as Duty to grant them something lest they get what we are unwilling to part from Some things imposed are without all controversie an offence to many weak ones and certainly we ought to remove the Stumbling-block so far as the safety of the Church will permit tho' they never Petition for the kindness unless their neglect of what we think is their Duty may excuse our neglect of what we know to be our own And indeed it is a pretty shuffle that because some Men are thought to be stiff therefore the Church owes no regards either to them or any of their Party of whom many may be gained if the fault is not our own But in truth all this is only a blind excuse for not doing what he hath no mind should be done for the close of this Paragraph saith it is declared in the Preface to the Liturgy as also in the Kings Ecclesiastical Commission that Alterations may be made according to the exigency of times and occasions yet he opposes another part of the Preface to both viz. That the Book that is of Common Prayer as it stood before Established by Law doth not contain in it any thing contrary to the Word of God or to sound Doctrin or which a godly Man may not with a good Conscience use and submit to or which is not fairly defensible to which he adds that it hath been altered for the better in some hundreds of places since suggesting hereby that it needs no Alterations now which gives an undoubted evidence 1. Of his inconsistency with himself for he argues against Alterations meerly for want of application from Dissenters and yet under the same Head changes his Topick disputing against such Alterations from the perfection of our Liturgy he would have none because Dissenters ask for none and then because there is need of none Certainly he shifts his Argument because he suspects that the first prpposed will not stand the shock and therefore brings on this as a reserve to support it 2. This speaks his Insincerity for he knows we plead for Alterations from a prudential necessity arising not so much from the Book it self as from the weakness of some who misunderstand and the perversness of others who industriously abuse it What need then of justifying the Book in this argument unless to amuse the Reader with an heap of pleas to no purpose 3. This discovers his grose Inadvertency in that he pleads against Alterations from Dissenters not asking for them and yet in the same Head declares himself absolutely against all Alterations whether they ask or not in that he uses the Kings Commission and the Preface to the Common Prayer against the design of that Commission and that very Liberty which the Preface it self doth give us so fain would he carry on a design which he is ashamed to own i. e. hinder Alteration and yet lay the fault at the Dissenters doors Whatever is at the bottom this is generally the humor amongst Men of this complexion they wish for Peace but will part with nothing for it and the Gentlemen in this Authors Neighbourhood who speak fair but do nothing are like the disobedient Son who said I go but went not for which he had I 'le warrant you as good reasons as these before you 2. He pleads p. 3. That they ought to declare what Alterations will satisfie else they have no reason to make any Answ 1 This some of 'em have done already under Car. 2. and still do by their frequent complaints and the reasons they give of their separation And the late promise of accommodation must respect the Alteration of those things so far as may be that offend the more reasonable and judicious amongst ' em Now after all this for them to make new proposals is not only actum agere but a putting their Cause back which is already known and hath advanced so far as to have gained the promise of a due consideration Therefore there is now nothing wanting on our parts in order to their case and our security but a performance of that Promise By this Paragraph he expects that all parties should agree in their demands which he knows and p. 2. acknowledges is impossible therefore his requiring impossible conditions of peace is no better than a fallacious denial of that peace it selfe Hence he urges the extravagancy of some men that have trampled on Condescensions made in the Year 1661. and others proposed by the present Bishop of Worcester in the Year 1681. which he thinks enough to render the Church justly sour and peevish forever Answ 1 He. withal acknowledges that these are but some that flie such heights and grants us p. 2. that all cannot agree in common Proposals which utterly destroys his argument for as some will not so the very Differences amongst themselves do assure us that others will accept reasonable Condescensions and the gaining a part is not only all we expect but is sufficient to our end too These few he quotes by such unreasonable flights must be presumed to design the obstructing all future Alterations as knowing that this is the ready way to break their Parties Therefore our Pamphlet not only trifles but also gratifies those few hot and designing men who intend not an accommodation but the maintaining of a Faction But p. 4. drives on the same argument quoting a Book of Mr. R. B's which saith There are Forty sinful particulars in our Communion besides Thirty tremendous Principles and Circumstantials which affright Dissenters from it and the healing attempt requires not such abatements as Authority now designs but the admission of their new Model for a Comprehension which is such as will make every Parish Church independent All which things p. 5. assure us that the Convocation neither can nor will alter and yet if any one remain unaltered the Schism will continue Whence he asks Cui bono To what end should any Alterations be made To which he thinks a satisfactory Answer cannot be given But this is an argument of the weakness of his reasoning not of the strength of his Cause for this supposes that all Dissenters are of the same mind which is a poor fallacy called Petitio principii a taking that for granted which he must prove else his whole cause falls to the ground To which we Answer It is well known that Dissenters under the same denomination are of very different minds as to the matters of our Church for some are offended at one thing some at another and some at more which together they think give a just cause of Separation Therefore a few Alterations would leave some no Objection and others too little even in their own judgments to justifie a Schism This supposes that Alterations will gain Dissenters only which we can never grant him because a great part of this Nation stands more or less doubtful and indifferent between the Church and the Conventicle who seeing the peaceable inclination of the Church manifested
will not promote Divisions in the Church This was the reason says p. 11. that the Clergy opposed a Bill for Comprehension contriv'd by Bishop Wilkins and for which and other Reasons the House of Commons cast it out Answ 1 He supposes what he can never prove viz. That such Comprehensions would have made a Division in the Church therefore this being a mere surmise must not be allow'd the repute of an Argument The Security he demands would have been their Preferments which would have made it their interest to support as much as they now think it their interest to pull us down and likewise their Oaths and Penalty of the Laws which would chastise every Deviation from their Rule But however to give strength and colour this suspition he says p. 10. That some Bishops and others preferred under King Charles the Second did attempt this To which we Answer What he calls Division was only a Comprehension design'd by those whose Judgment as well as Moderation we have lately had just cause to admire Such a Division we have in the Church at present and ever shall have so long as there be moderate and judicious men in it and had that Comprehension been established it would have prov'd our security at this very day Call it a Division yet they did only attempt but could not effect it and indeed it is so hard to sway a Constitution that not only the Nature of the thing but this Fruitless undertaking too may justly allay his fears of admitting a few moderate Men into the Church by some reasonable Alterations In p. 3 4. he passionately pleads against all Alterations from the unlikelyhood of gaining one Dissenter who are so stubborn and unreasonable in the terms they propose for an Accommodation and yet here he is afraid of such a number coming in as shall divide and ruin the whole Church which speaks the Author to pursue an Hypothesis but not the Truth and resolv'd by all manner of Pleas agreeing and disagreeing probable and improbable true and false or by any thing else you can imagine to confound and obstruct intended Condescensions It seems very marvellous that these very surmises set on foot by Popish Polititians purposely to hinder our Union at the restoring our Liturgy and the later project of Comprehension should not only be received by some hot men then but be pleaded at this time of the day when we have seen the dismal effects of these Policies which have used the Church against Dissenters and then Dissenters against the Church in order to the ruin of the whole Protestant interest and which at this day do give the greatest advantage to French and Popish designs throughout the World This seems to bode us no good and looks like a fate upon Men which makes them not their own Murderers only but the common Executioners of Protestants and their Religion But in the same Page he pleads against Alterations from another Topick viz reasonable Condescentions to one party is likely to encourage unreasonable Sollicitations from another Answ 1 This produced no such effect formerly Why then should it now This is the way to prevent what he pretends to fear for men are now in expectation and delays may make them clamorous but a present settlement puts a stop to all future expectations But if otherwise yet Such Alterations strengthning the Church will render it more safe for her to reject unreasonable Sollicitations hereafter than to frustrate reasonable expectations at the present But he adds Our frequent changes in some things may make men question all and at last center in the Church of Rome Answ 1 Have any or all former Changes considered together done so If they have produce your instances if they have not Why should one Alteration more do it especially considering it is well known that our Church has always allow'd such Changes Was this probable the Popish party would be wel-willers to Alterations whereas they and their confidents are raised in their expectations from the difficulties that attend this Affair The matter of Fact is undeniable therefore they or himself must be in an Error And if we consider his undertaking and performances we shall easily believe that he is not Infallible Thus you have his Feats whence in the next Paragraph he Triumphs reckoning he has knock'd down his Enemies with this Pamphlet as Sampson did the Philistines with the Jaw-bone of an Ass For thus he proceeds And now let the men that are given to change produce those weighty and important reasons required in the Preface to the Common-Prayer or that great necessity which Dr. Beveridge requires for the Alteration even of commodious Laws A bold Challenge indeed however I shall accept it And will shew these important Reasons and great Necessity of present Alterations from 1. The Sacred Scriptures 2. Our Circumstances 3. The general Sense of the Nation 4. The Duty of doing all we can for the keeping and securing our Flocks And 5. Some things themselves imposed 1. The Sacred Scriptures do determine this controversie against our Pamphlet for St. Paul forbids us to offend a weak Brother in using our power in things indifferent This indeed does not affect us as we are now under the Law but it doth affect the Church when the civil Authority calls her to Explain Alter and Omit those things that do offend But you will say that the Church hath power in all matters indifferent whence results the Duty of the Peoples Submission in all such matters It is true but if the People cannot see the Lawfulness of such Submission the Church ought not to press them any further than a due regard to the Souls of Men will allow or the general Interest of Religion and the common safety of the Church doth require 1 Corinth 10.3 We must not do all things that are Lawful but what things are expedient and edifying upon which Scripture Clem. Alex. Paedag. b. 2. c. 1. hath this Note 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Those who will do all that is Lawful quickly fall into that which is Vnlawful and I am sure it is no Paradox that if the Church will do all she may she certainly doth more than she ought because her power must be tempered by a tender and prudential regard to the weakness of all her Members St. Paul 2 Cor. 10.8 speaks of a power that God hath given for edification not for destruction therefore that Church doth abuse her power which by too strict terms of Communion doth not gather and build up but scatter the Flock Indeed at our last settlement the evils we have suffered were not sufficiently foreseen but since sad experience hath given us such terrible admonitions the Church seems utterly inexcusable if she refuse to the best of her skill and power to apply a suitable remedy 2. That a Kingdom divided cannot stand is a Truth so certain and allowed by all observing Men that our Saviour brought this as a Medium to prove that a
Division will ruine even Satan himself and what our Divisions have done this way by obstructing all publick undertakings and exposing us to hazards both at home and abroad I leave the World to judge nor can we think of any other expedient to secure us but Union nor is there any way to Union but mutual condescensions nor must we expect as long experience hath taught us that if we stiffly stand our ground others will move unless perhaps to confound and ruin us therefore if it be necessary to put life into the affairs of Church and State if necessary to secure to our selves Peace and Prospetity it is then necessary to make those Condescensions which seem now the only means to that end 3. This is evident from the general sense of all Parties in the Nation who look upon Alterations as the only Methods of Union which may be proved by an induction of particulars Those who are for Union and Settlement are for Alterations others are against them Moderate Presbyterians and the Unsetled multitude expect Alterations as incouraging motives to the Church Rigid Dissenters who resolve at any rate to maintain their Schism diligently endeavour as we hear from Essex and the West by all imaginable Methods to secure their People from a compliance what Alterations soever the Church may make which abundantly satisfies us that they fear Alterations will endanger their Parties Inferiour Sects whose Principles are inconsistent with Government are against these things lest hereby the Church should become strong enough to quash them at her pleasure While the Papists abhor these Methods as knowing they will obstruct all their designs and suffer them no longer to use Protestants as Tools in the ruining one another Now after all this what is the true reason that this Gentleman with those in his Neighbourhood and others under the same prejudices should oppose these undertakings If because they fear that Dissenters will not be gained or the Church be ruined by it we have the Sense of the whole Nation both Friends and Enemies against them but if for other Reasons let them look to it who must severely answer for their obstructing the most probable Methods of Peace and Unity Therefore if Peace and Unity and the common Interest both of Church and State be of any necessity and importance with us then in the judgment of the Nation Alterations must be of some necessity and importance too because they judge these the most conducive to those ends 4. We argue from the indispensible Duty of doing all we may to secure our Flocks in the ways of Truth and Peace which lies so hard upon us that their Blood will be required at the hands of those Shepherds who suffer them to perish out of negligence humor or any other means whatsoever And certainly few can be so much strangers at home as not to observe that they daily lose some and find others unsetling and perceive those growing incroachments upon our several changes which will quickly hasten things to a confusion and that especially since the present stiffness against Alteration And tho' I do not Damn those that leave us yet Schism is very dangerous and unsetling turns many to loosness and irreligion and occasions some to fix in Opinions that are in themselves Damnable which ought to be well considered by them who have read Jer. 23.1 Wo to the Pastors that destroy and scatter the Sheep of my Pasture saith the Lord. I know that Separation is but an accidental consequence proceeding not from the Nature of our Constitution but from the Weakness and Prejudices of Men yet when experience doth teach us such an accidental evil and the Church is called to provide so far as may be a suitable remedy I must place those that oppose this design amongst such Shepherds that destroy and scatter the Sheep for by such refusal they make the cause of Separation to be not only the others weakness but their own wilfulness too in that as the one will not understand so the other will not remove so far as they may the occasion of error Therefore as Dr. Beveridge saith if it be necessary to reduce wandring Sheep into Christs flock if necessary to take off scruples from the minds of weak Brethren if necessary to suppress all dissentions concerning Religion if necessary to keep those we have and to give up our accounts with joy at the last day it must be necessary to admit such changes as are conducive to such ends 5. We argue from things imposed As 1. Apocryphal Lessons which ought in reason and prudence to be changed for Canonical Scriptures because these containing some things unseemly some improbable and others evidently false do scandalize not only them without the Church but many of those who are frequenters of our daily Prayers His Answer to a Letter from a Minister in the Country brings several Pleas from others against Alterations in this particular p. 25. these are read not to confirm our Faith but to reform our manners this may be better applied to Ecclesiasticus and the Book of Wisdom than to Tobit Judith and Bell and the Dragon which looking like Legends and Romances seem very unapt this way But however why should not they that offend and respect Manners only give place to those Scriptures that do not offend and respect both Faith and Manners too unless men fear that they should do too much good at once He pleads the ancient use of them from Cypr. in Symb. which is it self an Apocryphal Book and not so old as the pretended Author by about One hundred and fifty years and is ascribed by some to St. Hierom by others to Ruffinus but however we are to enquire not what is oldest but what is most edifying indeed they might anciently be of good use but not now since squeamish and critical times are so much prejudiced against them whence according to the Preface to the Common Prayer it is but reasonable they should be changed according to the present exigence Omitting other things 26. pleads for em from the Dissenters who have declared that they are not against Apocryphal Chapters being read in the Church but against their being read as Lessons but our Liturgy doth order them as Lessons therefore this Quotation shews that they require an Alteration if not of the Chapters yet of the manner of reading ' em Where our Pamphleter shews himself such a Master of Defence that instead of hitting of his Enemy he either beats the Air or wounds himself with his own Weapon Some Nonconformists give this as a great Reason of their Dissent that they cannot be satisfied but that the Assent and Consent required by the Act of Uniformity doth reach not only the Use but the Truth of these Books Many of our own Church are offended some persons unsetled and others fixed in their Separation by reason of these Lessons He pleads p. 27. that some Sermons have done more mischief than Bell and the Dragon with