Liberty of captivating their Vnderstanding to Scripture only and as Rivers when they have a free Passage run all to the Ocean so it may well be hoped by God's Blessing that universal Liberty thus moderated may quickly reduce Christendom to Truth and Vnity This Citation being to long I shall add but one more out of him and that a shorter p. 209. This is most certain and I believe you will easily grant it that to reduce Christians to Vnity of Communion there are but two ways that may be conceived probable The one by taking away diversity of Opinions touching Matters of Religion The other by shewing that the diversity of Opinions which is among the several Sects of Christians ought to be no hinderance to their Vnity in Communion Last of all I close with your Rational Account p. 291. And therefore those lesser Societies cannot in Justice make the necessary Conditions of Communion narrower than those which belong to the Catholick Church i. e. those things which declare Men Christians ought to capacitate them for Communion with Christians Even an acknowledgment of the Scriptures as the indispensible Rule of Faith and Manners Which be pleased to note is something different from your late establish'd Rule Now would you fix here that those things which declare Men Christians shall suffice to capacitate them for Communion with you how many Mens Scruples would be removed and what better way can you think of to put a stop to Separation 7. Are you Impartial in charging all Nonconformist's Meetings with Separation tho very many of them ordinarily join with the Parochial Congregations and do not deny them â—o be true Churches as the old Separatists did p. 56. It is true say you in that Opinion they differ but in Separation they agree As in your Sermon p. 33. For do they not do the very same things and in the same manner that the others do how comes it then to be Separation in some and not in others Which I answered Rector of Sutton p. 49. thus What they do is not done upon the Separatists Principles and therefore not done in the same manner Yet you neither retract that Saying of yours nor refute my Answer And have not others as much reason to object against you that when you receive the Sacrament kâ—eeling you do the same thing that the Papists and Lutherans do I do not think it manifestly appears from the Pope's manner of receiving either sitting or a little leaning upon his Throne as you say p. 15. that the Papists are allowed to follow him herein How then comes that to be an Act of Worship in them when with you it is no Act of Worship but a â—eer indifferent Ceremony 8. Are you not very Partial in loading those that do not absolutely separate from you but only secundum quid as you do p. 54 55 56. Making their Practice that own you to be true Churches to be the more unjustifiable more inexcusable more unreasonable Separation Is it not a greater Schism to separate from you as no true Church than to do it only because you are faulty in imposing such Conditions as they cannot lawfully submit to Are they the greatest Separatists who hold Communion with you so far as they can I should think they are the greatest Separatists whose Separation is the most unjustifiable inexcusable and unreasonable As I had thought there was not so much reason to deny the Being of the Church of England while she retaineth the true Faith and hath the true Worship of God for substance as there may be to doubt of the lawfulness of Ceremonies and Modes of Worship invented and imposed without any clear Scripture-Warrant And suppose one dares not receive the Communion with you because he holdeth kneeling in that Act a participating with Idolaters and another is kept off because he suspects there may be some Superstition in it will you say the latter is the more unreasonable And do you not own those Lutheran Churches that have Exorcism with Baptism yet to be true Churches And if you was placed there must you therefore own and use Exorcism tho against your Judgment or be guilty of a more inexcusable unreasonable Separation from them than the Papists who deny them to be true Churches 9. Are you Impartial in allowing a different way of Worship to the Members of Forreign Churches here in England as p. 147 148. while you are against allowing the like Liberty to Natives which you deny not to Strangers Bishop Davenant Ad pacem Eccl. Adhort p. 116. Rat. 3. argues That none ought to deal more hardly with their Christian Brethren of other Churches than with their own Rom. 12. 5. Nam fraâ—â—rnitâ—s Christiana quae Intercedit inter membra Christi non variatur pro locorum aut nationum varietate You would have your own more hardly dealt with than those of forreign Churches Now what Equity is here Either you have Communion with those of Forreign Churches not withstanding their different way of Worship or you have not If you have no Communion with them then are you not Schismaticks from those Churches If you have Communion with them why may you not as lawfully have Communion with Nonconformists in their way of Worship Can you assign any just and sufficient Cause ex Natura rei why such a way of Worship should not be allowed 10. Do you deal Impartially while you complain p. 112. that no bounds are set to the Peoples Fancies of purer Administrations concerning which I am quite mistaken if I did not wish the Rector of Sutton had cautioned what he said and you on the other hand set no Bounds but by your excepting against what Mr. B. hath written of it would have People own and commit the care of their Souls to such Ministers as are in place be they never so profane insufficient or unsound Tho Mr. Cheyney Full Answer c. Introduct p. 7. grants That where God doth make a difference Men may Now God doth make a difference says he between the Ministry of the best and the worst between the Ministry of a John Baptist and a Pharisee a living Man and an Image P. 177. Say you And doth this Kindness only belong to some of our Parochial Churches c. Where you suppose every Parochial Church in England to be a true Church and every Parochial Minister by consequence to be a true Minister unless you would argue fallaciously there Tho I had thought it possible to have found out some few at least whom you would have been ashamed to own I cannot but wonder at that you urge again and again p. 111. Were they not baptized in this Church and received into Communion with it as Members of it p. 148. Our Business is with those who being baptized in this Church c. May not all those that were baptized in Presbyterian or Independent Congregations as well plead their Baptism for their continuing in that way of Worship which was in the
too p. 287. By that Rule whosoever regulates his Life and Doctrine or Belief I am confident that though he may mistake Error for Truth in the way he shall never mistake Hell for Heaven in the End And yet further should you not consider whether it be not more agreeable to the Revealed Will and Mind of Christ that you should suffer some Taâ—es to grow rather than pluck up good Corn with them Reverend Sir It having so happened that poor I have been called out among others an hundred times fitter to shew my Opinion touching the Matter you have started I cannot but think as I here declare so far as my Judgment serves you might have employed your Time your Learning and Parts to much better purpose than you have done in this late Piece of Work Surely my Life would be but sad to me if I could not find more pleasing Work than this that you have been an Occasion of engaging me in And yet I hope to have more Comfort in it at the great day of Accounts than I can conceive you to have of yours in that Day If you lay the Vnity â—f Christians upon Conformity too or Vniformity in doubtful and suspected if not unlawful Practices a general Vnion can never be had or hoped for If you would make the way to Heaven narower than Christ has left it many will be forced to leave you here But now if you would henceforth propose and promote an Vnion amongst Christians uâ—on Catholick Ierms we are for you and would heartily joyn with you And as that most learned and pious Bishop Vsher Serm. of Vnivers of the Church and Vnity of Faith p. 43 44. If at this dâ—y we should take a Survey of the several Professions of Christianity that have any large Spread in any part of the World and should put by the Points wher in they did differ one from another and gather into one Body the rest of the Articles wherein they all did generally agree we should find that in thâ—se Propositions which without all Controversy are universally received in the whole Christian World so much truth is contained as being joyned with holy Obedience may be sufficient to bring a Man unto everlasting Salvation Neither have â—e cause to doubt but that as many as do walk according to this Rule Peâ—â—e shalâ— be upon them and Mercy and upon the Israel of God Now thereâ—orâ— do as he says ibid. p. 18. We for our parts dare not abridg this Graâ—t and limit this great Lordship as we conceive it may best fit our own turns but â—â—ave it to his own Latitude and seek for the Catholick Church neither in this Part nor in that Pâ—ece but among all that in every place call upon the Nâ—mâ— of Jesus Christ our Lord both theirs and ours And if a Zeal for such a general Comprehension and happy Vnion of Christians will to use the Words of Mr. de L' Angâ—e p. 424. briâ—g down a thousand Blessings of Heaven and Earth upon those that shall contribute the most unto it resolve now and hence forward to put forth your self this â—ay Put in for your share of Blessings I remember I concluded my former writing with a Collect borrowed from you Here I would say Amen to that Prayer with which Dr. Potter shuts up his Answer to Charity mistaken That it would please the Father of Mercies to take away out of his Church all Dissention and Discord all Heresies and Schisms all Abuses and false Doctrines all Idolatry Superstition and Tyranny and to unite all Christians in one holy Bond of Truth and Peace Faith and Charity that so with one Mind and one Mouth we may all joyn in his Service I add no more but that the Father of Lights would so direct your Studies and Course that you may do nothing against the Truth but for the Truth which is the Prayer of Reverend Sir Your humble and faithful Servant Iohn Barrett I more wish than hope that of these sad Controversies here will be The END Proper Materials drawn from the true and only way of Concord c. QUERY 1. WHether the Apostle Paul hath not clearly and fully decided the case against censuring or despising one another for things Indifferent Rom. 14 15. And if Men wiâ—â— not understand nor stand to that Decision whether it should be any wonder if they will not understand or be satisfied with our most cogent Arguments Second Plea for Peace p. 169. § 75. Whether they that say the Apostle doth not forbid such Impositions there can see Day for Light 1. Doth he not forbid censuring despising and not receiving one another and command Dissenters to receive one another And then must he not forbid such Imposition as is inconsistent herewith 2. Doth he not direct this Command to all the Church of Rome even to the authorized Pastors and Rulers of the Church as well as to the People 3. Was he not a Pastor and Ruler of that Church as fully authorized as any that should succeed 4. Is not this Scripture as others written for a standing Rule and so obligatory to Rulers still ib. p. 170. § 77. Did not the Apostle speak here by Divine Authority Are not his Words recorded here part of Christ's Law indited by the Spirit And may we think that any that come after him or to whom he wrote should have power to contradict or obliterate the same Way of Concord p. 152. 5. Do not his Reasons touch the case of all Churches in all Ages and not only some particular Persons and Case As he argueth from the difference betwixt well-meaning Christians as weak and strong as doubting and as assured as mistaken and as in the right c. If such weak mistaken Christians in such matters ever have been and ever will be in the Church upon Earth doth not the reason from their case and necessity still hold 6. How many great and pressing moral Reasons that all Christians are bound by are heaped up here Does he not argue 1. From Christian love to Brethren 2. From human Compassion to the Weak 3. From God's own Example who receiveth such whom therefore we must not reject 4. From God's Prerogative to judg and our having no such judging power in such cases 5. From God's Propriety in his own Servants 6. From God's Love and Mercy that will uphold such 7. Because what Men do as to please God must not be condemned without necessity but an holy Intention cherished so it be not in forbidden things 8. Because Men must not go against Conscience in indifferent things 9. From Christ's dreadful Judgment which is near and which we our selves must undergo 10. From the Sin of laying Stumbling-blocks and occasions of Offence 11. From the danger of crossing the end of Christ's Death destroying Souls for whom he died 12. Because it will make our Good to be ill spoken of 13. Because the Kingdom of God or Constitution of Christianity and the Church lieth in
hearing of Sermons c and that frequently too to be lawful Now this is more than you allow to Dissenters pag. 98. No Man denies that more places for Worship are desireable and would be very useful where they may be had and the same way of Worship and Order observed in them as in our Parochial Churches where they may be under the same Inspection and Ecclesiastical Government But is it possible that Mr. B. should think the Case alike where the Orders of our Church are constantly neglected the Authority of the Bishops is slighted and contemned and such Meetings are kept up in Affront to them and the Laws Here you say in Effect that let Parishes be never so large and the Necessities of Souls never so urgent the Assemblies of Dissenters are not desirable nor to be encouraged because not under you establish'd Rule But either you must grant it may be lawful to joyn occasionally and that frequently too with the Non-conformists or you must judg them worse than Popish Teachers and say that it was better for Men to hear these than such as Mr. B. c. I know not whether you might fear the least countenancing of occasional Communion with Non-conformists lest any should thence argue from your own Words that constant Communion with them is a Duty I am thinking however that the Papists may thank you for so much Kindness to them that you grant it lawful for Protestants to be occasionally present in some parts of their Worship And let them alone to make their best of what you say you are sure will follow p. 176. and p. 77. As far as Men judg Communion lawful it becomes a Duty and Separation a Sin under what Denomination soever the Persons pass Because then Separation appears most unreasonable when occasional Communion is confessed to be lawful If they can get Protestants to joyn with them ordinarily though but in some parts of their Worship at first its possible they would gain far more Proselites by it than Non-conformists have drawn or would draw into Separation You seem to suppose great Force and Virtue in that Salvo p. 156. A Man is not said to separate from every Church where he forbears or ceases to have Communion but only from that Church with which he is obliged to hold Communion As if a Christian was only obliged to Communion with some one particular Church Yet you will look upon your self not only as a Member of the Church of England but as a Member of the Catholick Church And as you are a Member of the Catholick Church it may possibly sometimes fall out that you may be obliged to have Communion occasionally with a Dutch Church or a French Church And if Non-conformists with their Assemblies may be proved as sound parts of the Church Catholick as others you can freely have Communion with and while they differ from you in nothing but if the same was removed your Churches might be every jot as sound and pure I can see no sufficient Reason why you might not as lawfully have Occasional Communion with them and then for ought I know you may be obliged thereunto it may be a Duty Because you wholly overlook this I thought fit to take notice of it And further I would put you in mind of your own Arguments pag. 157. viz. 1. The general Obligation upon Christians to use all lawful Means for preserving the Peace and Unity of the Church And here I ask If there be not as great an Obligation at least upon Christians to preserve Peace or promote it with all Christians as with all Men And they are bound to that as far as possible and as much as lies in them Rom. 12. 18. And if you supposed the present Dissenters to be as bad as the Donatiâ—â— which you cannot in reason suppose yet your Learned and Excellent Hales says Miscel. of Schism p. 208. Why might it not be lawful to go to Church with the Donatists if occasion so require And Ibid. p. 209. In all publick Meetings pretending Holiness so there be nothing done but what true Devotion and Piety break why may not I be present in them and use Communication with them 2 The particular force of that Text Phil. 3. 16. As far as you have already attained walk by the same Rule c. And one would think such as have attained so much Knowledg as to see it lawful to joyn with the Roman Church in some parts of Wâ—â—ship might know it cannot but be as lawful at least to joyn in Worship with Non-conformiâ—ts 5. Are you not partial when you lay this down p. 157. As one of the provoking Sins of the Non-conformists that they have been so backward in doing what they were convinced they might have done with a good Conscience when they were earnestly pressed to it by those in Authority c. yet you tell us not what things those are neither the time when they were pressed thereunto and refused the same And I never heard of any Motions or Overtures for Peace that were reasonable made to them which they refused But you never take notice of it as any provoking Sin in those that would not hearken to their most just and earnest Petition for Peace Might not they with a good Conscience have forborn those needless Impositions which they very well knew would be so grievous and burdensome to many And might not so much have been expected from them as they would profess themselves to be for Vnity and Peace May I not here return your own Words pag. 159. Was ever Schisâ—â— made so light a matter of and the Peace and Unity of Christans valued at so low a Rate that for the Prevention of the one and the Preserevation of the other a thing that is lawful may not be done Or as I would say that the imposing of things indifferent and not necessary in their own Judgment but things doubtful or unlawful in the Judgment of others might not be forborn Now Sir are you for palliating so great Sin as the causing of Schism and Dissention in the Church when you know The Obligation which lieth upon all Christians to preserve the Peace and Unity of the Church which you give us again p. 209. And I find you citing these words of A. B. Laud in your Rational Account p 324 Nor is he a Christian that would not have Unity might he have it with Truth But I never said nor thought that the Protestants made this Rent Dissenting Protestants say we The cause of the Schism is yours for you thrust us from you because we called for Truth and redress of Abuses And there at the End of pag. 102. You could not but judg it a very prudent Expression of his Lordship That the Church of England is not such a Shreâ— to hâ—r Children as to deny her Blessing or denounce an Anathema against them if some peaceably dissent in some Particulars remoter from the Foundation c. Where I observe
Cases wherein Moderation ought to be shewn And is not that very agreeable to the Christian-temper And what may others say now of your Icenicum If what I transcribed thence seem to you not agreeable to the Christian temper then was you not under some great Distemper either at the writing of this latter or that former Book In the Christian-temper I have Occasion p. 370. to borrow something from Bishop Downam what he noteth to have always been the Hypocrit Guise I there say is the genius of false Zeal Sâ—il To neglect the greater Duâ—â—es and to affect the Observation of the less to prefer Circumstances before thâ—â—obstance and Ceremonies before the Works either of Piety or Charity to place the heigâ—th of their Religion either in observing or urging Ceremonies or Controversies in inveighing against them And I say further p. 371. You would not take him for a wise and careful Builder that laid the greatest Weight on the weakest part of the Wall And is that true Zeal for God Or rather is it not a selfish Zeal which is for ones own Opinions or own Party neglecting those things which make most for the Honour of God and wherein the main Interest of Religion lieth If I could see any thing there or in that Book which chanceth to bear the Name of the Rector of Sutton that is not agreeable to the Christian-temper and to the Truth and Doctrine of Christ I hope I should be ready to retract the same Ibid. For it is to pick up all the Passages he could meet with in a Book written twenty Years sinc with great tenderness towards Dissenters before the Laws were establish'd And have you repented of that your former Kindness and Tenderness towards them since the Laws were against them But Solomon tels us A Friend loveth at all times and a Brother is born for Adversity Which I observed 〈◊〉 agreeable to the Christian-temper p. 219. And you cannot deny that which you told us twenty Years since of the Magistrates Power being bounded He hath Power of determining things undetermined by the Word 〈◊〉 they be agreeable to the Word His Laws must be regulated by the general Rules of the Divine Law Rector of Sutton p. 12. That no Laws of Men can hinder but what was Truth will be Truth still and what was Duty will be Duty still In what followeth you more humbly as it would seem than truely confess in Mr. Cotton's words the weakness or unwariness of those Expressions which I have gathered out of your Irenicum That Book was your First-born And the First-born was the chief of their Strength Psal. 105. 36. But it seems you are for reading Gen. 49. 3. Principium doloris rather than Principium roboris The beginning of your Strength is now become the beginning of your Grief Thus you now let the World know indeed that whereas you had written much favouring the Cause of Dissenters your Thoughts at last are changed as to those Things and Persons too Next you fall hotly on me And have you not very well required the Author of that Book for the Tenderness and Pitty he had for you and the Concernment he then expressed to have brought you upon easier Terms c. Reverend Sir I hope you will give me leave to speak when I am thus spoken to I suppose you expect my Answer when you put Questions so close to me First then I thank you for your good pains taken in that Book and for your truly Christian Design in it so agreeable to the Christian-temper though it hath been unsuccesful I doubt not yet but that Book will stand as a Witness before God and the World against many who can never answer that Strength of Reason in it an Evidence of Truth against unnâ—cessary rigorous mischievous Impositions and yet were for pressing and are still for continuing them upon us But it is no ill Requital of the Author that I have an esteem of his Work And if you can reconcile the Scope of your Sermon with what I cite out of your former Writings do your self that Right Or if you can refute those Collections otherwise such as meet with them may be tempted to think you self-condemned When you say you wrote in Tenderness c. I hope you did not only play the Orator make a flourish meerly with Words or plead our Cause against your own Judgment nor acted the part of Politician as hoping to engage a Party but wrote your Judgment as a sober and indeed well studied Divine Will you say you wrote partially then as swayed with your Pitty and Tenderness towards Dissenters How then shall we be satisfied and assured that you have not written partially of late out of overmuch Fondnâ—ss on Conformity If you wrote impartially your Judgment and Reason deserves to be regarded till you or some other for you bring greater Strâ—â—gth of Reason to prove you was then in an Error You pleaded welâ— for 〈◊〉 â—â—ms and what can you say now what have you thought of since to justify Mens imposing harder Terms How can you answer your own Interrogatories What ground can there be why Christians should not stand upon the same Terms now which they did in the time of Christ and his Apost es And whether do they consult the Churches Peace and Vnity who suspend it upon such things as you know what How far doth the Example of our Saviour or his Apostles warrant such rigorous Impositions Rector of Sutton pag. 7 8. You express your having been concerned to have brought us in But were not many of us in both in the Church and in the Ministry before we were put out by the late Impositionsâ— By this expression of yours it would seem your Church is a new Church lately erected standing upon new Terms which I shall have occasion again to take notice of But were we not true Ministers before had we not a valid Ordination Deny it if you can And if we were true Ministers before then it is a great Question whether we are not so still unless you can prove we were justly degraded And consequently whether we are not obliged to the exercise of our Ministry as we may have opportunity Preface p. 72. And hath he now deserved this at your hands to have them all thrown down in his â—ace and to be thus upbraided with his former Kindness Is this your Ingenuity your Gratitude your Christian-temper Now are not these pretty sharp Reflections If you can justly charge me with any Bitterness and Rancor c. I shall acknowledg such things not agreeable to the Christian-temper and would be ashamed of them If you are ashamed to own your former Principles many will judg it is without Cause It may prove you fallen from those sober Principles but it will not prove those Principles false When you speak of my throwing them in your Face my Design was not to cast Dirt upon so worthy a Person What I alledged I took to be matter of
limiting and inclosing the Catholick Church and if any disturb the Peace of this Church and here you do not 〈◊〉 the most peaceable Dissenters that only meet for the Worship of God and separate no farther from your Church than as it is not Catholick you go on The Civil Magistrate may justly inflict Civil Penalties upon them for it Is this your Mind that all that submit not tâ— those new federal Rites as they are supposed and teaching Signs and Symbols spoken of should be both debarred of Church-Priviledges and laid under Civil Penalties as disturbers of thâ— Churches Pâ—ace Then I cannot but wish that Governours may have more Moderation and Clemency or poor Dissenters more Faith and Patience than you shew Christian Charity herein But if they are as near the Primitive Church and as much in Communion with the Catholick Church as you are yea and in Communion with you still so sar as you are Catholick what great reason can you have so severely to condemn them I hope the Doctrine of the Non-conformists generally is sound their Worship agreeable to the Word The only Question then remaining seems to be By what Authority they do these things And who gave them Authority Now it is true they cannot pretend Authority from the Bishops but if they can prove they have Authority from Christ is not that sufficient If he hath called them to the work of the Ministry and commandeth them to be diligent and faithful in it according to their Abilities and Opportunities me thâ—nks Men should not deny their Authority And whether may not such Societies as you call nâ—w Churches return what you cite p. 179 180. out of Calvin Instit. l. 4. c. 1. n 9. as proving them to be true Churches They having the Word of God truly preached and Sacraments administred accâ—rding to Christ's Institution Now he saith as you have him where ever thâ—se Marks are to be found in particular Societies those are true Churches howsoever they are distributed according to Humane Conveniences And therefore if you did not look only on one side you might probably see that you are no more allowed wilfully to separate from them than they are from you And as that Synod of the Reformed Churches in France at Charenton A. D. 1631. declared as you have it p. 186. That there was no Idolatry or Superstition in the Lutheran Churches and therefore the Members of their Churches might be received into Communion with them without renouncing their own Opinions or Practices So why might not the Non-conformists and their Hearers be taken into or acknowledged in Communion with the Church of England without renouncing their Opinions or Practices they being certainly as far from Idolatry or Superstition as any of the Lutheran Churches As the Helvetian Churches with you p. 187 declare That no Separation ought to be made for different Rites and Ceremonies where there is an Agreement in Doctrine and the true Concord of Churches lies in the Doctrine of Christ and the Sacraments delivered by him Even so because the Non-Conformists consent with you in Doctrine do not break them off from your Communion for their difference about Ceremonies May not several Churches differ in Modes and Forms of Worship and yet have Communion with one another Some Difference you cannot but grant betwixt your Cathedral Service and that in common Country Churches p. 146 147. You will not say the Churches in other Nations that have not the same Rule with you are Schismaticks No not though such came over into England and lived among you And what if the old Liturgy and that new one which you cannot but remember the compiling of and presenting to the Bishops at the Savoy 1661. had both passed and been allowed for Ministers to use as they judged most convenient might not several Ministers and Congregations in this case have used different Modes of Worship without Breach of the Churches Peace or counting each other Schismaticks Would you have called those new separate Churches that made use of the new reformed Liturgy And what if a Dutch Church was in your Parish Would you disclaim Communion with them because they had some Rules and Orders different from yours And what if divers of your Parish living near it should joyn with that Congregation would you thence conclude that they erected a new separate Church And as the Canon 1640. speaks of bowing towards the East or Altar That they which use this Rite should not despise them which use it not c. if now our King and Parliament like true Catholick Moderators should put forth an Henoticum make an healing Law enjoyning Conformists and Non-conformists that agree in the same Faith and Worship for Substance to attend peacably on their Ministery and serve God and his Church the best they can whether they use the Liturgy and Ceremonies or no without uncharitable Censures and bitter Reflections upon one another either in Word or Writing would you yet say that the Non-conformists Assemblies not following your Rules and Orders were no other than new separate Churches 5. I know no Laws nor Ecclesiastical Canons that the present Non-conformists have made And non-entis nulla sunt praedicata But if your meaning be that it is enough to prove them New Churches that they come not up to your Laws and Church-Rules and therefore are so 〈…〉 as they conform not to you I would argue thus Either Conformity in all things to your Church-Rules is necessary to Communion with the Church of England and to cut off the charge of being of a New â—hurch or not If Conformity in all things be not necessary here why may not sober Dissenters that own the Church of England for a true Church and profess the same Faith and worship God in no other manner than according to the Liturgy and Practice of the Church of England as you say p. 160. Mr. B. declared in writing and as I told you a good Lawyer pleadeth Rector of Sutton p. 26 50. I say why may not such be owned as in Communion with the Church of England Why do you charge them with erecting new separate Churches meerly because they differ from you in some alterable Circumstances and separable Accidents not necessary to Churches Concord and Communion I see you dare not say that those things wherein they differ from you are any parts of Worship So they are of the same Faith and agree with you in all parts of Worship And is not all this with their owning themselves to be be of the Church of England so far as it is Catholick a bidding fair for your Reception of them and acknowledging them still in Communion with you And then why have you so many words of such being no good Christians because Members of no Church as pag. 104 105 110. f. If Conformity in all things to your Church-Rules be not necessary pray tell us what is necessary and what not what things may be dispensed with and what not Rector of
Sutton p. 27. n. 9. You were put in mind of it to inquire whether there be not some in publick Place not very well satisfied with what they have done who come not up to your Church-Rules As some read not all the Common-Prâ—yer they are enjoyned to read and yet had declared their Assâ—nt and Consent to the use at least as you would have it Some use not the Surplice some omit the Cross in Baptism some dare not put away from the Sacrament any meerly for not kneeling And yet you charge not such with Schism pag. 148. n. 5. yet have they different Rules or at least they differ from your Rules as well as Non-conformists And I know not whether you may not be understood to allow Men to go from their Parish Church pag. 145. n. 1. provided they elsewhere joyn with your Churches as Members of them What then is the parting Point from the Communion of your Church or the trying Point of Conformity without which a New Church is erected Here I offer this Note upon what you say farther pag. 148. n. 5. That many whom you condemn though not satisfied with such and such Orders of the Church yet continue in all Acts of Communion with your Church or in all that you will call parts of Worship and draw not others from it upon any meer Pretence no not at all though they dare not but joyn at other times with Non-conformists in that which they are well assured is as truly God's Worship and if they say in some Respects more pure you have not yet disproved it And therefore you should make good your word there and not charge such with Schism Or if you should say Conformity in all things to your Church-Rules is necessary that if Men differ never so little from those Rules it is to erect new Churches what woful rending work would this make By a Parity of Reason may not other foreign Churches be denied to have Communion with the Church of England How many that could not submit to these Laws and Rules without receding from their own publick Confessions Could the French and Belgick Churches assent to the Ius divinum of Episcopacy could they own it as evident to all Men diligently reading the holy Scriptures to be of Apostolical Institution And would not any one that reads the Declaration of the Faith and Ceremonies of the Psaltzgraves Churches printed at London A. D. 1637 take them to have been averse from such Conformity as the Church of England stands upon You glory in the good Opinion of the Reformed Churches and Protestant Divines abroad concerning the Constitution and Orders of our Church and their owning Communion with our Church pag. 96 97. And you make nothing of what hath been returned by way of Answer to Dr. D. Bonasus Vapulans is but a little Creature I confess to look on yet some that have read it do not look on it as nothing But if an owning of the Divine or Apostolical Right of Episcopacy and Re-ordination c. be made the Terms of their Communion with our Church how many Protestant Divines abroad that would renonuce Communion with us rather than be pleased with it upon such Terms And further if Conformity in all things to your Church-Rules be necessary c. How many Parochial Ministers and Congregations as was noted before must be denied to be in Communion with the Church of England whom for the same Reason you must call new erected Churches For as one says alluding to that They who themselves were circumcised kept not the Law They who have assented and consented observe not the Orders and Rules to which they have given their Assent c. And yet as you have it from another The Priests in the Temple break the Law and are blameless Then must you not either acquit many Dissenters here or condemn many Conformists You see how fain I would have Protestant Dissenters acknowledged still to have Communion with the Church of England if it might be the difference being not in such things as belong to it as a Church If you took away those things which are as the Wall of Partition betwixt you and them your Churches would be as sound and entire without them And if you make them Sâ—hismaticks for differing from you in such things while they agree with you in all things necessary whether will you not make your selves or other Churches you would be ashamed to disown Schismaticks who differ from you in as great Matters as such Dissenters do Here let me press you a little further Keep to your own Rule Preface p. 46. As far as the Obligation to preserve the Church's Peace extends so far doth the Sin of Schism reach Then it follows if the Obligation to preserve the Church's Peace extends so far as to the Rulers and Governours of the Church there may be as much Schism in their setting up unnecessary Rules which others cannot submit to as in Mens varying from such Rules P. 209. You argue From the Obligation which lies upon all Christians to preserve the Peace and Unity of the Church And now say you I have brought the matter home to the Consciences of Men. Had you put the Matter home indifferently and impartially to the Consciences of Men on both sides that is both of Imposers and Dissenters many could not but have thought in their Consciences you was to be commended for it But then had you not pleaded as much for Dissenters as here you plead against them I must grant they ought for the Peace and Vnity of the Church to yield as far as they can without sinning against God and their own Souls and should not Imposers do the like Were this one Rule agreed on what Peace and Unity would soon follow What Chillingworth p. 283. § 71. says of Protestants That they grant their Communion to all who hold with them not all things but things necessary that is such as are in Scripture plainly delivered Make this good of the Church of England and by my consent all we who have unwillingly appeared against you will readily and joyfully give you our publick Thanks What you say further p. 209. may thus be handed back again to you If there be no sufficient Reason to justify such Rules and Orders if they are a Violation of the Vnity of the Church you there make it a Sin as much as murder is and as plainly forbidden And therefore I do earnestly desire as you p. 213. all Parties concerned as they love their own Souls and as they would avoid the Guilt of so great a Sin impartially and without prejudice to consider that Passage of Irenaeus with you p. 212. That Christ will come to judg those who make Schisms in the Church and rather regard their own Advantage than the Church's Vnity c. And if any indifferent Men had the matter put to them to decide who were more likely to regard their own Advantage whether some of you or such as Mr.
not the Psaltzgraves Churches to be reckoned among the reformed Churches And were they for our English Ceremonies Do not the Lutheran Churches hold some things lawful and indifferent which in the Judgment of the Church of England are unwarrantable As things indifferent and lawful in the Judgment of the Church of England are not so in the Judgment of some other reformed Churches I do profess plainly says Chillingworth p. 376. that I cannot find any rest for the Sole of my Foot but upon this Rock only the Bible I see plainly and with mine own Eyes that there are Popes against Popes Councils against Councils some Fathers against others the same Fathers against themselves a consent of Fathers of one Age against a consent of Fathers of another Age the Church of one Age against the Church of another Age. 6. Is this Rule of the Iudgment of the Primitive and Reformed Churches indeed applicable to your established Rule Do you find the one agreeable to the other Were the Primitive Churches for imposing the same Liturgy the same Rites and Ceremonies which they yet held undetermined by God's Word Was it their Judgment that each Nation or Province should be tied up to a strict Vniformity in such things Do you find this within the first five hundred years Can you gainsay those Words of yours cited Rector of Sutton p. 19. which I think are pertinent and material here We see the Primitive Christians did not make so much of any Uniformity in Rites and Ceremonies nay I sâ—arce think any Churches in the Primitive times can be produced that did exactly in all things observe the same Customs which might be an Argument of Moderation in all as to these things but especially in pretended admirers of the Primitive Church And yet would you have every one bound to submit to the determination of Church-Governors in such Matters whatever his private Iudgment be concerning them As Eusebius notes from Irenaeus l. 5. c. 26. English c. 23. the Primitive Christians could differ in such Matters and yet live in Peace And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Anicetas and Polycarpus could differ in such Matters and yet communicate one with another The Primitive Christians retained câ—ntrary Observations and yet as Irenaeus said held fast the bond of Love and Vnity Can you ever prove that the Primitive Church or the best reformed Churches have assumed a Power of suspending Ministers from their Office and of debarring Christians from Communion for such Matters Here comes to my Mind that which you say Vnreas of Separat p. 14. that our Reformers preceeded more out of râ—verence to the Ancient Church than meer opposition to Popery Yet with King Iames Defence of the right of Kings p. 47c the Christian Religion reformed is as to say purged and cleansed of all Popish Dregs And p. 17. Altho they made the Scripture the only Rule of Faith and rejected all things repugnant thereto yet they designed not to make a Transformation of a Church but a Reformation of it by reducing it as near as they could to that state it was in under the first Christian Emperors c. Agreeable to Chillingworth p. 287. â— 82. But whether you took not the hint of distinguishing the Transformation of a Church from the Reformation of it from Arch-Bishop Whitgift I cannot tell However T. C. latter part of his second Reply p. 172. could not discern it to have any Solidity but called it a single solid Argument seeing Transforming may be in part as well as Reforming And you have not improved it at all But what a strange Assertion is that of yours p. 96. That there are in effect no new Terms of Communion with this Church but the same wich our first Reformers owned and suffered Martyrdom for in Queen Mary's Days And will you stand to this that they died Mâ—rtyrs for Ceremonies and for such Impositions as have thrust out so many Ministers that are most ready to subscribe to the same Truth for which indeed they laid down their Lives I had thought that I. Rogers the Proto-Martyr in that Persecution had been a Non-conformist As there were other Nonconformists also that suffered And can you make the World believe that they suffered for Conformity And did not the Martyrs in Queen Mary's Days suffer in one and the same Cause whether Conformists or Non-conformists Indeed they agreed well in Red in Blood and Flames who before had differed in Black and White But as you will have it p. 2. Our Church stands on the same Grounds c. And p. 4. I would only know if those Terms of Communion which were imposed by the Martyrs and other Reformers and which are only continued by us c. I say you would persuade us that you are upon the same Grounds with our first Reformers who were for Reforming according to the Scripture rejecting all things repugnant thereto only they would have the Church reduced as near as they could to that state it was in under the first Christian Emperors p. 17. Now to make this good it lieth on you to prove from Catholick written Tradition that the present established Rule was the Rule for Admission of Ministers into their Function and other Church-Members into Communion observed in those Antient Churches or one as near as could be to it and further to make it good that it is not at all repugnant to the Scripture-Rule Or if you cannot do this you must then grant that you are gone off from the Rule of our first Reformers that is the Scripture and those Primitive Churches and that the Terms of Communion are not indeed the same Propter externos ritus disciplinae homines pios ferire neque Domini est voluntas neque purioris Ecclesiae mâ—s 7. Would not such a Rule be point-blank contrary to Scripture-Rule If never so many Councils if all the Churches upon Earth determined that they had such Power that they could cut off both Ministers and Members of the Church for Matters left undetermined by God's Law we could not submit to such Determination while we believe the Scripture which tells us so plainly that they have no Power for Destruction but for Edification I subscribe to that of Panormitan Magis Laico esse credendum si ex scripturis loquatur quam Papae si absque verbo Dei agat Is not the Scripture-Rule plain here 1 Pet. 5. 3. that the Governours of the Church must not Lord it over Godâ—s Heritage And tho the Laity or common Christian People are directly and properly intended there yet no doubt by just and undeniable Consequence it will as well follow that they are not to Lord it over the Clergy And when Peter Martyr sets down the just causes of separation from Rome he gives this for one good Reason Because they usurp more Power than the Apâ—stle Paul accounted belonging to him 2 Cor 1. Not as if we had Dominion over your Faith Quibus verbis testatur fidem nâ—mini subjectam
teach not Heresy nor preach down Holiness c. and deny us not their Communion unless we will sin or a Conformists that will hold Communion with none but his own Party but separates from all other Churches in the Land Ib. p. 41. Is he a greater Separatist that confesseth them to be a true Church and their Communion lawful but preferreth another as fitter for him or he that denieth Communion with true worshipping Assemblies as unlawful to be communicated with when it is not so If the former then will it not follow that condemning them as no Church is a Diminution or no Aggravation of Separation and the local presence of an Infidel or Scorner would be a less separate state than the absence of their Friends If the latter which is certain then will it not follow that if we can prove the Assemblies lawful which they condemn they are the true Separatists that condemn them and deny Communion with them declaring it unlawful Answ. to Dr. Stil Serm. p. 47 or 49. Q. 80. And whether is not the Separation of whole Churches much worse than of single Persons from one Church when it is upon unwarrantable Cause or Reasons Ib. p. 31. Now how many of the Dissenters frequently communicate with them while they generally refuse shun and condemn our Assemblies Are there no true Churches to be found in the World that have no Bishops of a superior order over Pastors And were there not true Churches in England in that long Interval of Episcopal Government And are not they as justly to be charged with Schism and Separation from those true Churches which were before the re-establishment of Episcopacy as they that are commonly charged by those Encroachers and Invaders of other Mens Rights Vid. Sacril Desert p. 60. Q. 81. Seeing the Universal Church is certainly the highest Species whether have any Authority on pretence of narrower Communion in lower Churches to change Christ's terms of Catholick Communion or to deprive Christians of the right of being loved and received by each other or to disoblige them from the duty of loving and receiving each other Whether can humane Power made by their own Contracts change Christ's Laws or the Priviledges or Forms of Christ's own Churches Way of Concord p. 111. § 14. Q. 82. Whether the greatest and commonest Schism be not by dividing Laws and Canons which causlessly silence Ministers scatter Flocks and decree the unjust Excommunication of Christians and deny Communion to those that yield not to sinful or unnecessary ill-made Terms of Communion ibid. third Part p. 13. § 43. And if any proud passionate or erroneous Person do as Diothrephes cast out the Brethren undeservedly by unjust Suspensions Silencings or Excommunications whether this be not tyrannical Schism First Plea c p. 41. And as we say of the Papists that they unjustly call those Men Schismaticks whom they first cast out themselves by unjust Excommunication may we not say so of any others especially if either for that which is a Duty or for some small mistake which is not in the Persons power to rectify no greater than most good Christians are guilty of their Church-Law says he shall be excommunicate ipso facto ibid. p. 104. See also Answ. to Dr. Stil Serm. p. 47. or 49. § 8. Q. 83. Whether making sinful Terms of Communion imposing things forbidden by God on those that will have Communion with them and expelling those that will not so sin whether this be not heinous Schism First Plea c. p. 41 42. Q. 84. Whether all those would not be deeply guilty of such Schism who by talk writing or preaching justify and cry it up and draw others into the Guilt and reproach the Innocent as Schismaticks for not offending God Ib. Q. 85. If any will confine the Power or Exercise of the Church-Keys into so few Hands as shall make the Exercise of Christ's Discipline impossible or shall make Churches so great or Pastors so few as that the most of the People must needs be without Pastoral Oversight Teaching and publick Worship and then will forbid those People to commit the care of their Souls to any other that would be Pastors indeed and so would compel them to live without Christ's Ordinances true Church-Communion and Pastoral Help whether this would not be Schismatical and much worse Ib. p. 44. Q. 86. When able faithful Pastors are lawfully sâ—t over the Assemblies by just Election and Ordination if any will causlessly and without Right silence them and command the People to desert them and to take to others for their Pastors in their stead oâ— whom they have no such knowledg as may encourage them to such a change Whether this can be defended from the charge of Schism As Cyprian in the case of Novatian says that he could be no Bishop because another was rightful Bishop before â— Ib. p. 49 50. Q. 87. Whether the way to heal us be not 1. To approve the best 2. To tolerate the tolerable 3. To have Sacraments free and not forced 4. To restrain the Intolerable 5. This to be the Test of Toleration Whether such tolerated Worship do more good or hurt in true impartial Judgment 6. Magistrates keeping all in Peace Way of Concord third Part p. 144. Q. 88. Whether it be not a weakning of the King's Interest to divide his Subjects and build up unnecessary Walls of Partition between them and to keep them in such Divisions seeing a Kingdom divided against it self cannot stand And whether it be not unsafe and uncomfortable to a Prince to rule a divided mutinous People but sweet and safe to rule them that are united in mutual Love Whether they that would lay the Peoples Concord upon uncapable Terms would not bring the King's Interest in his Peoples Love and willing Obedience and ready Defence of him into too narrow a Bottom making him the King of some causlessly divided and espoused Party which must be set up to the Oppression of all the rest who are as wise and just and loyal as they Second Plea c. p. 76. § 24. Si in necessariis sit Vnitas In Non-necessariis Libertas In uâ—risque Charitas Optimo certe loco essent res nostrae To make a rounder number I may add from Mr. M. Godwyn his Negro's and Indians Advocate pleading for the Instructing of them and so admitting them into the Church a Book lately Printed and Dedicated to the Arch Bishoâ— of Canterbury Q. 89. Whether Is the wilful neglecting and opposing of it as he says in the Title-Page no less than a manifest Apostacy from the Christian Faith Can no Christian ever justify his omitting any possible lawful Means for the Advancement of his Religion as he says p. 91. Are all professed Christians absolutely bounâ— in their Places to endeavour the same by their Vow in Baptism and their very Profession Q. 90. Then are they not bound in their Places to endeavour the Advancement of Religion as well at home as abroad And do they not owe as much Service herein for Christ's sake towards their own Country-men as towards Strangers Should not English-men be as well concerned for English-men as for Indians And when the State of Religion is so visibly declining in England Atheism Ignorance Error Profaneness Popery and Superstition encreasing and getting up so fast amongst us is he for any great Advancement of Religion that would send away all Non-conformists if there be thousands of them to his Negro's and Indians for this wise Reason that There is no want of their Labours at home FINIS ADVERTISEMENT THe Readers is desired to take notice that these Papers were sent to London by the Author on the latter end of February or beginning of March last but by reason of the multitude of Pamphlets they could not get through the Press sooner The Ingenuous Reader is â—â—so desired to pass by the Errata the Author being remote from the Press these few he hath observed in some of the Sheets he hath seen viz. ERRATA PAge 5. l. 6 r. above P. 20 l. 24. r. do you not P. 21. l. 12. r. Wages P. 22. l. 22. r. Contrarywise P. 23. l. 24. r. and. P. 24. l. 18. dele down P. 28. l. 1. r. Triarios P. 57. l. 6. r. single-soal'd P. 62. l. 29. r. excite greater P. 63. l. 24. r. Church P. 70. l. 30. r. Inobedientia P. 72. l. 19 20. r. betray P. 81. l. 35. r. for P. 83. l. 36 r. did he at all
untrue or evil or which all Men may not consent to therefore all others must think so too and say as they Who can think that in many thousand uncertain Words all Men can and must be of the same Mind and approve them all alike Or that honest Men can lye and say that they assent to what they do not ibid. p. 88. Q. 31. If Men in all these must be brought to Uniformity and Practising in the same Mode whether must it not be either by Argument and Perswasion or by Force And whether it be not certain that the first will never do it Besides a multitude of Reasons whether doth not many hundred Years experience prove that all Christians will never be in all things of a mind about lawful and unlawful Duty and Sin And whether it be not as certain that Force will never do it Will a sound Believer sell his Soul to save his Flesh or hazard Heaven by wilful Sin to save his Interest on Earth ibid. p. 89 90. Q. 32. Whether in regard of the diversity of mental Capacities and Apprehensions the best will ever agree in any but few plain and certain things Way of Concord 3d Part p. 109. And Q. 33. Whether universal Concord may not take in most of the differing Parties though not as such by receiving any of their Errors yet as Christians who agree in the common Essentials of Faith and Piety And whether we should not hold essential Unity with all that hold the Essentials of Christianity though with those that hold Integrals more purely we are to have more full and nearer Concord than the rest that have more Errors ib. p. 72. Whether Christians ought not to bear with one another without having their Affections alienated from and much more without persecuting one another in greater Matters than most of the dissenting Parties disagree in Whether Christians of as different Principles may not yea and ought not yet to love each other and live in Peace Sacril Desert p. 7 8. 9. Whether the Novatians for many Ages were not tolerated by the wisest and godliest Emperours and Bishops ibid. p. 14. Q. 34. Whether the Terms of Church-Communion must not be such as take in all that Christ taketh in and would have us take in i. e. All that are fit for Church-Communion And whether they should not be such Terms as all true Christians fit for such Church-Communion if imposed would have united in in all Ages and Places of the Church since the days of Christ till now And whether those Terms that would have divided the Church are fit means to unite it Or can we think that the Church should now unite upon such Terms as it never united before Second Plea for P. p. 152 153. Q. 35. Whether Christ himself hath not instituted the Baptismal Covenant Mat. 28. 19. to be the Title of visible Members of the Church and the Symbol by which they shall be notified and hath not commanded all the baptized as Christians to love each other as themselves and though weak in Faith to receive one another as Christ receiveth us but not to doubtful Disputations and so far as they have attained to walk by the same Rule of Love and Peace and not to despise or judg each other for tolerable Differences And whether any mortal Man hath Power to abrogate these Terms of Church-union and Concord which Christ hath made First Plea for P. p. 34. Q. 36. Whether Christ who made the Baptismal Covenant the Test and standing Terms of Entrance did set up Pastors over his Churches to make new and stricter Terms and Laws or to preserve Concord on the Terms that he had founded it and to see that Men lived in Unity and Piety according to the Terms of the Covenant which they had entered Second Plea for P. p. 154. And when they have as Ministers not as Lords received Men on Christ's Terms whether they may excommunicate and turn them out again for want of more or only for violating these ibid. p. 155. Q. 37. Whether it be not a strange Contrariety of some to themselves who judg that all Infants of Heathens Jews Turks or wicked Men are without Exception to be taken into the Church if any ignorant Christian will but offer them and say over a few Words and the Adult also if they can but say over the Creed by rote and a few Words more that would fill the Church with Enemies of Christ and yet when Men are in deny them Communion unless they will strictly come up to many humane unnecessary Impositions as if far stricter Obedience to Men perhaps in Usurpations was necessary than to Jesus Christ Way of Concord p. 118. § 10. Q. 38. Whether the universal Church had not Unity long upon the Terms of Baptism and the Creed and Scriptures without any other Subscriptions Oaths or other Professions made necessary to Communion And whether it ever had Union upon such additional Terms of new Professions Subscriptions and Oaths as most Churches now impose and require Whether they departed not from Unity and Concord and so continue divided to this day when they departed from the antient Simplicity and the primitive Terms ibid p. 157. § 42. And whether those Pastors who will make Canons that alâ— English Protestants shall agree in Subscriptions Professions Oaths Forms and Ceremonies which they are not agreed in nor ever will be do not in effect say we will break them more in pieces and set them farther from each other than before ibid. p. 183. § 100. Whether the hereticating and cursing Men for doubtful Words or want of Skill in aptness of Expressions yea or for Errors which consist with having Faith in Christ be not so far from being a means of the Churches Good that it hath been the grand Engine of Satan to exercise Tyranny excite Hatred and Schism c. and therefore carefully to be avoided Way of Concord p. 195. § 34. whether anathâ—matizing Men for doubtful Actions or for such Faults as consist with true Christianity and continued Subjection to Jesus Christ be not a sinful Church-dividing Means ibid. p. 195 196. Q. 39. Whether Addition to Christ's Terms be not very perilous as well as Diminution as when Men will deny Church-entrance or Communion to any that Christ would have received because they come not up to certain Terms which they or such as they devise And though they think that Christ giveth them Power to do thus yet whether their Error will make them guiltless Or whether imputing their Error to Christ untruly be not an Aggravation of the Sin ibid. p. 119. § 1. Whether it is a small Fault to usurp a Power proper to Christ ibid. § 2. Whether it be not dangerous Pride to think themselves great enough wise enough and good enough to come after Christ and to amend his Work ibid. § 3. And whether this imply not an Accusation against him and his Institutions ibid. § 4. And whether the merciful Lord and
you cannot well plead the Cause of our Separation from Rome without pleading something for Dissenters But to return to your Impartial Account p. 209. You say Violation of the Unity of the Church where there is no sufficient Reason to justify it is a Sin as much as Murder is and as plainly forbidden and in some respects aggravated beyond it Preface p. 45. All which returns upon your selves if the Arâ—h-Bishop's Words may take place And consider further seriously whether there be any sufficient Reason to justifie the pressing and imposing of those things which might lawfully be forborn when the imposing of them will certainly cause a Violation of the Churches Unity and Peacâ— Yet this is a thing you take no notice of unless it be to justify it As p. 76. The Church of England hath as much occasion to account those Scruples unreasonable as they do those of the Indâ—pendents Aâ—â—baptists and Quakers And pag. 59. So it is impossible for them to answer the Anabaptists who have as just a Plea for Separation from them as they can have from the Church of England Now lay these together and what follows but that as much is to be pleaded for the English Ceremonies and other things imposed which the Non-câ—nformists stick at as can be pleaded for the baptizing of Infants or against Re-baptization and I may add or against the way of the Quakers In the Fifty Queries concerning Infants Right to Baptism I set that down last which â— desired they would specially observe Scil. Whether the Anabaptist's Schism be not worse than their simple Opinion And whether it be not desireable and possible that some Way be found out and Terms laid down in which good and sober Men on both sides might agree and hold Communion as Christians concerning which something is proposed there from Mr. B. to others Consideration This the Author of the Anti-Queries took little notice of which engaged me to mind him of it again in my Reply p. 25 26. And yet I have met with no other Answer from him but that he is loth at present to give an Answer to it intreating all his Friends to take it into Consideration because it is a matter of Moment and common Concern T. G's Controversy c. epitomised p. 64. From whence I conclude if such Terms of Moderation were offered they would be hard put to it scarce know what to say for a standing off and denying to have Communion with Christians of a different Perswasion but they would have enough to say against your Terms and that from your self and not only in your Irenicum but in your Rational Account p. 209. It is a very necessary Enquiry what the cause of the distance is and where the main Fault lies and it being acknowledge that there is a possibility that Corruptions may get into a Christian Church and it being impossible to prove that Christianity obligeth Men to communicate with a Church in all those they will say in any Corruptions its Communion may be tainted with it seems evident to Reason that the cause of the Breach must lie there where the Corruptions are owned and imposed as Conditions of Communion c. I should have hoped that at least you would have granted the conditions put upon Ministers to be very hard yet I find nothing but a deep silence here Tho Mr. Cheny says I am satisfied that it is in it â—elf a great and `dreadful Sin to silence the Non-conformists It seems here is a provoking Sin which you was willing to overlook tho once in your Sermon p. 20. you were very near it 6. Do you speak Impartially p. 378 379. when you tell us you wonder that none of us have taken any care to put any stop to Separation or to let you know where you may fix and see an end of it what Scruples are to be allowed and what not I will say nothing for those who are better able to speak for themselves but for my self I thought I had told you plainly and sufficiently out of your Irenicum if you will not be offended that I call it yours where I would have you fix Let Christians stand upon the same terms now as they did in the time of Christ and his Apostles Do not add other conditions of Church-Communion than Christ hath done As Rector of Sutton p. 6 7. See also p. 59. If you make no new Terms and yet others will separate from you still the Sin is theirs but if indeed you add other Terms then beware that you be not found the Schismaticks Do not turn me off here as you do Mr. Baxter's Way of Concord You â—â—â—not justly say we go on in impracticable Notions here or dividing Principles When you have that Word Preface p. 38. As tho he had been Christ's Plenipotentiary upon Earth You forgot that others might as well apply it to the Rector of Sutton for publishing his Irenicum And I hope you will not deny but we are backt with great Authority when you consider what King Iames tells Cardinal Du Perron by the Pen of Isaac Causabon which Mr. Baxter takes notice of Direct p. 752. His Majesty thinketh that for Concord there is no nearer way than diligently to separate things necessary from the unnecessary and to bestow all our labour that we may agree in the things necessary and that in things unnecessary there may be place given for Christian Liberty A Golden Sentence And there is nothing that can be proved necessary but it must be either expresly taught or commanded in the Word of God or deduced thence by necessary Consequence And that of the Lord Bacon Essay 3. is considerable who for the true placing the Bonds of Vnity would have Points fundamental and of Substance in Religion truly discerned and distinguished from Points not meerly of Faith but of Opinion Order or good Intention And Chillingworth is full of such impracticable Notions if they deserve to be so called p. 197. He that could assert Christians to that Liberty which Christ and his Apostles left them must needs to Truth a most Heroieal Service And seeing the over-valuing of the Differences among Christians is one of the greatest Maintainers of the Schisme of Christendom c. p. 198. Certainly if Protestants be faulty in this matter of playing the Pope it is for doing it too much and not too little Take away these Walls of Separation and all will quickly 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 them 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 and Superstitions and Impieties I say take away Tyranny and restore Christians to their just and full