in all Cities Corporations or Places aforesaid though their example might have drawn many as mine did where I was 11. Ministers and Corporations and Vestries were not then bound to swear or subscribe that it is unlawful on any pretence whatsoever to resist any commissioned by the King when the Keeper of his Seal may sign Commissions to seize on the Kings Forts Garrisons Navies and Treasuries to deliver up the Kingdoms to Foreigners to destroy Parliaments Cities and Laws I am sure Hooker Bilson or Arch-Bishop Abbot subscribed not this nor were such Conformists Are all these no difference of case Sect. 8. There is 2. a great difference in the drift and tendency of the Impositions They were at first to quiet a Popish Nation while the true Doctrine took possession and rooting and to avoid the cavils of those Papists that charged the Reformers with forsaking all the Church But what they have been used for these last forty or fifty years I leave the Reader to judge 1. By the Complaints of all the Parliaments since then save one 2. By the History of Arch-Bishop Laud's Tryal 3. By Dr. Heylin's History of his Life 4. By the writings of Divines such as Mr. Thorndike Dr. Parker Dr. Pierce Arch-Bishop Bromhall and many more such and by the Papists historical collection out of such See Dr. Heylin's description of the Reconciling Plot Anno 1639. Arch Bishop Bromhal saith Vindicat. p. 19. c. Whereas Mr. Baxter doth accuse Grotius as a Papist I think he doth him wrong nay I am confident he doth him wrong And I have read all that he alledgeth to prove it but without any conviction or alteration in my judgment I will endeavour to give some further light what was the Religion of Grotius He was in affection a friend and in desire a true Son of the Church of England And on his Deathbed recommended that Church as it was legally established to his Wife and such other of his Family as were then about him obliging them by his Authority to adhere firmly to it The said Bishop though no Papist saith pag. 81. I know no members of the Greek Church who give them the Papists either more or less than I do Compare this with the Council at Florence and the Patriarch Jeremiah's Writings and the present sence of the Greek Church and we may know his mind But my ground is not the authority of the Greek Church but the authority of the Primitive Fathers and General Councils which are the representative Body of the Universal Church P. 82. To wave their last four hundred years determinations is implicitly to renounce all the necessary causes of this great Schism And to rest satisfied with their old Patriarchal power and dignity and Primacy of Order which is another part of my Proposition is to quit the modern Papacy name and thing Pag. 84 85. That Christians may joyn together in the same publick devotions and service of Christ 1. If the Bishop of Rome were reduced from the Universality of Soveraign Jurisdiction jure divino to his principium unitatis and his Court regulated by the Canons of the Fathers which was the sence of the Councils of Constance and Basil and is desired by many Roman Catholicks as well as we 2. If the Creed were reduced to what they were in the time of the four first General Councils with only necessary explications and those made by the Authority of a General Council 3. And some things whence offences have been given or taken be put out of the Divine Offices Whether Christians ought not to live in holy Communion and come to the same publick worship of God free from all schismatical separations Pag. 93. 1. That St. Peter had a fixed Chair at Antioch and after at Rome is a truth 2. That St. Peter had a Primacy of Order among the Apostles is the unanimous voice of the Primitive Church 3. Some Fathers and Schoolmen who were no sworn Vassals to the Roman Bishop do affirm that this Primacy of Order is fixed to the Chair of St. Peter P. 97. Though the Bishop of Rome had such a Primacy of Order by Divine Right or Humane it would not prejudice us at all nor is worth the contending about But 1. It is not by Divine Right in foro exteriore 2. Nor elsewhere interiore but executive according to the Canons Whereas I said that Protestants that consent not to the Popes Patriarchal Power over us in the West will fall under the reproach of Schism he saith p. 104. c. Must a man quit his just right because some dislike it Their dislike is but scandal taken but the quitting of that which is right for their satisfaction should be scandal given If they be forced to fall under the reproach of Schismaticks it is by their own wilful humors or erroneous Conscience other force there is none 2. Whether is the worse and more dangerous condition to fall under the reproach of Schism or to fall into Schism it self Whosoever shall oppose the just power of a lawful Patriarch lawfully proceeding is a material Schismatick at least P. 107. It 's unsound arguing to deny a man his just right for fear lest he may abuse it as a Patriarchal Power was the Bishop of Rome's just right They who made the Bishop of Rome a Patriarch were the Primitive Fathers not excluding the Apostles and Christian Emperors and Oecumenical Councils what Laws they made in this case we are bound to obey for Conscience sake till lawfully repealed by vertue of the Law of Christ Much more he hath to this purpose and p. 112. for uniting the Church Catholick on humane terms and p. 117. against the peoples liberty of reading and interpreting Scripture and after at large that concord must be on humane terms p. 122. Grotius judgment was and mine is moderate but had not this man been so owned by many now I had not cited so much of his And for Grotius I have over and over cited his own words and shall not now repeat them And was this the drift of Conformity of old 3. Sect. 9. Another difference is in the effects for with us things not universally or absolutely determined by God are to be used or refused as they do more good or hurt 1. Then open Preaching and gathering Assemblies by Nonconformists would have greatly offended the Prince but our King at Breda and in his three first Declarations and by his Licenses and connivence shewed such wisdom and clemency as intimated less displeasure at our liberty 2. It would have deprived most of the Nonconformists of their hopes of publick liberty in the Parish Churches which most of them enjoyed but we had neither possession nor expectation of such a thing 3. It would have hindred and hazarded the progress of the Reformation but our preaching hath done more to stop the progress of the Syncretism or of Popery Others know this whatever you frivolously
and next parts were all to communicate with the Bishop and were no more than could meet to choose the Bishops and to be present as to the main body of them and disciplinary debates to give consent 5. In Cyprian's time at Carthage a place of greatness and great numbers of Christians the Church was grown very great but not beyond the exercise of such personal Communion as I described And the Bishops there and round about being worthy men kept up the life of the former Discipline And as great as their Church was we would be glad of such an Episcopacy Order and Communion For I oft told you that by present Communion I meant not that all must meet in one place at once For the tenth part of some Parishes cannot But that as Neighbours and Citizens may have personal Converse and Meetings per vices of some at one time and some at another as different from meer mental Communion or by Synods or Persons delegate or as their Governours or Representatives and this for mutual Edification in holy Doctrine Worship and Conversation And that the footsteps of this remained long when worldly Reasons had made a change And all this I have proved so fully in my Treatise of Episcopacy besides what 's said in my Abstract of the Episcopal History that till some man shall confute the full Evidence of Antiquity there brought I have no more in Reason to do upon that subject And though the Doctors History of this be the most considerable part of all his Book yet so far doth he leave what I say uncontradicted that I find not one word that he saith against any of my Testimonies nor any for his own cause for the first two hundred years But when he should have proved the extent of the Churches at two hundred years he begins his historical Proofs at two hundred and fifty for three or four great Cities in the World and so proceeds to Augustine at above four hundred and Victor Uticensis about four hundred and ninety Theodoret four hundred and thirty where he supposeth me to say that of his City which I said of the Diocess of that City And to confute all Impertinencies and groundless Suppositions while my full proofs are unanswered is but loss of time Sect. 3. His chief argument is that no City how great soever was to have more Bishops than one Ans 1. He can prove no such Rule in the first two hundred years 2. See how well the defenders of Prelacy agree Gratious de Imperio in Anotat and Dr. Hammond I cited who say that Cities at first had two Bishops in each Rome Antioch c. one of Jewish Christians and one of Gentile Christians and saith D. H. Peter at Rome was Bishop of the Jews and Paul of the Gentiles and they had two Successors and saith Gretius The Churches were formed to the manner of the Synagogues and there were divers Churches with divers Bishops in the same City in 1 Tim. 5. 17. de Imp. p. 355 356 357. 3. In the fourth Century a Council at Capua decreed that the two Bishops with their several Churches at Antioch Flavian's and Evagrins should live together in Love and Peace 4. This was a good custom while there were in the Cities no more than one Bishop might take care of And the custom held when times altered the case and reason of it And Possession and the Desire to avoid division made it held up by good men 5. I have at large in my Treatise of Episcopacy confuted the opinion of appropriating Bishops to Cities and so did the old Churches that set up Chorepiscopos Sect. 4. p. 259. He saith In Cities and Dioceses under one Bishop were several distinct Congregations and Altars Ans 1. Yes no doubt after the second Century and perhaps in two Cities a little before but in few in the World till towards the fourth Century 2. This is the same man who in the very Sermon which he defendeth said p. 27. Though when the Churches increased the occasional Meetings were frequent in several places yet still there was but one Church and one Altar and one Baptism and one Bishop with many Presbyters assisting him And this is so very plain in Antiquity as to the Churches planted by the Apostles themselves in several parts that none but a stranger to the history of the Church can ever call it in question But when I told him how this would agree us and hurt his cause he will quickly fall under his own censure and became a stranger to the history of the Church asserting many Altars in one Church of one Bishop This Sermon was written since his Irenicon And now he feigneth a distinction between An Altar taken with particular respect to a Bishop and for the place at which Christians did communicare But what was the Altar that was taken with particular respect to the Bishop Was it not the material place of Communicn And so the members of the distinction are co-incident Saith Optatus lib. 6. Quid est Altare nisi sedes corporis sanguimis Christi Each Church had long but one of these The best Altars that were made after the chief Church Altars were not for ordinary communion but honorary of some Martyrs The truth is the phrase of unum Altare was taken up when each Church had but one but to set up Altare contra Altare continued after to signifie Anti-Churches But I have fully answered this in my Treatise of Episcopacy His conjectures from the numbers of Officers c. he may see there also sufficiently confuted and in Ch. Hist And the odd instance of Theodoret he doth not at all make credible by his willing belief of Metius and other Popish Feigners And were that Epistle genuine a Cypher is easily dropt in by Corrupters It hath need of better authority that shall be so singular from the case of all other Churches And I suppose he knoweth that Cyrus was not a simple Bishoprick but a Metropolitane Seat and might have 800 Parish Bishops Yea whereas there were under Antioch seven Dioceses and fifteen Provinces or as others say thirteen that yet had many Bishops under them as Seleucia twenty four c. that were more dependant on Antioch Cyrus was one of the eight Provinces or Metropolis that were per se subsistentes And therefore when Theodoret said how many Churches were under hands it 's like he meant Bishops Churches and not meer Presbyters and either a Cypher dropt in corrupted the account or else the Bishops had but single Congregations But for my part as the case so late concerneth me not so I see nothing to perswade me that that Epistle is genuine and uncorrupt But I would not have a Diocess which then had many Provinces or a Province which had many Bishops Churches be taken for a single Church Sect. 5. The same I say of Carthage which was the Metropolis of Africa and the first of six Provinces before
execution of it on others or the person in foro externo But still the Church hath done her part in Legislation to oblige as aforesaid § 6. He saith Persons excommunicate are to be denounced so every six months that others may have notice of them Answ 1. But are they not excommunicate then before they are so oft denounced yea or at all as far as aforesaid § 7. He saith I have fully answered my own Objection by saying I am not bound to execute the sentence on my self Answ 1. He would not say that he approveth the answer For if he do he confuteth himself that would have us execute the silencing sentence on our selves and the sentence against publick worship in any way but theirs 2. My reason is because I take the unjust sentence as invalid else I were bound in foro interiore 3. But sure the Church at least relaxeth that mans obligation to present Communion by shewing her will if she did not oblige him to withdraw Read over the words of the Canon and see whether they make them not as unintelligible and flexible to what sense they please as they do the words of the Act of Uniformity and Liturgy § 8. As to his two cases in which the excommunicate may be schismaticks for not communicating 1. We question not the first Just excommunication excludeth none but the guilty Here then indeed is the state of our Controversie Had he proved that in all the cases before cited it is just to excommunicate us he had done somewhat when now for want of it he betrayeth his cause 2. His 2d is If they form new Churches Answ 1. Is forming new Churches and not communicating with the old ones all one Our present question is of the later So that this great Accuser seemeth plainly to absolve all from being bound to Communicate with them who are unjustly excommunicate and gather not new Churches 2. But may not the unjustly excommunicate that cannot on just terms be restored worship God in some publick Church Doth such a wicked sentence bind men to live like Atheists till death or deprive them of their right to all God's Ordinances even many Papist Doctors and Councils say the contrary And how else do you justifie the Church of England against the Papists charge of Schism § 9. p. 372. He still seemeth to think that His own and others reasonings may change all the truly honest Christians in the Land to hold all the things imposed lawful Answ These thoughts of the Bishops in 1660. and 1661. have brought us all to the pass that we are at And if after 20 years so great experience of the inefficacy of all their Disputes yea and Prisons and after the notice of the nature and different cases of men they still trust to bring us to Concord on these terms disputing with such men is in vain The Lord deliver us from them CHAP. XII Of the English sort of Sponsors and the exclusion of Parents duty § 1. PAge 380. He saith I several times mention this as one of the grounds of the unlawfulness of the peoples joyning in Communion with us yea as the greatest objection Answ Four places of my writings are cited and all will testifie to him that will read them the untruth of the Doctors words This is an unhappy course of accusations I can find no word of The unlawfulness of the peoples joyning in Communion with you on this ground On the contrary I have taught men how to make this very action in them lawful viz. By getting if possible credible Sponsors of the old sort and agreeing with them to be the Parents Representer and promise as in his name or at least but as his second undertaking the Education of the Child if he die or apostatize which was the old sort and himself to be present and signifie his consent by gesture though he may not speak But I have shewed 1. That this must be done besides the Churches order that hath no such thing 2. That subscribing to the Churches order herein is unlawful 3. That the Church which refuseth the Child lawfully offered ought not to blame that person that cannot or will not make such shifts but getteth another Pastor to Baptize him whom they sinfully refuse But this is not to prove it unlawful to have Communion with you But it 's lawful to use better also when they can being thus repulsed by you § 2. He saith The Parents are to provide such as are fit to under take that office Answ 1. No one is fit for it as used by the Liturgy but an Adopter that taketh the Child for his own For he undertaketh the Parents work And it 's lis sub judice whether any others undertaking besides a Parent or Owner can prove the Child to be in the Covenant as offered and have right to the seal and benefits Atheists and Insidels Children are unholy 1 Cor. 7. 14. 2. If any were sit few Parents can get such as will understandingly and deliberately and credibly promise them to do all that Godfathers must by the Liturgy undertake I never knew one in my life that seemed to the Parent to mean any such thing much less to do it I have in my younger time been Godfather to three or four But we before agreed with the Parents to intend no more than to be Witnesses and the Father to be the Entitler and the undertaker I did in 1640. Baptize two by the Liturgy without Crossing and never more in 6. or 7. years after because of the imposed corruptions Mr. Kettilby the Bookseller unless his Father had another Child of the same name baptized the same year was one But his Father gave him his name and promised all his own duty and his Uncle and Aunt standing as Sponsors we before agreed that they should signifie but Witnesses and friendly helpers in case of need 2. But what if the Parents are bid provide such that is no discharge of their own part nor are they bound to cast their duty on others § 3. He saith as to the Child 's Right to Baptism that the Godfathers stand in a threefold capacity 1. Representing the Parent in offering 2. Representing the Child in promising 3. In their own as undertakers of his education c. Answ 1. I will not till he confute them repeat my proofs that in the Church of England's sence the Godfathers are not the Parents representatives at all nor speak in their name 2. If they were then when the Parents both are Atheists Infidels Hobbists scorners at Godliness Hereticks the Godfathers can represent them but as they are and their own faith entitleth not the Child because they stand in the persons of Atheists Infidels c. your Church doth not like this doctrine 3. And as to their representing the Child quo jure is the doubt It cannot be done without some representing power given them And who gave it them 4. And as to the third Person in this multiform
feeble onsets of your canker'd fiery opponents whose writings against you most of them seem to me to be indited by nothing but spleen and choler Nor have I been able to ascribe the ingaging of so many virulent pens against you to any other cause than the indeavours of Satan to hinder the success which your powerful pen hath had against the Dark Kingdom And the spirit that I have perceiv'd to animate some of their wild ravings hath confirm'd me in that belief that it was the great Abaddon that inspir'd their undertakings I thought e're this to have given you a more publick specimen of mine affections by indeavouring somewhat in your vindication against the calumnies and feeble arguings of some of those fiery Assailants But collateral occasions and other studies have hitherto diverted me Yet I shall not forget my obligations assoon as I can be master of convenient time and opportunities for the performance But I see my paper warns me And though I should please my self by a larger expression of my respects and sense of your high deservings from every one that hath had the happiness to be taught by you either from the Press or Pulpit yet I dare not be so rude in this first Address as to be troublesome and importunate I know your occasions are such as that they cannot bear a long divertisement I had several times design'd at London to have taken the boldness to have waited on you but the consideration how you were constantly ingag'd in business prevented the execution of those intentions And about three years since I came from Oxford on purpose to Kederminster to see you there and hear you preach both which I was happy in But you were then so busie in the company of several Ministers that were at your house that I could not gain an opportunity of making way for a future acquaintance If I were sure that you were less incumbred now and that you made any considerable stay in the Country I would make a journey on purpose to wait on you I have with this sent you a small Discourse of mine own of which I desire your acceptance For the subject and design I know it will not displease you And for the management I 'me confident you will not quarrel with it because it is not so popular as it might have been when you shall know that 't was intended for those of a Philosophick Genius I durst not Sir be any longer troublesome and therefore shall conclude with this profession that the freedom of your spirit the impartiality of your inquiries the Catholickness of your judgment and affections the peaceableness and moderation of your principles the generosity and publick spiritedness of your disposition the exact uniform holiness of your life and your indefatigable industry for the good of souls excellencies which I never knew so combin'd in one have so endear'd you to me that there is not that person breathing that hath such a share in the affections and highest value of Most excellent Sir one of the meanest though most sincere of your affectionate lovers and admirers Jos Glanvill Sept. 3. 61. CHAP. XV. Some Notes on the Book called the Lively Picture of Dr. Lud. Moulin and his Repentance subscribed by Dr. Simon Patrick Dean of Peterborough and Dr. Gilb. Burnet § 1. I Had taken no notice of this Book had not the Author by citing my words against Dr. L. Moulin as justifying his Character made me a party Therefore I shall impartially speak my judgment of him and the accusation lest I be thought to own all that the Writer speaketh of him and so to be as guilty of uncharitableness as he seemeth to me to be I honour the name for the sake of his famous Father and his worthy Brother Peter yet living who by his Answer to Philanax Anglicus c. hath well deserved of all Protestants And his worthy Brother Cyrus and his very worthy Son now dead And I truly believe that Dr. Lewis was a sincere honest-hearted man though Dr. Stillingfleet seem to dislike my giving him that title And I will tell you why I think so § 2. I ever observed that his faults lay in his weakness and not in wickedness 1. He was not a man of an accurate distinguishing head and so was apt to take verbal Controversies for real 2. And it was no singular thing in him that hereby he was led by the authorities which he most valued to think that the differences between the Remonstrants and Contra remonstrants were much greater than they are and Arminianism as it was called to be a more heinous thing than indeed it is 3. And when he thought that God's Cause as Bradwardine called it was so deeply engaged against such Opinions who can wonder if he was zealous against them 4. And then he had a hasty rashness in speaking what he thought was true and necessary when sometimes it was not well tryed and sometime it was in an imprudent manner and time And so in his hast ran into the temerities and mistakes which Mr. Daillé and I did blame him for But I never perceived that he had more passion much less fury than other ordinary disputers but a more raâ—h and blustering way of uttering his mind sometimes and in some Cases where he thought Religion much concerned He hâ—â— so servent â— love to truth that he sometime rusht upon mistakes that wore the vizor of it and then truth real or supposed whatever it cost him he would speak 5. I ever observed it was in his too extreme opposition to some real errour or crime that he was carried into his temerities 6. And I never found that he was a worldling nor sinned by the preference of worldly interest And doubtless the love of worldly profits honours and pleasures are more dangerously contrary to the love of God than some rash uncharitable words and censures in a Cause which he thought was Gods § 3. Yea I found him more patient of confutation contradiction and reproof than most men that ever I disputed with his Zeal which you call fury being far more for God than for himself I began with him about 24 years ago confuting his Latine Book of Justification against his Brother Cyrus I wrote a second time against him in the Preface cited by his Picture-drawer about Universal Redemption and had said much more in a Book of Universal Redemption going to the Press which I cast by because Mr. Daillés came then out which had the same testimonial part and more which I intended Yet I never heard that the Dr. gave me any uncivil or uncharitable word nor did he ever reply to either of these Books nor signified any abatement of his love And I think this shewed a forgiving mind § 4. But it 's intimated that this was because we agreed in other things I answer we disagreed also even about Church-Government which was the dividing Controversie of those times The Dr. was zealous for the Magistrates
all the Anabaptists Independants Presbyterians c. Who never were of their Church to be none of the Separatists here meant But if by withdrawing he mean not joyning in Communion either he meaneth in the whole Communion or but in part If the whole then the many thousands that live in the Parishes and Communicate not in the Sacrament are no members of the Parish Church And who knoweth then who are of their Church And how few in many Parishes are of it that yet pass for Members of the Church of England And yet I that joyn with them am none of it in their account And. 3. What meaneth he by Constant Communion I go to the Parish Church when sickness hindreth not once a day I go to the Sacrament and am none of their Church Thousands go but rarely and thousands scarce at all at least to the Sacrament and these are of their Church and no separatists 4. But perhaps the conjunction is explicative and joyn with separate Congregations for greater purity and Edification If so then he that never joyneth with them nor any other is none of the intended separatists 2. Nor he that goeth to other Churches on other accounts than for purity of Worship and Edification As Papists that go as to the only true Church for the Authority § 3. But the utter ambiguity is in the word separate And that you may understand it he explaineth it by repeating it By separation he means withdrawing to separate Congregations But the doubt is which are the separate Congregations I named many sorts of Lawful and unlawful separations but he will not tell us which he meaneth by any intreaâ—y § 4. I would my self yet that I may be understood tell the reader what sorts of separation I renounce and what I own But I have done it so oft and largely that I am ashamed to repeat it as oft as mens confusion calls me to it The reader who thinks it worth his labour may see it done in my first Plea for Peace and in the Preface to my Cath. Theol. and specially in the beginning of the third Part of my Treat of Concord and in Christ Direct And he calls me here afterward to the same Certainly it is only sinful separation that is in the question and as certainly there are many sorts not sinful I am locally separate from all Churches save that where I am I morally separate from the Roman Church as an unlawful Policy and all other which are in specie against Gods word I separate from some for Heresie as being not capable matter of a Church while they own not all the Essence of Christianity I separate from some as Imposing sin and refusing my Communion without it I separate from some as having no lawful Pastors some being uncapable matter and some being usurpers that have no true call I separate from some only so far as to prefer a better rebus sic stantibus sometime a better as to the Doctrine sometime as to the Worship sometime as to the Discipline sometime and mostly as to the Pastors worth and work some go from their own Parish because the Minister is very ignorant in comparison of another to whom they go some that hear the Minister preach against preciseness and for Ceremonies had rather hear another that calleth them to holiness some that have tollerable Preachers go to Doctor Stilling sleet and Doctor Tillotson as better some go for neerness to another Church Some go from their own Parish because the Minister cuts the Common-prayer too short and Preacheth too long some because they would have it so go to such some because the Parson is an Arminian others because he is contrary Some go to the Minister that is strict in keeping the scandalous from the Sacrament some therefore go from him some remove their Dwellings or Lodgings for these ends and some do not some go from their own Parish for the benefit of the Organs in another And of old when Nonconformists had Parish Churches and used some part of the Liturgy many went to them from their own Parishes Some of these are lawful some are unlawful Most certainly they that go from their own Parishes yea or to Nonconformists Assemblies in London go not all on the same account Nor doth the Doctor and such other separate from me as I am said to do from them but otherwise and much more § 5. If he would first have told us what Separation is sinful secondly and then have proved us guilty of it instead of the confused talk of Separation and a begging the question by suposing that to be sinful which he will neither discribe nor prove such it had been of some usefulness to our conviction But I confess I never liked those Physitians who give their Patients the Medicines that they are best stored with or they can best spare be the disease whatsoever Nor the disputer that poureth out what he is best furnished to say how useless soever to the reader or to the Cause Disputeing should not be like boys playing at Dust point who cover their Points in a great heap of Dust and then throw Stones or Cudgels at it and he that first uncovereth them wins them Dusty heaps of ambiguous words confusedly poured out befriend not Truth that should be Naked nor the reader § 6. Some thought it was the Place called Conventicle houses which made the Conformists call us Separatists and they got oft into Parish Churches and Chappell 's But these were made the worst of separatists and punished the more And doubletss it is not meeting at any of the new Tabernacles nor at the Spittle nor at Sturbridge Fair where Preaching hath long been used nor in a Prison nor at the Gallows to Prisoners and People which are faulty Separation § 7. Some thought that they meant that its want of the Common-prayer that maketh us Separatists and they have tryed and read the Common-prayer in their Assemblys But these have been accused and suffered the more And even Mr. Cheny was forced to fly his Country for reading it and Preaching in an unlicensed meeting And some reading more and some less by this it will not be known who are the Separatists The old Nonconformists in their Parish Churches read some more some less and now some Conformists vary They say a Conformist at Greenwich keepeth up a Common-prayer Conventicle some Conformists are accused for overpassing much One lately suspended for wearing the Surplice too seldom and refusing to pray for our gratious Queen and James Duke of York How much of this goeth to make a Separatist § 8. Some thought it was want of the Magistrates leave that made them call us separatists But when the King Licensed us the accusation was the same yea Mr. Hinkley and many others tell you that they took this for worst of all § 9. Some say it is want of the Bishops Licence But as Mr. Tho. Gouge hath his University Licence and I have Bishop Sheldon's Licence
say against it 4. Few of the most ignorant that needed them would then have left the Parish Churches to hear Nonconformists in private but now many will come to us that cannot get in to the Parish Churches Other different effects may be named Sect. 10. 4. And though I accuse you not you that unjustly said before that I made you seem a company of perjured Villains seems to think your self that the fore alledged causes make many of the people think little better of some and a Church thought to consist of such Pastors and Vestries c. essential parts differ from those that do not 2. And the multitude of Atheists and filthy livers and the thousands of Noncommunicants who are still taken for real members of your Churches have now stood out against so long means and patience that the reasons of longer waiting for Reformation much differs from theirs in the beginning 3. The Canon at first did not ipso facto excommunicate all that do but profess themselves Nonconformists as since it did 4. The Bishops and their Canoneers had not then cast out 2000 nor neer so many Preachers as now and so did not so much tempt the people to flee from them as persecutors thorns thistles or wolves 5. When one Bishop cast any out some other usually would endure them but now it was not so 6. The people saw daily that you bore with those as no Schismaticks that never communicated nor used to hear you even the greater half of many Parishes and took them for Church members as is said and therefore they had reason to hope that they that communicated somewhere with Protestants especially that communicated also with your own Churches were as good Members and by good Pastors would be as well endured Sect. 11. 5. Lastly The forenamed causes of our preaching much differ 1. We saw the Kingdom though under usurpers engaged by Vow Practice and about sixteen years possession and custom to another way and who could expect that a Law should presently change them all and assure them of absolution 2. They that conformed were the more averse to see about six thousand Ministers that had gone the other way so suddenly change as to declare assent and consent to a Book which they never saw 3. The case of the Plague the burning of the Churches the Kings Licenses c. I named before which verily made a great difference 4. And the numbers that call to us for help makes a great difference when then they that needed them most did not desire it These are some differences Sect. 12. p. 95. He saith There is no reason of separation because of the doctrine of our Church Answ But now you have corrupted it in the Article of Infants undoubted salvation before described and before by the doctrines about Prelacy Godfathers power and duty Impositions c. implyed in your practical Canons there is great cause of Nonconformity P. 96. Repeateth that great mistake that there are no alterations in our own judgment which make the terms of Communion harder than before Answ What hope then of being understood how far is this from truth The terms are sar harder to Ministers and to the people they are easier in some things as amending some translations c. but it is not to them a small matter to make such a change of their Pastors as in too many Parishes is made The Bishop promised them at Kiderminster when he forbad me to preach that they should be no losers by the change They said and I had great reason to believe them that the Successor knew so little of the sence of the Creed and preach'd so rarely four times a year I am loth to tell you how that they durst not be guilty of encouraging him in undertaking the charge of Souls nor durst take him for their Pastor And the great increase of buildings in London shuts thousands now out of such Parish Churches who could have got in heretofore and some more differences are before implyed p. 97. As other Churches own your Churches so do we though not your imposed sins Sect. 13. p. I was in hope to have met with some answer to my importunate Question What would you have the many score thousands do that cannot come within your Churches to hear But no importunity will prevail for so small a matter with inexorable men But he saith 1. that this is but a pretence 2. And that no man denyeth that more places are desirable c. Ans 1. It is me that he is now accusing why doth he barely say and not prove that it 's but a pretence I never set up a Meeting place but in St. Martins Parish where are said to be forty thousand more than can come within the Church And when they would not suffer me to use it I gladly left it to the use of the Parish Minister I preach now twice a week elsewhere but both the places are in Neighbourhoods where many thousands cannot hear in the Parish Churches What if other men have other sufficient reasons as the utter incapacity of some Ministers or the like doth it follow that my own case and prosessed reason is a meer pretence why then did I use no publick preaching while I lived in such Villages where the people might go to Church and why did I constantly twice a day lead them thither though some disliked it 2. The question is not whether more Churches are desirable But where they are not whether many thousands must live like Atheists without all publick teaching or Divine Worship for fear of being called Schismaticks Is not this plainly to chuse damnation If the Gospel be needless why do we wish the Heathens had it Why subscribe you against mens hopes of being saved in all their several Religions If Church worship be needless why is a Clergy to be so honoured and maintained at so dear a rate Aud why do you make such a stir with Separatists to bring them to your Churches Can men not blinded by interest chuse but wonder that so many thousands in a Parish should be taken for Church Members and live quietly that come not to any Church or never communicate with any and yet that godly persons who hear and communicate with their old tryed Pastors yea with such as communicate with you should be preach'd and written against as Schismaticks and judged to that which some endure Did this Dr. think that to drop in the case of other men when he was at a loss would make good his charge against me and such as I Mr. Tombes and Mr. Williams preached other doctrine do I do so and have you proved it But seeing he will needs bring the case to Kiderminster whether I would suffer Mr. Tombes to gather a Congregation I must not balk it but advise him hereafter to keep himself at a greater distance and not to put his own followers who are willing enough to believe him upon utter impossibilities He sped better
I give you his Letter to me because page 34. He â—aith The greatest part of thâ—se that now scâ—tâ—r and run â—bâ—â—â— do it out of Hâ—…â—ancy or Faction or Interest or Aâ—…y or desire of being câ—… godly 〈…〉 really out of Conscience and Conviction of duty and thâ—se the penalties duly exacted would bring back with much more sharp and cruel As if he knew the consciences of the most But see how much otherwise he lately thought of some Agapetus Diacon ad Justinian Adhort cap. 35. Episcopis vi gladio invitos regentibus quam Regibus magis congrua NOMIZE 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Existima tunc regnare te tutò cum volentibus imperas hominibus Quod enim invitò subjicitur seditiones molitur captâ occasione Quod vere vinculis benevolentiae tenetur firmam servat ergatenentem observantiam 1 Pet. 5. 1 2 3 4. The Elders which are AMONG you I exhort who am also an Elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ and also a partaker of the Glory that shall be revealed Feed the Flock of God which is among you taking the oversight thereof not by constraint but willingly Not for FILTHY LUCRE but of a ready mind Neither as being Lords over Gods heritage bâ—â— being ensamples to the Flock And when the chief Shepherd shall appear ye shall receive a Crown of Glory that fadeth not away See Dr. Hammond on the Text. Mr. Glanviles Letter Reverend and most Honoured Sir I Have often taken my pen in hand with a design to signifie to you how much I love and honour so much learning piety and exemplary goodness as you are owner of And how passionately desirous I have been and am to be known to a person with whom none hath a like place in my highest esteem and value But my affections and respects still growing infinitely too big for mine expression I thought I should but disparage them by going about to represent them And when I sate down to consider how I might most advantagiously set forth my regards and high sense of your great deserts I always found my self confounded with subject And the throng of mine affections each of them impatient to be first upon my paper hindred one another's gratification Great passions are difficultly spoken And I find my self now so pained with the sense that I cannot write suteably to the honour I have for you that I can scarce forbear thâ—owing away my pen being near concluding that 't is better to speak nothing in such a subject than a little But when I consider you as a person that have high affections for those excellent qualifications which in the highest degree are your possession and suteably resent the worth of those that own them I am incourag'd to think that you may conceive how I honour you though my pen cannot tell it you by reflecting upon your own estimate of those that are of the highest form of learning parts and exemplary piety or more compendiously such in your judgment as I take you for Incomparable And yet I have a jealousie that that will not reach it for though I think your judicious esteem of such cannot be surpassed yet I am apt to think that none ever got such an interest and hold upon your passions as hath the object of my admiration on mine Nor yet can I rebuke them as extravagant though at the highest since they take part with my severest judgment and were indeed inflamed by it And I profess I never found my self so dearly inclin'd to those of my nearest blood or so affectionately concern'd for my most beloved friends and acquaintance as for you whom I had never the happiness to converse with but in your excellent writings nor ever often saw but in the Pulpit Yea I speak unfeignedly I have always interessed my self more in your vindication when your unreasonable prejudic'd enemies have malign'd you and delighted my self more in your just praises from those that know you than ever my self-love or ambition could prompt me to do in any case of mine own Sir I hope you believe that I speak my most real sentiments and do not go about to complement you For I must be very weak and inconsiderate did I think to recommend my self to so much serious wisdom by such childish fooleries Therefore if my expressions savour any thing above common respect I beseech you to believe 't is for that their cause is not common but as much above ordinary as their object I know your humility and remarkable self denyal will not bear to read what I cannot but speak as often as I have occasion to mention your great worth and merits However I cannot chuse but here acknowledge how much I am a debtor to your incomparable writings In which when you deal in practical subjects I admire your affectionate piercing heart-affecting quickness And that experimental searching solid convictive way of speaking which are your peculiars for there is a smartness accompanying your pen that forces what you write into the heart by a sweet kind of irresistable violence which is so proper to your serious way that I never met it equal'd in any other writings And therefore I cannot read them without an elevation and emotions which I seldom feel in other perusals And when you are ingag'd in doctrinal and controversal matters I no less apprehend in them your peculiar excellencies I find a strength depth concinnity and coherence in your notions which are not commonly elsewhere met withall And you have no less power by your triumphant reason upon the judgments of capable free inquirers than you have upon their affections and consciences in your devotional and practical discourses And methinks there is a force in your way of arguing which overpowers opposition Among your excellent Treatises of this nature your Rational confirmation of that grand principle of our Religion the Sacred Authority of Scripture your solid dependent notions in the business of justification and your striking at the Root of Antinomianism in them which I look on as the canker of Christianity and have always abhorr'd as the shadow of death And your excellent Catholick healing indeavours These I say deserve from me particular acknowledgments I profess the loose impertinent unsound cobweb arguings of the most that I had met with in the Matter of the Divine Authority of Scripture had almost occasioned my stumbling at the threshold in my inquiries into the grounds of my Religion For I am not apt to rely on an implicit faith in things of this moment But your performances in this kind brought relief to my staggering judgment and triumph't over my hesitancy As they did also to an excellent person a friend of mine who was shaken on the same accounts that I was And we are both no less obliged by what you have done in the other things formentioned Which I profess I judge so rational that I cannot but wonder almost to stupor to behold the fierce though
Power in Erastus sense and went rather further than Dr. Stilling fleet in his Irenicum And as I was before against him so after this about 12 years ago I wrote that Book against him about the Magistrates Power in Church-matters in which I called him My sincere friend thinking sincere friendship consistent with such a difference and an open Confutation And if the contrary must be repented of I hope such charity is no crime This third Book against him also he took patiently and without breach of Love And when I laboured to perswade him to retract his Writings against Excommunication though he held still to his Conclusion and thought that the great work that God called him to in the World was to discover the Papal and Prelatical Usurpation of the Magistrates power under the name of Ecclesiastical yet I made him confess all the matter that I pleaded for and he made me see that his errour lay most in meer ambiguous words which he had not â—…ateness enough to explicate All this patience signified not uncharitableness rage or fury And I obliged him not by praise but 〈…〉 him for his eagerness for his own indigested conceptions nor gave him any thanks for his indiscreet and excessive praises afterwards given me in his Patronus bonae fidei Upon all this I would put some questions to the sober thoughts of the Author of his Picture 1. Whether there be not as great signs of sincerity humility and patience in such a behaviour and in that great love which he had to all that he thought Godly men though he too hardly judged of others for that which he thought great errour and sin as in those that cannot bear a just defence of dissenters against their unjust accusations nor endure men to tell why they rather suffer than Conform 2. Whether he that maketh him so very bad a man and incredible a lyar for too rash censoriousness of dissenters and some untruths vented in rash zeal do not tempt men to give as odious titles to those Reverend persons who go very far beyond him in untruths and uncharitable censures And whether they that were for the silencing and utter ruining of about 2000 Ministers and call'd to Magistrates to execute the Laws against them and that unchurch all the Reformed Churches which have not a continued succession of Diocesan Bishops shew not as much uncharitableness as he did that described some too hardly And whether most of the Books written against me by Conformists such as the Bishop of Worcester's Letter the Impleader Mr. Hinkley and many more be not much fuller of untruths in matter of fact than the Drs But yet I think it a sin to give them such a Character as this and render the persons as incredible lyars because errour interest and faction made some so unadvised 3. If it deserve such a Character to censure Arminians as dangerously erroneous and befriending Popery whether you do not consequently so stigmatize the old Church of England before Bishop Laud's time Even Arch-bishop Whitgift Bishop Fletcher and the rest who drew up the Lambeth Articles Arch-bishop Abbot and the Church in his time except six Bishops c. King James and the whole Church as consenting by six Delegates to the Synod of Dort And also that Synod and all the Forein Reformed Churches that consented to it And is not this more than Dr. Moulin did 4. And are they not then to be accordingly stigmatized who on the other side make the Calvinists as odious accusing them of Blasphemy Turcisme and doing as much against them as Dr. Heylin in the Life of Arch-bishop Laud tells us was done in England on that account 5. And if such hard thoughts of Arminians as furthering Popery deserve your Character whether by consequence you so brand not all those Parliaments who voted against it accordingly and made it one of the dangerous grievances of the Land And is not that as faulty as for Dr. Moulin too much to blame you 6. Yea I doubt you stigmatize thus so great a part of Christians in all the World as I am loth to mention so rare is it to hear of any Country where they are not so much guilty of sects and factions as by education and interest to run in a stream of uncharitable censures of one another speaking evil of more than they understand as I have proved in my Cathol Theolog. about this subject 7. Seeing it is above 20 years since I wrote that against Dr. Moulin which you cite and he never found fault with it nor justified his mistakes may I not think that he was convinced and repented And you that praise his death-bed repentance should not Characterize him by failings twenty years repented of 8. How do you know that the Dr. repented not of his too hard words of you till his death-bed You are mistaken In his health I more than once blamed him 1. For his censure of Dr. Stillingfleet and the other particular persons whose worth was known and had deserved well of the Protestant Churches 2. For his extending those censures to the Conformists and Church which belong to some particular persons and the most are not guilty of And 3. For his Book of the fewness of the saved as presumptuous And as far as I could then discern he repented of them all but laid the ill Title-page of the last on the Book-seller And he still thought of Causes and Parties as very different he owned not his harsh words or censures aforesaid I found him not raging nor impenitent 9. Doth not your own description of his great readiness to beg forgiveness and lothness to own any thing uncharitable shew a better spirit than your picture doth describe 10. Is not he as like to be a sincere man who asketh forgiveness of his faults rash censures and words as he that repenteth of his former duties his Pacificatory principles and Writings Surely to repent of evil is a better sign than to repent of good 11. Because you call us to acquit our selves by disowning Dr. Moulin may we not disown both his faults and our own without disowning God's grace and mens piety and worth would you be so disowned for your own faults 2. And how should I disown his rashness better than to write what I wrote against him and say what I said to him would you have a Synod called to reprove every rash word 12. Because you justly value mens repentance I will be thankful to you to further mine and give me leave to further yours Only I foretell you that your words shall not offend me by their hardness if they have but truth and you call me to repent of my sin and not of serving God I do not repent of defending Truth and Duty nor of seeking to save the Reader from the infection of false accusation and arguings which would destroy his charity and innocency by the fullest manifesting the falshood and evil of the words and deeds which are the Instruments