intollerable to them then present death which would have been both honourable and an end of their miseries I say are these things motives that at last they should condemn their former practise and without any relaxation quietly take all the Burthen on their Shoulders no they are satisfied that whereas the Church of England hath given her self a mortal wound by her Act of Uniformity and hath layn bleeding of it ever since almost to death that they ought not to hasten her death by putting their hands and adding their helps to it 5. The Dr. thinks that Ministers are not now so indispensibly bound preach as the Apostes were who were immediately sent by God and Authorized by Miracles and therefore they must cease preaching if forbidden by the Magistrate justly or unjustly Answ There is the same necessity of the Ministry to preserve build up and continue the Church by adding new Members through the preaching of the word as there was of the Apostles to lay the foundation of the Church and therefore there lay's the same necessity upon every Minister to preach to his flock within his Compass as did on the Apostles in their Compass May Civil Magistrates be resisted or deposed by the people upon any pretence and they not seek redress because they are not anointed and immediately sent by God as Saul and David c. were if the standing order of Magistracy hath its immutable warrant and unalterable priviledges to enable it for the the discharge of that office surely the standing and ordinary Ministry hath as much warrant and provision for the execution of their office without expecting Miracles to give them new Authority Serm. p. 36. 6. The Dr. saith the Assembly of Divines gave many weighty Reasons against Toleration and were for Uniformity as much as the Church of England So that that Church is justified by them from all Tyranny in exacting Uniformity and the question is not whether there shall be a Uiniformity but who shall have the ordering of it Answ The present Non-conformists have opposed Toleration of all Sects and Opinions as much as the Assembly but this charge is a great injury both to the Assembly and to the Nonconformists now living for the Assembly never desired Uniformity in the same words of Prayer and all Divine Offices or in Rites and Ceremonies devised by men that might occasion scruple to any nor do their reasons tend to any such thing but only that men should not have liberty to withdraw from their Parishes upon every pretence and to constitute new Congregations The present Non-conformists desire no Uniformity but in Doctrine and the substantials of worship Discipline and Government leaving the wording and methoding of worship to particular mens prudence and the necessities of their people and leaving all Congregations to their liberties in Rites and Ceremonies not instituted by Christ supposing that Physitians may as well be tied to the same rules in administring Physick to all bodies as Ministers and people be obliged to the same words and things universally for their souls Let the late Act of Uniformity be abolished the Apocryphal books and Holidayes be left out of the Lyturgy and the Psalms read in the new Translation let the Cross and Surplice be taken away and kneeling at the Sacrament be left indifferent according to the discretion of Ministers and the desires of the people also let Parents stipulate for their own children and some few things in the Prayers be altered or so explained that they may give no offence let the book of Consecration of Bishops c be restored as it was in Queen Elizabeths dayes and Ministers be bound only in general words to a peaceable submission to the Lyturgy let them subscribe to the 39 Articles only in Doctrines of faith and Sacraments according to the Statute Eliz. 13. and this will make much more for Union then any thing the Dr. or his brethren have yet said Serm. p. 11 12. But the Dr. saith Phil. 3.16 Commands all to walk by the same Rule viz. the Rule of Uniformity formerly given them when the Apostle was with them as they were wont to do in all the Churches Be it so but did the Apostle intend any more then that they should be content with the same substantials of worship which were for common edification wherein all might and ought to agree without contending about the Ceremonies of the Law or particular opinions which some out of weakness might be zealous for and others that were more perfect knew were abolished This seems to be the plain meaning of the Text for both the perfect and the imperfect and otherwise minded were all to agree in the practise of this Rule which therefore could not be the imposition or limitation of disputable Doctrines or questionable Rites and Ceremonies but he would prove that this Uniformity was in Rites and Ceremonies from 1 Cor. 7.17 because some things the Apostle ordained in all Churches but the Text speaks only of the Co-habitation of Husbands and wives when one was an Infidel ver 15 16. Was this a Ceremony In 1 Cor. 11.34 The Apostle abolisheth the custom of Love-feasts before the Lords Supper because it was
they bear any Testimony to them But some of those Martyrs refused Conformity to them themselves as was shewed before and those who were the chief occasions of retaining that form of Worship and those Ceremonies and to pleas whom the better men consented to them turned Papists again as Gardiner and Tunstall by Name and were the Persecutors of the rest CHAP. II. The Second Argument from the Principles and Practise of the Old Non-Conformists considered Their Principles and Practise the same with ours so farr as their circumstances did bear The Difference of Circumstances betwixt them and us THE Dr's Second Argument is taken from the Principles and Practise of the Old Non-Conformists and largly prosecuted from § 6 unto 17 shewing That they condemned Separation from the Church of England did not like of gathering separate Congregations wrote earnestly against the Separation of the Brownists and when silenced themselves pleaded for quiet submission hoping that others might teach the people better then themselves ' Ans An Argument from Authority and Example especially in a matter of practise as this is is of great force though not to convince yet to induce mens mind to further consideration of what they do especially when it hath been proved by reason before as farr as the nature of the thing will bear but the Dr. having not given any direct argument either in his Sermon or this Book to prove the Preaching of the Non-Conformists Unlawfull which was the thing in question and from which I will not wander the Judgment of former men is of much less weight when it is brought instead of Scripture and Reason but we shall examine the force of it such as it is to remove the prejudice or Calumny that may be Created by it though it be no argument for what if the former Non-Conformists thought it unlawfull to preach when silenced by Law which yet by the way they generally were not but by the new impositions of Arch-Bishop Whitgift and the Canons of K. James which were not Law is it therefore certainly so indeed what if they thought it unlawfull for them in their circumstances is it therefore unlawfull for us in our present case or doth it follow that they would have thought it so had they lived under the same circumstances The circumstances of every Generation vary things and make many actions Lawfull or Unlawfull expedient or not expedient prudent or imprudent and of this none but the persons living and concerned in them are competent Judges Spectators can see but the outside of things Ancestors know nothing of them only they whose business and duty it is to consider what they ought to do in the present case are able throughly to judge what is meet for them to do or forbear But the Old Non-Conformists direct all their Zeal against Separation from the Church of England as it was practised by the Brownists and what hence can be inferr'd against the present Non-Conformists Preaching the Reader must judge For the further clearing of this matter I will briefly consider what were the general and avowed Principles of the old Non-Conformists in Ecclesiastical Matters what was their practise and what is peculiar in the present case beyond theirs 1. For their Principles 1. The Old Non-Conformists generally held the National Constitution of the Church of England as it is Collected into one body under the Bishops as the general Heads and Spiritual Officers of it to be unlawfull yea Antichristian injurious to the several Congregations or Parishes and contrary to the King 's unquestionable Supremacy The Dr. Confesseth this of those that presented the Admonition to the Parliament 1570 Part 1 Sect. 7. viz That they condemned the Government of Bishops as Antichristian and that they disliked the Ministry of the Church of England as ordained by and derived from the Bishops Now this Admonition was written by Mr. Cartwright in the name and by the consent of most Non-conformists then living Doctor Fuller saith that the Non-conformists in the latter end of Queen Elizabeth Church Hist Cent. 16. had a kind of Synod met in Coventry Ann. 588 agreed upon divers things as Canons some whereof were That Christ had appointed no Ministers in his Church but Presbyters and Deacons that the Bishops pretending themselves to be neither Presbyters nor Deacons but Officers distinct from them both were no Ministers of Christ nor to be acknowledged as such in his Church and that none ought to receive Ordination from them because they Ordained not as Presbyters but as Bishops i. e. by a power not derived from Christ This and much more he took from Bishop Bancroft Dr. Ames the supposed Author of the English Puritanism delivers this Dang posit Book 3. cap. 6. for the Judgment of the Puritans in those dayes They hold that there are not by any divine institution in the word any ordinary National Provincial or Diocesan Pastours Eng. Purit chap. 3. pag. 2. or Ministers under which the Pastours of particular Congregations are to be subject as Inferiour Officers and that if there were any such that when the word of God would have set them down mored istinctly and precisely then any of the rest for the higher place that one Occupies in the Church of the more necessity he is to the Church the more carefully would Christ the head of the Church have been in pointing him out and distinguishing him from other c. The same thing Dr. Ames layes down and proves as his own Judgment There is a Treatise written in the Name of all the Non-conformists directed to King james Medul Theol. cap. 32. de Eccl. instit item 35. called a Protestation of the King's Supremacy wherein they say pos 27. We hold that these Ecclesiastical persons that make claim to greater power and authority than this i. e. in particular Congregations as in the former position especially they that make claim jure Divino of power and Jurisdiction to meddle with other Churches then that one Congregation of which they are or ought to be members do usurp upon the Supremacy of the Civil Magistrate who alone hath and ought to have as we hold and maintain a power over the several Congregations in his Dominions and who alone ought by his Authority not only to prescribe Common Lawes and Canons of Vniformity and consent in Religion and worship of God unto them all but also to punish the offences of the several Congregations that they shall commit against the Lawes of God the Policy of this Realm and the Ecclesiastical Constitutions Enacted by his Authority and pos 28. We hold that the King ought not to give this Authority away or to commit it to any Ecclesiastical person or persons whatsoever but ought himself to be as it were Arch-Bishop and general Over-sear of all the Churches within his Dominions and ought to imploy under him his honourable Council his Judges Lieutenants c. and Pos 32. They crave that the Bishops may not be
of peace which the Dr. now magnifies after their Death but was in their life time as little accounted of as ours at this day they being alwaies charged with breaking the peace of the Church I say all their desire of peace did not oblige them to comply with those things which they thought unlawful either in themselves or at least in their time and Circumstances 3. I infer That when they were rejected for Non-Conformity they still reckoned themselves the rightful Pastors of their Congregations and that their Right or Relation was not taken away only that they were forcibly kept from the enjoyment of their right and the discharge of the Duties of their Relation And thus much appears from Mr. Bradshaw's Letter cited by the Dr. giving the Reason why they must leave their People and not Preach to them when deprived because this were to run upon the Sword of the Civil Magistrate who would not suffer himself to be so despised as that they whom he commanded to be silent should yet publickly preach in contradiction to his Command there is nothing of fear of Schism in the case but a prudent yielding to the times and of two evils chosing the less i. e. to do what good they could privately to their People and Neighbours as their own words cited do shew rather then by Preaching publickly to hazzard the bringing an open Persecution upon themselves and their people p. 1. Sec. Sect. 16 17. All that the Dr. hath quoted let it be considered it proves no more then this that they did not think it prudence in their Time and Circumstances to Preach publickly when silenced for fear of provoking the Magistrate against them and giving occasion to those that used to slander them especially to King James as Enemies to the Kings Supremacy They also modestly added that the word might be Preached as well yea perhaps better by others then by them though their Parishes seldom found it so All this was but a prudential Reason proves no difference betwixt their Principles and Ours Let us next consider their practice The Dr. tells us Ibid. That the Old Non-Conformists thought it unlawful for private Persons to endeavour Reformation of the Church contrary to the will of the civil Magistrate this he thinks condemns the practice of the present Non-Conformists But Bishop Bancroft giveth another account of this matter viz. That it was resolved amongst the Non-Conformists after many years waiting Dang posit book 3. chap. 3. and chap. 8. and when they saw their admonitions to the Parliament 1570 had no effect that then they should endeavour to reform each one in their own places yet so as by all means to preserve the peace of the Kingdom which accordingly they did pursue in their several Synods Classical Provincial and National from the year 1572 and forward having at length composed a Book of Discipline Ann. 1583 which was revised by several Synods and at length perfected and according to it they did order themselves and frame their Congregations till all was discovered and stopt by Arch Bishop Whitgift let us hear their own words Protest pos 30. We hold it utterly unlawful for any Christian Churches whatsoever by any armed force or power against the will of the civil Magistracy and State under which they live to erect and set up in publick the true Worship and Service of God or to beat down or suppress any Superstition or Idolatry that shall be countenanced or maintained by the same only every man is to look to himself that he communicate not with the evils of the times enduring what it shall please the State to inflict and seeking by all honest and peaceable means all Reformation of publick abuses only at the hands of civil publick persons Vid. 3B ch 1. chap. 10. and all practises contrary to these we condemn as Seditious and sinful Bishop Bancroft makes it the design of his whole 3d. Book to shew that the English Non-conformist did after the example of the Scots endeavour Reformation contrary to or without the will of the civil Magistrate By this it is manifest that the attempts for Reformation which they condemned were 1. Such as were by force and Armes Do we defend any such The Gospel was planted and must be propagated by Preaching the VVord and bearing the Cross 2. Attempts for publick reformation either throughout the Nation or in other Churches besides their own or to bring their practise and way of worship into the publick view contrary to the will of the Magistrate especially if he were a Christian And this is all that the example of the Primitive Churches under Heathen Emperours doth prove for they did keep their Assemblies and Worships in private and maintain them to the death against the Laws and will of those Princes but they did not ordinarily bring them into publick to affront the Magistrates to their faces yet when they lived under mild Princes and had a kind of tacite connivance they met publickly as appears by the question brought to Alexander Severus by the Cooks in Rome who laid claim to a publick Hall which the Christians used for their Worship and the Mild Emperour assigned it to the Christians saying it was better that any God should be worshipped there then that it should be a place devoted to Excess and Riot Euseb eccl hist Lib. 1. Cap. 1.2 and by degrees the Christians had many Beautifull Churches which Dioclesian caused to be demolished and the Christians much bewailed it yea Mr. Mead contends that even from Nero's time the Christians had Churches or publick places appointed for their Worship And Mr. Nich. Fuller maintains the same opinion in his Miscellanies grounding it on the fore-quoted place of Eusebius Tract an 1 Cor. Ch. 11. ver 22. They who maintained every Congregation to be a distinct Church having full power within themselves and their Ministers to be compleat Pastours must needs allow that every Congregation must have an intrinsick power of reforming and regulating themselves though it should be managed with all reverence and respect to the Magistrate and publick order But the Non-Conformists judgment in this will better appear by their practise under the restraints that were laid upon them by Laws and Canons in the beginning of Q. Eliz. about 5 years Conformity was not pressed the Liturgy seemed to be put as a bound to extravagant humors as many Civil Laws be but not as a Snare to the Conscientious But when it was perceived that the Non-Conformists encreased in number and power with the people subscription to the 39 Artic. without any limitation was urged 1562 and many who had been Sufferers and Exiles in Q. Maries Days refused to subscribe amongst whom was the pious Mr. Fox as saith Dr. Fuller and from this time Mr. Ball dates the Miseries of our Church Ball agst Can. saying whilst they walked in peace God blessed them with peace there was no division Papists came to our