practise Physick in London The Posts Walls and Gates are stickt with Physicians offers to cure the Lecherous pox To day I read Kirleu's Bill that saith he hath cured eight hundred of that disease I dare bet with you all the Money I have that if you enquire not eight or perhaps two of that eight hundred were Puritans or such as you now cast out for Non-Conformists unless you call Papists or such other Non-Conformists except any of them were Wives that catcht it of Husbands that are of your Church or Parishes and not of us or Husbands that catcht it of such conformable or Papist Wives But of these things we need no defence 3. But if our hearers be bad they have the more need of teaching and whether more are converted from ignorance sensuality worldliness and prophaneness by their teaching or ours ask others and not us L. Obj. XIV But they say that it 's by you that we are in danger of Popery because you keep up their hopes of a toleration by your divisions weakning us M. They may of the two say more probably it is we that bring in Prelacy Lay Excommunicators Ceremonies Liturgies For of the two we have done less against these than against Popery and stand not at so great a distance from them The impudency of some men is the shame of depraved humane nature They know that it is for being more against Popery than they are that our ruine is so implacably endeavoured They know that the Papists are our chiefest prosecutors thinking that if they could destroy us as their greatest adversaries they should bring the Church of England to their will and that it is but appropriating the name of Popery to the Italian Faction that set the Pope above Councils and calling the rest by a better Name and cutting off a few shreds named by Heylin in the Life of Arch-bishop Laud and it 's done They know that it is for drawing so near to Popery that the Non-Conformists Dissent from them and take it for granted that those men that are labouring to bring in Popery are the forwardest to make this putid accusation of us and that it hath been their labour these two and twenty years to have forc'd us to yield to an universal toleration and to petition for it that they might bring in Popery and then say it is we that did it and that for denying this and being unreconcileable to Popery the Papists are so unreconcileable to us as that nothing will satisfy them but our utter extirpation of which they would make blind sensual debauched malignant men that call themselves Protestants the instruments And how many of their pillars have written for a foreign Jurisdiction and defend Grotius I have told you before And to this day that Priest that is nearest to Popery is the bitterest enemy to the Non-Conformists and most preacheth for their destruction And these brazen-faced men cannot endure an honest Conformist that doth but preferr Protestants that dissent from their fetters before the Papists And those Bishops and Arch-bishops and the very Church of England in their times that were most against Popery are their scorn and hatred as you may see in Heylin's reproach of Arch-Bishop Abbot and the Bishops and Convocation except six Bishops in his days And by the base scorns that they now pour out against good Arch-Bishop Grindal calling such men as would strengthen us against Popery by reconciliation by the names of Grindalizers and Trimmers and such as would betray the Church And how they reproach and use Dr. Whitby for his Protestant Reconciler and Mr. Bold for his Sermon and the Author of the four Pleas of the Conformists for the Non-Conformists and such others you know The Author of the Reflections and the Samaritan they have not yet found out Mr. Tho. Beverley feareth them not The Bishop of Hereford Dr. Crofts the first man that ever I saw go forth with a Troop raised by his Brother for the King and his Sermon in my Pulpit the first that ever I heard against the Parliament when the King was in Yorkshire and he himself had been a Papist and is still zealous for their Church cause because he wrote the Book called Naked Truth to heal us and strengthen us against Popery they gnash the Teeth at him and so they do at Dr. Barlow Bishop of Lincoln that wrote of the treasonable principles of Papists tho' these Bishops are too big for them yet to vilify and openly oppose L. You may be more against Popery than they and yet bring it in imprudently by dividing us M. Who do you think in your Conscience is liker to bring it in we or they Who hath done and suffer'd more to keep it out We lay down all that we have to that end They will not part with a Ceremony or one Oath or a Re-ordination or an Excommunication of Christs Members to keep it out but plainly tell us that they had rather Popery came in than abate a jott of their Self-made Religion or Impositions or than such as I should Preach the Gospel But I confess I am not able to deny it that the Non-Conformists may be the occasion of bringing in Popery by way of Antiperistasis some men hate us and all serious Godliness so much that they are like enough to be for Popery because godly men are against it And I fear lest they that see the Non-Conformists would reform their Prelacy and Church-Courts and reduce them to the Primitive Episcopacy described by Bishop Vsher will be so much afraid lest they lose some of their Wealth and Domination by it that some of them will hearken to the Papists that will promise them an Encrease of that which they so esteem And indeed it is already no strange thing to hear them say They had rather the Papists came in with Popery than the Dissenters with their Reformation I think ere long you are like to be convinced more effectually than by Writing which Party is liker to bring in Popery and to turn Papists In the mean time I begin to praise Stephen Gardiner and such others for their Modesty that when they burnt Cranmer Ridley Hooper Philpot Rogers and the rest that they did not charge them with bringing in Popery and say we burn you for that L. XV. They say that you stretch the Words of the Oaths Declarations Subscriptions Liturgy and Canons to an ill sence by a rigorous Interpretation which was never the Meaning of the Authors and on that you ground your Dissent M. 1. I hope you will grant that when the things that men fear whether justly or mistakingly no less than deliberate Lying Perjury and Contracting by Justification the Guilt of many hundred thousand Perjuries and Swearing or Covenanting never to repent or endeavour that the Nation should repent of heinous Church-Corruptions or amend them and the nullifying of the Ordination and Ministry of thousands and Unchurching almost all the Protestant Churches and more such like a
cost or danger We Pleaded we Wrote we Petitioned and Beg'd for Peace even for that which the King had granted And what could we do more Since then above twenty years we have laboured as we could sometime to few and sometime to more and have patiently lived upon Charity and suffered I need not tell you what L. But why could not you Conform to the Law as well as they M. 1. Can men believe what others list because they bid us Is there nothing that you or they would refuse if it be but commanded you What use have we for a Law of God then If we must disobey it as oft as we are bid that were to renounce God and all Religion and Salvation And we have not our own understandings at command we have offered them our Oaths these twenty years that we would obey them in all except at the rate of sinning and damnation 2. And if we had done as they did we must have profest our Assent and Consent to all things contained in and prescribed by a Book which we never saw For so did we suppose above seven thousand men the Book not coming out of the Press till about the day that they were so to Assent to it Aug. 24. so that no doubt they did it on an implicite trust in others except the few that were in or near London This fully shews that though almost all the nine thousand or more Ministers that were in possession when the King came in did before conform to the way of the Directory and not to the Common-Prayer Book yet there was a great latent difference between the seven thousand that conformed and the two thousand that did not L. But seeing all the stress lyeth upon the question Whether it be only things Lawful indifferent or good which you refuse or any thing which God forbiddeth I pray tell me plainly what it is that you take to be sinful in the Conformity required And what it is that you would have as necessary in its stead M. I will tell you on these Conditions 1. That you pardon me for repeating here what I have already written 2. That you bring not your self a Conscience so laxe as will take nothing for sin which men use to make light of though God forbid it and then think that our Consciences should be as wide as yours 3. That we may premise the things presupposed as agreed on CHAP. II. The things presupposed as agreed on L. WHat are the Agreements which you presuppose M. These following 1. That God is the Absolute Soveraign Ruler and hath made in Nature and in the Sacred Scripture Universal Laws for the whole Church and World And that Kings are His Subjects and Officers and have no Power but what He giveth them directly or indirectly and therefore none against Him no more than a Constable against the Sovereign Power and that he and all men are bound to obey Gods Lawes whoever are against it or forbid it L. I cannot deny this without denying God to be God and the Law of Nature and Scripture to be His Law and Word M. II. That next to his Government God in order of Nature and Time made Self-Government and Family-Government before the Government of Republicks Kingdoms or Cities And that publick Polity hath no Authority to abrogate Self-Government or Family-Government but only to over rule and use them for the common good and safety L. This is undenyable if you state the Governments presupposed 〈◊〉 M. III. That it belongs to Self-Government to discern by reason whether the Commands of Men be against the Commands of God or not which we call Iudicium discretionis by which all men must guide their actions L. Shall every man be a judge of the Law whether it be just and good How unfit are the vulgar to judge of Lawes M. They are no publick judges to decide the case for other men nor doth their judgment restrain or bind the Magistrate nor if they judge amiss will it justifie themselves or suspend the execution of the Law against them But if they must not have the foresaid discerning judgment to guide their actions it will follow 1. That they are not governed nor must obey as Men by Reason and Free-will but as Brutes 2. That Kings have Absolute Power against God and must be obeyed in all that they command e. g. if it be to curse or blaspheme or renouce God or Christ to command the Subject to live in Murder Adultery Perjury c. and so to abrogate the Law of Nature 3. It followeth that there is no God that is a Supream Ruler but the King. 4. And I pray you tell me what you will have the Subjects do in case of Usurpation or Competition for the Government as between the Houses of York and Lancaster Iane and Queen Mary c. when one saith fight for me and the other fight for me If the Subject have not a judgment of discretion to know which is his rightful Sovereign the King must be forsaken He that will stand to the command of another must judge who his Commander is L. And will you have Infants and Idiots judge of their Parents commands Or Children in their minority M. 1. Infants and Idiots have not the use of Reason and so far are to be ruled by force as Brutes And Children in that measure as they are short of reason But 2. If they come to reason and the King command them one thing e. g. what Church to go to and their Parents the contrary would you not have them judge which they must obey 3. Much more if Parents should command them to sin against God to Steal Lye Murder Blaspheme and Curse the King c. surely they must judge as far as they are able L. I cannot deny it proceed in your presuppositions M. IV. That no men have power to command us to damn our Souls or to do any thing that tendeth to it L. None will deny you that but perhaps some things may cease to be sin and dangerous if commanded M. None can dispense with the Laws of God but we grant that some things that are unlawful by some accident or circumstance may become a duty when commanded when the good of Obedience Order and Concord therein weighs down against the accident It may be a sin to go on Warfare before one is commanded and a duty when he is commanded It is a fault in a Servant to go before he is sent and a duty after V. We presuppose that deliberate Lying is a sin L. Is there any one doubts of that M. If they do not our Case will soon be decided But indeed many deny it The Iansenists name you many Jesuit Casuists And Grotiâ—â— de Iure Belli and Bishop Ier. Taylor deny that Lying is any sin when it is profitable and wrongeth none as in a Physician to fice down a Medicine L. And what have you to say to the contrary M. I must not stay
the Ordainers investing action This is it which we mean in the Controversie which may not be done twice 2. Or it may signifie the meer words of the Ordainers and Ordained which make up the said Moral action We deny not but the same words repeated may make up one Moral Ordination If the Bishop by tautology repeat them twice or thrice Or if they should to satisfie men of divers Languages that are present be first spoken in English and after in French or when some that doubted require it should go over them again all this is but one Ordination L. How prove you that our Bishops intend any more when they say it is only to satisfie the Law that you may be capable in England M. 1. That it is not a meer relation to some particular cure that they mean is undenyable 1. Because they call that by the name of Institution and Induction and not of Ordination 2. Because they never ordain any over and over upon removals 3. Because the words of Ordination in the Book tell it us 2. That they do it not as a Repetition of the same valid Ordination is past doubt 1. Because the same repeated by the same men will not serve 2. It is to be done again ten or twenty years after the first 3. He is to be fined in an hundred pound that administreth the Sacrament without it 4. He is taken for no true Minister without it which cannot be true of a bare repetition of words No reasonable men would lay so much on that 3. It is undeniable that they take men for unordained and no Ministers till they ordain them 1. Because they all disown reordaining they know that the Canons called the Apostles and the whole antient and later Church condemn it as like Anabaptistry and no one Bishop in England will not renounce it Therefore its certain that they take the first Ordination for null 2. And they have so declared their judgment in many words and writings and in the Act of Uniformity it is plainly intimated in the penalty L. And what harm is there in being twice Ordained M. 1. Ad hominem I need not dispute it All the Bishops disclaim it as unlawfull so that we have their confession 2. It is the same fault as Anabaptistry If they be blameless why make you such a noise against the Anabaptists To be twice made a Christian and twice made a Minister is of the like kind 3. It is something causelesly to cast our selves under the Censure of all the Church that hath been against it and to be condemned by them 4. It is a plain prophanation of God's holy name and of a great and holy Ordinance by Lying and taking Godâ—s name in vain For they are said to be now admitted to the Office and this day to receive it and God is told that they are now called to it And all their Examinations and Answers imply that they were no Ministers before and the Bishop saith Receive the Holy Ghost for the Office and work of a Priest now committed to thee by the Imposition of our hands which all imply it not done before And in so sacred a contract with God to lie to him and prophanely abuse his name and the holy Ghosts and the Duty of Prayer and Praise is tremendous Be not deceived God is not mocked 5. It is a confederacy with Corrupters and Usurpers that arrogate and appropriate valid Ordination to themselves and a confirming all their injury to posterity that all that shall hereafter imitate them may be encouraged by alledging our Re ordination 6. It is a hainous injury to all the other Reformed Churches as if we degraded their Ministers and separated from them all as no Churches For one part of them have no Diocesans and the rest have Bishops that at the Reformation were Ordained by Presbyters 7. It is contrary to one of the Articles of our Religion 23. These we ought to judge them lawfully called and sent which be chosen and called to this work by men who have publick authority given to them in the Congregation to call and send Ministers c. But in other Countries Presbyters have publick authority given them And Art. 36. The book of Consecration doth contain all things necessary to such consecration and Ordaining But it hath nothing for Re-ordaining those before Ordained 8. It is a plain condemnation of the Church of England which hath professed Communion with the Reformed abroad as with true Ministers and Churches of Christ. And we are now told that to communicate with Schismaticks induceth the guilt of Schism 9. It introduceth Anabaptistry or utter confusion into the Nation leaving men in doubt whether for fourteen years the people had any true Baptism while it's a controversie whether Lay-mens Baptizing be valid and Mr. Dodwell maketh all men to be out of any Covenant-title to Salvation that have not the Sacraments from a Minister that hath successive Episcopal Ordination And all Christians must question whether they have not so long here lived out of the Church of Christ without Ministery and Communion Do you think that none of these nine Reasons prove Re-ordination sinful L. But because the Bishops deny it let me hear your proof that the former Ordination here by Presbyters is not a nullity M. I. Ad hominem the Church of England hath as I said judged the like valid in the Reformed Churches by holding Communion with them I cited a great number of Bishops and Doctors in my Christian Concord L. But they say that necessity differeth their case from ours here And even Doctour Sherlock tells you that if God make necessity necessity will make Ministers But ours Schismatically pull'd down the Bishops and now disown the very Order M. There is a satisfactory concession in these words but the accusations are made up of falsehood and deceit 1. Archbishop Vsher and others that thought the Ejectors of Episcopacy were guilty of Schism yet maintained that their Ordination was valid He told me how he pleaded it to the King. 2. Do they think that Salmasius Blundel and all others that have written more against our Prelacy than the English were deprived of it against their wills by necessity 3. What necessity can they pretend to the Hollanders Helvetians Geneva Embden Bremen the Palatinate and Scotland heretofore might they not have had Prelates when they would 4. Was not the necessity far more notorious to those that I now plead for They lived in a Land where Episcopacy was cast out and kept out by a potent Army I think there were but four or five Bishops alive when it was restored 5. It is false that they cast out the Bishops Those Ministers that joyned with the Parliament to cast them out were Ordained by Bishops and therefore are none of the men that we are speaking of These that were Ordained by Presbyters were then young men at School or in the Universities And what are other mens actions to them L. But
and Kingdom is more worth than one man You can hardly name one principle in the Law of Nature more undoubted than that Kingdoms have a right to defend themselves if they can M. And may they not defend themselves against Usurpers and Rebels and Traytors at home as well as against Forreign Foes L. To deny that is Treason How else should we defend the King Was not Jack Straw and many a Rebellion lawfully resisted and did not the Lord Mayor of London Lawfully kill Wat. Tyler and so of any other in his case M. But what if the Irish took on them to rise by the Kings Commission and shew'd a Counterfeit of it was it lawful for the Protestants to have resisted them to save their Lives and Cities L. They should have sent to the King to know whether that Commission was Counterfeit or not M. But before they could do that Dublin had been lost and all their Lives and Estates And the two hundred thousand that were Murdered were not restored to Life again when it was notified that they belied the King and that they had not his Commission L. It was notorious by the nature of the case that they bâ—lied the King and had none of his Commission because it was so greatly ogainst his own Interest M. Will you allow any Countrey to resist an Army that shew the Kings Commission if they are confident or can prove that it is against his Interest L. He is the Iudge of his own Interest when the Case cometh before him Till then a doubtful or at least a certain Commission may not be resisted You would entangle the Case with difficulties that seldom fall out but are you against resisting all known Commissions M. You know that the Oaths and Subscriptions extend to all cases and against any pretence whatsoever not excepting rare Cases What I am for or against I 'll tell you more anon But I ask further tho' I am bound by the Fifth Commandment to believe that the Irish belied the King and that the Scots belied him who in their Book called Truths Manifest affirm that He Commissioned the Irish by the Scots broad Seal which was then in his possession in Scotland do you think if the Scots could have proved what they affirm that it had been lawful to have resisted the Irish and defended the Protestants Lives and Cities in Ireland L. I will not answer such dangerous questions M. But must all ignorant men then Subscribe and Swear to what you cannot or dare not answer But I further ask you about not resisting Commissions on any pretence whatsoever what was the sence of the old Greek Philosophers and Orators in that casâ— L. You know they were almost all bred up in Aristocratical or Democratical Republicks and therefore no wonder if they are against us in this and more M. What was the sence of the old Roman Orators Philosophers and Historians as to this point L. They also were hatcht under Popular Government and tho' the later sort magnifie such excellent Monarchs as Augustus Vespasian Titus Adrian Antoninus Pius and Anton. Philos. and Alexander Severus yet it is no wonder that they were too much for resisting and deposing such as opprest the Commonwealth M. What was the sence of the Ancient Bishops and Clergy herein L. They were long for patient suffering But it is no wonder that when they grew worldly and strong they not only resisted but deposed Emperors and Princes M. I pray which way go the Papist Casuists in this case of resistance L. You cannot doubt of that when you know their Councels Laws for deposing Kings on Excommunication And what wonder when they go on that false Supposition that the People give the Prince his Power for their own good and may take it from him if he turn it against them to the hurt of the Common-wealth M. I pray what say Politick Writers Papists and Protestants in this case I mean the Eminent ones such as Bodin Althusius Arnisaeus Tholofanus Besoldus Choquierius Menochius Liebenthalius Contzen Koningh Timplerus Willius Berekringer and such others L. They commonly run one way founding Power in the People as being the Majestas Realis and giving the King 's and States a derived Majestatem Personalem which being for the Common good they may resist when it would destroy it They took their Politicks by Learning from Aristotle Plato Cicero and such Ancients and no wonder if they follow them M. And I pray you which way go our famous Historians in this Point such as Commines Iovius Guicciardine Pontanus Sleidan Thuanus Besoldus Iohnston Fregius and our English Math. Paris Henry Huntington Mat. Westminster Malmsbury Hoveden c. L. You know they liv'd in times when Civil Wars were so frequent and Princes so bad and one pulling down another that it 's no wonder if they praise some resisters But if you read those of our Age that lived in quiet Times and under good Princes such as Cambden Speed and Baker you will find no such thing M. I pray which way go the famous Civilians herein such as Gothofred Hottoman Cujacius Wesenbcchius Pacius Duarenus and such others L. You know that the Civil Law is fetcht from the Romans and it 's no wonder if it run in their strein M. I pray which way go the Canonists L. You know they are Papists and set up the Pope's Laws above the King's But our English Canons do not so M. I pray which way go our late Protestant Lawyers such as Cook and Littleton and the like L. They are all for Loyalty and for the Preeminence of the Law and yet for the King's Prerogative M. I find some of the greatest Lawyers that have defended Monarchy such as William Barclay and Grotius do name many Cases in which it is lawful to resist What think you of their Writings L. I will be no judge of them M. I pray what think you of those great Prelatists that write as Bishop Bilson and Ri. Hooker and Ier. Taylor do and that joined with Abbot and the Parliament against Dr. Laud Sibthorpe and Mainwaring Which of them think you was in the right L. You put too many Questions I will answer no more M. And must we Ignorant Men swear that all these aforesaid were deceived and knew less than we Verily Sir It seems a bold Oath for so great a Number of unlearned Men as are put upon it and for us that are unlearned in the English Laws L. But I doubt all these hard Questions are but raised as dust to hide some Principles of Rebellion What is your own judgment and how will you give Security for your Loyalty M. They that think my Oath Security take me for so honest as that I will not be Perjured And if so I have already taken the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy and an Oath of Fidelity as the King's Chaplain in Ordinary tho' never called to exercise it And I have fully in a large Volume called A second
Plea for Peace declared my Political Principles which after all thoughts I stand to And no one hath given me a word of Exceptions against them to this day after so many years but some in meer Malice tell me of my Aphorisms revok't without taking notice of this I here repeat that I am ready to engage to the utmost that I renounce all Rebellion Treason and Sedition and all Principles tending thereto that I am for as much Power of Princes and Obedience of Subjects as any Text of Scripture speaks for or as is given or asserted by any General Council or the Confession of any Christian Church that I have seen except what is ascribed to the Pope and his Substitutes And I hold it unlawful to take Arms at all against the King that is against either his Authority Person Rights or Prerogative or against any lawfully Commissioned by him yea or unlawfully except in such Cases as God's Law of Nature or the King himself by Law or contrary Command shall bind Men to resist L. And so you will suppose that God's Law of Nature bindeth you in some Cases to resist And will not all Rebels plead that Law M. Dare you say that there is no such Case King Iames writeth that a King may not make War against his whole Kingdom If Ten Irishmen pretend a Commission to Kill all the Parliament and Protestants in the Land or to seize on the King's Garisons or if King Iohn give his Kingdom to the Pope ask Hooker Filson or Parliaments what the Law of Nature saith to these Cases Chap. XL. Point XXXVII Of Assenting and Consenting to the Damnatory Clauses of Athanasius's Creed L. I Hope you will not quarrel with the Creed M. I take the Creed called Athanasius's tho' the Author is unknown to be an excellent Explication of the Doctrine of the Trinity And could wish that it were more used and learnt of all But I am not so far to judge other Men as to conclude all Men certainly damned for ever that are not so well skilled in that Mystery as to believe every word there written L. I have heard Learned Men say That the Assent and Consent is not to be extended to the Damnatory Clauses but only the Doctrinal Articles M. They that can make Laws and Oaths speak or mean what they list need not stick at any thing Is not the Damnatory part a part of the Book of Common-Prayer and contained in it L. But they prove thus that it meaneth no such Consent or Approbation The Liturgy requireth you to read the Apocrypha and yet not to believe all things in it to be true For say they divers things in Tobit are evidently false And so tho' it bind you to use and read Athanasius's Creed it binds you not to believe all in it to be true M. This Cheat is too gross to deceive a School-Boy with Is Athanasius's Creed a real part of the Common-Prayer Book contain'd in it or not L. Yes no doubt we there find it both contained and prescribed Verbatim M. Is the Apocrypha any part of the Common-Prayer Book and contained in it or not L. If there be any Sentences out of it there inserted those are part else the Apocrypha is no part of the Book It is only the Order to read it that is a part M. Is not this a palpable Deceit to argue that we are not bound to Assent and Consent to that which is contained in the Book because we are not so bound to that which is not contained in it Chap XLI Point XXXVIII Of Saying Common-Prayer twice a day every day in the Year ordinarily L. IT is but that you shall every day say the Morning and Evening Service not being lett by Sickness or other urgent Cause And what have you against this M. I think when the Book was made to help the ignorant Vulgar out of Popery every day to use the Common-Prayer was a very good help to them But the Case is much altered and People now have more suitable Helps and Ministers have so much other Work to do in their Studies and with their Neighbours every day and some Prayers to use more suitable to their Families and Closets that it must needs be a sinful Impediment against other Duties to say Common-Prayer twice a day If they were commanded to Preach twice a day every day in the year it would cause a sinful Omission of other Duties how good soever Preaching be in it self L. But then you have urgent Cause of forbearance M. We are not for abusive dallying with Covenants about Sacred things It is evident by the instance of Sickness that the Authors of the Imposition meant only extraordinary Causes as urgent and not that we should take our ordinary Work for such an urgent Cause As if a Man that is bound to spend most of the day in his Shop should Covenant to go Thirty Miles every day if he be not lett by urgent Cause L. But you see that almost no Conformists do thus therefore it 's certain that they do not so understand it M. That 's a warning to take heed of promising that which we see so many that promised it not perform They are our Monitors to take heed of such a playing with Sacred Covenants and deceiving the Law instead of obeying it Chap. XLII Point XXXIX Of forcing the unwilling Parishioners to the Sacrament and Accusing and Excommunicating the Refusers L. HOw are you bound to this by Conformity M. 1. We must assent and consent to the Rubrick which commandeth That every Parishioner shall Communicate three times a year at least 2. The Oath of Canonical Obedience binds us to obey the 112 Canon as well as the rest which saith The Minister Churchwardens Questmen and Assistants of every Parish-Church and Chappel shall yearly within 40 days after Easter exhibit to the Bishop or his Chancellor the Names and Surnames of All the Parishioners as well Men as Women which being at the Age of 16 years received not the Communion at Easter before And then they are to be Excommunicated if they refuse and to lie in Jail till they die when taken by the Writ De Excommunicato Capiendo L. And why should not men be forced to their Duty and to their own good if they are backward to it M. The internal part is the first and chief part of their Duty without which the external is not their Duty but their great Sin. It is the Duty of Heathens to Believe and be baptized but not to be baptized till they believe It is the Duty of Candidates for the Ministry to get Ability and Ordination and to officiate But not to officiate before they get Ability and Ordination It is the Duty of every Man to believe the Truth of the Gospel and to profess that belief But to say he believeth when he doth not is Hypocrisie and Lying It is a sloathful Man's Duty to rise and dress him and go to his Work but not
Oxford-Oath in the Act of Confinement and the Subscription in the Act of Vniformity M. I have told you fully before Not because we differ in Doctrine but in expounding the words of that Oath and Subscription 2. Were neither Arch-bishop Abbot nor his Clergy nor the Parliaments of those times of the Church of England as well as Sâ—bthorp and Mainwaring Were not the Laws made by those Parliaments made by the Members if not Representatives of the Church of England You know that our late great Defenders of the Church describe the Church of England to be those that Worship God according to the Law And were the Parliaments that made those Laws none of the Church themselves Chillingworth would not Subscribe without a limitting Profession Was he therefore none of the Church Was Bishop Bilson none of the Church Was R. Hooker none of the Church The first dedicated his Book to Queen Elizabeth and the latter is Dedicated to our King Charles the second and Praised by his Father And yet the Author of the Holy Common-wealth hath larglier than any man confuted Hooker's Popular Principles When William Barclay a Lawyer defended the King of France his Temporal Power against the Popes Usurpation of a Power to depose and restrain him he is fain to profess that the contrary opinion was so common that he was taken to speak some strange and singular thing And yet none doubts but he was of the same Church of Rome I again challenge you to name that point in which we differ in this Doctrine from the true Church of England L. You hold that Kings may be resisted by Arms. M. Not so much as the aforesaid Bishop and Doctors of the Church of England did or the Parliaments that made Church-Laws Again See our second Plea for Peace how far we disclaim it I profess that I am acquainted with no meer Non-Conformist Ministers that hold it at all lawful for Subjects to resist the King or any Supream Power by a War except in case that he notoriously declareth that he will if he can destroy the Common-wealth or deliver it up to a foreigner or destroyer that hath no right L. Sure the cry would never be for Extirpating the Dissenters for this Plot and their disloyalty if they were not guilty M. Nay if that be your argument Strangers to them say they are disloyal and guilty ergo they are so I leave you to God's answer for I will not undertake to answer you But will you use Sobriety a little further 1. It is now twenty seven years since they were ejected and cast out of maintenance and countenance and left to beg or crave their bread Long have they been laid in Gaols and fined deeply the Law laying on them twenty and forty pound a Sermon Their Goods Beds Books taken from them and they left destitute How many in all these years have ever been accused and proved guilty of one disloyal or seditious Sermon or Word I know of none Certainly it was not for want of will in the Accusers Those that by Oaths have brought them under Convictions and Warrants for distress of five ten and much more forfeitures even divers hundred pounds at once before they were ever summoned to speak for themselves would sure have sworn some disloyal Words against them had they been able And can many hundred Ministers have a fuller proof of their innocency than that they had no such prosecution twenty seven years from such a sort of Adversaries in so great Sufferings 2. And now this Plot is detected It is divers Months since and many Countries and Corporations have accused the Dissenters of it and cry them down to Extirpation And to this day I cannot hear of any one English Minister or at most not of two that is either an Episcopal or Presbyterian Non-Conformist so much as accused or named as guilty The French and Dutch Churches in London are Dissenting Presbyterians Yet no man accuseth any of them for being in Plots and yet must they also be destroyed But Sir if any one or more of the Episcopal or Presbyterian Non-Conformists Ministers or People had been found guilty would you condemn thousands or any of the guiltless for their sakes On what account Is it for their Relation to them They are mostly strangers to one another Come and let us try your rule of Justice I. Is there any Relation nearer than that of Father and Son And can any Minister be supposed to have more interest in or influence on his Hearers than a Father hath on his Son And you know that the chief man accused is the Kings eldest Son I hope you will not for this charge the King as if he principled him for Treason against himself Nor as if he were to suffer for his Sons faults II. The Judges have oft declared that many Iesuits and Papists were Plotters and Traitors and they died for it I hope you will not make all Papists guilty of their crime nor extirpate them for it And yet the Papists are Conventicling Dissenters too III. The Lords and great Men accused of this Plot and Treason how justly God knoweth were of the Church of England and shall all the Church of England be destroyed for their sakes Dr. Whitby and others now blamed by the Oxford-Convocation and Bishop Bilson Mr. Hocker c. were of the Church of England and shall all the English Clergy be accused of their words IV. Many of the accused were Hobbists and Infidels and some common ill-living Protestants Shall all the Hobbists and Infidels and ill-living Protestants be extirpated for their faults V. Many Gentlemen of some late Parliaments are accused not yet tried and proved guilty Shall all the Parliament-men therefore be extirpated as guilty VI. Some Lawyers and Students at Law are accused Shall all Lawyers and Students therefore be extirpated VII Divers of the Nobility are accused Must all Noble-men be therefore reproached VIII Some that have been of the Kings Privy Council were accused Is his Council therefore to be disgraced or destroyed IX Formerly many Judges have been guilty Are Judges therefore to be dishonoured X. By this justice you may next conclude They were Englishmen that were accused therefore let all English-men be rooted out Or they were Protestants and Christians therefore away with all Protestants and Christians Whereas I think it an unjust conclusion that because they were Irish-men and Papists that murdered two hundred thousand in Ireland therefore root out all Irish-men and Papists unless you will inferr They are men that commit all sin therefore root out mankind If it had been men that hate serious Godliness and are the seed of the Serpent and of Cain that are at deadly enmity to the true fear of God and thirst for the blood of the innocent that are accused of this Plot and if People had petitioned to have all this sort of men rooted out for it it would have fallen on more than you and I are willing to name or
Laws that all the Kings Subjects shall be extirpated that will not subscribe There is not one word in all the Statute Book or the most Learned Law-Books contrary to the Word of God and that the London Dispensatory hath no errour in Medicine and that no Licensed Book hath any errour in Divinity Verily if the Bishops and Clergy of England cannot give us better proofs of their infallibility or that their publick imposed Books are as free from errours as Adam was before his fall than by making all subscribe or swear or declare in the Church that it is so cowards may say your Lordships and Reverences have never an erroneous word but few men will believe it ever the more yea it will be the less believed that needeth such a proof as this Even as men would take him to be never the more an unerring Philosopher Lawyer or Physician who could force all the apprentice boys and women in the Town to swear that he is such Try first to make all the Kings Subjects of one opinion in all points of Learning Law or Trading and of one degree of wit and of stature and complexion and then hope to make them all of one measure of understanding not only in the substance of Religion but in all the little things that Bishops call indifferent and do or may impose L. But you run upon the Errour that all must have so great knowledge according to our rules as to know the Lawfulness of all Lawful things We know no Church-men reach so high But the way to Concord must be by obeying the Church in all cases that are doubtful to the Subjects M. 1. It 's well that you limit it to doubtful cases But what if I am past all doubt e. g. that it is a sin to make our sort of God-fathers the vowing Covenanters in Baptism excluding the Parents to cast out all from Christian Communion that scruple kneeling in the reception to deny Christendom to all that refuse our God-fathers and Crossings to pronounce all in England at Burial saved except the unbaptized excommunicate and self-murderers to profess that It is certain by the word of God that Infants excepting none baptized and dying before actual sin are undoubtedly saved To assent to a false rule to know Easter-day with many such What must I do in such undoubted cases 2. Tell us plainly Is it all doubted cases or some only in which you say we must obey If not all till you tell us which and how to know them you talk in vain If all what if men doubt whether Polygamy Lying Fornication c. be lawful Or what if a Papist doubt whether King-killing be lawful and the Clergy command it must it therefore needs be done 3. And I pray you tell us where and when it is that men must obey this rule Was it a duty in England in the days of Thomas Becket Anselm Dunstan c. or in the Reign of all the Kings that were Papists Is it a duty now in France Spain Italy Bavaria Austria c. or in the Dominion of the Turks Persians Tartarians China c Must all Subjects every where do all commanded them If they have but ignorance enough to be in doubt themselves sure they are bound to receive God's Light to overcome those doubts and in errour it is not obedience in Evil but seeking truth till they find it that is their duty But If you limit this Rule to Christians is it to all Christians If to Orthodox Rulers are the Subjects any fitter to judge whether their Kings and Bishops are Orthodox or not than whether the things imposed be good or bad If you dare say That all Subjects are bound to be of the Religion which their Kings or Bishops say is right speak out and you will need no confutation It 's granted by all sober men that as Rulers have the judgment of publick decision so every reasonable man must judge by private discerning whether his Actions be agreeable to God's Commands or not It is not Brutes and Infants but Men that have the use of reason that Kings and Bishops rule 4. But if you are stiff in the contrary opinion that all men must implicitely believe the King and Prelates in all that ignorance can but make them doubtful of I hope you have more brains than once to dream that ever you shall bring all the Kingdom to unite in this opinion and to lay by their reason and confess themselves Ideots or Brutes that must not labour to know whether they keep or break God's Supream Law or if you must rule men on these terms you must keep them in fetters and not at liberty And I pray you dishonour not the King so much as to make him a King of Beasts and Ideots and not of Men or Christians or at least expose him not so much to the Power of Usurpers as to say that his Subjects are not the Discerning Iudges who is their True and Lawful Soveraign and who not and if they must judge whether all their actions be agreeable to the Kings Laws or not lest they be hang'd or punished allow them also to judge whether or no they be agreeable to God's Law lest they be damned If men once believe that God is not their Supream Governour no wonder if they believe that Kings have no Governing right nor any are bound in conscience to obey them for who can give Governing Authority or who can bind Conscience to obey it but the absolute Soveraign the Almighty God L. Experience confuteth all that you have said what Countries live in greater Vnity than those that have procured and kept it by violence and do endure no Dissenters as Spain and Italy M. It seems you know not what you say 1. The Pope and Spaniards and Italians allow greater differences by many degrees than those that you condemn Dissenters for their Iesuits and Dominicans Thomists Scotists Nominals Durandists c. differ so much from each others in Doctrinals about God and Grace and Free-will and Providence and the Cause of Sin and many other Points that the Volumes they have written for their several Opinions make up huge Libraries which employ the hard studies of the most Learned men in the World and are as far as ever from being ended 2. The Iansenists and Iesuits differ not only in such Doctrines about Predestination Redemption Grace Free-will Perseverance c. but also about abundance of Doctrines commonly called Moral as about Murder Perjury Fornication Stealing c. as you may see in the Books lately published by the Iansenists against the Iesuits And though approved general Councils have made the doctrine of Deposing Excommunicated Princes and Absolving their Subjects from their Allegiance and giving their Dominions to others to be a very part of their Religion yet are not the Papists agreed in it but the Germans in the days of the Emperours Frederick Otho Henry 4th and 5th c. and the French to this day are
theirs Will you therefore silence all your Teachers and shut up all your Church-doors and give over worshipping God Do you think that your Priests and your Worship are without Fault yea or the Constitution of your Churches We are not able well to know what a Parish-Church is by its Materials that is who are of the Churches and who not 1. If it be all the Baptized Parishioners the Papists and Separatists are your Members If it be all such as are of no other Church then the Atheists Infidels Seducers and others that are of no Church indeed are of it 3. If it be only those that dwell and communicate there how small a part of your great Parishes are of the Church Yet are not these many Thousands declared to be out but are permitted without Censure and may come if they will Not only the Members but the Minister himself knoweth not who are of his Church for the far greater part till he see them come to the Altar and then most if they come must be utter strangers to him whom he never saw before How great a Number of Hobbists Infidels Papists and wicked Livers are amongst us your own Pens proclaim And may not these come to the Altar when they please This is spoken only to convince you that if all this may be born the supposed sin of fearing sin in a thing call'd indifferent deserveth not Excommunication or Destruction Q. 17. Is not the Fear of God the beginning of Wisdom And doth not this contain a Fear of sinning And is not this commendable and to be cherished Is not God above man and first to be obeyed and most feared Hath man any Power but what God hath given him and hath God given any against himself or his own Laws or for destruction of his Fear If Conscience towards God be once driven away is any man to be trusted Will not the unconscionable do any thing for worldly Interest Q 18. Is it not an unmanly sort of impudence in them that many years perswade the world that those same men make Schisms by forbearing only such things as they confess to be no sin who have twenty years ago Protested that nothing but sinning is refused by them and did then give in a Catalogue of several sins which they undertook to prove such And should those same men that have read or may do The King 's Gracious Declaration about Ecclesiastical Affairs 1660. and the London Ministers printed Thanks-giving for it and the many late Books in which we have told men what it is which we dare not conform to I say should these still take on them that they cannot know it and call out still What is it that you stick at And what is it that would satisfy you Yea those that cannot bear that we should tell them Q. 19. Do you think that the King who then past that Declaration in which the Non-Conformists who sought it with thankfulness acquiesc't as in terms of happy Concord and the House of Commons who gave him thanks or the Bishops and Clergy who after rejected it and procured the new Act of Uniformity and such other did take the way to have United Protestants and to have prevented our present sad divisions Q. 20. Hath not Dr. Burnet in his History of the Regale fully proved that the choice of Bishops and Pastors for many hundred years was in the People and the Clergy And do you think in your Consciences that if a good Gentleman build and endow a Church all men must ever after trust the Pastoral conduct of their Souls with such Priests only as his Posterity or any man that will buy the Advowson shall present Will not Drunkards Fornicators malignant haters of Holy Life choose men as fit for their turn as will be admitted And do you think in your Consciences that all the Patrons now in England are either fit or by Christ allowed to be choosers of all those Pastors that all men in England must take up with Do you not know that Preaching converteth not like a Charm nor is the Devil cast out of Souls as by the words of an Exorcist It requireth great skill and care to convince sinners and instruct resolve confirm and comfort Souls There is as great difference of Teachers as of Physicians And Souls are unspeakably more precious than Bodies And it 's said of too many rash and unskillful Physicians that the difference between them and Souldiers is that they kill their Friends who pay them for it when Souldiers kill but their enemies What Power Princes and Patrons have of things Dedicated to God as Temples and Tithes Lands we presume not to dispute But these are not to inseparable from the Pastoral-office that the People must trust their Souls only on their Pastoral care to whom the Patron will give the Tithes and Temples Had men so setled maintenance on Physicians for every Parish we would not therefore trust our lives on the unskillful or negligent because either Prince or Patron choose him And if you would not say to such You shall have the Physician which the Patron chooseth or none Why should you say so of the Pastor Q. 21. Are we not of the same Religion with the Magistrates and Bishops In what one Article of Faith do we differ except the new one of the undoubted Salvation of all dying Baptized Infants not excepting those of Atheists or Infidels and this as certain by God's Word almost all parts of the Christian World Greeks Papists Protestants Nestorians Iacobites Arminians c. do charge one another with Heresy or false Doctrine while Conformists charge no such thing on the Non-conformists but only dissenting from the modes of worship and discipline which they impose And would you have all the Christian World forbid one another to Worship God till they all agree If not where yet their differences are so great why must they be forbidden it who differ not in points of Faith from the Churches Articles at all Q. 22. It is forbidden that more than four meet to VVorship God in other manner than according to the Liturgy and practice of the Church of England If by other manner be meant with any other positive manner of Worship I see none that do it otherwise For Reading of Scripture Praying Preaching Singing Psalms are all done in the Parish-Churches But if oâ—her manner extend to every omission of any appointed part of the Liturgy all Parish-Churches where I come do it in other manner And shall all the Lords Gentlemen and People be therefore punished as Conventiclers The Non-conformists where I come use most of the Liturgy that is The Psalms two Chapters the Lords Prayer the Creed the Commandments the Singing Psalms some of them more Must all go out of the Church if the Curate omit part If by otherwise be meant with any other accidents or circumstances the Church of England agreeth not in all such and can be no rule therein to the Non-conformists Cathedral