the Scruples and suspicions of private Christians concerning the lawfulness of Actions required by their Superiors cannot warrant their separation Because their obedience to Superiors in things not unlawful is their duty and to omit a certain duty upon a bare suspicion is dangerous and sinful And for a full answer to this error I desire it may be considered what a scrupulous Conscience is which I take to be such an act of the practical understanding as resolves what is or what is not to be done but with some fear and anxiety lest its determination be amiss And it differs from a doubting Conscience which assents to neither part of the question but remains unresolved as doubting of the true sense of the rule in which case it is resolved that in all things doubtful we are to take the safest course And doubtless that wherein the generality of wise and good Men as well Ancient as Modern are agreed is much more safe than that in which a few less knowing prejudicated and guilty persons pretend to be doubtful But where there are only groundless fears and scruples concerning some circumstance annexed to a known duty it is the sense even of our Non-conformists That if we cannot upon serious endeavours get rid of our Scruples we ought to act against them And this is so lawful and necessary that we cannot otherwise have either grace or peace See more to this purpose in a Sermon at Cripplegate on Acts 24. 26. p. 18 19. And if scruple and suspicion were a just plea for Separation then every discontented Person that is resolved to contemn his Superiours every one that is affectedly ignorant and lazy or refractory to better information every one that hath melancholy humours and temptations or wants true Christian Humility or Charity may make separation and yet be guiltless So that this Opinion of our Author's would be an Apology for all Separatists which being allowed there neither was nor can be any such sin as Schism For I suppose it is sufficiently known that neither the Doctrine or Worship of any Church is so well constituted but some unquiet spirits have raised scruples and suspicions concerning them And unless the Church have power to command things lawful and no way repugnant to the Word of God though some giddy Persons may scruple at them it is impossible that it should preserve it self from confusion The Apostles I am sure did practise this in the Synod at Hierusalem Acts 15. And St. Paul silenceth the objections of contentious and scrupulous Persons with the Custome of the Churches of God 1 Corinth 11. 16. Every Congregation that pretends to have the face of a Church requires the obedience of its Members to all Orders for publick Worship as well as their consent to their Articles of Faith and without this it could not subsist I shall conclude this with Mr. Baxter's advice in his Dispute of Ceremonies Ch. 15. S. 3. That the Duty of obeying being certain and the sinfulness of the thing commanded being uncertain and only Suspected we must go on the surer side And the Author of the Sermon on Acts 24. 16. gives a good reason for it saying If a Christian should forbear praying or receiving the Sacrament every time his scrupulous conscience tells him he had better wholly omit the duty than perform it in such a manner he would soon find to his sorrow the mischief of his scruples And he adviseth In all known necessary duties always do what you can when you cannot do what you would Our Author p. 202. falls on an Ancient controversie concerning the observation of Easter of which he gives us this imperfect account That it being upon error taken for necessary that an Easter must be kept and upon worse than Error if I may so speak for it was no less than a point of Judaism forced upon the Church thought further necessary that the ground for the keeping the time of that Feast must be the rule left by Moses to the Jews there arose a stout question whether we ought to Celebrate with the Jews on the 14th of the Moon or the Sunday following This matter though most unnecessary most vain yet caused as great a combustion as ever was in the Church the West separating from and refusing Communion with the East for many years together An impartial relation of the ground of this controversie as it lies in Church History will sufficiently discover how odiously it is represented First then whereas he says it was upon error taken for necessary that an Easter must be kept I answer if it were an error the Church had it from the Apostles themselves for although the contending parties differed among themselves in the day yet both agreed on the necessity of observing Easter in Commemoration of our Saviour's Resurrection And the Controversie concerning the day puts it out of controversie that there ought to be a day observed Some learned men have thought the setting a-part of an Easter day to be grounded on 1 Cor. 5. 8. where S. Paul speaking of the Christian Passover says Let us keep the Feast and Grotius observes that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answereth to the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to abstain from all work for the offering up of holy things to God If the observation of any day be necessary unto Christians this of Easter is because it is the Mother and ground of our weekly Sabbath and is supposed to be the same which S. John calls the Lords day Rev. 1. 10. But we need not seek express authority from Scripture to make it necessary the practice of the Apostles testified by such early and authentick witnesses and the continued celebration of it in all the Churches of God do evince that it was not taken up on an Error no more than the observation of the Weekly Sabbath Mr. Hales says enough to resolve this objection in his Golden Remains set forth by Mr. Garthwait 1673. p. 260. on the question how we may know the Scriptures to be the word of God When saith he we appeal to the Churches testimony we content not our selves with any part of the Church actually existent but add unto it the perpetually successive testimony of the Church in all Ages since the Apostles times viz. since its first beginning and out of both these draw an argument in this question of that force as that from it not the subtilest Disputer can find an escape For who is it that can think to find acceptance and credit with reasonable men by opposing not only the present Church conversing in earth but the uniform consent of the Church in all ages So that the Church in all Ages agreeing that an Easter must be kept it was not taken up upon Error Nor secondly was it upon worse than error i. e. as our Author affirms a point of Judaism grounded on the Law of Moses to the Jews that the observation thereof was by some Churches solemnized
on the 14th day of the Moon For the Eastern Churches alledging the practice of S. John and Philip for the 14th day had a better ground for it than a Jewish custom namely that of Christian Charity and Baronius notes it as worthy of our observation that the Apostles had anciently appointed that though Easter were observed on the Lords day by the generality of Christians yet they should gently tolerate the Judaizing Converts which were of the circumcision and were in great numbers in the Eastern parts See Baronius's Annals ad Ann. 167. p. 168. Now the Western Churches pleaded for their practice which was the observation of the Sunday following the Authority of S. Peter and S. Paul who had fully convinced the Gentile converts that all Jewish rites were to be laid aside as having had their full completion in Christ but yet as in other like cases they were instructed to bear with the Jews as for some time they did for the first time that this controversie was agitated was between Anicetus Bishop of Rome and Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna who according to the custom of other Asian Churches celebrated Easter day on the 14th of the Moon For which practice Polycarp alledged the Authority of S. John And Irenaeus in an Epistle mentioned by Eusebius l. 5. c. 18. tells us that Polycarp came to Rome to discourse with Anicetus concerning this and other different observations between the Eastern and Western Churches and having after some conference amicably agreed other controversies they still differed about this observation but without any violation of the bond of Charity for they communicated together Anicetus giving leave to Polycarp to perform the offices of Divine Worship in his Church and it was then concluded That both Churches should be at liberty to observe the Ancient customes delivered to them from their Predecessors But about the year of Christ 198. Victor Bishop of Rome revives the controversie with Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus who was then 65 years old and came within a little time of S. John being cotemporary with Polycarp Victor pleads that the custom of his Church was derived from the Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul and that all his Predecessors had celebrated Easter on the Lords day See Eusebius lib. 5. ch 21 22 23. And Nicephorus l. 4. c. 36. Polycrates in his Epistle mentioned by Eusebius l. 5. c. 24. replies That all the Provinces of Asia observed it according to an Ancient tradition received long before i. e. before the second Century from S. John and S. Philip from Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna from Thraseas Bishop of Eumenia Sagaris of Laodicea Papirius and Melito Bishops of Sardis who always practised according to the same Canon and all the Bishops of Asia then living consented to and subscribed his Epistle Upon this Victor beginneth to storm and threatneth to Excommunicate the Bishops of Asia as Heterodox and to that end he assembleth the Bishops under his Jurisdiction who with one consent declared for peace desiring his forbearance and disliking his too great severity The Epistle of Irenaeus to Victor on this occasion is yet extant in which he declares That although for his part he was resolved to observe the Feast of Easter on the Sunday according to the practice of the Western Church in which he lived yet he could not approve that the Eastern Church should be Excommunicated for observing an Ancient custom and mindeth Victor that the Bishops before him had never broken the Churches peace on this occasion But no mediation would prevail Victor was Victor still and proceeds to denounce an impotent sentence against the Asian Churches Baronius says something to excuse the severity of Victor viz. That as long as those Churches were Catholick and incorrupt they of Rome thought it expedient to tolerate that custom but when from that custom Schism and Heresie brake in upon the Asian Churches for Montanus having diffused his Heresie through Asia those Asians began to plead that they had received this Tradition from their Paraclete that the Pascha ought to be celebrated on the 14th of the Moon and on no other day and that all such as practised otherwise were in an error then Victor thought it his duty to restrain this error 2. This Opinion of keeping Easter after the Asian manner was taken up by many Hereticks and so spread it self that it invaded the very bosom of the Roman Church and pluckt thence one Blastus who in the face of that Church maintained the Asian against the Roman Custom Tertullian speaks of this Blastus in his book de Praescriptionibus c. 53. saying that he endeavoured to bring in Judaism affirming that the Christian Pascha was not to be kept otherwise than was prescribed by the Law of Moses And this opinion of Blastus drew away so many after him that Irenaeus wrote a book of Schism directed purposely against Blastus but could not recal him And now let the indifferent Reader judge whether the subject of this controversie were most unnecessary most vain as our Author declaims Victor indeed did prosecute it with too much heat insomuch that the Cardinal knows not what to say in his excuse An verò quod potestate jure faciebat recténe fecerit dubitatum est saith the Cardinal Doubtless the Asian Churches were sui juris not under the jurisdiction of Victor or if they had been yet was he not unblameable in Excommunicating all the Churches of Asia for the fault of some few that had crept in among them whom in due time they would have restrained by their own authority He was also too precipitate in not yielding to the mediation of his own Bishops in behalf of those Churches And lastly he was much more culpable for imposing this observation on the Asian Churches as a matter of Faith and judged them to be heterodox and excommunicate that would not submit Baronius his words ad annum Christi 198. p. 191. of the Antwerp edition are Totius Asia Ecclesias cum aliis finit imis tanquam alterius fidei opinionis à communi unitate Ecclesia amputare conatur Nor were the Asian Churches without fault for yielding so long to a Jewish Ceremony which might long ere that time have been decently buried as other Jewish customes had been And also for suffering some among them to teach a necessity of observing the Christian Pascha on the 14th day and no other So that to conclude though the Roman Church was in this particular stronger in the Faith yet as our Author saith they should have born with the imbecillity of their weaker Brethren a thing which he observes S. Paul would not refuse to do p. 218. To which I say that S. Paul did comply for a while with the Jewish Converts in the Case of Circumcision but when some of them pleaded for a necessity of Circumcision he thunders against that Opinion as loudly as Victor did against this saying That if they were Circumcised i. e. with an Opinion of the
strictly enjoyned by the word of God cannot be dispensed with by scruples about the lawfulness of rites and ceremonies in the external worship of God And I may safely add 4. That if honest and well meaning men shall so far indulge to such scruples as to live in disobedience to the Laws and constitutions of their Superiors their Superiors may justly punish them for so doing or the frame of their Government will soon be turned off its hinges And Governors not being able to discern the hearts of men may equally animadvert upon all refractory persons or they must let all go unpunished and if they should resolve on this later farewell all Government And seeing the wisdom of Man cannot prevent it it is better that a few mistaken Innocents should be punished than the peace and foundation of a Church or Nation be overturned Melius pereat unus quà m unitas Better is a private inconvenience than a publick mischief This is a foundation necessary to the settlement of all humane Laws and Constitutions Thus in matters of common right and interest when the several Courts of a Nation have established and published rules and orders for the appearances and proceedings of Persons litigant they who omit the time or mistake the right methods of pleading and thereupon suffer damage though as to the merits of their cause they be severely dealt with yet the proceedings of the Law are right and justifiable because it is more for the publick peace and establishment that some persons should sustain loss for their unwilling neglects and errors than that all wilful Offenders should go unpunished and publick Orders of Court be contemned and disobeyed And this Rule holds much stronger in such Ecclesiastical cases as are now under our consideration because the controversie is not here between private persons but between Superiors and Subjects If therefore one or more private Persons purely on mistake and after humble and serious inquiry for satisfaction though I think few sober persons using such means can remain unsatisfied in so plain a case Whether Scruples concerning ancient and innocent rites in the external Worship of God can justifie disobedience to the constitutions of lawful Governors should still judge contrary to their Governors who impose such things as lawful and convenient to be unlawful and superstitious and thereupon refuse to appear at their Courts and be ordered by them It is agreeable to the Laws of all Societies that such Persons should not go unpunished If a Child or Servant shall neglect to obey his Father or Master because he hath some Scruples against his commands I think such Father or Master may without Scruple correct that Child or Servant or within a short time they will become incorrigible And the Case is almost the same as if the debauched part of the Nation who are morally vicious should pretend scruples of conscience against such Laws of the Land as restrain their enormities suppose of Sabbath-breaking and neglecting the Publick Worship which yet I think the Nonconformists would not judge to be a tolerable plea. I have insisted so long on this argument not only because our Author mentioneth it so often and ever makes it a ground for separation telling us that Not only in Reason but in Religion too this Maxime admits of no release Cautissimi cujusque praeceptum quod dubitas nè feceris but often insinuates them to be guilty of Schism that do require any suspected thing as you may see p. 194. and p. 218. After this Pipe all the Factions do dance The Presbyterians in their Commissioners Papers suggest it frequently whether Ecclesiastical constitutions concerning things which are or may become matter of dispute and opposition are to be allowed And John Owen for the Independents would have some warrant from Scripture for every thing that is required in the Worship of God But minding my Reader of Dr. Owen's concessions before mentioned to which I shall only add the confessions of the Presbyterians who from the beginning opposed our Rites and Ceremonies not as unlawful but only as inconvenient as Mr. Cartwright did in his second Reply p. 262. and therefore perswaded Ministers rather to wear the Garments required by Law than cease their Ministry And in his Evangelical Harmony on Luke 22. à versu 14. ad 19. saith That kneeling in receiving the Sacrament being incommodious in its own nature and made more incommodious by Popish superstition is not so to be rejected that for the sake thereof we should abstain from the Sacrament His words are these Geniculatio in participatione suâ naturâ incommoda superstitione pontificiâ longè facta est incommodior Nec tamen propterea ita rejicienda ut ejus nomine à Sacramento abstineamus si ejus caeteroquin participes esse nequimus quia res suâ naturâ non est purè illicita because the thing is not in its own nature utterly unlawful From whence we may conclude that such things as are not purely unlawful in their own nature though they are incommodiously applied and have been grosly abused by Popish superstition are not a sufficient cause to hinder our participation of Divine Ordinances And yet to what mischievous ends is this forlorn scruple of receiving that blessed Sacrament on our Knees made use of by Fanatick Persons as a Bar against the receiving of it at all though it be a posture sanctified by the Son of God when in the days of his being in the flesh he offered up Prayers to God and hath been used by all sober Christians in their publick and private Devotions and therefore most agreeable to that Solemn Office wherein we cannot with sufficient humility and reverence receive at the hands of God such an ineffable blessing nor worthily express our humble acknowledgment of thankfulness to God And in the act of receiving besides our secret supplication to God to pardon and absolve us from all our sins for Christ's sake we joyn with the Minister to pray that the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for us may preserve our Bodies and Souls to Eternal life though the Church hath used as plain and effectual a mean to prevent our being scandalized and scrupled at it by declaring in the Rubrick that no adoration is intended or ought to be done either to the Sacramental Bread and Wine there bodily received or to any corporal presence of Christ's natural flesh and bloud for the Sacramental bread and wine remain still in their very natural substances and therefore may not be adored for that were Idolatry to be abhorred of all Christians And that it was intended for a signification of our humble and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits of Christ therein given to all worthy receivers and for avoiding such disorder and profanation in the holy Communion as might otherwise ensue as the wisdom of Men can invent yet the outcry of Superstition Will-worship and Idolizing the Creatures of Bread and Wine is kept up and
Incense to the Pagan Gods Trajan was one of the mildest of those Emperors and Pliny the Younger being required to certifie the practices and behaviour of the Christians in his days acquainted the Emperor that they did meet together in the Night and sung Hymns to Christ as to their God which was their only crime for as to other things They bound themselves by an Oath not to run into any wickedness not to commit Thefts Murders or Adulteries not to break their promises or withhold any thing committed to their trust l. 10. Epist 97. And yet besides those famous Bishops Ignatius Clemens Anicetus many Thousands of pious Christians were martyred the Heathen were so far from permitting their Meetings howsoever and by whomsoever celebrated that they hunted out private Christians and upon their confessions that they were so they were instantly condemned If a Legion of Witnesses will suffice I shall produce that of the Noble Thebean Legion consisting of 6666. Souldiers who when Maximinus was Emperor and prepared to fight his Enemies though they had often given testimony both of their valour and fidelity to his Predecessors and had by the accustomed Oaths sworn the same to him which Oaths Vegetius de Re militari l. 2. sets down in these words Jurant per Deum Christum Sanctum Spiritum per majestatem Imperatoris quae secundùm Deum generi humano diligenda est colenda omnia se strenuè facturos quae praeceperit Imperator nunquam deserturos militiam nec mortem recusaturos pro Romana Republicâ were yet required to lustrate or expiate themselves by offering sacrifice to the Heathen Gods which they refusing to do jointly professing themselves to be Christians he decimates the whole Legion and slays every Tenth Man with the Sword and afterward requires the same impiety from the rest but their chief Commanders who deserve serve to be mentioned in all Histories Mauritius Tribune of the Legion Exuperius their Standard-bearer and Candidus one of the Senatorian Order exhorting them to constancy in the Christian Faith being required to bring their Legion to the Emperor at Octodurus and there perform those Pagan rites answered That they were ready in all things to obey the Emperors commands in fighting against his Enemies only being Christians they could by no means Sacrifice to his Gods Whereupon they suffered another Decimation at which the remainder of the Legion were so far from being daunted that they all professed themselves of the same resolution and should rejoyce to obtain the same honour of Martyrdom Whereupon the Emperor Ordered his Army to fall on them and cut them in pieces which was accordingly done not one of them seeking an escape Baronius ad Annum 297. Nor were these Massacres only committed in the times of the ten persecutions but afterward when some Christian Emperors infected with Arrianism had the power they made havock of the peaceable and Orthodox Christians and denyed them the priviledge of publick or private meetings And our Author himself observes p. 228. That Christian meetings under Pagan Princes when for fear they durst not come together in open view were charged with foul imputations as by the report of Christians themselves plainly appears And again p. 227. That time had taken leave to fix this name of Conventicles upon good and honest meetings and that perchance not altogether without good reason Which reason he expresseth p. 228. it was espied that ill affected persons abused private meetings for Religion to gross impiety and therefore both Church and State jointly gave order for Forms times and places of publick Concourse and all other meetings besides those of which both time and place were limited they censured for routs and riots and unlawful assemblies in the State and in the Church for Conventicles Upon which our Author concludes p. 229. It is not lawful no not for prayer hearing c. for people to Assemble otherwise than by publick order is allowed But notwithstanding this concession our Author having distinguisâ—ed between times of corruption and incorruption he says p. 230. That in times of manifest corruptions and persecutions wherein Religious assembling is dangerous private meetings however besides publick Order are not only lawful but they are of necessity and duty And this he supposeth a competent Plea as well for the Papists in our days as for the Protestants in Queen Maries dayes For else saith he how shall we excuse the meetings of Christians for publick service in time of danger and persecutions and of our selves in Queen Maries days and how will those of the Roman Church amongst us put off the imputation of Conventicling who are known amongst us privately to assemble for Religious exercise against all established order both in Church and State Now I willingly grant that in times of manifest corruptions and persecutions such as the Roman and Marian were private meetings are lawful and necessary duties because if men do forbid what God hath commanded it is better to obey God than man But this rule will not hold with that Latitude which our Author annexeth to it that such meetings are lawful however besides publick order and p. 231. however practised For suppose that Dioclesian or Queen Mary had published their Edicts that on such days such a number of Christians or Protestants should meet and worship God in publick places allowed them for that purpose or as by the late Act of Parliament any Family not admitting above five for Religious exercises were tolerated it had been their duty to acquiesce in such an Indulgence and not by meeting in greater numbers and in places and times prohibited to provoke their Governors For certainly God hath committed to the Soveraign authority a power of regulating the External exercise of Divine Worship nor can the irregularity of good men make void that Ordinance of God And therefore our Author concludes amiss when he sayes That all pious Assemblies in times of persecution and corruption however practised are indeed or rather alone the lawful congregations and publick Assemblies though according to form of Law are indeed nothing else but Riots and Conventicles if they be stained with corruption and superstition A Doctrine that is very pleasing both to the Papists and other Sectaries who being perswaded that we are corrupted and they are persecuted may be incouraged once again to set up the good old Cause that is the overthrow of Monarchy and Episcopacy in this Nation and the setting up of Popery and Anarchy in their rooms Mr. Hales tells us in his Sermon on Luke 18. 1. p. 134. of his Golden Remains that Tully observed that Antony the Orator being to defend a person who was accused of Faction and Sedition bent his wits to maintain that Sedition was good and not to be objected as a fault our Author hath strained his wits to do the like by Schism and so far to excuse separation as ordinarily to lay the blame thereof upon Superiors and to make them the
lawful things oft become unlawful when Superiors forbid them yet no reason can be given why a lawful thing should become unlawful because a lawful Superior doth command it else Superiors might take away all our Christian liberty and make all things unlawful to us by commanding them You would take it for a wild conceit in your children or servants if they say when you bid them learn a Catechism or use a form of prayer It was lawful for us to do it till you commanded us but because you bid us do it it is unlawful If it be a duty to obey Governors in all lawful things then it is not a sin to obey them 3. It is not your knowing before hand that makes it unlawful for 1. I know in general before-hand that all imperfect men will do imperfectly and though I know not the particular that maketh it never the lawfuller if foreknowledge it self did make it unlawful 2. If you know that e.g. an Antinomian or some mistaken Preacher would constantly drop some words for his error in praying or preaching that will not make it unlawful in your own judgment for you to joyn if it be not a flat heresie 3. It is another mans error or fault that you foreknow and not your own 4. God himself doth as an universal cause of nature concur with men in those acts which he foreknoweth they will sinfully do yet is not the Author or approver of the sin We the Commissioners 1663. all thought a Liturgy lawful and divers learned and reverend Nonconformists of London met to consider how far it was their duty or lawful to communicate with the Parish Churches where they lived in the Liturgy and Sacrament and I proved four propositions 1. That it is lawful to use a form 2. That it is lawful to joyn with some Parish Churches in the use of the Liturgy 3. That it is lawful to joyn with some Parish Churches in the Lords Supper 4. That it is to some a duty to joyn with some Parish Churches three times a year in the Lords Supper and none of the Brethren seemed to dissent but took the reasons to be valid Were I in Armenia Abassia or among the Greeks I would joyn in a much more defective form than our Liturgy rather than none And this is the judgment of many New-England Ministers conform to the old Non-conformists who did some of them read the Common-Prayer and the most of them judged it lawful to joyn in it or else Mr. Hildersham Mr. Rich. Rogers c. would not write so earnestly for coming to the beginning and preferring it before all private duties And truly I am not able to bear the thoughts of separating from almost all Christs Churches upon earth but he that separates from one or many upon a reason common to almost all doth virtually separate from almost all and he that separates from all among us upon the account of the unlawfulness of our Liturgy and the badness of our Ministry doth separate from them upon a reason common to almost all or the far greatest part as I conceive Those forms of Liturgy which now are most distasted were brought in by the most zealous religious people at the first the many short invocations versicles and responses which the people use were brought in when the Souls of the faithful did abound with zeal and in holy fervors break out in such expressions and could not well endure to be bare Auditors not vocally to bear their part in the praises of God and prayers of the Church I have shewed at large How far God hath given men power to prescribe and impose forms for others and commanded others to obey them when Christ said When ye pray say Our Father c. he bound the Disciples in duty to do as he bid them How forms may be imposed publickly on the congregations of Believers and on the Ministers yea though the forms imposed be worse than the exercise of their own gifts though among us no man be forbidden to use his own gifts in the Pulpit The Pharisees long Liturgy it is like was in many things worse than ours yet Christ and his Apostles often joyned with them and never condemned them I shall now only add that the Lord's prayer is a form directed to God as in the third person and not to man only as a directory for prayer in the Second Person it is not Pray to God your Father in heaven that his name may be Hallowed his Kingdom come c. But Our Father which art in heaven hallowed be thy name c. And it seems by the disciples words that thus John taught his disciples to pray Luke 11. 1. and we have in the Scripture the mention of many Set forms of Service to God which therefore we may well use And I desire the Reader again to Note that though Prayer was corrupted by the Pharisees yet Christ usually joyned in their Synagogues Luke 14. 17. and never medled with our controversie about the lawfulness of Set forms This Mr. Baxter infers from Calvins note on Matth. 6. before the Preface to the Defence Of Obedience to our Pastors We are indangered by divisions principally because the self-conceited part of Religious people will not be ruled by their Pastors but must have their way and will needs be rulers of the Church and them But pleasing the ignorant Professors humors is a sin that shews us to be too humane and carnal and hath always sad effects at last It is a high degree of pride for persons of ordinary understandings to conclude that almost all Christs Chruches in the world for thirteen hundred years at least have offered such worship to God as that you are obliged to avoid it and all their communion in it and that almost all the Catholick Church on earth at this day is below your communion for using forms Mark Is it not more of the women and apprentices that are of this mind than of old experienced Christians I think till we have better taught even our godly people what credit and obedience is due to their teachers and spiritual guides the Church of England shall never have peace or any good or established order We are broken for want of the knowledge of this truth till this be known we shall never be well bound up and healed The people of the new separation so much rule their Ministers that many of them have been forced to forsake their own judgments to comply with the violent Labour to maintain the Ordinances and Ministry in esteem The Church is bound to take many a man as a true Minister to them and receive the Ordinances from him in faith and expectation of blessing upon promise who yet before God is a sinful invader and usurper of the Ministry and shall be condemned for it How much more then to respect their lawful Bishops and Pastors For Lay-Elders As