l. 27. r. hers p. 11â— l. 9r and Superstition p. 118. l. 6. r. sayes p. 125. l. r. Churches obedience p. 127. l. 9. r. in no wise p. 132. l. 31. for Kings r. kindes p. 133. l. 7. r. aide p 135. l. 10. r. Nursing p. 136. l. 18. r. And so p. 138. l 3 r. Mahumatism l. 15. r. of others l. 16. r. i.e. such p 140. 25 26. r. gaudentem p. 142. l. 10. r. neatly p. 144. l. 17. r. their duty p. 151. l. 6. r. Authors l. 14. r. Murther p. 153. after l. 26. r. with a designe and purpose to ensnare the Consciences of Inferiours much less shall we take upon us to determine what humane Laws thwart c. p. 15â— l. 10 11. r. Instructions l. 14. r. the Kings p. 156. l. 21. r. these p. 161. l. 21. r. endear his l. 26. r. passed a p. 166. l. 9 10. r. Superstitions Query I. Whether hath Christ Instituted a Gospel Church Reply to the Answer to this Query CAvils at expressions tending only to an unprofitable strife of words ought no less to be avoided then foolish and unlearned Questions This Answer therefore who so early as in his Title Page caution'd his Reader against the one should not himself have so soon obtruded on him the other 〈◊〉 What Prerogative preceeding Ages had above the present to Coyn Phrases in Divinity we should be glad to be informed Or if no expression may be therein us'd we meet not with in the New-Testament we may no longer use Sacrament nor Trinity which are not to be there found And yet a Church constituted and Goverâ—'d according to the Rule of the Gospel may as properly be term'd a Gospel-Church as a Church Constituted and Govern'd according to the Laws of a Nation be term'd a National Church an expression frequently us'd by this Answerer though he meet not with it in the New-Testament Nor possibly in Antiquity at least to express a Christian Church But having given us the Queries meaning in his own words he acknowledges that Christ hath Instituted such a Church Query II. What is an Instituted Church of the Gospel and by what means do Persons become a Church of Christ Reply to the Answer to this Query AS in all Disputations 't is necessary the Terms be agreed upon so here what is meant by Church which in Scripture hath divers acceptations for by Church there is sometimes understood the Elect only or mystical Body of Christ by some called the Holy Catholick Church Sometimes again the universality of the Professors of Christianity commonly called the Church Catholick visible And sometimes by Church is meant only a particular Church or Society of Christians united for the performance of the worship of God in the same individual Ordinances according to the Order by Christ prescrib'd Such was the Church at Corinth the Church at Jerusalem the Church at Antioch the Seven Churches in Asia and divers others mentioned in the New-Testament and is the Church here inquired after To which this Answer in saying The Church or the Christian Church is God's Family or Houshold c. answers not the Question not being concerning the Church in the 1st or 2d acceptation of the word But had he said An Instituted Church of the Gospel or as he expresses it A Church Constituted and Govern'd according to the Rules of the Gospel is a Society of men joyning together in the Profession of the Christian Faith having right Pastors or Officers invested with Power to Guide and Govern them in the ways of God and to dispence unto them the Ordinances of the Gospel which none but a Church in the third acceptation of the word hath it might have past for an answer to the Query though not so full and clear a one as might have been given But whereas he says He hopes there may be as well such a National Church in England as there was for above fifteen hundred years in Palestine among the Jews If by such a National Church he means only a Church having National Church-Officers over it as had the Church of the Jews no man sure doubts it But if by such a National Church he means a National Church of Divine Institution we see not whereon he grounds his hopes since it hath not pleased God to Institute or appoint any such National Church under the Gospel Nor does the Church of England pretend to any such original as is evident by the Statute of the 25th of Edward the 3d. Where it is declared to be founded in Prelacy by the Kings and Nobles of England without the least pretence to a Divine Institution as had the National Church of the Jews There is no doubt but that Christ as he says would have his Church Catholick as well as Holy yet not always so Illustrious or visible as to be seen and owned by the world And though whole Nations were to embrace the Christian Faith and upon that account to Constitute the Christian Church or Catholick Church visible yet that doth not Constitute them National Churches such as was the Church of the Jews nor can they be so called upon the same account that a particular Church is called a Church And when Christ threatned the Jews to take the Kingdom of God from them and give it unto a Nation that should bring forth the Fruits of it he meant no doubt as he says more by a Nation then one particular Church for he meant a Nation or People that might have many particular Churches or Congregations of Christians in it but did not thereby Constitute or intend a National Church in his notion Neither yet did he confine the Christian Church to a Nation and consequently not within smaller bounds then the Jewish was when empal'd within the Land of Canaan But how will this Answerer prove it to have been as he says far from the mind of our Redeemer to crumble his Church as he words it into such minute and little Principles of being as Congregational Churches when the Scriptures give so great evidence to the contrary there being indeed no other Instituted Church under the Gospel then what is Congregational And when our Blessed Saviour Instituted those he commanded certainly the Demolishing an Established National Church even the National Church of the Jews the only National Church in the world of Gods Institution The second part of this Query does evidently enough intend a particular Church as before exprest which 't is not impossible but five or six Persons may Constitute notwithstanding his peremptory denyal thereof Christ himself having told us Where two or three are gathered together in his name he is in the midst of them which is the ground or principle of all Instituted Churches and we read of the Church in the House of Aquila and Priscilla which cannot reasonably be supposed to consist of any great number By what means Persons become a Church of Christ And how particular
Persons become Members of the Church of Christ are two different Questions and even this which is his own he answers not distinctly for by his first way They become Members only of the Catholick Church visible By his second They become Members also of the Holy Catholick Church the mystical Body of Christ so that without distinguishing what is here and there meant by Church we are not like to be much edified by this Answerer That a visible Profession of Christianity Entitles men to the Priviledges of the Church in the second acceptation of the word may be true which yet with his good leave their Debaucheries and Immoralitys may again deprive them of notwithstanding the Church at Corinths delay in casting out the incestuous person But 't is not every vice or error in a Member of a particular Church that Unchurches them St. Paul therefore might very well own the Church at Corinth for a Church notwithstanding the Debaucheries and Immoralities that were in some of its Members But the tolerating them was certainly a Crime which the Parable of the Tares and Wheat will never justifie for though they were to grow together till Harvest it was not in the Church but in the world for so our Saviour declares the field to be Nor will the parable of the Net and good and bad Fishes contained therein give any more countenance to this fond Assertion that Debaucheries and Immoralities are or may be tolerated in a Christian Church or that Debaucht and Immoral persons are not to be debarr'd the Priviledges thereof If that be as it seems to be this Answerers meaning the Apostle commanding that the Incestuous person be delivered unto Satan i. e. cast out of the Church the Kingdom of God into the world the Kingdom of the Devil Query III. Whether the Parochial Churches within these Nations and the worship therein us'd be according to Christs Institution or the Rule and Order of the Gospel Reply to the Answer to this Query THis Query relating to the former hath respect unto the means whereby Christians become a Church of Christ and aim'd at their Information or satisfaction who doubted whether Co-habitation or mens living together within such or such a Precinct having a Priest or Curate so and so set over them be the formal cause of an Instituted Church of the Gospel And whether such Societies meeting to worship God by certain set or prescribed Forms of Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments be according to Christs Institution or the Rule and Order of the Gospel which this Answerer not thinking good to speak to requiring only the contrary to be showne leaves his Reader therein as much unsatisfied and to seek as before while he troubles himself with enumerating such particulars as are not here questioned nor were ever intrâ—ded by the Query which respected more the manner then matter of worship and formal cause only of an Instituted Church of the Gospel Query IV. Whether it be not the duty of every Christian to withdraw from every Brother that walks disorderly and not after the Traditions received from the Apostles Reply to the Answer to this Query WE have an affirmative answer here which could not well be denyed us since it is but what the Apostle commands But then he tells us from an excellent Expositor what disorderly walking is by which it seems we are only to withdraw from such as withdraw their Obedience from the Church and like disbanded Souldiers run away from their Colours where by the way disbanded Souldiers are improperly said to run away forsake the Service of their Superiours and Commands of their Bishops c. and with such he tells us we are not to have any familiar or friendly conversation But this withdrawing says he concerns only private Persons and yet private Persons are not totally to withdraw themselves from such disorderly walkers till so and so nay even then we are not interdicted all Society with such a Person So that we are little edified by this Answerer or his excellent Expositor as to our duty of withdrawing which they do not convince us ought to be only from the civil conversation of such as withdraw their obedience from the Church or as forsake the service of their Superiours and commands of their Bishops and not also from the Religious Fellowship and Communion of such Bishops and Brethren as in the Worship and Service of God walk not according to the Rule and Order of the Gospel Query V. Whether it be not the duty of every Christian to chuse the Communion of the purest Church And whether in the choice thereof is he bound to follow his own Judgement after the best information he is able to attain unto or other mens Judgements against his own Reply to the Answer to this Query LIttle of what hath been here said is to the matter in Question though in a peevish and froward manner he tells us If there be a purer Church they may betake themselves to it Whereby he seems to acknowledge That it is every mans duty to chuse the Communion of the purest Church Nor does he say that in the choice thereof a man is bound to follow anothers Judgement against his own and if he be not why are any molested for but doing their duty and though possibly they may be mistaken in their choice yet while they are so by misfortune and not their fault God will pardon it and men ought not to punish it at least while therein they hurt none but themselves Yea but says this Answerer They introduce confusion in all the Parishes of this Kingdom in setting up one Altar against another and removing ancient Land-marks expressly against a Divine Prohibition which is not saith he to embrace the Communion of the purest Church but to cast a mans self out of the Catholick Church But does this Learned and Judicious Answerer really believe That they who Separate from a Parochial or National Church do thereby cast themselves out of the Catholick Church Does he believe the French Protestants cast themselves out of the Catholick Church when they Separated from their Parochial Churches or from the National Church of France Or that the Parliament went expressly against a Divine Prohibition in removing an Ancieut Land-mark when they gave new Bounds to St. Martins Parish by taking Covent-Garden out of it And what do they who in this Nation worship God in Assemblies Separate from the Parochial Congregations more then all the Reformed Churches in all Popish Conntries in Europe both do and have done ever since they had a Being and yet I hope they set not Altar against Altar or if they do let him shew the evil of it His objection against Dissenters being let alone or snffer'd to go on in their way in that it will as he says administer occasion to the Enemies of our Religion to come and take away both our Place our Church and Nation is but the old objection the Chief Priests
to be burnt alive at Geneva Query VIII Whether it is not Incongruous and Heterogeniall to punish Corporally man erring Spiritually Reply to the Answer to this Query THe Question is not here Whether any Judge or Justice can take cognizance of mens Thoughts or Consciences nor when wickedness in the heart is manifested by external action whether liable to the Magistrates Power and Inspection none I think ever questioning either of them But whether men erring Spiritually ought Corporally to be punisht Paul 's reckoning Heresies among the works of the flesh and telling the Gorinthians they were Carnal from the Schisms and disorders that were amongst them does not prove it But says this Answerer Certainly any sensual sin may be punisht by the Civil Sword What thinks he then of Hatred Wrath Covetousness Emulations Envyings and the like which are sensual Sins or works of the flesh yet not therefore to be punisht by the Civil Sword But why are they as he tells us Who gather Churches c. more then Spiritually Erronious How comes that which was the great Errand and Duty of the Apostles and their immediate Successors now to become so great a Crime Is it that Men or Children rather are now born Christians or being born in a Christian Commonwealth as it is usually though improperly exprest or in such or such a Parish they do thereby become a Church of Christ No one certainly who understands what either a Christian or a Church of Christ is can think so And wherein do they as he says dispise Government and Trample upon all Laws Did he not but now tell us The Church was a Society and that there can be no Society without Government How then comes the gathering of Churches to be a despising of Government and trampling upon all Laws undoubtedly there is a Law and a Divine Law to for the gathering of Churches if the Gospel be the Law of God as I hope neither this Answerer nor any who own themselves Christians doubt it to be There is little reason sure to say as he does The inticers to Idolatry mention'd in Deutromony might as well have pleaded it was only an error of their minds as any of our Dissenting Ministers for that none certainly can imagine that it could be a sin of Ignorance in them to draw any from the true God to worship Idols it being against the very light of Nature in that as the Apostle tell us That which may be known of God was manifest in them It may therefore for any thing this Answerer hath here said Be both Incongruous and Heterogenial to punish Corporally men erring Spiritually Query IX Whether secular force and compulsion in things of Divine and Supernatural Revelation be not the Arms of Antichrist and not of the true Church Reply to the Answer to this Query THis Answerer might have done well to hae inform'd us How secular force and compulsion in Religion towards some is as he says Anti-Christian and not towards other the difference not being evident at least to all capacities We are not here enquiring after what is so much a violation of the Law of Nations as of the Law of Nature and though our Answerer expresses his dislike of the Spaniards dealings with the Indians graciously acknowledging that propriety is not forfeited by unbelief Yet but now speaking of Dissenters here he said If they disapprove of the Decisions of their Superiours the world is wide enough they may leave the Government and betake themselves to the Communion of purer Churches which is but in other words to say Be of the Religion of your Country or abanden your Properties with the Land of your Nativity But should providence permit the Establishment of a Religion in this Nation he approves not of if he be not resolv'd to approve of whatever shall be the National Religion would he not think himself hardly dealt with to be requir'd to Conform or to abandon his Native Country He may do well therefore to meditate a little on that no less Divine then Moral precept Of doing to others as he would they should do to him The Cannon he mentions is indeeed very pertinent to our purpose So likewise is what he Cites from Tertullian and Lactantius But then without the least colour or shadow of Reason and perhaps only because Grotius says It is not just or lawful to make War upon any because they will not embrace the Christian Religion He would have this to be understood only of Princes raising Wars against Pagan Nations to compel and force them to the Profession of Christianity and imbracing of the Gospel But 't is very well and judiciously observ'd of him That these things nothing concern a Kingdom in which there is a visible and universal profession of the same Religion in that there is indeed no need of compelling or forcing any to profess what all already do profess But yet even in such a Kingdom Magistrates he says may use compulsive methods to secure their People from a totall and manifest Apostacy from the true Faith c. which we would freely allow him if compulsive methods could secure a People from Apostacy and that through ignorance or mistake of the Truth Magistrates did not too often instead thereof compell to error But none sure will say but that Magistrates may and ought to repress such Seducers as threaten the extirpation of their own Government yea and of the true Faith too were it once determined which amongst the many that would be so accounted were the true What he says of the Religious Princes of the Jewish Church hath been already spoken to Query X. Whether any one can be compelled by secular force or compulsion to perform any one Religious duty acceptably since God accepts not of any but what is volâ—ntary and of Faith which cannot be forc't And of what use then is secular Force and compulsion in Religion but to make men sin or suffer Reply to the Answer to this Query THis Query which this Answerer says with others is forged in the Shops of the Socinians and Anabaptists is with the rest grounded on the Rule of Gods word with which he seems to be little acquainted or with the due performance of Religious Duties in saying That it might with as much strength of Reason be urg'd against the Magistrates using compulsive methods towards his Subjects for the performance of the Duties of the 2d Table aâ— those of the first There being some difference beâ—ween forcing men to moral actions and Divine duties since in things moral the action however circumstantiated is in it self positively good or evil But in things of Divine Institution the manner only of the performance makes the action good or evil and therefore it is said He that Sacrificeth an Ox is as if he kild a Man and he that killeth a Lamb as if he cut off a Dogs neck where the manner of performing the Command is not observ'd as well as the
tells us His design was to ease men of their former burdens and not to lay on more That the duties he required were no other but such as were necessary and withall Just and Reasonable That he that came to take away the insupportable Yoke of Jewish Ceremonies certainly did never intend to gall the necks of his Disciples with another instead of it and if so did not certainly give Power or Authority unto any to Institute in their room such others as they should think good it would be strange says he the Church should require more then Christ himself did and make other conditions of her Communion then our Saviour did of Discipleship Then asks What ground there can be why Christians should not stand upon the same terms now which they did in the times of Christ and his Apostles Whether Religion were not sufficiently guarded and fenced in them Whether there was ever more true and cordial reverence in the worship of God What Charter Christ hath given his Church to bind men up to more then himself hath done And then tells us The grand Commission the Apostles were sent out with was only to Teach what Christ had commanded them not the least intimation of any Power given them to impose or require any thing beyond what himself had spoken to them or they were directed to by the immediate guidance of the spirit of God What Power or Commission therefore any have since received to Institute such Ceremonies in the Worship and Service of God as they shall think good this Answerer or his Adherents may do well to inform us But instead thereof he tells us Nothing is more evident in the New-Testament than that Christ did intrust those whom he appointed in his absence to be the Ministers of his Church with the Government of it He did so and yet he did not Empower or Authorise them to Institute in the Worship and Service of God such Ceremonies as they should think good But says our Politick Answerer This Government could not subsist without the Enacting of Laws for its own and the Churches preservation for that Christ intended c. How does that appear we find nothing in his Gospel of any such intention nor have we reason to believe he intended any should Enact other Laws for the Government of his Church than what himself Enacted since 't were to deny the Scriptures sufficiency unto that end and its being a perfect Rule of our Faith and Obedience in all Gospel Duties and Administrations and in plain term's to tell us that Christ was not faithfull to him that appointed him as was Moses in all his House in that he left not as did Moses a compleat Volume of Laws for its Rule and Government We wish therefore this Answerer would acquaint us with the Instrument by which the Apostles made over their Authority of Enacting Laws for the Government of the Church to their Successors in that it would tend greatly to their conviction who have hitherto been in an error and very much deceived if the Lord Christ be not the sole Lord over and Law-giver to his Church and that the Apostles neither did nor could Delegate a Legislative Power to their Successors being themselves Ministers only of the Gospel of Jesus Christ the Power of the Keys committed unto them not being a Power of giving Laws to the Church but a Power of Teaching and Ruling the Church according to the Laws which Christ himself had given and those as he says not to that present Age of Christians but to all Succeeding Ages in which his Church was to continue in the World they being evey way sufficient to continue and preserve upon Earth a visible Church untill his Second coming But so far this Answerer is in the right That there could have been no such Society if there had been no Law for its Vnity But he should withall have consider'd that there neither could nor can be any Law for its Unity but from an Universal Law-giver the obligation of no Law extending farther then the Iuâ—â—â—â—â—tion or Authority of the Legislator So that it is altogether impossible for any but the Lord Christ to Enact Laws for the visible Unity of Christian Communion in the external Administration of Gods sacred Worship since the Jurisdiction or Authority of none other can reach or oblige all Christians That our Blessed Saviour was greatly concern'd for the Unity of his Church none sure ever doubted But the words quoted by this Answerer from St. Johns Gospel relate not so much to the external visible Unity of the Church as to the internal mystical Union that is between Christ and his Members Yet he tells us That which he would principally have the Reader observe in them is The care that our Blessed Lord and Master took for that great Essential of Christianity the Vnity of the Church No doubt he did both for the internal and external Unity thereof and that not only in his frequent calling on his Disciples to Unity and to love one another making it a Caracteristical note of their relation unto him By this shall all men know that ye are my Disciples if ye love one another But also in commanding them to teach the observation of all things whatsoever he commanded them which would all who would be accounted his Disciples likewise observe and do without setting up their Posts as the Prophet speaks by his Posts Unity would not be wanting among Christians nor yet throughout the Christian world a due uniformity in the external Administration of Gods Sacred worship which variety of Rites and Ceremonies in particular Churches destroys And it may be truly enough said by him That it is impossible for the Gospel to be propagated and upheld by Faith and Charity only as they are lodg'd in mens Hearts unless the Fruits of these Graces were exerted in some things that were visible and obvious to sense and therefore outward worship is required that the inward may be exercised and expressed for to talk of inward worship without any outward expressions thereof is but a Cloak for Atheism But for this Answerer to tell us That the Churches Vnity was the main thing that Christ took care of before his Crucifixion That it is the great Essential of Christianity the very being of Christian Religion depending on it And that the main principle of all Christian Amity and affection is the visible Vnity of Christian Communion in the external Administration of Gods Sacred Worship which ought to be Vniform and undevided and then conclude That variety of Rites in one National Church would cause Division of Judgement and of affection Is such an explanation of the Unity of the Church and visible Unity of Christian Communion in the External Administration of Gods Sacred Worship as I think the world was never before blest with For was it the Unity of a National Church only that Christ took such care of and which is the great essential of Christianity or is
circumstances of Affairs as is evident from the praeamb'es of those Statutes and His Majesties gracious Answer of the 24th of February 1672 to the Petition and Address of the House of Commons as followeth C. R. His Majesty hath received an Address from you which he hath seriously consider'd of and returneth you this Answer That he is much troubled That that Declaration which he put out for ends so necessary to the Quiet of the Kingdom and especially in that conjuncture should have proved the cause of disquiet to the House of Commons and have given occasion to question his Power in Ecclesiasticks which he finds not done in the Reign of any of his Ancestors And he is sure he never had thoughts of using it otherwise than as it has been intrusted in him to the Peace and establishment of the Church of England and to the ease of all his Subjects in general Neither doth he pretend to the right of suspending Laws wherein the Properties Rights or Liberties of his Subjects are concerned nor to alter any thing in the Established Doctrine or Discipline of the Church of England The only design of this was to take off the penalties the Statutes inflicted upon Dissenters and which he believes when well consider'd of you Your selves would not wish Executed according to the Rigour and Leter of the Law Neither hath he done this with thought of avoiding or precluding the advice of his Parliament And if any Bill shall be offer'd him which shall appear more proper to attain the aforesaid ends and secure the Peace of the Church and Kingdom when tender'd in due manner to him he will shew how ready he will be to concur in all wayes that shall appear good for the Kingdom How expressive of Royal goodness and Heavenly Benignity and Compassion towards mankind is this gracious Answer which cannot but endare His Majesty unto all sober and Pious Persons of what Judgement or perswasion soever in Religion Nor were the Commons against the Indulgenee but the way and manner of it in that they immediately upon this pesâ—a Bill of ease for Protestant Dissenters which was sent up to the Lords But the differences that after happen'd between the two Houses about Jurisdiction and Priviledge with other greater Affairs of State hath hitherto obstructed its farther progress But to return to our Answerer who tells us That to repeal the Churches Laws would administer too just an occasion to the Papists to triumph in the ruine of it for what Truth or Being saith he could that Church pretend to That had neither Ephod nor Traphim no Order no Law no Liturgy no Bishop no Discipline It seems then in his Judgement all these in the Chnrch of England depend wholly upon the Ecclesiastical Laws although the Primitive Church in and after the Apostles time had both Order Law Discipline Bishops or Overseers without other Laws than what were Divine or of Apostolical Institution Though I am absent in the flesh yet am I with you in the Spirit joying and beholding your Order c. saith the Apostle to the Colossians And is not the good word of God a Law to all Believers But this Law it seems is perished from our Priest who yet we hope will not deny the Holy Ghost a Power without the aid of Ecclesiastical Laws of making Bishops or Overseers over the Churches of Christs Institution and such certainly are not without Discipline nor deprived of Law Order or Overseers nor consequently of Truth or Being upon the repeal of Ecclesiastical or the Churches Laws Yea God forbid the Christian Church should depend upon the continuance or alteration of these or those Civil or Ecclesiastical Laws which we see chang'd and alter'd as oft almost as we change our Governours which is indeed a consideration that ought seriously to be thought on by all the lovers of Religion and who have any regard or concern for the Truths of the Gospel and purity of â—hrists Institutions But says this Answerer we have now unanswerable Arguments to justifie our departure from Rome but if all our Laws and constitutions be laid aside and abrogated we should be just like the Israelites when they waged War with the Philistines in the day of Battle there was neither Sword nor Spear found in the hand of any of the People If then our Laws and Constitutions be our only unanswerable Arguments to justifie our departure from Rome and our only Swords and Spears to fight against those Adversaries an abrogation or change of those Laws and Constitutions would indeed disarm and silence us and might as well justifie our return to Rome as now our departure from it But I trust though this be Ratiâ— ultima the best Arms and Argument of our Answerer we have yet other Arms and Arguments to justifie our departure from Rome and fight against those Philistines But he now tells us 'T is none of his bufiness or intention to exasperate any mans Spirit much less to direct his Governours c. Yet he admonishes them to stand up in a zealous vindication of their own Liberty and Power and to provoke them to it upbraides them with Cowardize if they do it not telling them It is there neglect thereof that encourages men in their 〈…〉 Separations Disobedience and 〈…〉 provokes God to deprive them 〈…〉 Power and Authority with which be entrusts them and which they have betrayed and exposed to scorn and insolence of his and their greatest Enemies Yea tells them Histories are not barren of instances how God hath revealed his wrath from Heaven against those Governours and deprived them of the Honour of being his Deputies when their Spirits have been softned with sensuality and ease and they have lived in fear of their Inferiours who ought to live in fear of them Which is such a menace of and reflection on Authority and our Governours as none but this Bold and Insolent Answerer would ever have dar'd to publish He does well therefore to recollect himself and tell us He has proceeded too far on this Argument which indeed speaks him a Person so highly impudent and immeasurably malitions that as himself hath elsewhere said he is fitter to receive a confutation from the penalties of Laws and the Seutence of a Judge than from the Strength of Reason or Argument But he concludes in the words of indeed a truly wise and Learned Statesman That Herefies and Scisms are of all others the greatest scandals yea more than corruption of manners c. which being so all just and lawful means ought certainly to be used not only for their Suppression but prevention in removing the Causes of them of which there is not a greater than the Authority by some ascribed to the 〈◊〉 yea to particular Churches Church 〈…〉 imposing upon Christians in the 〈…〉 â—â—â—nda of the Gospel which is indeed as that Learned and Judicious Statesman says A wound or solution of continuity destructive of the Churches Unity dividing her into as
many Sects or Parties as there are particular Churches or Societies of Churchmen assuming such Authority in the Christian world I shall therefore conclude the whole in the words of a Learned and Judicious Son of the Church of England who in vindicating his Friend for not taking on him that Authority his Adversary would have had him That is for not playing the Pope thus expresses himself Certainly saith he If Protestants be faulty in this matter it is for doing it too much and not to little This presumptious imposing of the senses of men upon the words of God the special senses of men upon the general words of God and laying them upon mens Consciences together under the equal penalty of death and Damnation This vain conceit that we can speak of the things of God better than in the words of God This defying our own Interpretations and Tyrannous enforcing them upon others this restraining of the word of God from that Latitude and generality and the understandings of men from that Liberty wherein Christ and the Apostles left them is and hath been the only Fountain of all the Schisms in the Church and that which makes them immortal the common Incendiary of Christendom and that which tears in pieces not the Coat but the Bowells and Members of Christ. Ridente Turcâ nec dolente Judaeo Take away these walls of Separation and all will be one Take away this Persecuting Burning Cursing Damning of men for not subscribing to the words of men as the words of God require of Christians only to believe Christ and to call no man Master but him only let those leave claiming Infallibility that have no Title to it ' and let those that in their words disclaim it disclaim it likewise in their actions ' In a word take away Tyranny which is the Devils Instrument to support Errors Superstitiâ—â—s and ' Impieties in the several parts of the world which could not otherwise long withstand the Power of Truth I say take away Tyranny and restore Christians to their just and full Liberty of captivating their understandings to Scripture only and as Rivers when they have a free passage run all to the Ocean so it may well be hoped by Gods blessing that Universal Liberty thus moderated may quickly reduce Christendom to Truth and Vnity FINIS Gal. 2. 18. Chap. 5 §. 96. p. 265. Imp. 3. Mat. 6. 9. Acts 1 14. 4. 24 c. Rom. 1. 9. 10. 1. Eph 1. 16 c. 1 Thess. 1 2 3 10. Phil. 4. Isa. 29. 13. Safe way to Salv. p. 187. Mat. 21. 25. See Ans. to the 21. and 27. Quer. Mat. 23. 〈…〉 the 24. Qu. Phil. 2. 12 Acts 17. Eph. 1. 22. 5. 23. 27. Acts 8. 3. Phil. 3. 6. 1 Cor. 12. Acts 15. 4. 14. 27. Rev. 2. Statute of Provisors of Benifices 1 Cor. 16. 19. Matt 13. 38. 2 Thes. 3 6. Deut. 19. 14. Joh. 11. 48. 1 Tim. 4. 8. 2 Chro. 14 2 Chro. 15 2 Chro. 34. verse 30. Rev. 17. 12. 13. Ire Chap. 6. Sect. 6. Lib. 5. Cap. 23. Epist. 3â— ad soro Lib. 2 ad Const. Rom. 1. 19. Ans. to the 5th Q. Lib. 2. C. 20. Isa. 66. 3. Acts 4. Deter Q. Quest. 15. 2 Coâ— 10. Matt. 28. 18. Eph. 4. 2 Cor. 10. 2 Thess. 3 Matt. 28. Luke 6. 26. Irâ— ch 6. Rom. 14. Rev. 2. 20. Dullor Dubit l. 1. cap. 3. rule 6. Rat. account p. 7. Det. Quaest. Quaest. 6. Rom. 14. 13 1 Cor 7. 23. Ire ch 6. p. 118 Matt. 23. Matt. 16. 1 Thâ—ss 5. 21. Eph. 5. 6. 1 Cor. 7. 23 Rom. 14. 12 Psal. 119. 18. Chap. 3. Matt. 7. 15 1 Joh. 4. 1. Mal. 2. 8 9. Jer. 23. 16. Heb. 13. 17 Indulgence not justified Sect 2. Tolerat Discust in two Dialogues p. 246. Rom. 15. 27. Psal. 107. 34. Jer. 12. 4. Communicating under one or both kinds by some Said to be indifferent Catholicks no Idolators by T. G. p. 33. Pref. to his Irenicon Lev. 10. 1. Deut. 4. Jer. 7. Mat. 28. 10 Preface to his Iren. 1 Cor. 1. 27 Heb. 11. 6. Deut. 14 2 Isa. 49. 2. Psal. 78. 5. Ans. to the 17. Q. Col. 1. 2 12. 13. Act. 16. 24 Gal. 5. 2. Eccl. Pali ch 3. Sect. 4 1 Pet. 3. 15 1 Cor. 6. 10 Acts 24. 6. Acts 7. 48. 1 Tim. 6. 2â— Matt. 15. Bilson's true differ Part 3 Page 535. Aâ—s to the 19 Query Eph. 4. 1 Kings 16 33. Joh 16. 33 2 Tim. 3. 12 Psal. 119. 67 71. Myst of Godliness l. â—0 c. 11. P. 521. Lib 2 c 10. Sect 48. Myst. of Iniq. l. 2. c. 15. pag. 166. Psal. 72. Isa. 40. Pres. to the Author of cha Main Eccl. Pol. p. 99. Ans. to the 21. and 22 Query Matt. 25. Rom. 14. 12. â— Cor. 10. Eâ—oâ— Clar. Anim. on Cres. p. 10. 11. As appears by the jeveral Treatises written to that purpose by their Order Chap. 2. 5. Ezek. 7. 26. Chil. safe way to Sal. Part. 1. ch 4.