thousand things that they did and must be presumed to have done and may I thence conclude they never did 'em and thence make what inferences collections and conclusions I think good § 2. He asserts that because the Apostle was willing to have the law buried with as little noise as might be that therefore in this case he perswades both parties to forbearance and charity And what is that other case or those other cases wherein the Apostle would dispense with forbearance and charity Are there any select and reserved cases wherein he would have Christians fall together by the ears was it a duty at Rome not to judge and despise one another and will these be such Cardinal Virtues at Philippi or were they at Rome only to stand or fall to their own Master and must the poor wretches at Philippi be sold for Galley-slaves was it good Doctrine in one Church that every man should be fully perswaded in his own mind before he adventured upon acting and was it Heterodox in the other that they might debauch and prostitute conscience to all pretenders and set their souls for every dog to piss on If the Doctor presumed upon his Auditors had he the same confidence to impose upon his Readers § 3. The Church of England in her Canons of 1640. tells us she followed the Rule prescribed by the Apostle in this chapter to the Romans and has 40. years more so altered the case If the Rule of Charity prescribed by the Apostle to Rome does reach us here in England it 's less matter whether it obliged them at Philippi or no and yet that it obliged them also has been made clear from the Text. § 4. The Dr. manifestly prevaricates when he tells us The Apostle does so much insist upon this advice to the Phillippians that whatever their attainments were they should walk by the same Rule when the innocent Apostle insists upon no such thing He commands as I have oft observed the clear contrary that different attainments should have different walkings and practices that they are to walk as they have attained and not a◠they have not attained And that Rule to which the Apostle refers that which he injoyns is a Rule that may be equally observed under different attainments as under the same namely that evangelical Rule of charity which neither infringes christian liberty nor violates conscience but teaches us to exercise forbearance of one another notwithstanding our different attaintments which is that Royal Law commanded by the Apostle James Jam. 2.8 Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self Not to be repealed by all the authority on earth nor ever will by that of Heaven § 5. If the Apostle bids the Churches beware of those who make use of the pretence of the Levitical Law being still in force to divide the Churches He does also by parity of Reason bid us beware too of those who upon pretence of any other Ceremonies old Customs and apocryphal usages divide the Church and render Communion with it grievous and burdensom and I hope we shall hearken to his advice to beware of them and trust them no further than needs must especially when those old customs have been found of such dangerous and pernicious consequences that they have divided and almost ruined a most flourishing Church and madeway for a common Enemy to break in with utmost fury upon us § 6. If the preserving the Peace of the Church and preventing separation was the great measure according to which the Apostle gave his Directions Then those directions or whatever they are called that disturb the Churches Peace and give just cause for separation proceed by other measures and it 's time to look about us when we meet with such as hazard that precious blessing of Peace upon such Rules Canons and Institutions as have almost and if not seasonably prevented will certainly destroy us SECT IV. Of the Obligation that lies upon Christians to walk by the same Rule The Doctor 's two questions propounded The former considered but no answer to it given by him Several preliminaries examined THe Reverend Doctor having at length got over the flats and bars that lay at the mouth of the channel is now hoising up his main Sail to the wind And can we expect his discourse should run more naturally and smoothly for having begg'd one half of the controversie he may more easily borrow the rest of it And therefore from the obligation that lies upon Christians to walk by the same Rule that is such a Rule as he has made for the Apostle and us There will arise saies he two very considerable Questions that is to say where one absurditie is granted two more nay twenty will follow 1. Question How far the obligation doth extend to comply with an establisht Rule and to preserve the Peace of the Church we live in This Question I confess is considerable very considerable had he told us what the Rule establisht is for there are very crooked ones in the World and who must be the Rule maker for there are many pretenders and then proved that we are to comply with it but to enquire how far we are to comply and not make it out that we are to comply at all to such Rules as he has contrived is not so considerable as he would perswade us And yet seeing the hare is started I wish it were caught and since he has propounded the question it had been well if he had answered it which we might demand in Justice but shall take it for a special favour if he will at any time hereafter tell us how far we are to comply with an establisht Rule At present he cannot be at leisure in the mean time for the preventing all misunderstanding the design of his Discourse he desires us to consider 1 That he speaks not of the separation or distinct communion of whole Churches from each other we are glad of that First because if he allow separation by whole sale we shall do the better if the retail trade be denyed And secondly because hereby the Churches of the dissenters will be out of the way his anger for as he adds These whole Churches according to Scripture Antiquity and Reason have a just right and power to reform themselves If then the Churches of the dissenters be but true Churches and whole Churches If they have in them all the essentials of Churches If they have pastors rightly qualified duly chosen the word of God purely preached the Sacraments duly administred and all other ordinances of Christ regularly used they have then power to govern and reform themselves But by whole Churches he means the Churches of such nations which upon the decay of the Roman Empire resumed their just right of government to themselves and upon their owning Christianity incorporated into one Christian society under the same common Ties and Rules of Government To which I answer 1. It 's not material in this Case what Churches he
him that he would not be so morose and humoursome however that he would shave his face that made him look so like satyr and besides she could not tell how to have communion with his lips for the bristles of his chin and the turn-pikes of his overgrown Mustachoes but Monsieur Moroso for so was the gallant called protested he would not lose a hair of his beard as poor an excrement as the ignorant Laity call'd it for the greatest Lady in Europe and so all this hot love evaporated in Complement and Ridicule SECT VII The principle assigned to some others of the Dissenters considered The Arguments from the Papers of Accommodation between a Sub Committee of the Assembly and their Brethren of the Congregational persuasion modestly examined HItherto the Doctor 's reasonings against that principle that there is a separation but yet the separation is no Schism have fallen under consideration He proceeds now to that of some others who confess as he says That to live in a state of separation from such Churches as many at least of ours are is a sin what mystery may there be in the phrase of living in a state of separation I am not well aware of and therefore cannot prevent what mischeif may be design'd against us by it Of a State of Nature and a state of Grace we have read in old Protestant Authors but now adays all the outcry is against this state of separation Now the Doctor informs us that the men of this Plea deny that they live in a state of separation although they preach when and where it is forbidden by law and worship God and administer Sacraments by other Rules and after a different manner than what our Church requires They own separation to be sinful and have no other Refuge left but to deny the fact which is evident to all persons In the general I shall only say that the principles and pleading of these whom the Doctor would make two parties are really and indeed but one and the same only they have made use of other expressions to declare their minds They that say separation is lawful take the word only for a withdrawing from the Communion of a Church when they have good reasons to justifie their departure They that say separation is sinful take the word in an evil sense as denoting a departure from a Church out of humour Levity or some worse principle as hatred of opposition to those Churches from which they withdraw And this he might have seen in those very words he quoted from the Author of Concord Causeless renouncing Communion with true Churches is Schism especially if it be joyned with setting up Anti-Churches unwarrantably against them Now how many things must concur to make separation culpable according to the tenor of these words I can hardly reckon up 1. It must be separation without cause from a true Church Now the Doctor himself will allow that there may be a just cause of separation from a true Church 2. It must be renouncing communion but though these men suspend or forbear Communion for a while yet when the Church shall return to herself and abate of her rigors they carry in their breasts Animum revertendi a propensity to return again 3. It must be setting up Churches against Churches not one besides another to carry on the common cause of Religion against Atheists Hereticks Infidels prophane persons and all the debauchees both in faith and manners And 4. all this must be done in an unwarrantable manner the circumstances must be such as cross the general rules of the Gospel and if all these be found in any separation let it be doomed and condemned for schism and sinful I wonder therefore with what sincerity the Doctor could say They own the thing to be sinful and yet deny the fact Whereas that which they confess to be sinful in the Rule or Principle that only they deny themselves to have done in fact And what they confess themselves to have done they never confessed to be sinful There is a separation that is sinful this say they we never practised And there is a separation too that is lawful and here they own the fact and deny the sinfulness of it These tricks therefore will never satisfie his Auditors nor his Readers but the Doctor 's great Repute and smoothness of his Style and a notable talent to misrepresent his adversaries have made very mean and ordinary Discourses pass for superexcellent and his name being up he may lie-abed till noon for so have I heard somewhere of a Cutler's boy that was making a knife and unluckily the steel fell off when he had welded it No matter no matter Let it go boy said the Master my name 's up and my Iron will sell though not cut better than other mens Steel And now for a more particular return 1. They confess that they three months ago you must understand that we come not within the statute preach when and where it was forbidden by law and they have a cause for it Because they can preach no where nor time else without such conditions as they judge are and think they have proved unlawful but they say that to preach when forbidden by Law is not always sinful For so did the Ministers of Jesus Christ even when their Commission was not vouched by Miracles till 300 years after Christ And if it be said that it is sinful in our case that must be tryed out by no general Arguments and Reasons but such as are special and proper to the case 2. They confess they do worship God and administer Sacraments by other Rules and in other manner than what the present Church prescribes If the Dissenters do all this by other Rules and in other manner than the Assenters do it will follow unavoidably that the Assenters do them by other Rules and in other manner than the Dissenters do which is the worst that I know will follow unless he can prove that the Rules by which they worship God the manner in which they administer Sacraments are nearer then or as near the Rule and Prescript of the Word as those of the Dissenters So that the Question must come to this at last Whether those Rules by which that manner after which the Church requires to worship God and administer Sacraments be conformable to the Scripture Rule of Worship the Scripture manner of Administration for if they be then these Dissenters flatly affirm That they worship God they administer the Sacraments by no other Rule in no other manner than what the Church prescribes But if they be not then they say If they in all their ways of Worship Conform to the Canonical Rules though they do swerve a little from such as are Apocryphal they hope and believe God will acquit them as their Consciences now do of the guilt of Schism and if others will not 't is not so much material because they shall not receive their final doom from
it been done in our case all differences might have been composed 2 The Dissenting Brethren say p. 15. That they agreed in those things which contained the Substance of the Service and Worship of God in the Directory according to the Preface and were confident they should agree in the Confession of Faith so that here was nothing but a Punctilio of Government about which they differ'd 3 The Committee p. 19. render this Reason why the desire of their Brethren could not in Terminis be granted Because it held out a total Separation from the Rule as if in nothing it were to be complied with nor their Churches be Communicated with in any thing which argued Church-Communion and that more could not be done or said against false Churches wherein though they might be mistaken yet it shews upon what Reasons they proceeded but the Persons against whom the Doctor disputes neither plead for nor practice a total Separation nor do any thing that may imply the Parrochial Churches to be false Churches 4. The Committee or Sub-Committee had many things to urge which the Doctor cannot make use of against the Dissenters as 1. That they were now endeavouring a further Reformation according to the Word of God and therefore there was more ground for Hope more reason for Patience to see what the Issue of their Consultations might prove And herein perhaps the Dissenting Brethren might be a little too hasty and nimble with them who knows but matters might have been adjusted to their satisfaction But things are much otherwise with us For 1. they are so far from Reforming according to the Word of God that they own it not for a perfect Rule of Reformation 2. They have taken up their Rest and will not proceed one Step farther not to King Edward's Beginning nor Queen Elizabeths Beginning much less to what Posture things were in at Christ's Beginning 3. When they had power in their hands by His Majesties Commission to have reformed the Liturgy to have eased the People of their Burdens they would not Abate an Ace of their Pretensions but rendred the Terms of Communion more severe and difficult 4. The Parish Churches are meer Minors and under Age they move by the Motions of others cannot Reform themselves but are strictly tyed up to the Rubricks Canons and Constitutions of the Convocation so that we have not the same Reason to hope for their Reforming of Worship according to the Word of God 5. And yet this shall not be any prejudice to them for if they shall do so though it were to morrow or a year or ten years hence we stand ready to fall in with such Reformation And farther 2. the Committee did plead That they had both of them Covenanted to endeavour the nearest Conjunction and therefore for their Oaths sake were bound to part with as much of their Right as with a good Conscience they could foregoe But Dissenters are under no such Obligation that they know of to endeavour such Conjunction with them who obtend their meer Wills to their Edification and some pretend farther That they are under a Solemn Covenant to endeavour a Reformation according to the Word of God in their respective places and stations and therefore ought not to comply with any Declensions and Departures from such Reformation 5 the Committee were willing That some Expedient should be endeavoured how to bear with Dissenters in the Particulars wherein they could not agree But we see no such expedient endeavoured after nor once thought of nay declared against notwithstanding the many Humble Petitions for Peace that have been presented to them notwithstanding His Majesties Gracious Declaration about Ecclesiastical Affairs and the Parliaments Inclinations to shew some favour to tender Consciences nay they have declared against any Condescentions and are daily provoking Magistrates to the utmost Rigour and are like the immovable Bank to which if the Dissenters will not wholly come over the Boat and the Bank must never meet 6 Such was the tenderness of that Committee that we find not so much in a dozen Convocations For first they offer That such as through scruple or error of Conscience cannot joyn to partake of the Lords Supper shall repair to the Minister and Elders for satisfaction which if they cannot receive they shall not be compel'd to Communicate in the Lords Supper provided that in all other parts of Worship wherein there was an agreement they joyned with the Congregation 2. They offer p. 22. That such as are under the Government of the Congregation where they live not being Officers shall seek satisfaction as before which if they cannot receive they shall not be compel'd to be under the power of Censures from Classes or Synods provided they continued under the Government of that Congregation How joyful at how thankful for such Moderation would thousands of poor English-men be if they might enjoy the Benefit of such a Canon to save their Persons from a Prison their Estates from Ruine and their Families from Desolation 7 The Sub-Committee do readily acknowledge That Schism consists not in every diversity of Opinion and Practice but in an open Breach of Love and that no Uniformity is necessary to prevent Schism p. 47. But the Doctor would make us believe p. 32. That men may please themselves in talking of Peace and Love under separate Communions but sad Experience shews the contrary 8 The Committee p. 48. think the Dissenting Brethren wrong them in saying That they make those Impositions upon the people as qualifications for receiving Sacraments whenas they desired no more than that the people appeared to be Orthodox But certainly here 's something more than Orthodoxy required of us even in the judgment of their own Test of Orthodoxy as a qualification for receiving Sacraments and we must Submit to the Sign of the Cross in the one Sacrament for our Infants and Kneeling in the other as necessary to our own receiving them when neither the one nor the other were mentioned by the Assembly 9 The Committee expresly declare they would not have the Dissenting Brethren walk by their Rule farther than as they had attained But the Doctor is for the Rule of Severity waving the great Rule of Charity notwithstanding the different attainments of Christians 10 The Committee profess their Wonder p. 49. That their Brethren should impute it to them as if they arrogated to themselves a power in Ecclesiastical Assemblies to determine and impose circumstantial matters Seeing say they our Proposition doth mention nothing but Agreement in Substance But the Doctor supposing that we are agreed in the Substantials of Worship with him yet presses us to come to the Churches Rules in those things which they themselves call Circumstantials 11 The Committee p. 49. desires That the matters of Offence may be particularly expressed professing their earnest desire as much as in them lay to remove whatever may hinder comfortable Communion that there may be no just cause of Separation But the
will certainly do 1. When such Communion shall persuade the Parish-Churches that their Frame is eligible and not only tolerable that they are righteous and need no repentance pure as well as true Churches of Christ and need no Reformation 2. When that Communion shall be so managed that the persons communicating must be obliged to separate from all other Churches which they judge to be of a purer mold and wherein they may enjoy all Christ's Ordinances with much greater and clearer satisfaction to their Consciences and more notable advantages for edification 3. When such Communion shall visibly harden the Papists in their superstitious usages As kneeling at the Sacrament bowing before Altars Churches the East and at the word Jesus has apparently done and so much T.G. the Doctor 's grand Antagonist has professed in his Dispute about Idolatry 4. When such Communion and Conformity shall notably prejudice the Christian Religion in general and that this would have been the effect of an universal Conformity was well express'd by a Conformable Minister of good Note in the Church who told his Friend a Captain in His Majesties Service That he was heartily glad that so many Ministers had refus'd to Conform upon the Terms proposed And being ask'd with some wonderment a reason of his strange expression he answer'd thus Not that thereby they had more good Livings to scramble for as one answer'd Had all Conform'd the People would have thought there had been nothing in Religion that it had been onely a thing to talk of in the Pulpit to serve a State design but now by throwing up their Livings and exposing themselves and Families to outward ruine rather than Conform to the things imposed not agreeable as they apprehend to the Gospel they had preached they have convinced the world there is a Reality in Religion and thereby given a check to Atheism To shut up this Discourse If the Doctor would have us Conform as far as we judge it lawful when such Compliance is cloathed with all its particular circumstances we are willing to it provided the Doctor can secure us that such Compliance shall be accepted in full satisfaction of the debt But we doubt it must not be the Dean of St. Paul's but the Convocation there that must assign the Limits Bounds Terms and Measures of our Conformity If hearing a Sermon as we have occasion and going as much further as Conscience warranted by the Word will permit us would excuse us from being reviled and railed at as Schismaticks Rebels Traytors and what not would do it it would be done nay it is done but if he has no Commission to treat with us and compound the matter I fear he has spoiled the Wit and Ingenuity of his late Allegory and fought a Skirmish without the Command of his General for though he stand upon very high Ground he stands not as yet on the highest and there are higher than he SECT VI. The Grounds of the present Separation assigned by the Doctor Examined and Cleared THE main Question so solemnly propounded by the Reverend Doctor having given us the slip we are entertained with another What are the Grounds of the present Separation and the utmost he can find in the best Writers of the several Parties amounts but to these two 1. That although they are in a State of Separation from the Church yet this Separation is not Schism And he courteously supposes them to have one Reason for this Principle from the Author of Evangelical Love p. 68. Our Lord Christ Instituted only Congregational Churches or particular Aslemblies for Divine Worship which having the sole Church-power in themselves they are under no Obligation of Communion with other Churches but only to preserve Peace and Charity with them and from the Author of The true and only way of Concord p. 111. That to devise new Species of Churches beyond Parochial or Congregational without God's Authority and to impose them on the World yea in his Name and call all Dissenters Schismaticks is a far worse usurpation than to make and Impose new Ceremonies This is all the reason the Doctor can find to justifie their Separation to be no Sin But does the vast weight of their Cause hang upon one single string I can shew him where he may find more assigned by the Author of Evangelical Love whom he quotes 1. That there are many things in all Parochial Churches that openly stand in need of Reformation which these Parochial Churches neither do nor can nor have power to Reform And who would joyn with them that have no power to Reform themselves 2. Many things in the constant total Communion of Parochial Churches are imposed on the Consciences and Practices of men which are not aceording to the mind of Christ And will Christ Condemn them for Schismaticks who are ready to come up to his Commands because they dare advance no further 3. That there is no Evangelical Church-Discipline administred in such Parochial Churches which yet is a necessary means unto the Edification of the Churches appointed by Christ himself And are they Schismaticks who separate not from but to any of Christ's means for their Edification 4. The Rule and Government which such Parochial Churches are under in the room of that which ought to be in and among themselves viz. by Bishops-Courts Chancellors Commissaries is unknown to the Scriptures And are they Schismaticks who refuse an unscriptural for a Scriptural Rule and Government 5. There is a total Deprivation of the Peoples Liberty to chuse their own Pastors whereby they are deprived of all use of their Light and Knowledge for providing for their own Edification And it 's hard that men shall be made Schismaticks because they would use their Reasons that is unless they will be something worse than Men they cannot be good Christians 6. That there is a want of due means of Edification in many of those Parochial Congregations and yet none shall be allowed to provide themselves better And is it not very severe for Christians to be Damned because they would be more certainly and easily Saved Thus then we see there are other many other Reasons alledged to justifie such Separation to be no Schism though it pleased the Doctor to wink at them and Assign only this one which yet it 's well if he can Confute In order to which He thinks That to clear the practice of Separation from being a Sin two things are necessary to be done § 1. To prove that a Christian has no obligation to external Communion beyond a Congregational Church And is this the Duty incumbent upon them They think they have done enough if they prove there 's an Obligation lies upon them to hold external Communion in that Church whereof they are Members and let others prove that they are obliged to Communion beyond those Bounds If the Dissenters enlarge their Communion as far as Christ enlarged the Churches let them who have enlarged the Bounds of the Churches prove
there are other just rules of conscience then Gods Law which is a Notion we cannot admit of without better evidence we would gladly know where those other just Rules are to be found must we seek them in Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical whether then are all such or only some of them such just rules If onely some of them which are they and by what characteristical marks may we distinguish them but if all be so then must we acquiesce in all the Canons decrees rescripts and Rules that were ever made by any Counsel or convocation and why then did not the Church of England rest satisfied with those rules which were given her before the Reformation 2. We must needs say that if the Dissenters do examine things fairly on both sides praying for Divine Direction and have had a world of patience to boot to hear any thing against their Opinion though never so weak in Reason and strong in passion which they profess before the searcher of all hearts they have done and continue still to do they must be discharg'd before all the world that shall take cognizance of their cause and hear their pleas of any wilful or voluntary error And for the suggestion that they form their judgments from prejudice passion and interest they dare not judge of other men contenting themselves to have averred their own innocency when the temptation visibly lies on the other side § 4. For a Conclusion The Dr. would apply the charge of a wilfully erroneous Conscience to the Dissenters If men says he through the power of an erroneous Conscience may think themselves bound to make schisms to disobey Laws to break in pieces the Communion of the Church they may satisfie themselves that they pursue their Consciences and yet for want of due care of inforcing themselves those actions may be wilful and damnable sins But we think not our selves bound to any such wickedness There are enow that think themselves bound t do that without our assistance enow besides us to perpetuate the cause of our divisions and to entail contentions upon Innocent posterity whose teeth must be set on Edge with the sowre grapes their Fathers have eaten but if any shall think themselves bound through the power of an Erroneous Conscience to make unjust Rules of Conscience when t is Impossible they should make one de novo that is just and thereby break the Church in peices they may think what they please that they are pursueing their just rights to impose upon other mens Consciences and satisfying their own and yet for want of a due care to inform themselves better in their duty the extent of their power and the ends for which it was given be guilty in the sight of God of willful and damnable sins as bad as those of the Jews who thought they did God good Service when they persecuted and murtherd his faithful Servants SECTION IX A consideration of those Assertions of the Doctor If Communion with the Church be lawful it will in time be judged a duty And If occasional Communion be lawful its hard to understand that constant Communion should not be a duty I Find the Doctor ever and anon insinuating that what is lawful to be done upon some account or other ought to be done Which if it be universally true will take away the difference between merely lawful and necessary at least as to use and practice since it implies that whatever is lawful may be made constantly and fixedly a duty If it were only asserted that what is merely lawful might through a concurrence of circumstances pro hic nunc become a duty as it would do this cause no service so neither would it meet with our opposition But to be thus laid down in general without further explication needs a little consideration and so in this case that which otherwise had been but lawful will be incumbent on me as my duty Two expressions I find worthy our Notice 1. I do not question but in time if they find it Communion in prayers and Sacraments lawful they will judge it to be their duty Now because we have ever thought that what was lawful and merely so stood in the midst between sinful and necessary forbidden and Commanded it deserves some care and pains to dive into the Mystery of it how or why these lawfulls may become determined to one side of their extremes or termes between which they formerly stood neuters And by what we can gather from his discourse it must be one of these things 1. That whatever we judge lawful to be done in any case for peace sake will become a duty to be alwayes done For he tells us p. 31. 32. There 's nothing Christ and his Apostles have charged more upon the Consciences of Christians then studying to preserve peace and unity among Christians To which pupose the Doctor quotes us several places of Scripture which it is needless here to repeat seeing none ever yet denied the study of peace to be a very great and manifest duty But if it be charg'd on the Consciences of all Christians to study to preserve peace We hope they find the charge upon their Consciences also for they are Christians Have they then studyed the things that make for peace I mean not their own but the peace of all the Christians in the Nation A little study would have discovered the means had they been as they pretend such passionate Lovers of the end What expedients have they then found out by all their study or what expedients will they accept that others have studied and found out to releive and procure peace so far as it s lost to preserve peace so far as it yet remaines and to further peace so far as it may be attainable in the Imperfect state of this life what will they part with to purchase it will they step over one straw remove one stumbling block that lies in the way of it will they wave the least of their pretensions or condescend to others in the smallest of their desires will they promise to reforme our Rubrick that one Rule for finding out Easter for ever when it would not find it out for but proved it self Erroneous in almost half seven years will they forbear to exact our Assent and consent to a known falshood for that excellent thing which they so much predicate Peace The matter is slight yet if an Error they can more easily forgoe it then we avow it we know not why we should tell the smallest lie for peace if they will not part with one Nay tell us what thing so Inconsiderate so minute which all our humble Petitions for peace could procure the relaxation of And yet thâ—se are the Men that boast themselves highly of their burning zeal for peace To be an Advocate for peace is an office of good credit but I cannot tell what to think on 't when I am pressed so earnestly and heartily to feed lustily on that Dâ—sh
Vincent Alsop 〈◊〉 an Original Painting in Dr. Williams's Library Publiâ—â—'d by 〈…〉 Paternoster Row THE Mischief of Impositions OR AN ANTIDOTE Against a Late DISCOURSE Partly Preached At Guild-Hall Chappel May 2. 1680. CALLED The Mischief of SEPARATION If your Church had kept to the Primitive Simplicity and Moderation the occasions of most Controversies had been taken away Dr. Edw. Stillingfleet 's Rational Account p. 102. I will not conceal my mind In things purely Indifferent Multiformity joyn'd with Charity does no less advance the glory of God than Uniformity Dr. Fuller Def. of Ch. History Sacra Scriptura est lex Ecclesiae fidei mensura Regula Intellectûs Humanae Ratiocinationis fraenum An. LONDON Printed for Benj. Alsop at the Angel and Bible in the Poultrey over against the Stocks-Market 1680. To the Right Worshipful Sir T. R. Knight SIR SInce your Command gave occasion to the Conception of this Discourse justice will oblige you to stand for its Godfather which you may safely do without danger from the Canon The height of my ambition was to provide my self of a Right Worshipful Susceptor when Favourites may command the Patronage of the Right Honourable thus every man will answer for a Great mans Error when the poor mans Truth may go unchristen'd for thus the Poet An heaven-born-Truth like poor mens infants may For want of Godfathers unchristen'd stay And find no Priest when every stander-by Will be a Gossip to a Great mans Lye Among the many discouragements I struggled with in answering your desires and the Doctors Sermon there was none more terrifying though many so than that it was a Sermon and a Sermon premunited with the Lord Mayors Order The former because it seem'd indecent to Arraign a Discourse that came with the Certificate of the God of Heaven and had so honourably been acquitted by the Gods on Earth To this I had nothing to say in my Defence but that He that will plead the priviledg of the sanctuary must keep within the verge of it I have heard of a Gentleman that being long prosecuted in the high Commission for striking a Reverend Clergy-man pleaded that Mr. Parson was not in his Canonical Habiliments and therefore ought not to insist upon his character and Archbishop Laud voted for the poor mans discharge because it was but Lay-battery to cudgel a Coat which would have been Theomachy upon a Cassock I must borrow the same Plea That the Reverend Doctor ought not to stand upon the priviledg of a Preacher unless he had kept closer to his Commission and preacht nothing for but what really was the Word of God But to be open with you Sir It was the latter that put me hardest to it when I saw the flag of London streaming before the Ship for I protest to you I am always ready to strike sail to the meanest Yatch that hangs out the Colours of so sacred a Name so great an Authority And yet I rub'd through that by considering that the Order was for its Printing not against my Answering and though that License made it more vendible yet not at all more unanswerable and so I hope we are past the worst for I never much Dread those Polemical pieces whose greatest strength lies in the left-hand Page before the Title And yet I was a little stumbled at the Order which desires the Doctor to Print not only what he had preached but what further he had prepared to deliver at that time which me-thought lookt somewhat like the Implicit faith required by the Rubrick which enjoyns the Minister to use one of the Homilies set forth or hereafter to be set forth by Common Authority In the very entrance of his Epistle Dedicatory the Doctor takes notice of a Report raised it seems by some ill men that 's the Alamode phrase that he intended to stir up the Magistrates and Judges to a persecution of Dissenters I was not a little troubled that a person of his Character should be so unworthily misrepresented and misinterpreted and no less joyful that the Doctor has so timely and zealously disclaimed a design so horrid in it self so unbecoming the Place he then bore and the Title he justly wears nor can I imagine whence a suspicion as scandalous as groundless could be foster'd except from this one thing That his Sermon was preach't to those Righteous persons who in the matter of Conformity needed no repentance when the Harangue had been more pertinent and proper for a Conventicle to those Sinners whom he presumes to need it But so far was he from blowing up the coals of persecution that he professes his only design was to prevent all occasion of it by finding out a certain foundation for a lasting union among our selves And not without good reason for seeing there are but two ways to extinguish a raging fire the one by pouring water upon that merciless Element the other by withdrawing the fewel that feeds but never fills its insatiable appetite the Dr. judg'd it the wiser course to convert all the Dissenters that there might be nothing to burn rather than leaving such combubistle matter to quench the fiery fury of persecution for if there were no offenders there would neither be room for pardoning mercy nor vindicative justice and if he could perswade all men to conform upon such easie arguments the whole Generation Kind and Tribe of Ecclesiastical Informers must be extinct and fail for ever However an union and a lasting union and a foundation nay a certain foundation for that lasting union are terms of that melodious chime to our ears that his tendries must needs be highly acceptable even when their disproportionateness to those ends give us feeble hopes that they will prove effectual All union that pretends to be lasting must be real and cordial and that it may be so must necessarily be founded upon terms consistent with the conscientious principles of the united parties force may possibly justle and thrust men into one place but never into one mind and fraud may palliate for a while the threatning symptoms but will never eradicate the causes of the malady such was that union between the Greek and Latin Churches hastily patcht up in the Council of Florence where his Holiness like an old bungling Botcher stitcht together the two ill-matcht pieces which presently dropt asunder and the rent was made worse All dough-bak'd Alliances will give again and those differences which are compromised upon unequal terms last no longer than a fair juncture shall tempt the aggrieved party to a rupture So have we sometime seen a mighty Conqueror impose such terms upon the conquered that they suppose it one tacit Article in the Peace That it shall endure no longer than the injured and weaker side can get power to justifie its violation This lasting Vnion the Doctor thinks is impossible to be attained till men are convinced of the evil and danger of the present Separation but others think with equal plausibleness that it is
impossible to be attained till men are convinced of the evil and danger of the present Impositions and the Dr. was once of that mind when he proved so learnedly Iren. p. 1 2. That things necessary for the Churches peace must be clearly revealed Which principle had he and others adhered to his Weapon-salve for the Churches wounds had been as common and famous as the sympathetical Powder which Sir K. Digby assures us is in France successfully practised by every Barber But why is Union impossible but upon such conviction Is it impossible for the same Power that imposed these severe conditions of Union to relax and remit them We use to say Eodem modo quo quid Instituitur destituitur There 's no more goes to Repeal a Law than to Enact it Nay it 's more possible for our Ecclesiasticks to wave what they confess indifferent than for the Laity to comply with what they judg sinful But if inexorable stiffness has made their condescention impossible who created the impossibility If Union as matters now stand is become desperate who put matters into that desperate posture It 's unreasonable that any should create a necessity of separation and then complain of an impossibility of union but 't is easily observed that men to conciliate repute to their own humors call what they have a mind to absolutely necessary and that to which they bear an aversion simply impossible The Grandees of the Church knew full well that the generality of the Nation who seriously attended Religion had contracted such principles as either condemned the Ceremonious appendages as sinful or unuseful and therefore sinful because unuseful they knew well also that these Impositions had lost much of that stock of credit upon which they had formerly set up for themselves and driven a pretty trade among us They must needs know too that to perpetuate the old Conditions would be but to perpetuate old divisions and create new ones why then would they venture so precious a lading as Peace in that old worm-eaten bottom wherein it must certainly miscarry But if it be impossible to attain Union at cheaper rates with men we must look up to Him to whom nothing is impossible who can open their eyes to see the things that belong to our common peace and in the mean time enable us to discharge the things that belong to our duty and bear those evils which shall attend them What a fine world now must moderate and unconcerned Christians have between these two some have sworn to endeavour a Reformation according to the word of God and others seem to have taken a solemn Oath never to come up to that Rule and between them both Vnion is impossible Well! say what we will or can it 's impossible to attain a lasting Vnion till Dissenters are convinc'd of the evil of their Separation Pray then convince them of it That he will do with a wet finger for the present Separation says the Doctor is carried on by such principles as not only overthrow the present constitution of our Church but any other whatsoever If that be the worst on 't we 'l endeavour to carry it on by better principles that shall overthrow neither will that please him But what if I should return that the present Impositions are supported by such principles as will divide not only our Church but any Church whatsoever This would be but a Rowland for his Oliver And I am somewhat confident that fairer probabilities may be offer'd for this Assertion than the other for as to matter of fact it 's most evident that from the first Infancy of the Gospel-state when the Church was in its Minority of years and Adult state of perfection to this very day nothing has more disorder'd the outward face of the Church than the Lordly Imperious Imposition of dubious matters Thus the Judaizing Dogmatizers who would stretch all mens Consciences to their own Last and compel them to a conformity to the antiquated Law of Moses began the brawl and their successors in pride have danced after their measures to the World's confusion Nor has any Engine of the Devil more batter'd and shaken the well-compacted Walls of God's Jerusalem than these roaring Ecclesiastical Canons And if we examine the principles upon which they proceed in exacting these unnecessary and doubtful terms of Union we shall find them the very same upon which proud Rome has introduced the whole Lirry of her superstitious Observances viz. an unaccountable power in those that are the Top to make them do and say any thing that are at the Bottom in which Observances and upon which Principle the Christian World never yet united and it 's more than probable never will But I intend not to confront but modestly examine the truth of the Doctor 's Assertion namely Whether the present Separation be carried on by such principles as not only overthrow the present Constitution of our Church but of any other whatsoever And there are two Inquiries I shall make upon this subject First Whether the principles by which the Separation is carried on will destroy any other Church Which if it be true and that the Dissenting-Churches are built upon such mouldering foundations such self-destroying principles it is next to miracle that they should yet stand and neither fall with their own weakness nor the weight of Oppression wherewith they have been surcharged that they should be continually batter'd with violence from without and undermined by policy from beneath and yet no considerable breach be made in their intrinsick Frame and Constitution Now to put this Question out of all question I will make a reasonable motion Leave the Dissenters quietly to overthrow themselves by their own bad principles and so shall the Church of England avoid the odium of Persecution which of late has no very good name and the Separators as Felones de se shall be condemned to have a stake driven through them who like the foolish woman pluckt down their own house upon their own heads with their own hands Give them but respite from outward fury and commit them to be crumbled to nothing by the inconsistency of their own principles and they must lay upon themselves not the Church the guilt of their own destruction The Dissenters have outlived one twenty years of vexation and if men could be quiet may outlive twenty more and in time outgrow all their weaknesses so that it may tempt an Impartial Considerer to think their present constitution immortal which no outward assaults no inward Schisms has been able to dissolve There are two things usually pleaded for the souls Immortality the one that it 's not compounded of Contraries such as by intestine jars may dissolve its essence The other that it 's not obnoxious to external Impressions such as may storm and break in pieceâ— its powers And on both those accounts the Dissenters humbly hope their Congregations may prove Immortal seeing they have not felt utter ruine from
the latter and do not much fear a dissolution from the former Secondly Let us a little enquire what truth there may be in the other branch of the Doctors Proposition That the Separation is carried on by such principles as will overthrow the present constitution of the Church of England I shall not assume the confidence to say That then its present constitution is none of the best and strongest but this I may with modesty assert That the principles upon which the Dissenters proceed will pluck down nothing that Christ ever built nor pluck up any thing that Christ ever planted and if they should pluck up a few weeds which the envious one threw over the hedg whilest men slept the good corn would thrive the better for such weeding if they should pluck down a few Imaginations which curiosity has carved and set up in the Nitches on the outside of the Church-wall the main of the Fabrick would stand more firm discharg'd of a needless cumber without prejudice to the foundation Some few Traditions some few unscriptural Additions some supernumerary Ceremonies or some few Encroachments upon Christs Regal and Prophetical Offices their principles might overthrow but what are these all these to the being the well-being the flourishing being of the Church of England Is it true that no Ceremony no Episcopacy Was ever a Church built upon such Woolsacks Such discourses as these tempt us to suspect there 's nothing substantial in that Constitution which cannot subsist without these accidents Are Ceremonies grown such Inseparable Adjuncts that they cannot Abesse sine subjecti Interitu We may as well fancy that to scowr off the rust will destroy the Iron or that it 's impossible to wash the face without fleying of the skin as that a Reformation according to Gods word will draw along with it the inevitable ruine of that Church which is founded on it and reformed by it And if it rest upon any other Basis it needs the principles of none but it self to undo it I can allow the Doctor to see much farther into these matters than I and yet I cannot be perswaded that I am stark blind and with the best eyes I have or can borrow cannot yet discern what prejudice it can be to them that worship God in a more spruce splendid gentile mode than we do to suffer us to worship our God in his own old Scripture-fashion It cannot be denied that the Protestant Churches in France are really separated from the Papal Gallican Polity It must be acknowledged that their principles carry a direct opposition to those of their Adversaries that their separation from and opposition to the National frame is much greater than that of Dissenters from and to the constitution of the Church of England and yet the Roman Polity lives and thrives and prospers and no one of all the Popish Kingdoms bears a greater port or glories more in its exteriour splendor and grandeur than that does Why then cannot Conformists secure themselves against the Dissenters principles as well as the Gallican Church against those of the Hugonots And why may not Dissenters plead for the same freedom especially as to the immediate worship of God and ordering their own particular Societies since they plead for less here than they there enjoy and yet upon much stronger arguments for the Dissenters at home plead for no power to set up Classes and Synods Provincial or National which yet are there indulged them and they think they might expect a little more respect as being of one and the same Protestant Religion and not guilty of any principles which have any tendency as they that own them have no design to overthrow the present constitution of the Church so that the Doctors Reasonings are herein so unlike himself so defective of that evidence and cogency wherewith he attacques the Papal Idolatry that had I not known his Discourse to have been Concio ad Magistratum I might have suspected it to be nothing but Ad Populum phalerae The principles upon which the present Separation such a one as it is is carried on are such as fear not to appear before any Bar where Scripture and Reason not Interest and Prejudice have the Chair which though it be not here pertinent to dispute but nakedly to assert leaving their Justification to those larger Volumes which are in every mans hand concerned to arrive at satisfaction in these matters yet shall I direct the Reader to some few of them 1. That every particular Church upon a due ballance of all circumstances has an inherent right to chuse its own Pastor and every particular Christian the same power to chuse his own Church I say not they have a power to mischuse but a power to chuse not to chuse any but one that may best advance their own edification at least that no Pastor be forced upon a Church no Church obtruded on a single Christian without their own consent A principle so highly rational so clearly scriptural and of such venerable Antiquity as ought not upon some imaginary or pretended evil consequences to be exploded seeing the contrary principle is clogg'd with more real than this can be with surmised Inconveniencies I will thank my friends that will recommend to my choice an able Physician a faithful Lawyer but I am sure I love my health my life my estate so well as not to put the Election out of my own hands into theirs who are not likely to love me better than my self and if I chuse amiss the greatest wrong will be my own Now what Church this principle would overthrow I am yet ignorant If indeed such tyranny should prevail in the world that men must be driven to Heaven like silly sheep to the Market and this principle should a little cross the humour on 't the Churches of Christ would stand where they do and I believe carry a clearer Counterpart of the Gospel of Jesus Christ It is pretended that upon this principle men would chuse one Pastor to day another to morrow and a third the next and so turn round till they are giddy or run themselves out of breath in a wild-goose chase till they sit down and rest in Atheism and Irreligion And is this all The Apostle commands us to prove all things must we needs therefore never hold fast that which is good We ought upon great deliberation advice and counsel chuse our own Pastor and when we have so chosen sit down under Gods Ordinance and wait for his presence in and blessing upon his own way And in the purest Primitive times when the Churches exercised this power most then were they most firmly united and Divisions Schisms and Separations the greatest rarities among them but suppose the worst on 't That some malecontent should now and then desert the Communion of England for that of Rome Cruelties will never remedy the evil or the Remedy would be worse than the disease and what if some odd Maggot-pate should drop
out with the Dissenters Congregations what is all this to the overthrow of the Church This priviledg may be abused must it therefore not be used Vnsetled heads and unstable hearts will be wandring let them go 't is a good riddance of them if they be obstinate but where this humour has destroy'd one Church this rigorous forcing of Pastors upon the people has divided and destroyed hundreds The generality of Dissenters in this Nation at this day may be reduced to two Heads First Such who having been formerly sixt with and under their faithful Pastors by their deliberate choice after good experience of their Ministerial abilities to teach them the mind and will of God of their wisdom to advise them in their spiritual cases of their skill to conduct them through their emergent difficulties of their meekness sobriety heavenly-mindedness and whatever might recommend to and inforce upon their consciences their sound Doctrine do still judg it their unquestionable duty to abide in that Relation and by no terrours to be driven by no blandishments to be withdrawn from their oversight and guidance according to the word of God judging that such withdrawing such separation would be that real Schism which hears so badly in and is loaded with such guilt by the holy Scriptures A second sort is of those who having been sometime hearers at large in their respective Parish-Churches and coming at last to have more concernment for their souls and the important business of another world and finding that their Parochial Teacher was either so overlaid with a numerous throng of people which he commonly but unadvisely calls his Flock and Charge that he cannot personally take care of the hundredth part of them or so engaged in secular affairs of more weight to him than his Pastoral Charge that he has neither heart nor leisure to attend so troublesome an employment or so unskilful in the word of Righteousness that he cannot tolerably declare the Counsel of God for edification or so unsound in his judgment that he 's more likely to poyson than feed his people or so debauched in his life that he plucks down more in an hour than he builds up in a year or such a Bigot for humane Inventions and Superstitions that the naked simplicity of divine Worship is either clouded to render it useless or clogged to render it burdensome this person seeks and finds out some other Pastor qualified as before described to whose Ministerial conduct under Christ the only chief shepherd he commits himself and there peaceably and patiently continues notwithstanding the barbarick clamours of Schism and Separation And all this without more prejudice to the Church he forsakes then it 's an injury to a Tradesman to leave his shop who has left it himself or has his hands full of better customers 2. That it is the duty of every Christian to worship God not only in purity of the heart but according to the purity of Gospel-administrations The true measure of which Purity is to be taken from its consonancy and harmony with the word of God which has sufficiently either in general special or particular instructed us in the acceptable service of our God Purity of worship is no such idle and contemptible thing to be flam'd off with an impertinent story that we must not separate from a true Church upon pretence of greater purity Nor can I imagine upon what pretence except that of greater purity the Church of England separated from Rome if it be true what we read in Rat. Account p. 293. That the Church of Rome is a true Church and what he further owns Defence against T. G. p. 785. I allow says the Doctor the Church of Rome to be a true Church as holding all the essential points of the Christian faith and what the Archbishop Laud confessed to that Lady who would needs go before to Rome alone because she could not bear a crowd that she might be saved in Communion with the Roman Church Now if Rome be a true Church if she holds all the essential points of Christianity If salvation may be attained in that Communion why was there such a stir about reforming of Accidents when the Essentials were secured Why such a Contest about a little easier way when the other way was passable Why all this a-do about a purer Church when the other is confessed a true Church These things then will follow in the lump from the Archbishops and Doctors Concessions 1. That a person or party may separate from some true Church which holds all the essential points of the Christian faith without the Imputation of a Schismatick 2. That a person or party may separate from some Church where salvation is attainable without peril of the guilt of Schism 3. That the only Reason that yet appears to justifie the Church of Englands departure from Rome is that it is lawful in some cases to withdraw from the Communion of a true Church wherein all the essential points of faith are owned and wherein salvation may be attained for the sake of greater purity of worship greater clearness of Doctrine and greater security of salvation Is it then lawful for England to separate from Italy for greater purity It may be lawful for others to separate from England for greater purity 'T is readily acknowledged that the Impurity of the Roman Synagogue is much more unconceivably more than that of the Church of England and therefore there was not so great cause to leave the latter as the former upon that account but in aspiring after Conformity to the Institutions of Christ we are not to consider so much what is behind as what is before not so much what we have left as what we have yet to reach nor so much the Terminus aquo from what state of Impurity we have emerged as the Terminus ad quem to what state of purity we would arrive for if it be true that there is such a state of Purity to be obtained and such a state of Impurity to be avoided as will justifie our forsaking of this for that and such a measure of both these as will not It must be exactly stated what is the lowest degree of corruption that will and what is the highest that will not warrant a separation The Dissenters being judges there are enow at home to excuse their secession The Romanists being judges there are not enow abroad to vindicate the Church of Englands separation and the former are more confirm'd in their judgment since the Doctors Epistle Dedicatory to the now B. of London prefixt to his Defence against T. G. where he openly avows on the behalf of the English Church that it has reformed those abuses only which have crept in since the times of the first four general Councils Now the last of these four first being held at Chalcedon An. 451. there were such Corruptions crept into the Church before that time which if imposed upon any as the condition of enjoying
not our bare opinion as the Doctor wisely phraseth it but our setled judgment which we have do and shall maintain against them when they have once leisure to understand the Question We have therefore something to divide upon besides substantial parts of worship and circumstances And now where is this consequence which to an intelligent and observing Reader is the only strength of his Sermon But we need never fear it the Clergy will be sure to find us matter for quarrel and contention or it shall go hard besides a parcel of inconsiderable circumstances which may be determined but very sorrily by those that pretend most to the power for he that worst may commonly holds the Candle But 2. for further answer let him go back to the former Discourse where I have proved that the foundation upon which his discourse is built is weak and therefore the whole superstructure must tumble upon his own head for he supposes there is an agreement in Doctrine and the substantial parts of worship which we either deny or cannot grant till we are taught what he means by them The Controversie therefore stands upon the same bottom on which it has stood these hundred years and more like that famous stone in the West which they say a child may shake but a hundred men cannot overturn Every wrangler can jostle our principles but the United force of the world cannot overthrow them True men may be killed but Truth will out-live all enmity This argument of the Doctors has been frequently answered and exposed but now like an old Livery new turn'd and fresh trim'd up with a new Lace it passes for a spruce piece of Gallantry a brisk sally of Ratiocination so considerable it is who it is that speaks and writes more than what is spoken or written So have I known a sorry Jade which in the hands of the poor Countrey-man would not give five Marks when in the hands of a Gentleman a little curried up well managed by a nimble Jockey and stoutly voucht for by one that was no slave to his word fetch roundly Twenty Guineys at the hands of a youngster that had more money than wit What has hitherto engrost the whole strength of the Doctors Reason he now comes to set a fine edg and gloss upon with his Rhetorick To separate says he considering the variety of mens fancies about these matters is to make an infinite Divisibility in Churches without any possible stop to further Separation Which is nothing but the Eccho of that Charge which from their Roman Adversaries has so long and loudly rung about their own Ears I shall only say That the power which he ascribes to National Churches considering the great variety of the fancies and humours in finding out and imposing their own Inventions will but make burdens innumerable and intolerable without any possible stop to further and greater vexations only let him not always miscall Conscience by the scandalous name of Fancy The very truth is we have no Mathematical Certainty in these matters no such Demonstration Cui non potest subesse falsum which Archbishop Laud and by consequence the Doctor requires of all Dissenters when yet he could find no such Demonstration for the being of a God as I shall evince ere long But some will scruple where they need not and others to cry quit with them will impose where they ought not and thus between weakness and wilfulness between little knowledg and great pride humble peaceable Christians are like to have a fine time on 't But from some inconsiderable and petty inconveniences some little trouble that arises to a Church from the levity and volubility of mens minds to bring in that enormous monstrous principle of enslaving all mens judgments and consciences forcing them to surrender their Reasons to naked will and pleasure and put all that 's worth owning in their Beings into the hands of those of whose fidelity and tenderness to keep and dispose of them they have had no better experience and can have no good security is a Medicine worse than that Poyson even as much as 't is better to have a Rational Soul though subject to mistakes than the Soul of a Brute which may be managed as you will with a strong Bit and Bridle Honoured Sir you see how I have wearied my self to tire you with the prolixty of this Letter and now to refresh you in the close I 'le tell you a piece of News The Doctor tells us That if once the people be brought to understand and practise their duty as to Communion with our Churches other difficulties which obstruct our Vnion will be more easily removed It 's incredible what the various Votes of the Coffee-houses are about those words some say Ay! If there were no Nonconformists there would be no Nonconformity if there were no disagreement we should all be agreed others again deny it and say That though the people were brought to understand and practise all their duty which they owe to God and man yet the same difference the same distance would continue except it be first proved which they are always coming towards but can never find a time to come to that it is their duty to hold entire Communion with the Parish-Churches others again of the more warm tempers assert That if the people could be brought to understand and practise their duty in these matters those Assemblies would be thinner than they are and some protest it 's a most Meridian Truth that if men could be brought to conform in practise but there lies the cunning on 't though against the shins and conscience all other difficulties would be easily removed for they that are once engaged in a practise whether by slavish fears or worldly hopes it makes no matter must study Arguments to defend their practise as well as they can and they vouch infallible experience to justifie their opinion for say they throw a Dog into a River over head and ears and if he will not take care to swim out let him be drown'd It 's mighty pleasing to me to hear the Doctor profess he has endeavoured to pursue his design without sharp and provoking reflexions on the persons of any for though you Sir have noted several passages as inconsistent with the sincerity of this expression yet I doubt not to clear up his Integrity You mention Page 38. where I confess the Doctor does say The most godly among them Dissenters can least endure to be told of their faults This did a little startle me but not stumble me into a disbelief of his Honesty for though he tells us he has not used provoking reflexions on the persons of any i. e. by name yet he might with a good conscience and without contradicton to his word make sharp provoking reflexions upon the whole generation of the Dissenters and condemn them in the lump And whereas you insist upon 't that the expression is either a scurrilous Sarcasm unbecoming a
a little disguis'd the matter in his Discourse to make it smile upon his pretensions I will give the Reader the naked truth of the whole business There were in the Apostles days some Judaizing Christians who being not well weaned from the Mosaic Ceremonies would needs compel the Gentile Converts to their old observances for which they plausibly pretened that those Rites having been once confessedly establish'd by Divine Authority and not yet explicitely repealed by any Countermand of Christ equal to that whereby they had been enjoined were still in full force power strength and virtue and did oblige the gentil world to give their assent and consent to them and in pursuance of this imposing humor they would have obtruded upon them a Canon Acts 15.5 That except they were circumcised and observ'd the law of Moses they could not be saved To this Usurpation the Apostles oppose their authority and taking the Gentile Christians into their protection vindicate their Liberty and command them to stand fast in it and not tamely surrender themselves to the will and pleasures of these imperious Masters And because St. Peter by his compliance had hardened these Judaizers in their Superstitions St. Paul takes him up roundly reproves him to his face and strenuously asserts their Gospel Liberty which had he not done the Doctor thinks all the Gentile Christians had been forced either to a compliance with the Jews or to a perpetual Schism But herein I must beg his pardon for though they had been forced to a Separation it had been no Schism which visibly had lain on the other side for Paul in his admonition to the Church at Rome lays all the blame of the Separation not upon them that separate but on those that gave cause to the Separation Rom. 16.17 I beseech you Brethren mark them which cause divisions and offences among you and avoid them Where he points to us these three things 1. That they who cause divisions are the culpable dividers the Imposers must be responsible for the evil consequences of their Impositions 2. That it 's lawful nay a duty to divide from those that unwarrantably give such cause of division 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decline or depart from them 3. That any Condition of Communion imposed besides as well as against the Doctrine received from the Apostles is a sufficient ground to condemn the Imposers to justifie those that reject such conditions for so we read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And so we find it rendered Gal. 1.8 Though we or an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel unto you then that we have preach'd unto you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let him be accursed Hitherto matters do not work to the Doctor 's mind he does movere but nihil promovere the step he has taken has set his cause a step backward 2 And therefore he will try another Experiment whether the Epistle with the Context may not invite or draw the Text to his Interest 1 His first approach he makes thus The Apostle exhorts the Philippians to an unanimous and constant resolution in holding fast to the faith of the Gospel in spight of all the malice and threats of their enemies Phil. 1.27 28. And most wholsom counsel it is God give all Dissenters grace to take it for if once the fears of Troubles and Persecutions make men afraid to own and maintain their Religion it will be an easie matter for their enemies first to divide and then to subdue them This will not yet do the Doctor 's work nor undo the Dissenters 2 He makes a nearer approach thus The Apostle beseeches them in the most vehement and affectionate manner not to give way to any differences or divisions among them Very good As much then as in us lies we will live peaceably with all men But what security shall we have that they will do so with us We will labor that there be no differences in judgment which yet in our imperfect state is not to be expected but if there be differences we will take care there be no divisions for we are taught to maintain Christian affections towards those that are of different apprehensions from our selves and different practices too proportionable to those different sentiments for so the Apostle adjures the Church Phil. 2.1 2. To be like minded having the same love being of one accord and of one mind Upon which words the Doctor gives us this Paraphrase q. d. I have seen the miserable effects of Divisions in other Churches indeed Divisions that are caused by or issue out in hatred malice envy persecution have effects as miserable as themselves but what miserable effects did he or we ever see that all mens faces were not of one complexion Let me therefore entreat you to avoid the first tendencies to any breaches among you and unnecessary Impositions lay the first foundations to these Mischiefs entertain no jealousies no unjust suspicions of each other as that the most godly among those that differ from you in lesser matters can least endure to be told of their faults or that the tenderness of their minds out of meer shame-facedness keeps them from declaring truth but shew all the kindness you are able to your fellow members and surely you are able to wave these Bones of Contention these make-bate Ceremonies you are able to forbear railing persecuting are you not I confess Pride is an impotency of mind and Passion a great weakness of soul the strongest wills have commonly the weakest reason to govern them and the ambition of glorying in the flesh of those whom they can make to truckle to their Humors and Crotchets is a pretty flesh-pleasing vanity which I hope in time you will overcome so that hitherto we can smell no Plot the Doctor has upon us no scent of Match or Powder or how by these Ambages and remote Fetches he intends to attack us we discern not 3 In the next place therefore he tells us the Apostle gives Cautions against some persons from whom their greatest danger was viz. such as pretended a mighty zeal for the Law Nay I always suspected our danger would come from that Quarter but am glad we know our enemies and do promise him we 'll keep a special eye upon them in all their motions Some such there are in the world who are exceeding zealous for Ceremonies and Traditions and would triumph if they could carry it for Bel and the Dragon such as would knead the world into its old mass and lump rather than want of their wills and as the Judaizers would renounce Christianity and return to Moses except the Gentiles would conform to their legal observances so have we some such who will revolt to Rome unless they may not retain for who hinders them but impose their own admired knick-knacks upon others Now such as these the Apostle deals smartly with he calls them Dogs Evil Workers the Concision because they tore in pieces the seamless Coat of Christ into shreds
and tatters confounding the minds of peaceable Christians who would willingly have united upon those plain easie reasonable terms upon which they had already received and professed Christianity only these peevish trouble-houses would not let them And this is remarkable that the Apostle never gave one hard word to the Conscientious Dissenter nor one good word to the Judaizing Imposer in all his Epistles To what end now is all this pompous ceremonious train of words to what end are these Positions Suppositions and Preliminaries why so many Lines Entrenchments Galleries why these tedious Approaches why all this Spanish Gravity why does he not fall aboard with his Text and storm it Alas Things are not yet ripe and ready for such hot service and therefore 4 The Apostle having done this he persuades all good Christians to do as he did ver 15. Let us therefore as many as be perfect be thus minded What was that to assert his liberty he did so and would not be brought under the power even of lawful things 1 Cor. 6.12 Was it not to put his neck under the old yoke of bondage he did so or did he scorn to build up what he had once pluckt down he did so and would he have us do as be did Content Shall we stand fast in our liberty as he in his Content Must we not build up whatever of humane inventions we have pluckt down Content Would he have us as many as be perfect be thus minded Content Let as many as are as he was do as he did They that are honour'd with his Attainments let them come up to his Evangelical Practice when we were children we thought spake acted as children Are we grown up to Manhood let 's put away childish things It is a shame not to outgrow our Trinckets our Rattles our Hobby-horses when we have outgrown the Rickets Shall it be said of Christians as of the Grecians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Greeks are always children But such were the Judaizers always learning never coming to the knowledge of the truth And you may as soon whip these huge great Boys out of all Religion as out of one Ceremony so fond so doating so peevish froward awkward such a whimpering such a whining such puleing and powting for Ceremonies as if they had lost that famous Engine of the Nutcrack or had been plundered of a pin-box I have read of a learned man in this nation who tells us he had quite other sentiments of and apprehensions about death than most men others were afraid to die but he was ashamed to die Really many are afraid of the Ceremonies as sinful and I am not without those fears too but methinks I am greatly ashamed of 'em as I should that any should spie me riding upon a penny Colt or a Gelding No St. Paul would have them that are thus perfect grow up into a more manly and generous way of serving and worshipping God Though the famous Alcibiades did once to please a child condescend Ludere par impar equitare in Arundine longâ To play the fool at even-or-odd And for a hobby-horse ride a rod. 5. Hitherto we have felt no wound but like the bird in the tree looking at the gunner wonders what he 's fidling about till of a sudden she 's past feeling At last the Author comes nearer Because says he many disputes and differences as to opinion and practice might happen among them he therefore lays down two Rules to govern themselves by Here now the Dr. beats up and gets within our Quarters and very subtilly would insinuate to the unwary Reader that the Apostle gave two Rules about one and the same thing whenas 't is evident he gave but one nor was it possible he should give more in that case The case which the Dr. supposes is that there were differences of opinion and practice among the Philippians Let it be supposed Does the Apostle give two Rules in that case No! but one single Rule which was the Rule of mutual forbearance and leaving one another to Gods Instructions but in Another Case where Christians had attained to be of the like mind there the Rule was that they should walk up and according to what they had attained But we must go through now we are in and therefore let us hear what these two Rules are and what use he will make of them 1. Rule If any happen'd to differ from the body of Christians they lived with they should do it with modesty and humility not breaking out into factions and Divisions but waiting for further information Now here we want that Accuracy that might have been expected from a person of his Abilities For 1. He puts it as a rare and extraordinary Case If any happen such a one as might fall out in an Age or so whereas this was a most familiar Case and that which the Apostle met with everywhere that there was a difference of apprehensions about the lesser things at least of Religion nor was he to seek what direction to give in the case but uniformly determines that they should not judge nor despise each other upon these accounts nor was there ever any Church at any time wherein these differences did not happen 2. He lays the stress of the duty upon those that differ from the Body of the Christians they live with It is very true the Church or Body of Christians at Philippi at that time was sound in the Doctrine of the Gospel evangelical in their worship and regular in government and Discipline and therefore it was the duty of those that differed from that body not to separate from it but suppose any happened to differ from the body of Christians they lived with which were not so must the Rule hold equally is there the same obligation in the case also what if a Christian should happen to live at Rome what if it should be the Drs. lot to live there must he be under the same obligation not to divide from the body 3. He supposes the Rule only to be given to the person that happens to differ from the body of the Church whereas the Rule is mainly given to the Church how they are to demean themselves toward a dissenting brother viz. to wait till God shall reveal his mind to the person otherwise minded Neither is he to act nor the Church to compel till God clear it up to his Conscience that he may act like a Saint or since Saints is a term of reproach at least like a Man and not a Beast 4. He disguises his rule by those Terms of Art faction separation c whereas faction and separation are two things the one always sinful the other many times a duty 2. Rule For those that are come to a firmness and settlement upon the Christian Principles he charges them by all means to preserve Unity and Peace among themselves Now these things also are laid down with as much obscurity as one could wish For 1.
Is it not the duty of those who are not arrived at that firmness and settlement of judgment to preserve Unity and Peace without question only this will handsomly mislead us to a mistake that Unity and Peace among Christians are unattainable till they are all of one scantling in Opinion for this is the fancy that is gotten into mens heads That we must have peace with all that in order to Peace there must be Unity of judgment and uniformity in practice 2. He says the Apostle charges them by all means to preserve Unity which if we understand of Gods means is very true but we are not to use our own means such as a naughty heart would prompt to us not to prostitute our Reasons and Consciences to the lust of men but if it be possible as much as in us lies to live in Unity and Peace The Text I see is exceedingly unwilling to be dragg'd into the Doctor 's service two or three plucks therefore he will try more and if it will not come leave it as incorrigible and untractable for says he the Apostle supposes two things § 1. The necessity of one fixed certain Rule notwithstanding the different attainments among Christians This the Dr. calls one of the Apostles but 't is certainly one of his own supposals For 1. We are even now told of two Rules one for them that differ from the body of Christians they lived with and here the Rule was to leave them to Gods immediate Care for farther illumination but now there is but one fixed standing Rule notwithstanding the different attainments of Christians 2. And to what end is there a fixed Rule inflexible and untreatable when dissatisfaction of Conscience about these matters will exempt any man from it or to what purpose had we a Rule for Indulgence if now it must be vacated by this certain and fixed Rule 3. If there be such a necessity of a fixed standing Rule notwithstanding mens different attainments It 's a wonder the Scripture that contains all things necessary should not speak of it neither of the matter of this Rule nor the makers of the Rule nor the Rules by which the Rule must be made 4. And if there must be one fixed Rule then perhaps The particular forms of Church-government may in time prove jure Divino 5. And what are we the nearer to satisfaction to be told of a Rule and not to be told also what that Rule is If a Scripture Rule we agree but that will not serve his turn if a Rule sent down by Tradition that would do his work but that we want evidence it was intended by the Apostle If Christ or his Apostles had made the Rule with what security of Conscience with what satisfaction of mind could we acquiesce in it but if it be a rule made by the Church governours of after times to hamper and snickle all that they can get within their clutches it will alter the case and we see no reason to give that subjection to it 6. If there be a necessity of one fixed Rule about things in their own natures indifferent then when those things by their particular Circumstances are reduced ad actum exercitum what must the poor Christian do If the Rule commands him to Act and the Circumstances have made the Act sinful in that time place c. where is he now here 's a rule against his acting here 's another made by men for his acting they might as well have made one Rule more and that is to hang 'em out of the way rather than to leave them to be tormented between two contrary Rules 7. If there be a necessity of one fixed Rule in circumstantial matters how comes it to pass that the Church of England has determined that she has power to alter and varie these Rules according as she sees cause And 8. Must this Rule be for the Universal Church or a National Church or a Particular Church If for the Universal Church it crosses the judgment of your National Church which says it is not necessary that Rites and Ceremonies be alike If for a National Church it must be proved that ever the Apostle understood any such Creature If for a Particular Church only then what will become of Uniformity in the face of the National Church which is the great thing for which this Rule is pretended useful and necessary 9. If there be a necessity of one fixed standing Rule notwithstanding differing attainments then either this fixed Rule must yield and bend to those weak ones that have not attained to see the lawfulness of it or those weak ones must be stretch'd and screw'd up to the fixed Rule If the former how is it fixed that in thousands of Cases every day must bend If the latter what is become of the other Rule that allows those that have not attained to stand or fall to their own Master and appoints them to be left to God's gracious instruction For 10. The Rule prescribed by the Apostle If any man be otherwise minded is the only fixed Rule in matters of indifferent nature which Rule is plain Nonsense if there must be another Rule to which all Christians must come up notwithstanding their dissatisfactions about it 11. That which exceedingly prejudices the Doctor 's Rule is that the universal current and stream of all Expositors run against him Grotius thus glosses it Etiam qui de Ritibus aliter sentiunt interim sciant Evangelii praecepta quae Divina esse persuasi sunt sibi esse sequenda i. e. They that differ in their judgments about Rituals must yet know that they are obliged to walk according to the Precepts of the Gospel which they are persuaded to be of Divine Authority So that the Rule of Scripture was that alone to which they were obliged who were not satisfied about Rites and Ceremonies So Tirinus Regulam hic intelligit à Christo Apostolis ejus praescriptam He understands the Rule prescribed by Christ and his Apostles Zanchy takes it for the Rule of Brotherly Love and Holiness and in a word all conspire against the Doctor 's interpretation 12. And why could not the Apostle have spoken intelligibly had he pretended any such thing it had been easie to have said Notwithstanding what I said just now of leaving those that have not attained so far as you and I to God's instruction yet my will is that you all walk by one fixed and standing Rule whether you have attained or no 't is no great matter I 'll not indulge these peevish tender Consciences Let 'em Conform or the Prelates and their Chancellors shall admonish them admonish them admonish them thrice with one breath and then Excommunicate and deliver them up to the Devil To conclude the Doctor had much better have employed his Talents in demonstrating 1. That by a Rule is meant a fixed Rule about things indifferent or dubious 2. That the Archbishops Bishops and Clergy in Convocation Synod or
deny themselves in a greater matter than things strangled and blood rather than give offence to their weak Brethren without troubling the Church to make any Decree about them And when this Canon was in its greatest force and vigor the Gentile Believers might have eaten the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 privately yea in company where no offence would be given or taken for what was the Jewish Convert concern'd what another should eat at home either of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or fragments of heathenish Sacrifices presented to him by his Relations or of those things killed by suffocation But alas the Case is otherwise with us for such is the necessity of the Cross the white Garment kneeling at the Supper c. That the omission of them shall silence and suspend a learned faithful laborious Minister of Jesus Christ ab officio beneficio from his work and wages 7. The Apostles add no penalty neither pecuniary corporal or spiritual to afright men into compliance with it but contented themselves to have commanded in the Name of Christ and of his true Church they made not those necessary things the conditions of ministerial or lay-communion Significavits Writs de Excommunicato Capiendo were not then invented nor till a long time after that the Lady Churches having lost the true spiritual Sword began to arm themselves with secular power to back and set an edge upon their Dictates 8. This Decree was onely negative not positive a restraint from the use of some but not an imposition of any It was onely This you shall not Do not This you shall Do which kind of Canons are much easier than the other Conscience may better be tyed up from acting in a hundred than forced to act in one particular A negative precept restrains us from acting at any time in any Case an affirmative always obliges but obliges not always to act in every Case But things at home are much otherwise where we are commanded both what to do and what not to do and are still constrain'd to act even in those things we apprehend against the command of God either in general or special 9. Lastly It appears from the Apostle Paul's After-writings that when this Decree had a little gratified the Jewish Converts weaned them a little from their old customs and usages whereof they were so tenacious mollified their morose and rugged tempers sweeten'd and endear'd them towards the Gentiles it expired of course as to what obligation it received from man and lay among those obsolete Canons which were not regarded because antiquated for when the reason of an humane Ecclesiastical Law ceases the Law itself ceases without any formal Repeal which because some expected should have been more solemn they will not be beaten out on 't but it 's still in force Thus have we seen the Vanity of the Doctor 's Supposition which he would persuade us is the Apostles viz. That there was a necessity of one fixed and certain Rule notwithstanding the different attainments among Christians Which I am not afraid to call vain being so dark that we neither know whether the Rule must be of Divine or Humane Institution what the matter of it must be nor is it proved by Reason or any Scripture argument but what is ultimately resolved into that Decree made at Jerusalem which I have now fully shewn will do him nor his Cause any service SECT III. The Dissenters Plea from Rom. 14. and whether the Doctor hath spoken Reason to invalidate their Reasonings from hence THe Reverend Dr. having toiled hard to prove the necessity of a fixed standing Rule notwithstanding the different attainments of Christians about unnecessary matters and caught nothing to reward his pains bethinks himself of an objection that Dissenters might possibly make which he thus words for them Doth not the Apostle in the 14th Chapter of his Epistle to the Rom. lay down quite another Rule viz. only of mutual forbearance in such Cases where men are unsatisfied in Conscience Yes he doth so and the same Rule he lays down in the verse before the Drs. Text That if any were otherwise minded they should wait and not Act the Church should wait and not impose but leave them to the instruction of God To which the Dr. gives an intimation of a general answer That there was a vast difference between the case as it stood then at Rome and the case as it stood at Philippi For sayes he The Church of Rome consisted most of Jews where they did not impose the necessity of keeping the Law on the gentile Christians And therefore in this case he perswades both parties to forbearance and charity But now in those Churches suppose at Philippi for one where the false Apostles made use of the pretence of the Levitical Law being still in force to divide the Churches there the Apostle bids them beware of them and their practices as being of a dangerous and pernicious consequence So that the preserving the peace of the Church and preventing separation was the great measure according to which the Apostle gave his Directions and that makes him insist so much on this advise to the Philippians that whatever their attainments were they should walk by the same Rule and mind the same things I have often observed that when men are pinch't with plain Scripture they use to twist and twine and turn themselves into all shapes to get out of their streights and they have no more ordinary way of evasion than to fancy some imaginary various Cases upon which a various judgment must be made and a various Rule laid down to serve the present turn which is most notorious in this answer The Apostle acted like a prudent governour says he and in such a manner as he thought did tend most to the propagation of the Gospel and good of particular Churches To which some would reply that then there are a great many in the world that have acted like fools But my general answer is that the Apostle acted upon higher Reasons than those dictated to humane prudence even the infallible guidance and immediate direction of the Holy Ghost Divine directions and the supernatural counsels of the H. Spirit are well consistent and had he only gone upon thinking as the Dr. fancies I had rather have built my faith and practice upon one of his thinkings than upon one of the Drs. full perswasions 1 Cor. 7.40 I think also that I have the Spirit of God And he was not deceived in so thinking But for a particular answer § 1. The Doctors Reason why the Jewish professors at Rome did not impose on the gentile Christians the necessity of keeping the Law of Moses is this Because we do not find they did so And is not this an ingenious course for a person of his learning to suppose the main foundation upon which he builds the variety of the case with no other proof but that he does not find it so I do not find a
been assignned to them nor do they love to have him for their Pastor whom they know to be of a different Religion from theirs But here are some particulars wherein the Reader will desire the Doctor 's ingenuity and that plainness which became a sermon 1. He asserts that there has been a great deal of art used to confound these two this I say is not honest dealing for they that Judge parochial Lay-communion lawful and have the greatest latitude that way have from Press and Pulpit sufficiently proclaimed their minds and they that judge otherwise have by their own practice and example sufficiently declared their judgment unless the Doctor be angry that they do not fill up their publick worship with declamations against Ceremonies and they that have made the nearest approaches to Parochial Communion have found such bad treatment that they are tempted to judge the Clergy are more afraid of their coming wholly in than keeping out of the Church and they are to be allowed the fittest judges in this case because they know best what stock the Church-commons will bear In the mean time they may take warning how they approach too near that flame which has already singed some or their wings and may possibly consume their whole bodies but consciencious men are above those considerations 2. The Doctor tells us that in the Judgment of the most impartial among the dissenters little is to be said on the behalf of the people from whom none of those things are required None of these things what not to dedicate their Children to God by the sign of the cross not to kneel at the Sacrament I am sure the Canons of 1603. have declared Can. 30. that in memory of the Cross and other Reasons the Church of England hath thought meet to retain the sign of the Cross in baptism taking it for a symbol whereby the Infant is devoted or dedicated to the service of him who dyed the death of the Cross This is the true import of that Canon which I cannot now give the Reader the English of Verbatim having only by me a Latine Copy of those Canons And those of the most impartial among the dissenters and such as have come nearest to conformity in their Lay-Capacity will tell you that there are some things which even they in their private station cannot comply withall 3. The Doctor does not understand how they can preach lawfully to a people who commit a sin in hearing them Either then the things are unintelligible or the Dr. is not that man of understanding we have always taken him for what the Divisions of Reuben were he does not well understand p. 2. Why many Cities united under one civil government and the same Rules of Religion should not be called one national Church he cannot understand p. 19. And if occasional Communion be lawful that constant Communion should not be a duty is hard to understand p. 56. And now here how they can preach lawfully to a people who commit a fault in hearing them he does not understand But what great difficulty lies in this Some do sin though they hear and yet not sin because they hear or there may be a sin in the hearer and yet no sin in hearing but whatever the tempers or distempers the ends and designs of the hearers are that which justifies the Ministers preaching is his own call to the Ministry not the qualification of the hearers A man may come from the next parish to hear the Doctor when by the Rules of the Church he should have been in his own parish Church and yet the Doctor will not think that this supersedes the exercise of his Ministry Some may come out of custom because they have used to trundle thither down the hill others out of curiosity to hear a person of whom fame has spoken so much others out of a carping humour to pick quarrels as no doubt Priests and Jesuites have done and yet the Doctor satisfies himself that it is his duty to do his Masters work and however they hear sinfully schismatically captiously yet he is acquitted in his ministerial service 3 The Doctor tells us he does not confound bare suspending Communion in some particular Rites with either total or at least ordinary forbearance of Communion in what they judge lawful and proceeding to the forming of separate Congregations What great matter is it to us or to the controversie what the Doctor shall please to confound or to distinguish The law of the nation which is the assigned Rule and Reason of Conformity requires total Conformity to all Rites The Law considers not whether mens scruples be modest or immodest nor what they judge lawful or unlawful Conformity is exacted to the whole Liturgy Ceremonies and the Laity must not pick and chuse what they can use and refuse the rest they must like Travellours on the King 's high way keep to the road and not break out here and there to escape the foul way If the Doctor were the Church of England or the Parliament it were considerable but as the case stands we are under a peremptory law Now then if there be some things which we do scruple and not only scruple but upon the most impartial scrutiny we can make do judge sinful and these be made the condition of enjoying one Sacrament or other Ordinance of Christ and that by a law of his as peremptory as any of these of men and imposed upon a far more severe penalty than man can inflict we are bound to live in the constant use of all his institutions we must unite our selves to those churches where we may enjoy them upon better terms Thus much in consideration of his considerations But yet we are to seek for the answer to the Question How far we are obliged to comply with an establisht Rule Separation of whole Churches is shut out of the Question Ministerial Conformity is shut out of the Question Suspending Communion in some particular Rites is shut out of the Question But where is the answer to the Question That is adjourned or prorogued or utterly lost and therefore if any honest Gentleman or Citizen has taken up the answer to this question lost between St. Pauls and the Guild-Hall Chappel let him restore it to the owner and he will be well rewarded for his pains And now let the Reader judge whether the dissenters are not likely to be well instructed by a Catechism made up of Questions without Answers SECT V. The state of the present Controversie between the disagreeing Parties as laid down by the Doctor what Concessions some Dissenters make and what use the Doctor makes of them THE former Question being laid by at present he comes to consider the present Case of Separation and to make the sinfulness and mischief of it appear And this is it which denominates the Discourse The Mischief of Separation Though to an impartial Considerer how loth they are to step over a straw or to forgo the
least of their Impositions which have made the Separation it might better have been stiled The Mischief of Union Now to do this as he thinks more convincingly he will first lay down some Concessions It had been a more convincing method in the judgment of most Men if he had proved Separation sinful from Scripture grounds rather than from some Mens Concessions seeing I do not understand either that we are bound to stand to their Concessions or that the Concessions themselves will do his Cause the least service And they themselves have been so bang'd by the Papists by this Argumentum ad hominem that one would think they should have little comfort to use it We cannot forget how in the Relation of the Conference between the A. B. Laud and the Jesuite the Lady who gave occasion to the Dispute asked this Question Whether a Person living and dying in Communion with the Church of Rome might be saved His Grace answered affirmatively Now what Triumphs before the Victory the Papists have made upon this Concession the Doctor has sufficient cause to understand You say they confess that Salvation is attainable in Communion with us we peremptorily deny it That Salvation may be had in your Communion And therefore the safest way is to hold Communion there where both sides agree Salvation may be attained This Argument from that Concession is much stronger than one drawn from the Concession of any one or many amongst us because we own no learned Men to be our Ecclesiastical Head as that Archbishop was supposed to have been theirs But thus fared it with them for their Charity to Rome and thus fares it with us for our Charity to them they cannot own Rome to be a true Church and that persons in that Communion may be saved but they must hear on 't on both sides of their ears why then did you separate from a true Church wherein you might have been saved Nor must we grant the Church of England to be a true Church but presently we are pelted with the same Reply that was thrown at their heads why then did you separate But we had rather suffer by our Charitableness and their Uncharitableness than admit any the least Temptation to deny the Church of England to be a true Church and to hold all the essential Points of Faith seeing the Doctor himself has granted as much as this comes to where he allows of Separation yet let us hear what these Concessions are § 1. They unanimously confess they find no fault with the Doctrinal Articles of our Church Doctrinal Articles Are there then any Articles that are not Doctrinal Every Article contains as I always thought some Doctrine or other and which then are the Non-doctrinal Articles more particularly 1. It is not true that the Dissenters unanimously confess they find no fault with the Doctrine of the Church for I am confident none of them but do find fault with that Doctrine That Children baptized and dying before the commission of actual sin are undoubtedly saved And that other That whosoever believeth not stedfastly all that is contained in the Athanasian Creed cannot be saved but shall perish everlastingly 2. They do not believe all the Articles of the Thirty nine and particularly not the 20th of the Churches power to impose Rites and Ceremonies and that also is a Doctrinal Article 3. But if by Doctrinal Articles be intended no more than those that relate to the essential Points of saving Faith it 's true they find no fault with them but then it 's as true that the Doctor has confest also That the Church of Rome maintains all such Articles and yet he justifies the Separation from their Communion whence it will unavoidably follow that it is lawful to separate from a Church which holds all the essential Points of Faith absolutely necessary to salvation 4. And what is it to the Laity what Doctrinal Articles are contained in the Book compiled 1562. if the contrary Doctrines be now openly preached in those Parochial Churches to which their adherence is required For if their Communion with the Parish Churches be the thing which he mainly insists on it 's of more concern to them what is there preach'd than what Faith they were of an hundred years ago § 2. They generally yield that our Parochial Churches are true Churches and it is with these their Communion is required And are not then the Parochial Churches more beholden to the Dissenters than to the Doctor whose Principles do deny them to be true Churches For so he tells us p. 27. That although when the Churches encreased the occasional meetings were frequent in several places yet still there was but one Church and one Altar and one Baptistry and one Bishop So that the Parochial Congregations are but occasional meetings members and appurtenances of the Cathedral Chappels of Ease under the Mother Church but no true Churches because each has not its proper Bishop And so they make the Diocesan Bishop the onely Pastor and the Parochial Teachers to be onely his Curates to ease them of the trouble and cumber of Preaching And some have observed a strange Innovation in the very office of the Minister of late years for whereas in the old Ordination of Priests they enstated them in their whole office by reading that Text Acts 20.28 Feed the Flock whereof the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers or Bishops This Text is now omitted and Ministers are ordain'd to preach when and where the Bishops shall give them a Licence And thus the Parochial Teachers are no Officers of Christ but creatures of the Bishops making nor have they any Jurisdiction any power of Government or Discipline in their hands which all those Pastors whom Christ appointed are vested with but serve to execute the Decrees Sentences and Awards of the Chancellors Officials and Commissaries without liberty to interpose so much as a judgment of discretion And though they retain the name of Rectors yet 't is rather a footstep of what once originally they were but not any term that carries or imports in it any real Authority And what if the Dissenters do not deny that you have all the Essentials of true Churches true Doctrine true Sacraments and an implicit Covenant between Pastors and People Do not also our great Clergymen own and allow that Rome hath all these The Doctor I am certain allows them to be true Churches to have all the Essentials of true Churches and that they have true Sacraments too else why are not they re-baptized which from Rome are converted and brought over to the Church of England And true Ministers else why are they not re-ordained who after reconciliation are allowed to exercise their Ministerial Function when yet a Minister ordained by the Reformed Churches shall not enjoy that priviledge meerly for want of Episcopal Ordination And will the Doctor deny that they have the Eucharist in all its essential parts though they have superadded many gross
Corruptions as they have many Errors in the Doctrine of Faith which yet does not in his judgment destroy the essential points of the Christian Doctrine 3 Many of them declare that they hold Communion with our Churches to be lawful And then 1. Who is the true Catholick Christian and who is the real Schismatick He that holds Communion with all Protestant Churches occasionally lawful and accordingly holds Communion with them actually as Providence gives him opportunity or he that denying all Churches to be truly such except his own refuses Communion with them for want of a Ceremony or two and the necessary consequence of a Ceremony A Bishop 2. That they hold Communion with this Church to be lawful is one of those dubious Propositions which will do the conceding Party no harm nor them that make use of it any service First many of them declare so and many declare otherwise but they do neither of them prejudge the other nor intend to bind them to their private sentiments and it 's as good an argument to prove Communion unlawful because many declare against it as 't is to prove it lawful because many declare for it Secondly they declare Communion lawful but do they declare total Communion lawful The same persons will tell us that both these Propositions are true Communion is lawful and Communion is unlawful Communion in some parts of worship is so in others not And thirdly they will further tell us that Communion with some Parish-Churches is lawful with others unlawful that there are not the same Doctrines preached the same Ceremonies urged the same rigid terms of Communion in all Churches exacted And lastly that occasional Communion is or may be lawful where a stated and fixed Communion is not so and they give this reason for their judgment and practice because to hold Communion with one Church or sort of Christians exclusively to all others is contrary to their true Catholick principles which teach them to hold Communion though not equally with all tolerable Churches and that there are some things tolerable which are not eligible wherein they can bear with much for peace-sake but chuse rather to sit down ordinarily with purer administrations It is a dangerous thing to give us uncertain ambulatory Notions of Schism other than what the Scripture has given us both because the Scriptures alone can inform us what is the Notion of a true Church and by consequence what must be the true Notion of sinful Separation from it and because these unstable mutable Notions of Schism will make that to be Schism in one Countrey which is an innocent thing in another and that to be Schism one year which perhaps the next may prove a good and Catholick practice That was Schism in England in Edward the 6th's days which was not so in Queen Maries and that was Schism in Her Reign which became none in the days of Her Successor And we may be Schismaticks here in England when if we cross the water we shall be none though we practise the same Worship and retain all that which at home would have fastened that brand upon us And if we travel through Germany though perhaps we cannot be Schismaticks and Catholicks twice a day because the miles are very long yet may we be both backwards and forwards forty times in a Twelvemonth and continue the same men both in principle and practice that we were when we went our pilgrimage It is little to our purpose what the Doctor is pleased to tell us what one told him viz. that An. Dom. 1663. Divers Preachers met at London to consider how far it was lawful or their duty to communicate with the Parish-Churches where they lived in the Liturgy and Sacraments or that 20 Reasons were brought in to prove that it is a duty in some persons to join with some Parish-Churches three times a year in the Lord's Supper For 1. If they consider'd how far it was lawful I hope they spoke something at least to the Question and left it not as they found it a Question forsaken of its Answer which ought to be individual Companions 2. They met to consider what was lawful for or a duty to themselves not for or to others in whose names they had no commission to hear and determine the Question 3. If they inquired how far it was lawful or a duty they supposed that it was not unlimitedly so for to what end should they inquire how far they might go if they had once thought they could go through 4. And the design of the twenty reasons abundantly proves it for it was but some persons whose duty it was adjudged to be to receive the Sacrament thrice a year and it was but in some parishes neither where those some persons might communicate so that there might be some others many others possibly the greatest number whose duty it was not so to joyn and other some parishes many others and and possibly the greatest number with whom it was not lawful or not a duty to hold Communion The Case then is this a Christian may be placed in such circumstances that he may receive the Sacrament from some persons who will indulge him in the questionable Terms in such places where he cannot enjoy that ordinance at all if he do not receive it there and thus with many restrictions limitations distinctions and clauses a Case may be put wherein the twenty reasons may conclude some thing but yet nothing to the Doctors advantage But what effect what operation had these twenty reasons upon the Company Why none of them seemed to dissent that is they did not enter their several protestations nor formally declare against the Reasons of their Brother like wise and wary persons they would advise upon them They came to consider of the lawfulness of Communion and they would go away and consider of the strength of the Reasons propounded to convince them I see it 's more dangerous than I had thought it to have been to come into the parish Churches lest naked presence and silent appearing in those assemblies should be brought against us as an interpretative approbation of whatsoever is there done or spoken The Doctor adds that they had such another meeting after the plague and fire and if it were but such another there was no great harm in 't at which they agreed that communion with our Church was in it self lawful and good for which he quotes Plea for Peace p. 240. But here the Doctor is tardy by his favour and wrongs his Relator manifestly by nibbling off the last and most considerable words of the sentence viz. when it would do no more harm than good And we believe it lawful in that Case to hold Communion with any Church in the world so that now we must come to another enquiry and start a new question when there are one or two already up before the Dogs viz. whether Communion with the Parish-Churches will do more harm than good which it
it to be the Dissenters duty to widen their Communion to that Latitude It 's sufficient if they that hold this Principle can justifie it without confuting other mens Notions and they Judge their own Principle and Practice sufficiently authorised from this one thing Their Doctrine Communion and Ordinances have the same extent with those of the first Christians Acts 2.42 Who continued in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellowship breaking Bread and Prayer And let the opposers prove that any larger extent of Churches than what answers these ends is necessary and they are ready to Conform themselves to it What the Doctor hath to say or however what he hath said will fall under these heads 1. I have never seen any tolerable Proof that the Churches Planted by the Apostles were limited to Congregations To which more needs not be said than that 1. If the Churches planted by the Apostles were in such Congregations it 's no matter to us whether they were limited to such Congregations or no If Congregational bounds be allowed let other and larger bounds be proved by them that are concern'd to justifie them 2. If such particular Churches were not of Christs institution then it would be no Schism to separate from them I say no Schism of Christ's condemning and if others will make other Notions of Schism which Christ and his Apostles never knew and so multiply sin without cause let them contrive a hell too wherein those sins and schisms shall be punished 2 The Doctor proceeds It 's possible at first there might be no more Christians in one City than could meet in one assembly for worship but where doth it appear that when they multiplied into more Congregations they did make new and distinct officers with a separate power of government I confess I know not where any such thing appears that they made new and distinct Churches that is specifically new of another kind sort or species but that they did make other Churches and other Officers that is more Churches and more Officers is made appear thus that if they had not such Officers their assemblies had not answered their ends and if they had not the same power of Government that the other Churches had they had not been of the same kind but quite another thing but what it does not appear the Apostles did it appears abundantly the succeeding corrupter times have done even to form new Churches new Officers wholly distinct from those instituted by Christ and his Apostles and hence it was that to keep Peace as is pretended amongst the Pastors of particular Churches they found out a Bishop and to keep the Bishops from falling together by the ears they invented an Archbishop and because the Metropolitans might possibly quarrel they instituted a Patriarch and because the Patriarchs were subject to the same passions with other men prudence contrived a Pope and clapt him upon them all to keep them in Decorum 3 The Doctor thinks it will not appear credible to any considerate man that the 5000 in the Church of Jerusalem made one stated and fixed Congregation for divine worship Things are credible or incredible as some mens interests and occasions will have them or else it were no such hard matter to make it credible to the Doctor that 5000 10000 20000 might make one stated and fixt Congregation for worship he has an instance of it in St. Andrews Holborn a place which he has cause to know contains more than 5000 and yet they have but one stated fixed Congregation for divine worship 4 The Doctor thinks that much more may be said for lim ting Churches to private families than to particular Congregations Let us hear it then Do we not read of the Church in the house of Priscilla and Aquila Rom. 16.3 5. and of the Church that was in the house of Nymphas at Coloss Col. 4.15 and in the house of Philemon in Laodicea Philem. 2 3. yes we do so and yet hear nothing to the purpose for a Church may be in a house and yet not composed of that house A Church may meet in a family when it consists of more than the family A Church of Dissenters may possibly meet in a house and yet if one of the ecclesiastick Setters should get them in the wind and inform against them that they were there assembled for the worship of God with above the number of four besides the family I fear A Plea that they that meet in a family are of the family would hardly prevent a Conviction 5 Again the Doctor argues thus If notwithstanding such plain examples men will extend Churches to Congregations of many families why may not others extend them to those societies which consist of many Congregations I will tell him why 1. Because his plain examples are plain mistakes nor can he give one instance of a Church that consisted of a family because it was a family 2. We read of Churches of many families but of none composed of many particular Churches Many families have warrant to unite into a Church not as families but as the individuals are duly qualified in order to the great ends of worship edification c. But many Churches have no such warrant to unite for the destruction of those ends or any one of them And it is the end and the usefulness of unity for that end which must regulate and determine the Union It is very lawful to build a Ship or Man of war as big as two or three Yachts which may do better service but it 's folly to make one that would reach from Calice to Dover which must lie like an useless Log unmeet for sailing and the ends for which all Ships are built but let the Doctor extend the name of Church as far as he pleases to the worlds end or as far as the Rules of the Kings bench have been extended we are unconcern'd so long as this is clear that how far soever men may extend Churches name or thing in Compliance with the extent of the civil government yet the extent of our actual communion in worship is no other than that of the Church of which we are by our own choice members 6 He goes on Although when the Churches increased the occasional meetings were frequent in several places yet still there was but one Church one Altar one Baptistry one Bishop which will utterly destroy either parochial or Diocesan Churches For if one Baptistry and one Church be of the same extent what will become of the Diocesan Church in which there are hundred of those Baptistries and but one Bishop and if one Bishop and one Church be of the same extent what will become of the Parochials where there is one Baptistry indeed but not one Bishop And it seems very evident that in the beginning of Christianity a Church was no larger a Body than could assemble in one place for all the ends of a Christian Society so the Apostle supposes 1 Cor. 11.18 when ye come
the Churches mouth nor be tryed by her Rules when they come to be tryed for their All. And by this time we see and so may the Doctor how much better it had been for him to have follow'd his Text and not to gather Doctrines thence which never grew there nor to have so confidently asserted pag. 9. The necessity of one fixed and certain Rule notwithstanding the different attainments amongst Christians unless he could have proved it more solidly of such Rules as Churches make not contained in the general Rules of the Scripture 3. Is the Doctor in good earnest On is this Rhetorick pro formâ tantùm Will worshiping God by other Rules and in other modes and manners than a Church requires make such Worship Schismatical then mark the fatal consequences 1. It 's then apparent that most of the Parochial Churches in England are Schismatical Churches for do not they worship by other Rules and in other manner than the Church prescribes where is the prescribed Rule for singing Psalms in Hopkins's and Sternhold's Metre which yet is universally practised in most Parishes that I have heard of The Title Page of the Common-Prayer-Book tells us there are contained in it the Psalms pointed as they are to be said or sung but what Parishes sing according to those Interpunctations The end of the Book tells us Here the Morning Prayer is ended and Here the Evening Prayer is ended And yet when the Church has ended the Parishes begin and set up their Notes in those Metrical Versions Again what Rule have we for bowing towards the Altar the East the Church And yet these modes and manners of worshiping God are commonly practised Are all those Parish-Churches which are got into the garb and equipage of the Cathedrals with Organs Choristers and the like Schismatical or no If not Then to worship God in another mode than what is prescribed by the Church may not be Schismatical Worship but if it be so then are those Churches Schismatical and how then can it be Schism to separate from them 2. It will follow also there 's no remedy for it that either the Parochial Churches or the Cathedral are Schismatical Churches for the former are as much below the splendor of the latter as the latter are above the rusticity of the former If there be two Rules one for the mode of Cathedral Worship another for that of the private Parishes let them but allow half as much diversity to the Dissenters and all the pother and dust and clamor of Schism will be over I would therefore propound one modest Question Why is this practice of singing Hopkins's Metre so universally practised and yet so little or not at all preach'd against in the Pulpits Is it for fear they should have none left to preach to That is not to be imagined of conscientious and mortified men Though it 's true English Men they say are like your Irish Cows that will not give down their milk kindly except their Calves stand by or however to humor them the Calves skin stuft with straw Or is it lest they should seem to condemn themselves that make Dissenters Schismaticks for that very thing which they themselves practise This looks somewhat oddly I confess and the tenderness of a man's mind in such a case may out of meer shame-facedness keep him from declaring a Truth which flies in his face while he speaks it What can it then be Do they fear the reproaches of the People I will not determine but by asking the Doctor his own Question How comes it to be Schismatical in some and lawful in others Have they two weights and measures Are the Dissenters Schismaticks for worshiping God by other Rules and the parish-Parish-Churches pious Sons who do the same thing Or are they resolved that all the World shall be Schismaticks besides themselves But the Doctor has got a Notion in his head that these men are unwilling to confess a Separation and he gives us the reason of it because they have formerly condemned it with great severity and yet they do the same things for which they charg'd others as guilty of a sinful Separation A heavy Charge and wants nothing but the old thing Proof Is it not a wise course to pretend to give a Reason of nothing To assign a cause of a thing before it 's clear that there is such a thing in the World To tell us why they are unwilling before it appears they are unwilling So far as they do Separate they are willing to confess it and would he have them confess more than the Truth against themselves They own that they do not locally hold Communion with all Parishes at all times in all the parts of Worship and this they are ready to prove is not Schism is not sinful They avow that they do hold Communion with some Parishes in some Ordinances at some times and this they say will avoid the charge of a total Separation They say they never condemned that for Separation in others which they practise themselves How will he evince this Why he has ransacked and rumaged all the Papers of Accommodation that past between the Presbyterians and the Independents and there he finds That the Assembly of Divines urged their dissenting Brethren to comply with their Rules of Church-Government and charged them with Schism if they did it not Well what then Were the Rules proposed by the Assembly the same with these that are urged now Were they of the same nature doubtfulness difficulty What if it was not the Assembly but a Committee a Sub-Committee or a Subter-Sub-Committee of the Assembly What if it was not the final judgment of the Assembly but the private opinion of that Sub-Committee And what if we be no ways obliged to abide by their judgments or opinions And what if the Presbyterians were too rigid the other too stiff in their Sentiments must the Church only imitate them in their weaknesses when they had so many excellencies which deserved imitation And lastly what if the Doctor has misreported the matter of Fact as there laid down Any of these much more all these will render the most plausible part of his Sermon preached or his Discourse printed manifestly impertinent All which particulars and many more I shall make out from those very Papers 1 The Order of the Lords and Commons Die Jovis Novemb. 6. 1645 which Ordered the Committee to Act gives them these Instructions That they should take into consideration the differences in Opinions of the Members of the Assembly in point of Church-Government and to endeavour an Union if it be possible And in case that cannot be done to endeavour to find out some way how far tender Consciences who cannot in all things submit to the Common Rule which shall be Established may be born with according to the word Here we see a provision designed for Tender Consciences and that before the Rule was Establisht in case an Union could not be procured which had
too bad to redeem and whil'st there are such the Church unless She will be a Shrew or a Stepmother must take a tender care of them But if it be so endless to satisfie these erring Consciences leave 'em to God he can do it and he will either forbear them in their ignorance or give them knowledge whom it might become those men a little to imitate who call themselves his servants 3. That Scruple of Conscience is no protection against Schism Who says it is It 's only a Prohibition to afford Communion in what we scruple Except when the things scrupled and not scrupled are so blended together that we cannot swallow what appears lawful but we must gorge that with it which appears otherwise which has been the policy of some modern Imposers so artificially to mix the certain and the uncertain the questionable with the unquestionable that these scrupulous Consciences cannot enjoy that wherein they are satisfied except they will venture at that about which they are not so so are Private Bills stitch'd with the Publick ones that the more useful may sell the other which few else would regard So have I seen idle Masters delight themselves to see their Children play at Bob-apple where the poor young Rascals would have been glad of a Bit but were always prevented by the Candle 4 That the Apostles notwithstanding the difference of mens judgments did prescribe Rules of Uniformity Well but mark their proof Did not the Apostles bind the burden of some necessary things on the Churches albeit there were in those Churches gradual differences of light And will the Doctor infer hence a power to bind unnecessary burdens upon the necks of Disciples because the Apostles imposed such as were necessary The Argument then concludes If the Apostles who were infallible had power to impose Necessaries much more may the Prelates impose Unnecessaries though they be fallible But of these things thus much § 3. Come we now to his third and last Proposition A wilful Error or mistake of Conscience doth by no means excuse from sin These things surely are oddly joined together that a wilful Error and a mistake of Conscience should be made the subject of one Proposition There may be a mistake of Conscience where there 's no wilful Error wilfulness makes every Error double obstinacy being added to it but a mistake of simple ignorance makes it not half so great though it makes it not to become nothing it may excuse à tanto though not à toto and mollifie it a little though not justifie it nor nullifie it It will not excuse from sin And yet p. 44. he moves this Question What Error of Conscience doth excuse a man from sin in following the dictates of it If no Error will excuse why is the Question put What Error will excuse And if some Error will excuse why is the Proposition laid down so loosely and uncertainly A wilful Error or Mistake will not excuse from sin And upon this proposition he makes a case If a man think himself bound to divide the Church by sinful separation that separation is nevertheless a sin for his thinking himself bound to do it which is one of the wildest cases that ever was put For 1. It may be justly questioned whether it be possible for a Man in his wits to think himself bound to divide the Church by sinful separation A man may think himself bound to separate and that separation may possibly be sinful but he cannot think himself bound to sinful separation He that is bound is under a Law He that thinks himself bound thinks himself under a law but it Implies a broad contradiction for a man to think himself bound to sin because that implies that he thinks himself bound not to be bound or under a law to be under no law A sort of men there are that think it lawful to tell a Lie to avoid a great evil to procure some great good Yet none ever owned this principle that it was lawful to sin to procure the one or avoid the other but they pretend that to tell a Lie in such a case under such circumstances is no sin 2. I very much question whether ever any did think himself bound to divide a Church he may possibly think himself bound to avoid it but how should such a crotchet come in 's head that he was bound to divide it when the Church of England separated from Rome did they think it their duty to make divisions in it 3. The instances that he gives are short or wide of his case by many leagues Paul thought himself bound to do many things against the Name of Jesus He did so but not to do one thing that was sin The Jews thought themselves bound in Conscience to kill the Apostles True but yet they thought not themselves bound to kill them sinfully they wanted not pretences to justifie the cause to the World nor untemper'd mortar to daub over their own Conscience 't was easie to say they were rebels against traitors to the Emperor An easie thing to cry out of heresie and schism and sects every where spoken against nor wanted they a Tertullus who before the Magistrates and Judges could accuse Paul for a pestilent fellow a mover of sedition and a Ring-leader of a sect so that all the world sees and the poor dissenters feel the Truth of what the Dr. says men may do very bad things and yet think themselves bound in conscience to do them 4. It s freely granted by all the world that wilful error that is Interpretively such for no man can formally err wilfully does not excuse from sin that is what God has prohibited no mans errour can make a duty what God has commanded no mans errour can discharge him from obedience to it Nor do we or ever did we make Conscience a stalking horse for these ends And thus we have got through the three famous propositions that should have cleared up the objection and so answered to the second Question but what are we edified by all this discourse or how do we understand either what we or Church governours must do in case we or others cannot come up to the establisht rule men are not justifiable in not doing what they lawfully may do well but if they see not that may be lawfully done which may so must they be left to God or no wilful error and mistake will not excuse from sin be it so still what must be done when men cannot come up to the establisht rule I confess I am just as wise as I was but this is the Genius of the Sermon He propounds an enquiry p. 15. How far the obligation doth extend to comply with an establisht rule He shuts one thing out of the Question then a second thing out of the Question then excludes a third out of the Question and at last shuts the Question out of doors and it goes wandring up and down like a vagabond to this day
he is somewhat hard of understanding especially of those things that he has no mind to In the former discourse he argues from the lawfulness of Communion to the necessity but here also from occasional to constant Communion To which confident assertion of his we Oppose this Occasional communion with a particular Church may be lawful when yet constant fixed stated Communion may not be a duty which we prove 1. From their own Doctrines and practises Their Canons have made it the duty of every individual member of their Church to hold constant Communion with his own parish Church and Teacher and yet they allow occasional Communion with other parish Churches A journey will make occasional Communion with a remote Congregation lawful but they will hardly perswade us that they can make it our duty to take such journeys in order to such communion If the great Bell rings at the next parish to a Lecture Sermon or chimes all in to Divine Service when we have none of those at home 't is lawful to take the occasion without coming under a constant obligation to it The dissenters crave the same equity they say they are under an obligation ordinarily fixedly statedly constantly to worship God in those congregations whereof they are members they say they can readily joyn with other congregations as they have opportunity but they cannot admit the inference that because they may occasionally that therefore they must constantly practise it because Acts of worship have a larger extent then Church relation those may be performed and yet these remain sacred and inviolate 2. Some conforming Ministers and Christians judge it lawful to hold communion occasionally with the dissenters in prayer and preaching what a rare argument has the Dr. furnisht us with to prove it their constant duty and from once hearing lawfully to prove it an incumbent duty to hear them for ever 3. It may be lawful occasionally to step in and hear a very weak preacher perhaps one that is vicious in his life or unfound in some points of Doctrine when we can hear no other will it follow that we are bound or that any power on earth can bind us to hear such constantly when God has made better provision for our souls and we want only grace to accept it 4. How many have judg'd it lawful to go to a play or the Chappel at Sommersethouse occasionally who yet think that twenty Acts of Parliament cannot make either of them a constant duty 5. And how unwilling are most men to be argued into duty from the meer lawfulness of the thing The Dr. thinks it lawful to resign one of his preferments to some worthy person that has none and yet his own argument will hardly convince him 't is his duty It seems very lawful for him that is almost melted with two coats to part with one to his brother that 's almost naked and yet we despair of success in thus arguing with him Nay it were well if some men would be perswaded that plain duty when it crosses worldly interest is duty and we should the better bear with them in denying every thing lawful to be duty And 6. If all lawful things may be converted into duty and what is occasionally indifferent may be turn'd into constant necessity then farewel Christian liberty and let man hereafter eternally mourn or dance to the Musick of his fetters SECTION X. Of terms of Communion required by the Church whether upon the same Reason that some of them are Imposed the Church may not also impose some Vse of Images Circumcision and the Paschal Lamb WE hear every day eloquent Orations in praise of peace and Union smart declamations against separation but we seldom hear of the fatal terms which obstruct the one or may justifie the other I shall not tire the Reader with a tedious enumeration of the particular conditions but shall content my self to have named One though I discontent some others that I have no more and some will find themselvs aggrieved that I have named that one It is the use of the sign of the Cross in baptism which I intend and have therefore singled out that one because it is number'd amongst the three innocent Ceremonies and because 't is imposed both on the Ministers to practice it and the people to dedicate their Children to God by it 1 And here I ask what Reason can be assigned for the use of this sign as it signifies Christs cross and him crucified thereon as it is the symbol of a persons dedication to Christ and his service but what will equally justifie the Religious use of a crucifix set up in the Church for the same use and purposes This sign of the cross is instituted by the Church First as a memorial of Christs cross Secondly as a Symbol whereby a person is dedicated to him who died the death of the cross Thirdly as a token that he shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified and manfully to fight under his banner against sin the world and the Devil to continue Christs faithful servant and soldier to his lives end That these are the ends and uses of that sign is expresly owned by the Canons of 1603. and the office of baptism in the Liturgy Now why the image of Christ upon the Cross or a Crucifix may not be used for these ends upon the same Reason nay upon somewhat better reason we are yet to seek for if a sign may be used to these ends to make impression upon our minds of those spiritual truths duties and mercies the fixed visible Image will much better do the work then the transient and scarce visible sign of a cross made in the Air with the finger That the Papists do use the Image of Christ upon the Cross as an immediate though not ultimate object of Adoration is true and it is as true that the Church of England does not use the sign of the Cross nor is it by us charg'd to use it for that end but yet as there is an inferiour use of the Crucifix to be the Lay-mans hornbook to teach him to spell out a crucified Christ and a Covenanting use to initiate Converts in the profesion of the Gospel and an obliging use to engage them to serve their Redeemer so there can be no solid reason given why such lower uses of an Image or Crucifix may not be introduced but what will equally militate against our use of the Cross 2. What Reason can be alledged why circumcision may not be imposed as a tearm of Union or Communion to signify the circumcision of the heart as well as the sign of the Cross to signifie faithfulness and perseverance in the service of Christ To the Jews indeed it was a badge of their duty to keep the whole law Gal. 3.4 And such use would now be apparently sinful but suppose it were enjoyned for no other end than as the surplice to denote purity kneeling at the Sacrament to
in his time who satisfied all his Neighbours contending about the old Ceremony of Chaucers Ale-stake and determined it thus Neighbours you that are for a May-pole shall have a May-pole and you that are for no May-pole shall have no May-pole Christians that have out-grown their Juvenile-vanities can be satisfied with a worship adorned with Gospel-simplicity but if any must have a better let the children be satisfied rather than bawl and disturb the family But the Doctor would have us consider further How many things must be allow'd a favourable Interpretation how many things must be born how many things must be allow'd a favourable construction I fear they are Sans number Now if our Interpretation might stand for Authentick and they would allow us to add our Interpretation to their Text this were something In the mean time let them be pleased to consider whether a more favourable Interpretation ought not to be put upon the principles and practises of Dissenters without wresting vexing torturing them to a sense beyond and against their intentions And further may it please them to consider whether a more favourable Interpretation ought not to be put upon their own Constitutions for it cannot be expected that any should interpret them favourably if they themselves Interpret them rigidly And the execution of Laws and Canons will tell us what construction they put upon them that best understand ' em It cannot be hidden what an Interpretation has been made of the Statute against Popish Recusants to torment poor Protestants who are brought within the lash of it though out of the Reason of it And lastly we humbly desire it may be a little better considered that the Imposed matters are in their judgments indifferent in ours sinful which is like the Quid si to an Atheist that can never be answered And seeing as the Doctor says something will be amiss either in Doctrine Discipline Ceremonies or Manners he might have added or in all that they who have the power in their hands would either rectifie what is amiss or however not compel others to comply with what they themselves confess to be so 3. He would have us consider How Separation of the people from our Churches comes to be more lawful now than in the days of our Fathers But had it not been more becoming a rational Divine first to consider whether it be so or no before it be considered how it came to be so Many men are so hasty they leap over the stile before they come at it 1. Then Separation was as lawful then as 't is now had they seen with our eyes and as unlawful now as then if we saw with their eyes I mean the eyes of Conformists for such are they who are produced against us And what an odd argument is it to quote them for our Fathers who were their own Grandfathers 2. It would be considered whether the Separation of former times was not much greater than that of the present time for they proceeded to set up their Presbyteries their Synods their Provincial and National Assemblies formed themselves into separate bodies for Government and were soundly smok't for it in the high Commission 3. And yet if in any respect the Separation be greater now than it was then it is because there are more severe terms put upon the Pastors of Churches and they being removed from the Benefices the Flock did not judg that a sufficient discharge from nor dissolution of their relation and therefore adhered to their true and only lawful Pastor and by consequence a Separation followed Nor were the Ministers of old haggled off their legs with a quarter of the Oaths Subscriptions Declarations Renunciations that now they are and they that took such care to throw the Pastors out of Churches must be responsible to Christ if the people follow'd them And in those former days there was much connivence and Indulgence exercised towards the Nonconformists in some obscure places where lay no temptation to a quare Impedit but we have mended the matter as sowr Ale does in Summer 4. Lastly He would have us consider The common danger that threatens us all by our divisions which if some late Preachers had well considered they had never blown up the sparks of persecution against Protestant Dissenters we are willing to consider the common danger that threatens us by our Divisions Are they as willing to consider and remove the Causes of the Divisions which heighten the common danger If the danger be common to both why is not the security so too Must the Dissenters only be in danger on all hands Wise men that can foresee a common danger should not destroy one half of their friends that the common enemy may with more ease destroy the other The first Conquest Rome made of Brittain was by this error of the Natives Dum singuli pugnant omnes vincantur and we heartily wish that in their next attempt they proceed not upon the encouragement of the same Maxim In which Devastation though all are like enough to share in the common misery yet their share of the sin will be the greatest that would hazard every thing rather than part with any thing that would lose the Horse to save the Saddle or perhaps one hair of the Horses tail They that are such admirers of Vnity and will yeild nothing to procure it and have such apprehensions of Popery and yet will do nothing to prevent it must presume strangely of the strength of their Rhetorick or think meanly of the weakness of our Reasons if ever they hope to Proselyte us into the faith of it As for Dissenters how vigilant and active they have been against the Designs of Rome how Cordially they have espoused the common English Protestant Interest without regard to their private pretensions how zealous they have been for His Majesties Person Government and Interest let others speak we shall be silent SECT XIII The Doctors Pacquet of Advices Advised upon with some humble Advice to himself and others The Conclusion THE Advice to those in Communion with the Church was short and sweet but the Dissenters shall now have it by Winchester measure § 1. And first we are advised Not to give encouragement to rash and intemperate zeal We thankfully take his advice and humbly return our own Not to give encouragement to rash and intemperate Railing whether he gave or his successor took without his giving any encouragement to let fly at Meroz to vomit up a whole Pulpitful of Gall we must no determine but if the quatuor tempora four times a year or so would serve their turn to revile us we could be content but this intemperate railing grows very tedious That Gregory Nazianzen seldom saw any good end of Councils we easily believe and have therefore the less hope of Convocations for my part I observed nothing more in the Nation than an universal tendency to mutual love and forbearance till that of late some fearing we should
the honour of Christ and the peace of the Church he may give proof of his great understanding but not his conscience In the mean time the Doctor might have done well to suspect his own great interests in the world before he had reflected on their little ones § 5. Another branch of his Advice is Not to harbor or foment unreasonable jealousies in peoples minds concerning us i. e. That we are not hearty and sincere in the Protestant Cause To this I only say I shall never hereafter entertain one thought that the Church of England is marching towards Popery for since I read this Sermon and the definition of the Church of England therein I despair of ever knowing who or what the Church of England is Pope Pius the fifth used to say when he was a Bishop he was pretty sure when a Cardinal he began to doubt but when Pope he absolutely despaired of his salvation I have sometimes thought it easie of late I found it hard but now I see it impossible to understand this secret As for his advice we do thankfully accept it and shall not harbour or foment one unreasonable if they will be sure not to give in reasonable suspicions of their inclinations that way And we do humbly intreat them to give us no more grounds for our jealousies than they needs must for if they do though we may be so modest as not to foment them in others it will be difficult not to harbour them in our selves For if whilst they cry out we are all undone for want of unity they continue the impediments which obstruct it and when they thunder against separation they continue the cause of it If they speak hard words against Popery and give harder blows to Protestancy both at home and abroad or if whilst they give the Papists a gentle fillip they reach dissenting Protestants a sound rap if they will still proceed to represent all but themselves as silly in their Principles seditious in their practises and disloyal in their designs we may perhaps perswade the people to say little but they will pay it with thinking § 6. Lastly He concludes with this Advice Not to run the hazard of all for a shew of greater liberty to our selves This advice may be wholsome for ought we know and we may take it when we understand it At present we know not what we have worth the keeping if our Consciences be once lost If he intends we should not hazard substances for shews we shall hearken as far as we may but if he means we should not be wrought upon by the Papists to petition or endeavour a general Toleration his advice is already taken and so becomes our praise we have not done it we shall not do it though their continued provocations and persecutions tempt us daily to it and some are ready to say What matters it by whom we are undone if we must be undone but it 's very wonderful that wise men can yet see no difference between a little moderation and universal toleration nor can distniguish between the toleration of Idolatry and forbearing two or three Ceremonies An universal Toleration says the Doctor is like the Trojan horse which brings in our enemies without being seen It was well rymed however because Toleration of Popery will bring in our enemies most visibly No! it 's secret connivence under hand encouragement that brings 'em in in Masquerade which open toleration would bring in bare-faced and naked The Doctor is afraid lest by setting their gates wide enough open to let in all their friends they should bring in their enemies Such are the wise Notions that Kirk-statesmen have in their heads to shut out their friends for fear of letting in their enemies when they can come in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and can pick the locks of Oaths Tests Subscriptions by a Papal dispensation Let then the Gates be well watcht the horses belly well searcht the Doli fabricator Vlysses the great Engineer of the Intrigue well examined and old Father Sinon not suffered to equivocate with good King Priam Trojdque adhuc stabit Priamique arx alta manebit As I abhor cruelty towards all men upon the sole account of Religion so shall I never plead for Indulgence to any who discredit Religion with such practices or mix it with such Principles as disturb Government and destroy the ends of all society the Magistrate is the Peace-keeper and is intrusted by God to suppress and punish the violaters of it Nor do I fear what advantage the Romanists would get upon us by that Connivence which they enjoy if their Temporal hopes from a worldly interest were less and their fears of being brought to condign punishment for their Treasons were greater and they might have been past the hopes of the one and the fear of the other if some of our Clergy-men had not unseasonably and some say unreasonably insisted upon certain Imaginary priviledges to the obstructing of the Justice of the Nation But if folly be such a catching disease the only antidote will be to teach 'em more wisdom If boldness in Religion give our enemies advantage let not prudent zeal be discouraged If contentions will do 'em such great service remove their causes by following the Rule not as the Dr. has warp't it but as the Apostle left it to walk by the Canon of the Word so far as we have attained and if any man be otherwise minded to leave him to Gods instruction and wait till he shall reveal his mind farther unto him The Conclusion THus have I at length rub'd through the Reverend Authors Discourse and upon a Calm Reflexion on my work do not think I can displease any one more than my self Such is the common fate of eager Disputants that whilst they would reach a knock at their Antagonists they lose their blow and wound themselves so easie it is while we are scribling to forget that we are dying and that our Sand runs faster than our Ink If the late change of Ink-horns into Inck-glasses had but taught us how frail and brittle we all are it had been the most innocent significant Ceremony that ever was invented I could wish there were a General Auditors Office erected to take the Account what all Disputes amount to and 't is probable the Total would be this That the Contenders have lost more than ever their Readers gained Thus zealous Gamesters win and lose awhile till at last the Box gets the stakes and it s well if the unconcerned by-standers come off savers And yet when we condemn and seem to bewail our wranglings we go on and wrangle still like little children that scratch and bite and cry together But the Dissenters have one Plea That in these Piracies they are not the Aggressors but stand purely on their just Defence If the Winds could be quiet the Waves would not tumultuate but poor Neptune bears the blame of all the Mutinies in his Kingdom when Aeolus only is guilty of the disorder If their Opposers could hold their hands the Dissenters would easily rule their tongues and pens and would silently suffer silent persecution That which goes to the quick is this That men cannot be content to shoot their keen arrows except they poyson them with bitter words like the Serpent that pierces with his teeth and infuses his venom along with his biting It is far more easie to pluck up the Flood-gates than having once done it to shut 'em down again We have seen the beginning of a Controversie which may perhaps outlive our Funerals and the next age may lament those wounds which the present has got but sleeps it out and feels not But if we must or will reciprocate this Saw of Contention what need to go down to the Philistins to sharpen the Polemical Cutlass when we have a file at home will give it too much keenness I owe the Reader and my self this debt of Justice to profess That I have not to my knowledg gratified any base lust in this my Answer I have steered by the compass of Truth and have not vered willingly from it though perhaps I have not always made the point I aimed at I must further profess That I have those awful thoughts of the Reverend Doctor whose Tract I pretend to Answer that he has equalled most and excelled many of those Worthies who have maintained the Protestant Cause against insulting Rome but in this Cause he has gone below himself and many others which I do not impute to any want of Controversial skill but the intrinsick weakness of the Cause he defended and the real strength of that he oppugned and seeing further than others into the true state of the Controversie he discerned the feebless of other mens Arguments but yet through the iniquity of the matter could find out none better of his own And lastly I must openly profess after all I can hear or read against the Cause of Nonconformity I am more confirm'd that all the wit of man can never prove the Dissenters in their way of worship guilty of the Mischiefs of Separation nor justifie the exacters of such terms of Communion as are no way commanded by the word of God no way necessary to the executing of those Commands but they must remain still guilty of the Mischief of these Impositions FINIS
the means of their salvation will justifie a separation but I shall the less insist upon this because I am confident the Church of England never gave the Doctor a Commission to declare so much in her name and I believe will give him as little thanks for his labour 3. That every Christian is obliged at least necessitate praecepti to live in the use of all Gods Ordinances and Commandments and therefore it will follow 1. That where all Christs Institutions are not to be had a Christian may peaceably withdraw from that society and seek them where he can find them Now they say the case is this That though we ought not to commit one sin to enjoy all Christs Ordinances yet there are some wanting in this Church which if you would commit a thousand sins to purchase you cannot have them The preamble to the Office of Commination intimates some such matter Brethren in the Primitive Church there was a godly Discipline that at the beginning of Lent such persons as were notorious sinners were put to open penance and punishment in this world that their souls might be saved in the day of the Lord and that others admonished by their example might be more afraid to offend Instead whereof until the said discipline may be restored again which thing is much to be desired it is thought good that at this time in your presence should-be read the general sentences of Gods curse against impenitent sinners Now view this paragraph well in its parts 1. There was a godly discipline in the Primitive times if we could have kept it 2. That this discipline was of unspeakable benefit to the people notorious sinners were put to open shame others warned by their censures and the end of all was the salvation of their souls 3. That this Ordinance is not to be found in the Church at this day which is a great loss 4. That it is a thing to be much desired and therefore it cannot but be worth the while to step over two thresholds for it it 's worth a wish if wishing would do it with the most ordinary Christian on earth 5. That there 's something set up instead of it but quo warranto we are not informed nor who has power to chop and change any Institution of his for a new trick a Quid pro Quo contrived by men And therefore we may fairly hope we shall not be condemned for Schismaticks for practising what they desire to practise but alas we can and they cannot because none hinders them 2. It will follow also that where the Institutions of Christ may be found yet if they be fetter'd and chain'd to or mixed with sinful Conditions 't is the same case as if they were not at all to be had for we can do nothing but what we can lawfully do To name no more at present we cannot have our Infants baptized without the Aerial sign of the Cross as a Medium whereby it is dedicated to Christ What then shall we do Here we may have a part or two of worship with innocency and peace of conscience but if we will walk in all Christs institutions we must seek elsewhere What shall we do then must we spend our Lords days in an undecent trotting up and down the Town for one scrap here a snap there or shall we sit down under a well-fixed order of Worship and Discipline and joyn with other Congregations occasionally in what they have This is the general course of Dissenters and will deliver us from that argument wherein they so much triumph That though we cannot joyn with them in all parts of worship yet are we bound to it so far as we are perswaded it is lawful so to do for we are fully perswaded 'tis our duty to partake of and communicate in every Ordinance of Christ and therefore statedly and fixedly to adhere to that Church where to that Pastor by whom they are all administred not neglecting other Congregations as Providence shall invite to participate of what they afford and what without sin we may have 4. That it is sinful to submit subscribe assent to dubious and obscure terms of Communion How far this principle will be allow'd us I know not but this I know the Reverend Doctor once allow'd himself the benefit of it when he justified the Separation of the Church of England from Rome Dialogue p. 165. We think says he the requiring of doubtful things for certain false for true new for old absurd for reasonable is ground enough for us not to embrace communion with that Church unless it may be had on better terms And we think that this is ground enough for us as well as himself not to embrace the Communion of this Church seeing there are imposed upon us doubtful things for certain new for old and we think too false for true I say we think so and it was but the Doctors we think that he opposed to T. G. And we think further that this will vindicate us from those loud but empty outcrys of Schism and Schismaticks for so the Doctor asserts Ibid. We have often proved that the imposing unreasonable conditions of Communion makes the Church so imposing guilty of the Schism I have told the Doctor what we think I will tell him now why we so think that doubtful things are imposed on us for certain false for true and among many others I assign this one instance That in the Catechism of the Church wherein the Laity are concern'd this Doctrine is contained That Infants perform faith and repentance by their sureties and such repentance too whereby they forsake sin and such faith whereby they stedfastly believe the promises of God made to them in that Sacrament You see Sir how the Importunity of the Doctor has drawn us out of our reservedness Dissenters have been modest to their great prejudice and had rather dispute the matter upon other Arguments than those drawn from the sinfulness and unlawfulness of the things required out of that great veneration they have ever had for the Church of England and yet we hope that they that call and invite nay provoke and force us to this task will not be so disingenuous to trapan us into the ambush of a penal Statute it being unworthy of Gentlemen and persons of Honour first to be our Tempters and then our Accusers 5. That every Christian is obliged to walk with and in all the ways of God so far as they have attained so far as they have the knowledg of Gods Will they are to live up to it so far as they see their freedom from bondage they are to stand fast in it so far as they are advanced towards a perfect reformation they are to persevere All retrograde motions are dangerous for who knows but that the least declension from the ways of God may terminate in Apostacy Foreseeing Christians therefore will not dare to tread back those steps they have taken towards perfection but rather will