my Answer These XII Arguments I understand they are likeliest to prevail most by the honour of Dr. Owen's Name more then by any strength that is in them J was willing as long as I could to believe they were not his they being as fallacious and frivolous as the rest i. e. Mr. Ralphson's and Mr. Warner's and one Error managed with above forty mistakes Besides after being assured they were his I was the more encouraged by the Example of Paul Gal. 2. J. O. As frivolous as they are or as little strength as they have you have not so much as shaken one of them or any Scripture duely managed by the Suffering Gentlemen you trampled upon one dead and the other alive dead or alive it 's all one to you but go on A Ream of Paper fill'd with such a Noise as this was will not carry the cause you have undertaken unless you can find better Arguments and Reasons both Logical and Theological to manage it with Put on the Spirit of Meekness Gravity Tenderness Humility Self-denyal Do not think to raise your Honour upon the Ruines of Christs Truth and the Reproaches of his Followers this was not Pauls Spirit neither have you his cause for the business that he withstood Peter in was compliance with the Jews abolished worship in opposition to the present Gospel-Worship as it was owned and professed by the Gentiles Besides there was his Cowardliness and fear of man that brought him to it with a great deal of dissimulation whereby Barnabas and others were drawn away Gal. 2.12 13. Sir you write much and Err much and yet justifie your self as the most infallible Person in the World when you come to particulars Sir I tell you I shall appeal to any Christian Spirit that reads your Refutation oâ— these Arguments as you call it whether you give any Testimony of the Spirit of Christ accompanying you in it I say no more but recommend to your serious consideration 1st The third chapter of the first Epistle of S. Paul to the Corinthians especially vers 11 12.13 14 15. 18 19. 2dly The loud Paâ—fietick Call of Mr. Vincent in the end of his Book of Love O Tongues of Professors Catholick Communicants as well as others how long will it be ere you be quiet How long shall your breath bâ— as the Eâ—sâ—-wind blasting all about you When shall your words be agreeable to the Word of God When shall your Lips feed many and hurt none Your reproachful back-biting railing Language your Lies and Falsehoods have seen your sin and shame and the shame of Religion Repentance and Amendment is absolutely necessary else Salvation will still stand at a distance Isa 63.8 This he said suspecting men spoke of his Conformity R. B. Well Doctor I would not have you offended at what I have said and done I doubt not but whatever I wrote was faulty But I write as a Defendant of Love Unity and the Catholick Church and for the sake of such as being justly afraid of Sin and Idolatry and Damnation are affrighted from Love Unity c. and fall into a wilderness of sinful Divisions and confusions by these frightful names And tho' in the Trials and late Distractions of the Land I mention some of your confessions it is to tell you That I had reason to hope that you repented for doing no more in your publick Opportunities against the Spirit of Division that dissolved us J. O. True had it not been for that Spirit of Division there might not have been cccasion of your Repentance for writing the Holy Commonwealth The World is hardly peâ—swaded yet that it was hearty but only to qualify your Self for State-Charity as many Catholick Communicants go to Church and receive the Sacraments R. B. I will do much for that reason that the World may know my Charity with you and have Charity for me for all any thing said of you in this Pamphlet I will tell the Bishops that they should not be angry with you That I know not three men alive whom they are more beholden to for their Restitution by opening the door and sweeping the way and melting down and pulverizing all that was like to have resisted them J. O. Now to return this great favour we will take care if they understand it not already to acquaint them that no ten men in England now alive have done more for their Establishment by dirtying the Dissenters and melting and crumbling the Cause of Nonconformity to attoms that upon the Principles and Reasons that you would have the World beleive it stands it seems justly to them and all other duly considering men the most idle weak and ridiculous thing in the world So that I hope now they will be well pleas'd with us both R. B. Dr. let us shake hands then and be friends and walk like Bâ—e hren in Catholick Communion I tell thee one thing but it 's not fit to be spoken of yeâ— but among Friends I am going to discourse Dr. Sieâ—â—ck upon this great point of Câ—tholick Communâ—on to beat it into his thick Skull how the Catholick Church is united into one bâ—dy so as to be one Church I cann't make him understand what 's meant by the word Union nor how many sorts of Union â—e will receive nothing de nomine nor de re but I am not out of hopes of effecting something at last If I cann't do it I am sure no man can It shall escape me hard if I do not â—â—râ— those worldly Pr. I G. and the unruly Pr. Ig's by Persecution and by causless Separation and Alienation to Catholick Communion J. O. Good night Sâ—r. R. B. Good morrow Sâ—â— J. O. We cann't agâ—â—e on the time of day yet it seems FINIS
A Theological Dialogue Containing the DEFENCE and JUSTIFICATION OF Dr. John Owen FROM THE FORTY TWO ERRORS Charged upon him by Mr. Richard Baxter In a certain MANUSCRIPT ABOUT Communion in Lyturgical Worship Hebr. 11.5 By Faith Abel obtained a witness that he was righteous God testifying of his gifts and by it being dead yet speaketh 1 Cor. 4.3 4. With me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you or of mans judgment He that judgeth me is the Lord. LONDON Printed for the Author 1684. A THEOLOGICAL DIALOGUE CONTAINING Dr. Iohn Owen's DEFENCE AND JUSTIFICATION AGAINST Mr. Richard Baxter's CHARGE c. J. O. SIR you say That there is a certain Manuscript come to your hand which is famed to be Dr Owen's but received by you from a private hand which you publish taking it for granted so to be add his Name to it and expose it to Publick View and charge the said Dr. Owen with forty two Errors therein contained It is not yet proved by you to be his and therefore whether its reasonable for you to charge him with forty two Errors if you had found them in the said Manuscript let the World judge But whether the charge of such Errors on the said Manuscript be just give us leave to Examine by our Ensuing Conference And seeing by a continued Prosopopeia you direct your Discourse Charges Reproofs and Admonitions to me as if I were personally present or at least living in the Body who you know departed this Life some months since Take it not amiss if I treat you in the like nature and think it as feasible for a dead man to speak in the Ears of the Living as for the Living to speak in the Ears of the Dead I suppose if that Manuscript were mine some or other of the Congregation to which I was Pastor might come to me with this Case of Conscience Sir Is it lawful for us who are Members of a Congregation of Faithful People according to Article 19. of the Church of England for to joyn now as things are in their present Circumstances in the Publick Worship by the Liturgy And that it was Answered Manuscript It is not lawful for us to go to and joyn in Publick Worship by the Common Prayer because that Worship in it self according to the Rule of the Gospel is unlawful Now I pray Sir what Resolution would you give of this Case R. B. I say It is not only lawful but a Duty for those that cannot have better Publick Church-Worship without more hurt than benefit and are near a competent Parish Minister to go to and joyn in Publick Worship performed according to the Liturgy and in Sacramental Communion and for those that can have better to joyn sometimes with such parish-Parish-Churches when their forbearance scandalously seemeth to signifie that they take such Communion for unlawful and so would tempt others to the same Accusation and Uncharitable Separation J. O. Sir Your Resolution seems to me very long and upon so many Suppositions that its very ambiguous and doth very scarcely if at all reach the Enquiry here made For 1. We ask for our selves who are Actual Members of a Voluntary Church whether we may joyn in such Communion spoken of when we are as we apprehend of a Society and have a Publick Worship more agreeable to the mind of Christ and our own Edification and do you judge whether that be better or no for us 2. What you mean by a competent Ministry we know not one man judges a man a Competent yea able and profitable Minister which another doth not who must be a binding Judge to me in this case Must I walk by my own Judgment for Edification or by another Mans 3. Doth nearness to a Competent Minister make it my duty to joyn in all the Publick Worship of that Church of which he is Minister You say If I cann't have better But if I have and can by going further what then And for those that can have better to joyn sometimes in such Parish-Churches but then not alwayes and to leave their aforesaid Communion as unlawful whereas our said Parish-Churches require us so to do prosecuting us by Laws wherever they find us assembled You say it must be when our forbearance scandalously seemeth to signifie that we take such Communion for unlawful Who shall be judge of this Doth my Actual Non-communion with any Church scandalously reflect upon its Constitution if I walk in Communion with a Church which I judge to be a Church of Christ Must I go by the conduct of every peevish man or Church that will say so If a Church of Baptists in the same Parish with me will say so must I therefore joyn with them upon their unalterable terms which I am not satisfyed in Again what if I do take such Communion for unlawful upon grounds satisfactory to my self am I bound to-slight those grounds because somebody saith my forbearance hath a Scandalous Signification Likewise if my Separation be in duty to wards God and my own Soul it 's not uncharitable to any Man neither do I tempt any man by walking therein to uncharitableness or any Accusation thereof Manuscript Something must be premised to the Confirmation of this Position J. O. These are the things that we premise and therefore should be agreed upon on both sides pro concessis before we go to prove the Position laid down by the following Twelve Arguments Manusc 1. The whole System of Liturgical Worship with all its inseparable Dependencies are intended for as such it is Established by Law and not in any part of it only as such it is required that we receive it and attend unto it It is not in our power it is not left to our judgment or liberty to close with or make use of any part of it as we shall think fit There are in the Mass-Book many Prayers directed to God only by Jesus Christ yet it is not lawful for us thereon to go to Mass under a pretence only of joyning in such lawful Prayers As we must not offer their Drink-Offerings of Blood so we must not take up their Names in our Lips Psal 16 4. have no Communion with them R. B. To the first I answer 1. If he will include all that is in the Liturgy the Nonconformists confess that there is something in it which they differ from as unjustifiable and so there is in all mens Worship of God J. O. We say The whole System our meaning is plain the totum as it stands constituted in all its integral parts When I speak of John or Thomas c. I speak not of a Finger or a Leg if I do I say the Finger or Leg of such an one So we speak not of those things that you will call faulty and unjustifyable as it may be a Surplice or Cross c. but of the whole Liturgy-Worship as Establish'd R. B. He intimateth that it is not in cur power to
lâ—wful modes things lawfully used are to be indifferently used in the Worship of God what he thinks is necessary to be made a binding Law he hath made so or else he is deficient in his house R. B. Your Conclusion is a Mistake Error 33. J. O. That it must needs be if the premises were so full of Errors but we have vindicated them so the Conclusion is true Manuscript Argument 4. That which gives Testimony against the Faithfulness of Christ in his house as a Son and Lord of it above that of a Servant is not to be complyed withal let all the Disciples judge Vnto the Faithfulness of Christ doth belong to appoint and command all things whatsoever in the Church that belongs to the Worship of God as is Evident from the Comparison with Moses herein and his Preference above him Heb. 3.3 4 5 6. But that Institution and Prescription of all things in Religious Worship of things never Instituted nor prescribed by Christ in form and modes of them ariseth from a Supposition of a defect in the Wisdom Care and Faithfulness of Christ Whence alone a Necessity can arise of Prescribing that in Divine Worship that he hath not Prescribed R. B. 1st To your Major I answer 1. To give Testimony Signifyeth either by remote unseen Consequence to cross Christs Faithfulness and so do many of your Mistakes 2. Or it signifieth a plain Denyal of Christs Faithfulness no Christian complyeth with this J. O. By a remote unseen Consequence you have answered the Major for no man can see any Answer in it worth a Button To give Testimony against the Faithfulness of Christ is by making or Complying with Laws necessary for the Churches Esse or bene esse which he hath not made and it charges him for not doing what he ought to do as the Lord of his house and that which a man bears Testimony to by open Profession in Words or Practice is not to cross Christs Faithfulness by a remote unseen Consequence men do not use to bear Testimonies in the dark Our meanig is mens plain Denyal in Practice and it may be an open mouth Vindication of themselves and Condemnation of others added as you do This we roundly affirm to be a Testimony born against the Faithfulness of Christ and in this meaning you grant our Major R B. To your Minor I answer In your Supposition it is not true That it belongeth to Christs Faithfulness to appoint and command all things whatever in the Church which belongs to the Worship of God Else he were unfaithful in bidding them appoint many things belonging to his Worship Error 34. J. O. Here is another bold Attempt against Christ if it were not contradicted in the same breath for if he hath bid them appoint and make Laws then he did it in faithfulness and it belongs still to his faithfulness to give them a faithful Commission so as might not turn to the certain manifest wrong and injury of his Church as the exerting such a power hath done but tell us the Vbi of those Laws and biddings to men in the present sence and the Controversy is at an end R. B. It is another Error That the prescription of forms and modes of things in Worship not commanded by Christ can arise from nothing but a Supposition of a defect in the Wisdom Care and Faithfulness of Christ J. O. I prove it either it 's so or all that is done in that kind is superfluous For if there were Laws enough ad esse bene esse Ecclesiae it 's folly and madness to make more that which you instance in forms of Catechising Confessions or Forms of Prayer for Children c. they are nothing to the purpose they may be of use in their place for some means of instruction to the Ignorant as persons and cases require But we speak of forms and Systems of Worship imposed and bound on upon our shoulders at mans pleasure this we assert must be upon a Supposal of the defect of Christs Law or be done in manifest opposition to it to thrust it out or be a professed folly to make Laws were we declare there is no need of them Your Refutation in the three particulars are idle or false not worth our pains to take notice of Manuscript Argument 5. That which is a means humanely Invented for the attaining of an End in Divine Worship which Christ hath Ordained a means for unto the Exclusion of the means so appointed by Christ is false Worship and not to be complyed withal The end intended is the Edification of the Church in the Administration of all its holy Ordinances This the Service Book is Ordained and appointed by men for or it hath no end or use at all But the Lord Christ hath appointed other means for the attaining this End as is Expresly declared He hath given gifts unto men for the work of the Min stry for the edifying of the Body Ephes 4.7 8 11 12. that is in all Gospel Administrations but this means Ordained by Christ namely the Exercise of Spiritual Gifts in Gospel Administrations unto the Edification of the Church is Excluded yea expresly prohibited in the prescription of this Liturgical Worship R. B. To the major of your fifth Argument I answer as to the former no man is to comply by approbation with any thing that excludeth any of Gods means E. gr not with you that exclude the great duty of Catholick Communion J. O. Then you grant the maior but insinuate a distinction or keep a hole rather to creep out at There is say you compliance by Approbation and compliance without and that is by Compulsion When men comply with a Worship they submit to the Rule as the mind and will of God not as to a faulty and Erroneous Rule You are still upon your old shift a short turn â—nd a leap putting the Errors of Performances instâ—ad of the Errors of the Rule It 's a false accusation to say that I did ever exclude Catholick Communion But if I should please men I should not be the Servant of Jesus Christ but it is a very small thing with me that I should be judged of you or of mans judgment 1 Cor. 4.3 He that judgeth me is the Lord verse 4. Only this I shall say I will not go to the Church of Rome for Catholick Communion nor betray the Lord of the Vineyard that I may eat of the fruit thereof R. B. It is another mistake that the exercise of Spiritual Gifts is expresly forbidden except you meant just at the use of the Liturgy extemporate utterance is forbidden but it is not so in the Pulpit Error 36 J. O. We mean that there is an actual Exclusion of the Exercise of Spiritual Gifts in the whole Lyturgical Worship both in praying or any thing else it 's all prescribed Manuscript The pretence of mens liberty to use their Gifts in Prayer before Sermon and in Preaching is ridiculous they are excluded
the preceptive or penal part though it justifies me before the Law R. B. What if the Creed or Lords Prayer were too rigorously imposed J. O. If the thing be my duty in obedience to a just and Supream Law I am not to neglect it because an Inferiour Governour too rigorously imposeth it 1. Such a rigorous imposition hurts me not in that which I take to be duty to do whether that Imposition be or no. 2. Christ never annexeth too severe Penalties to any of his Laws 3. If man undertake to annex too rigorous Punishments or unsuitable ones it hinders not me in my Duty to Christ As if a Magistrate make Whipping or Hanging the Penalty of not receiving the Sacrament in such a time If I upon Examination of my self and the Rule apprehend it my duty in Obedience to Christ I will do it but not in respect to Mans Laws But if the Subordinate Law-maker alter the Nature and Circumstances of the Supream the Law is another thing and my Obedience justifies the power of the Law-maker and the goodness of the Law in the Mandatory part Again good things by a lawful Authority may be too rigorously imposed and the Law may be unjust in the Penalty though the Mandatory part be good which injustice is the sin of the Law-givers loss and wrong of the Transgressor because he suffers beyond the Merit of his Transgression but this hinders not me from my Duty neither doth this rigorous Imposition hurt me so long as I stand in obligation and practice of my duty by another Righteous Law which requires the same thing If Christ commands me to say the Lords Prayer and annexeth no corporal punishment I will do it If Mans Law saith I shall be hang'd if I do not do it I do the Action by vertue of Christ's Law But let such Law makers look to it that annex Corporal Penalties to Laws of his Institution the Cries of them upon which they are Executed will be loud in Christs Ear. Manuscript This Corjunction by C mmunion by the Worship of the Liturgy is a Symbol Pledge and Token of â—n Ecclesâ—astical Incorporation with the Church of England in its present Constitution it is so in the Law of the Land it is so in the Canons of the Church it is so in the common understanding of all men and by these Rules must our Vnderstanding and Practice be judged and not be any Reserves of our own which neither God nor good men will allow of Wherefâ—re R. B. To the third Premise I answer The Church of England is an Ambiguous word 1. As it signifies a part of the Universal Church agreeing in Faith one God and all Essentials J. O. So any Church may be as well as it any particular Congregation this is no distinguishing Character but is ambiguous too R. B. 2. As it is a Christian Kingdom under one King J. O. A Church in a sence is a Christian Kingdom i. e. a Royal Nation under Christ their King But there 's no such Gospel Church in your sence for there was neither Christian Kingdom nor King in the Apostles days R. B. As it is a Confedracy of many Churches to keep concord in lawful Circumstantials as well as Integrals J. O. This will not tell us yet what the Church of England is 1. A confederacy of Churches is by No-body call'd a Church in your sence of a Church the Scripture no where calls a confedracy of Churches a Church nor doth any that call the Church of England â— Church owning it so to be in its professed Constitution mean thereby a confederation of Churches 2. National Churches may be a confederation of Churches and such confederation in lawful circumstantials as well as integrals will make a Church I know not why we may not have a Catholick Visible Church Organized if this be a due acceptation of a Church R. B. If any Church go beyond these bounds and upon good pretences shall agree upon any Error or Evil it is a mistake to hold that all that incorporate with them in the three aforesaid lawful respects do therefore confederate with them in their Error This is your Fourth Error J. O. That 's â—our Error 1. In Arithmetick it s but the third by your own mark 2. In Logick for what â—ounds have you set These three things are but general Descriptions of a Church at most Here 's no definition in any or all of them of any particular Church and that is setting of â—ounds when I difference and describe a Species or Individual under its next Genus by its particular form or proper adjunct we spâ—ak of a particular Church so bounded The Church of England is so according to its present constitution by Establishing Laws in its actual form of Officers Members particular Worship and power as an Organized individual Church National Church is not the next Genus of the Church of England but remote National Church is the next Genus Now I say upon whatever pretences a particular Church calls and professeth it self a Church as the conditions of their Communion if you joyn with them upon those conditions pretended and professed that is a Token of your Ecclesiastical Incorporation in the said Church in its present constitution the Church and all others looks upon you as an Actual Member let the conditions be Error or no Error The Question is not so much now whether the terms be Error or not but whether your joyning upon the terms required is not your Ecclesiastical Incorporation with them And then if the terms be erroneous and sinful whether you do not joyn in the Error and professedly allow it by your practice R. B. I will give you a general instance and a particular one 1. You cann't name me one combined company of Churches from the Apostles dayes till now that had no Error J. O. You might as well have said any one Church for we speak of a particular Church not of combined Churches but suppose as you say If that Combination be an Error or an Error be the condition of the Combination then my coming upon that condition is an Error and an Incorporation into that combination so as to make me Confederate in that Error R. B. The Independents gathered a Synâ—d at the Savoy and there among their Doctrinals or Articles of Faith laid down two points Expresly contrary to Scripture 1. That it is not Faith but Christs Righteousness that we are justified by whereas it is both and the Scripture often saith the contrary J. O. It is a strange thing that any man should take upon him such Magisterial Dictatorship in matters of Religion to insinuate Error into Mens Minds and unjust accusations of others For 1. When the Scripture speaks of Justification by Faith doth any sound Divines or Christians understand it of the Act of believing but that the object of Faith that Justifies is the Righteousness of Faith our own Righteousness or Christs Righteousness but this dispute is not