an establish't Church Answ We tell you that if the inconveniencies are sinless we are willing to suffer in and with an Establish't Church or tho' it were not Established by Law but if the inconveniencies be to our Consciences we must and will Dissent nor will our Charity bear with what is inconsistent with a good Conscience Such as found their separation from your Assemblys upon this that they find themselves more edified in Godliness and Piety by their own Meetings than yours ye confess your inability to find what reason they can ground upon this for a down-right separation and utter refusal of your Communion Answ Tho' our edification in Godliness is the great end of our joyning with any Assembly and where that may be best had Communion is there most eligible yet if we may be really edified in that Assembly whereof we are Members we allow not separation on preâ—ence of better elsewhere no more than a Womans leaving her Husband to live with another for more pleasure and conveniency Yet Edification being the end of church-Church-Communion no wise men should condemn those who choose the best means for that end I suppose you make use of the best meat and medicines for preserving of your life and health and would take it ill 't is possible if Governors of Church or State should confine you to the quantity quality and time of your Diet which experience teaches you to be inconsistent with health and strength and why may not men be as much concern'd for their Souls as Bodies Dr. Stillingfleet Ireâ— page 109. in answer to a question disputed by Grotius to wit whether it be in a time when Churches are divided it be a Christians duty to communicate with either Party that divides the Church or to Communion from all of them the Dr. says that a Christian by virtue of his general obligation to Communion is bound to adhere to that Church which retains most of Evangelick purity in it Bramhall in his vindication of the Church of England page 7. cites Dr. Holden with approbation When there is a mutual division of two parts or member of the Mystical Body of the Church one from the other yet both retain Communion with the universal Church which for the most part springs from some doubtful opinion or less necessary part of Divine Worship whatsoever part you take you are no Schismatick because the universal Church hath condemn'd no part so that real experience of edification will warrant separation from these Assemblies where it is not found to these where it is found To such as plead for occasional Communion who do not utterly renounce your Communion but sometimes come to your publick Worship and receive the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper after your form your Question upon this is If occasional Communion be lawful why is constant unlawful Answ Altho I allow of no such amphibious creatures as a Non and Conformist appears to be because as a Neuter in the Common-Wealth nec amicum perit nec inimicum pellit so in Religion he is worse according to Christ's reasoning Luke 11. 23. yet if we distinguish occasional Communion in total and partial total I call a communicating in all Sermons Liturgy and Ceremonies for such I have nothing to say and will not judge other mens Servants but as for those who can and do occasionally hear such as are orthodox in the Faith and sober in their Conversation as they do not despise others so we do not judge them But as for most of us we are of your judgement as to such who communicate with you occasionally in all things according to the form prescribed if they see no sin in such conformity they are but fools to suffer for non conformity Having heard your Doctrine we come now to its Use in which you ingenuously discover your design which is either to perswade us to Conformity or disswade us from thoughts of a legal toleration As for your desire to know our aims and purposes in respest to an Act of Toleration tho we are not obliged to discover our thoughts to you yet finding you a plain-dealing man in telling yours we shall tell you ours by ingenuously answering your Quaeries distinctly To the first to wit Is it only to have the liberty of serving God in that way which you think to be bâ—st and thereby to be free of persecution and to go the readiest way to Heaven as ye suppose To this 1. We confess we sincerely desire liberty to serve God according to that perfect rule he hath given us which we firmly believe is the best way and safest both for you and us both 2. We desire by this not only to be freed from persecution but that ye may free your selves from the guilt and appearance of that evil 3. Having bodies as well as souls by which we are bound to glorify God and serve our King and Countrey as we shall be called or capable we desire that we be not deprived of or rendred unfit for enjoying our birth-right-privileges as free-born Subjects and persons professing the Reformed Christian Religion by yoking our Consciences to unlawful or suspected practices or insnaring Oaths But ye tell us If liberty to serve God the way we think best be all we desire why are we against the Sacramental Test by which we are made uncapable of any Office or Employment unless we Receive the Sacrament after the form prescribed by the Church of England if we be not content with liberty unless we have share in the Government and be made capable of Employments of Power Trust and Profit 't is apparent we design somewhat else than the Salvation of our souls and freedom from persecution Answ Tho Non-Conformists shou'd aim at more than the saving of their souls and freedom from persecution where is the great fault of it if we be guilty in this you are not innocent who we suppose aim at something more than these things I have already in the Animadversions shewn the inconsistency of the Test with the true interest of Ireland which the Ingenuous Author of the Remarks on the Affairs of Ireland c. hath well done but it seems you have low thoughts of Salvation who rate it lower than Employments of Trust and Profit upon Earth for that you seem to grant us liberty to seek but the other is too good for us and therefore you are either not in earnest in permitting us to seek the best way of Salvation or else you over-value earthly honour and profit while you would monopolize that to your party and deprive others of the ordinary means of subsisting and serving God and their Countrey To the 2d Question if it be our aim to lay a foundation for the overthrow of the Establish't Church and to get into our hands all Civil and Ecclesiastic Power which is already done by those of our perswasion in another Kingdom Ye confess ye were not wise if ye give us not all the opposition ye can
Dissenters in Ireland tho' it prov'd fatal to its Contrivers was by God's Providence a means of preserving the Dissenters who forsaking the Nation on that account were preserved from the Massacre 1641 and these same persons returning were the first relief that Ireland got which can be made evident by many yet alive and may be instructive to pasterity The V. having to prove the equity of giving free-born Subjects the same legal Indulgence in their Dissenting as is given to Foreigners asserted that the French Protestants if left to their liberty would chuse a Discipline and Worship more conformable to their own than that of the Establish't Church Hath this Answer We are not to pass judgment on a particular Church from the inconsiderate words and actions of some of the meaner sort of the Laity but by the solemn Declarations and constant Practices of the Learned Clergy of that Communion And to shew the Sentiments of the French Church produceth a triple testimony of three French Divines in favor of the Establish't Church and censuring the Dissenters separation from it from three Letters written fifteen years ago on this Subject by Monsieur Lamoyne M. D. Langle and M. Cloud which we shall not transcribe But 1. We think it strange that the Bishops of the Church of England shou'd own the French Protestants to be a Churh and to have a learned Clergy when in the mean time they deny them to have a Lawful Ordained Ministry and force them to be Re-ordained who come for Refuge into England and are willing to conform So that this seems to be but a complement given for these 3 Letters and no sincere acknowledgment of their being a Church A Reverend French Minister informs us that flying from Persecution into England he with some others were permitted to Preach in London but upon his refusal to be Re-ordained he was not only hindred to Preach by the Bishop of London but deny'd any part of the publick Charity collected for the French Protestants and so was necessitated to leave England The same entertainment others of them met with here in Ireland about Anno 1680 or 1682 who flying to Dublin and setting up the beginnings of several useful Manufactures but being averse to joyn in the Church-Service a certain charitable Peer lent them his House to Worship in where they served God according to the manner of the French Churches whereupon their Minister was seized imprison'd c. until for obtaining his liberty he consented to quit or abjure the Kingdom And yet Liberty was publickly allow'd the Papists And we are well informed how the Papists now insult over them as having by their disowning the validity of their own former Ordination and being Re-ordain'd by Bishops in England thereby declared that they have hitherto been no Church have had no Sacraments lawfully Administred among them which is a great addition to their former miseries so that whether it be worse to destroy the being of that Church in all time past or persecute some of its Members in time present be the greater severity and so whether the Popish or English Clergy have been more merciful to the Protestant Church of France we leave to be consider'd 2. The Testimony of these 3 Men are not the solemn Declaration and constant practice of that Church as he vainly says but the opinion of three private Doctors to whom he might oppose the Judgment of 3000 and the constant known practice of that Church solemnly declared in its publick Confessions of Faith and Synodical Constitutions disowning the Form of Worship and Disciplin of the Church of England And it seems as unequal to judge of a Church by the Sentiments of several of her learn'd Clergy as by the Laity What a Monster would the Church of England be if we were left to judge of her by the several opinions of her Learned Clergy whereof some approve others condemn Arminiasm some are passive obedient Doctors others not some for Episcopacy jure Divino others think it only jure Humano some have been for others are now against Liberty of Prophesying c. The justest way then of judging what are the sentiments of a Church is neither by the private practices or opinions of Clergy or Lay-men but by their Unanimous deliberate and publickly declared Judgment in their Confessions of Faith and Synodical Constitutions which had he produc'd against us had been some service to his cause And we have just cause to except against the Evidence Some of whom have conformed and have disgrac'd their Church by renouncing its Ordination so that these who have dishonor'd their Parents will little regard their Brethren 3. We know that indirect means have been used to obtain such Testimonies against us and can tell of one who had 4 good fat Benefices in England with a Faculty of Non-residence to Enable him to Traffick in France introducing Dissenters and Exalting and vindicating the Prelacy and Ceremonies of England 4. The Testimonies are not fairly produc'd but a part conceal'd of the Letters which had he repeated would have condemn'd himself And therefore M. Cloud in his Letter as Published by Dr. Stillingfleet p. 448. hath this I hope my Lord you will not be wanting in the Duties of Charity and Spirit of Peace and that when the dispute shall be only of some Ceremonies which are stumbling blocks and which in themselves are nothing in comparison of an intire re-union of your Church under your holy Ministry you will make it seen that you love the Spouse of your Master more than your selves And that it is not so much from your greatness and Ecclesiastical Dignity that you desire to receive your joy and glory as from your Pastoral Vertues and the ardent care you take of your Flocks M. De Langle tells you that even amongst these separating Brethren there is a very great Number of good Men whose Faith is pure Piety sincere And it seems to me that the good and charitable Bishops ought to say of them as Optatus Melivitatus said of the Donatists in something a different sense Si Collegium Episcopate notunt habere nobiscum tamen fratres sunt And I 'me sure saith he that if there were nothing wanting to cure your Divisions but tho abstaining from some Expressions the quitting some Ceremonies the changing the colour of some Habits you would resolve to do that and something more difficult But this the D. disingenuously conceals because of his Moderation which is contrary to his Nature or Design The V. having asserted also that a further security ought to be granted to Protestant Dissenters than to Papists for this reason that some difference should be made between them who deserve well and them who deserve ill of the Govarnment The D. allowing the reasoning to be unque6ionably true yet will have it understood with this supposition that if the Civil Parent be forced by the pressure of some unfortunate occurrences to a concession of such favorable and advantagious
and there may be Schisms where there is no separation of Churches 1 Cor. 3. 1. 2d Before ye had as with confidence ye do asserted a Schism betwixt you and us it had been requisite that ye had proved that there was once an union in these things in which we divide seeing all division presupposeth a prior union if then we were never joyned in one how can there be a division now I apprehend it will puzzle you to prove that the Presbyterians in the North ever joyned with the Establish't Church in these things in which we now differ to wit Church-Government Liturgy and Ceremonies therefore if you would succesfully attack Dissenters you must not use the same Topicks for all some you must prove Schismaticks tho they never joyned others you must convince that there is a National Church before you will be able to perswade them that they have divided it To your first Question Is there any of these things which are necessary to the salvation of a Christian wanting in the Communion of our Church Do we not profess and teach the true Christian Faith in all its Fundamental Articles Answer 1st Tho you may be so inured to officiate by Delegates as to think we should serve the Cure for you we do not find our selves obliged to prove what you affirm seeing the rule hath hitherto universally obtained affirmanti incumbit probatio It lies upon you to shew that your Church teacheth all the Fundamental Articles of the Christian Faith and not on us who are not bound to give the reason of the Faith that is in you Christ and his Apostles proved their Doctrines and left them not to be disproved by Jews and Pagans until they had first proved them 2. But in reverence to the antiquity of the question which is old Roman Catholick I shall give it a Protestant's answer which cannot be excepted against for Non-conformity being the learned Chillingsworth's in his Book The Religion of a Protestant the safe way to Salvation in answer to a Papist who maintained the contrary The Papist had put this Question Page 4. Parag. 14 15. If the Roman Church did not fall into any Error that was damnable how can it be damnable to live in her Communion and if her Errors were not damnable nor did exclude Salvation how can they be excused from Schism who forsake her Communion c. To this Chillingworth answers Page 16. All that we forsake in you is the belief profession and practice of your Errors Hereupon you cast us out of your Communion and with a strange contradictious and ridiculous confidence complain that we forsake it as if a man should thrust his friend out of doors and then be offended at his departure but for us not to forsake the belief of your Errors having discovered them to be Errors was impossible and therefore to do so could not be damnable believing them to be Errors not to forsake the profession and practice of them had been damnable hypocrisie so that either you must free your Church from requiring the belief of any Error whatsoever or whether you will or not you must free us from Schism for Schism there cannot be unless we were obliged to continue in it Man cannot be obliged by man but to what he was formerly or virtually obliged by God God the eternal Truth neither can nor will oblige us to believe any the most innocent falshood to be a divine truth that is to err nor to prosess a known Error which is to lye so that if ye require the belief of any Error among the conditions of your Communion our obligation to Communicate with you ceaseth and so the imputation of Schism to us vanisheth to nothing but lies heavy on you for making our separation necessary by requiring unnecessary and unlawful conditions of your Communion Hereafter I therefore intreat you demand not how came we to forsake your Communion without Schism seeing ye err'd not damnably but how could we so do seeing ye err'd not at all Which if either ye do prove or we cannot disprove we will turn to your Communion or subscribe our selves Schismaticks In the mean time let us continue as we are Yet notwithstanding of all your Errors we do not renounce your Communion totally and absolutely but only leave Communicating with you in the practice and profession of your Errors the trial whereof will be to propose some form of worshipping God taken wholly out of the Scriptures and herein if we refuse to joyn with you then and not till then let us be condemned as Schismaticks so he whom the late Arch-Bishop Tillotson thought it an honour to be his Scholar To the next Question Is there any thing required by us from them that Communicate with us that is a Sin We answer affirmatively there be things required which to us are so To the third Question Are there any of our Constitutions contrary to God's Law We answer to us it appears there be To the 4th Hath God any where forbid us to use the sign of the Cross after Baptism a Ring in the Celebration of Marriage a Surplice in divine Service the posture of kneeling at the Reception of the Lord's Supper or any of those Rites and Ceremonies which are appointed to be used among us Answer Things are either forbidden expresly or by just and necessary consequence though then they be not expresly by name forbidden they be by good consequence for whatever is not commanded by GOD and is required by men as a part or means of the worship of God is forbidden by God 1st Then whatever part or means of divine worship is not commanded is forbidden is evident from that reason given Lev. 10. 1. Why God destroyed Nadab and Abihu for offering strange fire which is this for I commanded them not The reason of God's rejecting what was offered Isa 1. 12. is given Who hath required these things at your hands the cause of God's Judgments on false Prophets Jer. 14. 14 15. is I sent them not neither have I commanded them Fear or Worship of God taught by the commandments of men is not only vain Matth. 15. 9. but brings plagues on them who abuse their wisdom that way Isa 29. 14. And we are lately taught this to be the doctrine of the Establish't Church by the Bishop of Derry in his Vanity of Humane Inventions page 3. 1st saith he It belongs to God only to give rules how he will be worshipped which is a truth naturally implanted in the minds of men and universally acknowledged at all times 2. The holy Scriptures contain the revelation of God's will concerning his own Worship 3. It concerns us to keep as close as we can to the directions which God hath been pleased to afford us without adding to omitting or altering any thing that he hath therein laid down for since God hath vouchsafed us a certain and perfect direction for his Worship in the holy Scripture it is to be supposed
But if we can make appear that these Ceremonies as imposed by you are made essential parts of Religion and necessary to Salvation then you must acknowledge them destructive of Christian Liberty This will appear if it be considered 1. That if these Impositions be necessary in order to Communion with the Church and Communion with the Church necessary to Salvation then they must be necessary to Salvation that they are made necessary conditions of our Communion with the Church is evident by the Act of Uniformity and your calling us all Schismaticks who conform not to them 2. What is made necessary to the Solemn Worship of God is made necessary to Salvation but so are they seeing without them it cannot be solemnly performed in England and Ireland 3. If the bare omission of them tho' out of tenderness of Conscience be juâ—ged Schism Sedition and Rebellion and be made worthy of Fining Imprisonment and Excommunication 4. If for calling them unlawful a man must be delivered to Satan according to Can 6. 5 If the omission of these make a Minister more lyable to Deprivation c. than Whoredom Drunkenness or breaking the Lord's day 6. If the refusers of Conformity to them be judged worse than Idolatrous Papists if they be more necessary than the Peace and Unity of the Church with what confidence can any man say that he judgeth them not necessary to Salvation That our Directory requâ—reth any Ceremonies of mystical signification or imposeth any indifferent things save such circumstances as nature's Light and right Reason direct us to for the decent and orderly performance of our duties we deny and demand proof from all who assert it Having justify'd as you think the nature of your Ceremonies you proceed to vindicate their number telling us if we should say that your Ceremonies were too numerous and burthensome c. if this were really so it were only an inconvenience and not a sin Ans God's word tells us that to do what is not convenient is sinful Rom. 1. 28. Ephes 5. 4. though to suffer things inconvenient is not still so and by what authority can any burthen Consciences with their own Inventions was not this the sin of the Pharisees Matt. 23. 4. if Augustine complain'd as you say of the number and burthen of Ceremonies in his time why may not Dissenters do so now who are as unable to bear them as he was yet had he lived in some place of the World and complain'd of such a burthen there is a Canon called the 10th by which he had been ipso facto shut out of the Church But ye'll say he did not separate tho' he complained Answ How do ye know that he did not separate if he refused to use them he separated from them as well as we do and if he used them after his complaint of their being burthensome and too numerous it would be hard to excuse him from sinning against his confession but we have more Charity for him than to believe he did so To your Non-Conformists last Objection to wit The Ceremonies are unnecessary and therefore the Governors of the Church are not to lay unnecessary impositions on the People Ye Answer thus Tho' this were true that Governors did impose such things yet our complyance therewith for Peace and Vnityâ— sake were no sin but a virtue Answ That they are unnecessary you confess while you declare them indifferent and therefore the dubious supposition if they were c. is needless but that it is a virtue rather than a sin to comply with the unnecessary impositions of Church Governors for peace and unity is asserted not proved seeing nothing can be a Christian virtue which wants Christ's Command and we know of none he hath given for our complyance with Governors in their unnecessary impositions Yea we find Church Governors obliged by their Commission to teach us to observe no more than what Christ commanded them Matth. 28. 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you and the good Centurian Cornelius would submit no further to the Apostle Peter Acts 10. 33. Now therefore are we all here present before God to hear all things that are commanded thee of God for seeing God and Nature do nothing in vain they have no power to impose things needless and where their power to command is void we are under no Obligation to obey yea such complyance is but a conspiracy with men usurping power and so partaking of their sins Paul withstood Peter to the face in his imposing unnecessary things on the Jews Gal. 2. 11. And seeing the Church hath no Power but to Edification 2 Cor. 10. 8. We are to follow them no further than they follow Christ 1 Cor. 11. 1. The Synod of Jerusalem Acts 15. guided by the holy Spirit thought fit to impose nothing but necessary things Bishop Bramhall page 101 of his Vindication says It was not the Erroneous opinions of the Church of Rome but the imposing them by Law on other Churches that warranted the separation So when things unnecessary are made conditions of our Communion we look not upon it as a Christian virtue to comply with them Having asserted not only the lawfulness but innocence of your Communion you profess your self assured that we do not think every man is at liberty either to join himself with the establish't Church of a place or to set up a distinct Church for himself Answ Such as on good grounds judge your Communion lawful and innocent will not set up for themselves but your asserting your selves such makes it not evident seeing there is a generation all whose ways are clean in their own eyes tho they be not wash'd from their iniquity Therefore we say with Memerable Hales of Eaton page 194. Notwithstanding of the great benefit of Communion in regard of divers Distempers Men are subject to Dissention and Dis-union are often necessary for when either false or uncertain Conclusions are obtruded for truth and acts either unlawful or ministring just scruple are required of us to be performed by us in those cases consent were conspiracy and open contestation is not Faction or Schism but due Christian animosity For tho' you value your selves mightily on account of your legal establishment which is indeed your most powerful argument yet the aforesaid Author page 231. says That publick Assemblys though according to form of Law are indeed nothing else but Riots and Conventicles if they be stain'd with Corruption and Superstition A Legal Establishment gives protection and provision but makes neither Doctrine true Worship pure or Government of Divine apponitment and seeing it adds no intrinsick value to a Church it can merit nothing barely upon that account else other Churches who have had a longer title to a Legal Establishment than ye might expect more honour While you desire to know whether one or more bare inconveniencies which are or may be free from sin can be a sufficient reason to separate from
Animadversions ON The Defence of the Answer To a PAPER INTITULED The CASE of the Dissenting Protestants of Ireland In Reference to a BILL of Indulgence from the Exceptions made against it TOGETHER With An ANSWER to A Peaceable Friendly Address TO THE Non-Conformists Written upon their desiring an Act of Toleration without the SACRAMENTAL TEST Phil. 4. 5. Let your Moderation be known unto all men the Lord is at hand Printed in the the Year 1697. To the Protestant Reader THe Publication of these Animadversions tho design'd some time ago had ceas'd if a late Pamphlet called A Peaceable and Friendly Address c. had not importun'd it For seeing some men judge it their Interest to mis-represent to the world them they 'r pleas'd to call N. Conforming Brethren as a factious and schismatical people whereby we are mis-apprehended and pre-condemn'd We cannot in justice to Truth and Innocence suffer such so to prey upon the Credulity of some and our Reputation as thereby to hazard their Souls and our Safety Yea compassion to our Adversaries in endeavouring the prevention of their being wise in their own conceit a case more despcrate than that of Fools obligeth us to vindicate our selves and inform mis-guided people with words of Truth and Soberness The people we plead for are not the Idle and Consuming Caterpillars of the Nation but Industrious Labourers Ingenious Artists and Honest Traders whose religious Principles will abide in their strength while one jâ—t or tittle of the Law of God indures becase they adore the fulness of the H. Scriptures as the perfect and only rule of Faith and Manners They believe the necessity of a standing Gospel-Ministry in the Church to whose directive Authority they submit themselves not by an implicit Faith but by a judgment of Discretion All God's holy Ordinances and instituted Worship they embrace but their Fear towards God is not taught by the Commandments of men Their doctrine bears conformity with that of the Reformed Churches abroad and harmoniously agrees with that of Ireland declar'd in her Convocation An. 1615 excepting in what relates to Prelacy and Ceremonies They are willing to give unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's They profess their Credenda Petenda and Agenda ought all to be regulated by the word of God These Principles we believe are able to abide a Fiery Tryal And as their Principles are true so their Petitions are modest Episcopal Grandeur Jurisdiction or Revenues is not demanded for their Ministers or by them A liberty to serve God according to these foresaid Principles with a relief from some Penal Laws formerly fram'd against them and that no new ones be forg'd to their preiudice is all they require And if such modest Requests may be with Christian Conscience deny'd a people of such Principles we leave to the determination of our Judge that standeth at the Door if Men should give sentence against us Animadversions On the Defence of the Answer to a Paper ENTITULED The Case of the Dissenting Protestants in Ireland c. WHen Diogenes trampled upon Aristippus's Cushion and insulted over himself in these words See how I trample on Aristippus's Pride he had this return thou dost it but with no less Pride So when the Defendant of the Answer c. salutes the Vindicator of the Dissenters Case with a charge of sourness and vanity of temper In the very entrance of his diseourse he discovers so much of the distemper in himself that if Civility coult not yet Conscience of the same evil in himself should have oblig'd him to treat his Adversary more decently But whether the sourness of his temper or his vanity to comprize an Iliad of Railing Accusations in a Nut-shell hath induc'd him with one breath to upbraid the Vindicator with sourness and vanity of temper dexterity in perverting little sincerity dising enuity injustice c. I determine not but if his Reasoning taâ—ent be equivalent to his Railing no Dissenter will be able to stand before him Lest he shou'd be suspected of transgressing the 9th Commandment he attempts to make good this charge by as he calls it A remarkable Instance of the Dissenters injustice to him viz. The phrase general Indulgence us'd by him which as he saith doth plainly signify no more than a legal toleration of Dissenting Protestants the Vindicator wrests to import a comprehension of all sorts of Religion Answ If this be Injustice he hath cause to fear that all who have sense to discern words will be injurious to him seeing General Indulgence natively signifies Indulgence to all sorts of Persons and Opinions And 't is improper to say that General Indulgence imports only toleration of Protestant Dissenters which is but Special unless Protestant Dissentors should comprehend all sorts which himself doth not assert As the Vindicator hath not wrested his Expressions so neither hath he misrepresented his Sense seeing all the arguments he useth against the Indulgence pleaded for militat only against an unlimited and general Indulgence of all sorts The next thing disgusts the Defendant is a rule laid down by the Vindicator that these are of the same Religion with the Establish't Church who subscribe her Doctriual Articles this rule he 'll not allow to be true and that because there being three general parts of Religion viz. Doctrin Worship and Government unless we agree in all these we are not of the same Religion A. If the Rule be not good why do the Books of Articles in England an 1552 and 1562 and those in Ireland in 1616 unanimously declare that they were agreed upon in Convocation for avoiding of diversities of Opinions and for Establishing Consent touching true Religion Do not the Subscribers to the 6th Article concerning the sufficiency of holy Scripture for Salvation subscribe to the Worship and Government of the Church as well as to its Doctrin if they do not as the D. insinuates it must be because that Worship and Doctrin is not read in the holy Scripture nor may be proved thereby which is no honor to the Liturgy Ceremonies or Prelacy Dr. Stillinfleet in his Irenicum hath endeavoured to prove that Men may be of the same Religion and yet not under the same particular form of Church Government And I am persuaded 't will be hard for the D. to produce any Church that is or hath been in the world with which the Establisht Church of England doth exactly agree in Form of Worship and Government And thus by his Rule excluding us from the same Religion with the Establisht Church he doth also cut her off from Communion in the same Religion with any Church in the World The Anabaptists against whom the D. excepts as unfit to be comprehended in the Indulgence are of age let them speak for themselves we are none of their Advocates Yet the V's reason for including them and his Charity also was their being included in the Act of Indulgence for England An. 1689. And in a Bill
to the form and way of the Church of England tho they never did it before and perhaps never intended it after except on the like occasion are too justly obâ—oxious to be suspected as men of flexible and profligate Consciences But we are sure the V. intended to justify no such persons Having now impartially consider'd this Defence we must tell him that if he had borrow'd as much out of Dr. Stillingfleet's Irenicum as he hath stolen out of his Unreasonableness of Separation and given less credit to his Jacobitish Pamphleteers in the affairs of Scotland he had better consulted for his own reputation and our ease and might have spar'd several reflections he too liberally bestows on his Majesty's Government in Scotland but hereby he hath given a Commentar upon the old Prelatick Maxim No Bishop no King that is if Kings do not support Bishops there shall be no Kings But we wish that our Zeal may be better employ'd about things wherein the glory of God the good of Souls and the peace of the Church and State may be more concern'd than either they enjoying their Ceremonies or we our Civil Offices AN ANSVVER TO A Peaceable Friendly Address TO THE Non-Conformists c ALtho' the reasonings of this Address appear not to be so powerful as to make us Schismaticks and thereby uncapable of a Legal Toleration yet left our not pleading to such an Indictment as is here drawn up against us shou'd be construed to flow from sullenness or conscious of a weak and ill cause we cannot but consider them and that either to prevent the Addressor's conceit of his Work as if it were impregnable or choler for looking on it as contemptible If it be malum omen cespitare in limine the Doctor hath snappered on a piece of disingenuity in the very frontispiece for what he calls a Peaceable and Friendly Address to Non-Conformists upon perusal appears to be a Libel against them as Schismaticks and it's design to provoke the Civil Magistrate to keep us still under the lash of penal Laws for Non-Conformity so that as it is reported of a Polish Ambassador sent to Queen Elizabeth at his arrival he pretended he came for Peace but when he had his publick Audience he proclaimed War whereupon the Queen said Heu quam decepta fui Legatum expectavi Herauldum accept I look'd for an Ambassador but have receiv'd a Herauld so when ye have rais'd our expectations with the name of a Peaceable and Friendly Address bring in an Accusation against us as guilty of a Crime which if what Divines say of it be true is no less than renting the mystical Body of Jesus Christ and if this be your kindness to your friends and brethren you must excuse us if we be not fond of that relation In your Epistle seeing you flatter your self with hopes of doing some good and confidence of doing no hurt by publishing this Address and that because of the calmness and temper ye have studed in it to prevent giving offence to your Non Conforming Brethren as ye call them we hope it will be no hurt to tell you that the studyed temper and calmness of your words will not make an attonement for the distemper of its matter and windy storm and tempest thereby designed for you mistake your Non-Conforming brethren if you think them so simple as not to be offended with good words and fair speeches whereby men lye in wait to deceive and tho' your words be smoother than butter yet it is evident to us that war is in your heart while ye cast iniquity upon us and were they softer than Oyl we must look upon them as drawn Swords while by them ye are stirring up those who bear not the Sword in vain to employ it against us As for the large encomium you exalt your Patron with as an eminent example of temper and moderation to Dissenters and that none was more mild and gentle to them than he ev'n in those times when it was in his power to use severity towards them we cannot but from experience of the contrary dissent from you in this as well as in some other things for Non-Conformists do remember that they never met with greater severity at least in the North than when the Primate of all Ireland and Chancellor rode both upon one horse and we advise you for his honour and your own honesty not to put us upon the proof of it As for that remarkable effect of his arguments and moderation that he obliged divers Non-Conforming Ministers to receive Ordmation at his hands according to the form prescribed by your Church and to conform to the Worship and Discipline thereof if such were ordained Ministers before tho' by Presbyters you will find it hard to convince any of the Reformed Churches or all of your own either that this was the proper effect of moderation but rather of Prelatick Domination and an uncharitable condemning of the forreign Reformed Churches as none and their Ministerial Administration as void and null for want of Episcopal Ordination and we fear that love of the world prevailed more powerfully than any other arguments else it 's hard to believe that conscientious Ministers would have renounced their former Ordination which if they did without a publick declaration of their former sin in unlawful invading the Ministerial Office and cheating the world by a pretended Administration of Sacraments when they had no power so to do as ye have not by them gained honest Ministers so we have lost as few and if this be the native fruit of his Moderation we bless God that hath delivered us from it and thus we shall apply our selves to the Address it self It hath ever been the honour of Peace to be well spoken of by all men Pacem le poscimus omnes but the unhappiness of many men to be under the dominion of such Lusts as disenable them to pursue it that there are and shall be divisions among us we confess but to convince the guilty of their Sin is this hoc opus hic labor est seeing it is as rare to find men impartial as infallible Considering what brevity I intend I shall not catch all advantages I might take by some unnecessary phrases of this Address in which the Doctor rather catechiseth the Non-Conformists by asking questions than convinceth them by reasons proving his own or disproving their principles and practices and tho some short categorical answers of yea and nay might suffice I shall give answer with a reason to it tho not bound more than he who gives none for his questions And 1st While he tell us that there is a separation between us and thereby a Schism in our National Church the consequence is not good for there may be a separation without Schism as there is between all the Parochial Churches which are locally separate without any Schism of your National Church Paul and Barnabas separated A s 15. 39. yet were no Schismaticks
that all ways of Worship are displeasing to him that are not expresly contained or warranted by the examples of holy men mentioned therein Now if Cross Ring c. be not expresly contain'd in Scripture or warranted by the examples of holy men therein they must according to the Bishop of Derry's reasoning be displeasing to God and so forbidden by him I know nothing that can be excepted against this but that Cross c. are neither required as parts nor ways and means of Worship but that they are required as such is evident 1st The Liturgy or Divine Service is a principal part of the Worship of God and those Ceremonies are a part of the Liturgy therefore they are parts of the Worship of God for quod est pars partis est pars totius 2d That they are reputed ways and means of the Worship is plain because no solemn publick Worship can be performed without them no Sacraments given or received without crossing or kneeling yea if all Ministers should refuse to say Common Prayer or Administer Sacraments otherwise than prescribed by the Common Prayer that is with all these Ceremonies then according to the Act of Uniformity it would be unlawful to worship God publickly in this Kingdom Hence we see an Answer to his Question Can any thing be call'd a Sin which God hath not forbid Answer it may for uncommanded Worship is Sin to Baptize without the Sign of the Cross Communicate without Kneeling c. are not forbidden of God and yet the Establish't Church account these Sins else why are men Imprisoned and Excommunicated for what is acknowledged to be no Sin yea punish't more severely than for some gross immoralities for which they are not excommunicated ipso facto tho for Non-conformity they ought to be according to the Canons 2d Oil Salt Chrism Spittle c. are no more forbidden than the Sign of the Cross c. why then hath the Church rejected them they being lawful The same Arguments are used by the Papists for all their Ceremonies selling Doves and changing Money were not forbidden yet Christ drove all out of the Temple To vindicate your Ceremonies you tell us you place no holiness in them Answer If they be not holy they are not civil nor natural Ceremonies and therefore must be profane nor doth your placing no holiness in them free them from Superstition if ye super-add them as parts of Worship to God's Statutes while ye tell us that ye only use them as things in themselves indifferent ordained by Humane Authority for decency and Order Ans Tho' Ceremonies were indifferent in their Nature yet they never can be so in their use for as our actions are specified good or evil by their ends the end being good or evil or neither they in their use must be good evil or idle and impertinent and so can never be used as things indifferent 2. Things indifferent being neither good or evil can make nothing either better or worse for add nothing to something and it will be no bigger so they can make nothing decent or orderly seeing they have nothing of decency or order in them else they were things really good and not indifferent 3. These Ceremonies must either be necessary means of decency and order or not if necessary they are not only not indifferent but all worship perform'd without them hath been undecently and disorderly perform'd and so Christ and his Apostles Baptized Prayed and Communicated undecently because without Crosses Surplices and Kneeling if not necessary why is all this needless contention for things confessedly unnecessary We confess with you that Worship cannot be perform'd without circumstances and that all outward circumstances of Worship are not expresly prescribed by God yet we are fully pwerswaded that mystical Rites and Ceremonies invented and imposed by men as terms of Communion with them are not circumstances tho' craftily or ignorantly they be confounded yet all men of reason know them not to be the same for time place person c. are circumstances of humane actions but none can call them Rites or Ceremonies of actions if they were then Ceremonies should be necessary and not indifferent seeing it is impossible to do any thing without such circumstances We have often told you that such natural circumstances as are necessary for a decent and orderly performance of our actions being included in the general Precept we esteem lawful but such mystical Rites and Ceremonies as are not necessarily required to the performance of any of God's Commandments and not comprehended in any general Law of Christ we judge additions to his Institutions and contrary to that Precept Deut. 12. 2. What things soever I command you observe to do it thou shalt not add thereto or diminish therefrom Seeing you humble your self in desiring us to teach you how ye shall more effectually disclaim all superstition in the use of them than ye do and promise to confess your fault if ye give us not satisfaction we presume to teach you a more effectual way and that is to disclaim all use of them and so you effectually disclaim all superstitious abuse of them and herein we expect the satisfaction ye promise When you have convinc'd us of that innocency of your Church wherein ye glory you 'll find it easy to induce us to joyn with you but this you have not made convincingly appear among Non-Conformists among whom we find you have met with two sorts 1st Such as judge Communion with the Establish't Church absolutely unlawful these you tell that their judgment is false and apparently uncharitable unless they can shew that something is wanting which God hath commanded or required that he hath forbidden Answ For such what is already said let it be considered and then judge whether their judgment be false and uncharitable though we know few that are for absolute and total separation from you 2. A second sort of such as doubt of the lawfulness of your Communion to whom you offer your self a ductor dubitantium and after stating their Case resolve it Their Case is they doubt that is are not well assured whether it be lawful to conform the resolution you propose is if they are not able by any means to clear their doubts and satisfy their scruples yet surely in such a case they ought to choose that way which is most free and safe from the danger of Sin But we wou'd ask you how a person that is not as you say by any means able to clear his doubts about which is the most safe way shall choose the most safe way this is to oblige men to impossibilities for while one hath used all means to clear his doubts about which is the safest and yet these continue he cannot choose the safest because he knows it not and if he choose without knowledge he acts neither as a Christian nor a reasonable man and so Cicero de Offic. tho' a Pagan is in my mind a better Casuist than you who