preach to all the World were so afraid of Distinction and Divisions in their Churches that before they parted it is generally supposed they agreed of a common form of Words which they all delivered to their Converts and was not to be the distinguishing Doctrine of any particular Church but the common Badg of their Christianity and is I suppose that to which St. Paul refers when he charges his Son Timothy to hold fast the form of sound Words which thou hast heard of me 2 Tim. 1. 13. and he also tells us that the Design of his leaving him at Ephesus was that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other Doctrine 1 Tim. 1. 3. And the first Request that St. Paul makes to his Corinthians is That you all speak the same things and there be no Divisions among you but that you be perfectly joyn'd together in the same Mind and in the same Judgment 1 Cor. 1. 10. And this being a thing of such extraordinary Concern he does not only make use of his own Authority but as it was the Custom of the Jews to adjure by the Name of God when they would oblige any Person to answer truly as the High Priest did to our Saviour Mat. 22. 63. So how the Apostle ushers in his Request with the same Solemnity Now I beseech you Brethren by the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ thereby to oblige them the more carefully to observe what he says from which you may guess how far he was from thinking distinguishing Doctrines necessary that he would not tolerate them And if Unity were so necessary among Christians then is it less so now Or what Necessity is there of being so uncharitable as to suppose all the Churches erroneous in their Creeds but our selves That 't is now convenient for particular Churches to make new Articles of Faith and have their distinguishing Doctrines unless they will be obliged to err for Company I thought it had been all along one of the great Charges against the Church of Rome their making such large Addenda's to our Creed and making the Belief of some Points necessary to Salvation which neither our Saviour nor his Apostles taught and that Churches abounding so with distinguishing Doctrines and imposing them upon others for Catholick Truths has formerly been look'd upon as one of their great Errors but I perceive Sir that was a great Mistake for this Learned Author tells me That although the avoiding Distinction does not very well agree with the Practice of the Primitive Christians yet it agrees admirably with the Principles of Popery thus to avoid Distinction which has its Numbers to boast on when nothing else can be said But if their Unity and Number is the only thing that the Author has to object against the Papists I could as soon be reconciled to their Uncharitableness as his for Heaven I perceive is to be the Enclosure of his distinguishing Doctrines or at least no body is to be thought a Member of the true Church unless they hold that and this strange Uncharitableness is that which does convince me of the great Inconvenience of distinguishing Doctrines for generally speaking all sides are so apt to value themselves upon them that they are ready with the Men in the Prophet Isaiah 65. 5. to cry Stand by thy self come not near me for I am holier than thou And did we press our selves only for doing our Duty and adhering to our Common Creed it might be the more pardonable But alas 'T is not the Faith that was once delivered to the Saints Jude 3. that we thus earnestly contend for for a Man may hold all that and yet be pronounced a Heretick unless he chance to agree with them in all their Opinions which are now to be the Standard of our Faith But whether the breach of Charity and Unity among our selves is the readiest way to build us up in our most holy Faith our sad Experience will I doubt too soon shew But however sure I am it does not agree very well with Saint Jude's Method ver 21. who bids us keep our selves in the Love of God and then we may look for the Mercy of Christ unto Eternal Life But because it is so possible to deceive our selves Saint John has given us an infallible Criterion whereby we may know whether we love God or no for he tells us 1 Epist 4. 20. If a Man say he loveth God and hateth his Brother he is a Liar for he that loveth not his Brother whom he hath seen how can he love God whom he hath not seen Therefore this Commandment have we from him that he that loveth God loveth his Brother also Therefore since God has made our Brother as it were his Proxy to receive the Proofs of our Love to him and our Saviour has made it the Badg of our Discipleship By this shall all Men know that you are my Disciples if ye love one another It is very unhappy that those that pretend to be so should set up another Touch-stone for the Trial of their Sincerity and think to approve their Love to God by their Zeal against their Brethren if they chance to dissent from them in a bare Opinion Although our Saviour did not say by their Faith and distinguishing Doctrines but by their Love to one another Men shall know whether you are my Disciples or no. Therefore I think it is not strange if no Church be fond of those Opinions that will engage them to deposit their Charity and if they are 't is certainly their Failing not their Excellence But now it seems I am to beg the Author's Pardon for thinking that the distinguishing Doctrine of such a Church had been that which was peculiar to it for it seems a distinguishing Doctrine is that which they held in common with other Churches which truly I did not understand before And if this Doctrine be so yet the appropriating of it to one looks as if they had a mind to have the Enclosure of it But I skipped one short Paragraph wherein our Author according to his fair way of treating the Person of Quality has jumbled two Texts together which were cited on different Accounts as will be apparent to any body that consults the Paper For when from our having but one Lord one Faith one Baptism I was willing to infer the reasonableness of being or at least endeavouring to be all of one Mind I did not think that had been such an Error as stood in need of a Confutation But now he asks And must not then those that held one Lord one Faith one Baptism necessarily distinguish themselves from all that held more than one But I think there is distinction enough made to our Hands for those Hereticks that first set up those Errors and separated from the Church on their account I hope were distinguishable enough from the true Church and if others hold two Gods or first Principles with the Manichees must I therefore have a
may not till we are willing to part with the latter both the Author and I may have Reason to say as Hezekiah does Isaiah 39. Good is the Word of the Lord for Peace and Truth shall be in my Days But although 't is a very true Rule that we must not do Evil that Good may come of it yet when Evil is done especially if without our Consent it is certainly very lawful both to enjoy and rejoice in that Good which God Almighty by his infinite Wisdom shall bring out of it and if our Author is so tender conscienced that he is of another Mind and will not receive Advantage from any thing which springs from other Peoples Sins he must not only deny the Priviledges of his Birth-Right as an English-Man but even his Christianity also For was there ever so horrid a Sin as crucifying the Son of God And yet what a lost undone World has this been if that had not happened And although for ten thousand Worlds I would not be the Traytor Judas nor any of the impenitent Jews yet with what Hallelujahs ought we to celebrate that Divine Goodness that from Man's greatest Sin and the Devil 's highest Malice could thus work out Mans Salvation And indeed Events of this Nature seem to be the great Abyss of God's Wisdom as well as Goodness which Man 's shallow Reason must never pretend to sound but however we may adore what we cannot comprehend and with the Apostle cry out O Altitudo Rom. 11. 33. Oh the Height and the Depth of the Riches both of the Wisdom and Knowledg of God! How unsearchable are his Judgments and his Ways past finding out And perhaps this might be a better Employment for all our Thoughts than to censure and quarrel with our Brethren because they are not of our Sentiments in all Points and if they think themselves so much in the Right yet pray let them remember the Apostle's Rules That they which are strong ought to bear with the Infirmities of the weak and not to please themselves Rom. 15. 1. And he also commands the Galatians that they bear one anothers Burdens and so to fulfil the Law of Christ But alas instead of following this Method we rather chuse to imitate the Scribes and Pharisees who by laying heavy Burdens on other Mens Shoulders thought to discharge their own Duty But for all they sat in Moses's Seat yet all their Comments on the Law were not true nor were all Conjectures false that contradicted their received Opinions and Infallibility which being no more intailed on the Chair now than it was then it would be very happy if all sides would remember and observe Gamaliel's Advice to the Jews who said very well when he told them Acts 5. 38. If this Counsel and Work be of Men it will come to nought but if it be of God ye cannot overthrow it lest happily ye be found to fight against God Therefore it would be Piety as well as Discretion for both sides to attend a little and not divide from much less fall foul upon one another till they are sure that by so doing they shall not oppose God also Although I must confess I have some Temptation to believe from what has already happened that it is the Lords Doing and that upon this Consideration that all the ways of returning to King James are guarded by the blackest and foulest Sins that a Nation can possibly be guilty of and you must break thorow that is commit all of them before you can open any one Door for his Return For 1st There would be the greatest Falseness and highest Ingratitude in the World against a Prince that put his Life in his Hand and exposed his own Person to the greatest Hazard to rescue a perishing Church and sinking Nation 2dly No Person can so much as treat of such a thing without incurring the Guilt of Treason for by the ancient Laws of the Land 't is Treason to conspire against the King de facto Then 3dly There would be the same Guilt of Perjury in breaking an Oath to him as to King James 4thly They must betray God's Church and the true Religion and give up their Country to Ruin and Devastation and consequently have all the Blood to answer for that should be shed in such an unhappy Revolution So that were King James's Return a good Worth projecting for on other Accounts yet that standing Rule of St. Paul's That you must not do Evil that Good may come of it ought to deter any body from attempting it but when the thing it self if compass'd would be the greatest Mischief it would then be the greatest Height of Madness as well as Sin to go about it For can any body think that the destroying a Church and Nation nay extirpating the true Faith out of the World that is as far as we can go towards it is so meritorious a thing that it will legitimate the use of those means which it was not lawful to use no not for the planting of the Gospel and if any Man can think this but a Jesuit for a good honest moral Papist I believe will not I should indeed think it a great Infatuation but however that would not alter the Nature of things but my Rule would still remain unshaken for the way to Duty always lies plain and open so that he that runs may read And although sometimes it may be attended with Sufferings yet I am confident never any Person had the fatal Necessity of sining laid on him to enable him to discharge any Part of his Duty to God or Man But I beg Pardon for this Digression which proved longer than I at first designed it but yet I shall not think it impertinent if it proves useful to the undeceiving of any that have been carried out of the way by the specious Pretence of Loyalty But to return to my Author And the next thing we are to consider is the Epithet of the distinguishing Character of the Church of England and you may remember that I ask'd you whether you thought it necessary for particular Churches to have particular distinguishing Doctrines for that to me it appear'd so far from necessary that I thought it very inconvenient But he tells us as to that Whether distinguishing Doctrines be convenient or inconvenient it is according as the Doctrines are good or bad No doubt it is inconvenient to have bad distinguishing Doctrines but it is as certain that it is very convenient for a Church to have distinguishing Doctrines provided they be good ones unless a Church can be obliged to err for Company and to avoid Distinction But I would be very glad to know upon what Thesis it is he grounds this dogmatical Conclusion That a Church must needs err that holds only the Catholick Faith and has not some particular Doctrine of its own to distinguish it from other Churches by This did not seem to be the Rule of the Apostles who when they were to
as the Person of Quality is mightily if he would have told him the Inference that he is to make from this extraordinary Comparison For all that I can make of it is this In Polycarp's Days other People besides himself lived to be 86 Years old Ergo Bishop Lake's being bred and born in the Doctrine of Passive Obedience is an undeniable Proof of the Truth of it And in his next Paragraph he brings another Evidence for the Antiquity of it that I think is not much short of this as to the end it was designed for for he tells us The Bishop had lived to hear it affirmed that Passive Obedience was a Doctrine of but 40 or 50 Years standing But his Testimony alone being sufficient to confute that Error it was most proper and requisite for him to aver that he was educated in that Doctrine and that it was not only as old as he could remember who was now 65 Years of Age but that it was taught him as an ancient Doctrine And this Sir says he was the way of maintaining the Truth of old by pleading against Hereticks What by bringing a Youth of 15 Years old for Bishop Lake was no more 50 Years ago to depose for the Antiquity of a Doctrine and by the single Instance of his being brought up in it prove the Universality of it And if this be such convincing Evidence of his side and if he would please to give us leave to bring in our Witnesses 't is possible we might produce as ancient and authentick Persons who would tell us another Story Although truly for my own part I can easily believe the Doctrine to be of a much ancienter date than fifty Years and 't is possible might be taught by some from the Reformation For there was some reason to cajole Henry the Eighth and so to make him more favourable to them they might tell him what good Passive Subjects they were like to make which was a thing he liked very well and therefore it might be a prevalent Argument with him to encourage them as much as he could but for all that I am very far from believing it was the Faith of the whole Clergy either then or at any time since but yet believe it gained more ground since King Charles's Restauration and was more generally received than ever it was before but yet for all that Sir I am sure that both you and I know some of the eminent Fathers of our Church who never owned it in that Latitude that Bishop Lake and some others preach'd it up at But after all the Truth is no Doctrine ought to be valued for the Antiquity but the Truth of it For at that rate Heathenism might claim the Preference to Christianity because 't is certain it had the Precedence of it but Truth is Truth though reveal'd but yesterday and Error not the less Error but the more to be avoided for being of some hundred of Years standing But for all those weighty Reasons for the Bishop's making this Profession I cannot say that I yet see any Reason to change my Opinion For I do still believe that his submitting to a Suspension was a more convincing Proof of his Opinion than a thousand Volumns nay I will say than a thousand such Protestations For I dare appeal to the Author himself whether if Bishop Lake had not submitted to Suspension he would have believed this or any other Protestation of that Nature that he could have made so that it still seems very evident to me that though he made it to please himself yet there was no Necessity on the Bishop's Account to make it publick the World being as much satisfied of his Opinion as they could be But although the Author does not think fit to tell us what were the Designs of publishing it yet he is pleased to quarrel with the Inferences I make from it but how justly you shall see presently For I thank him instead of confuting he has confirm'd my first Inference so that truly I have no Reason to be offended although he says he has now found out the Cause why I am so But at this time the Person of Quality is not a Community but speaks only for himself in his private Capacity so that I dare not undertake for others to whom perhaps he has given Provocation enough but they being to be Judges in that Matter I have nothing more to say to that only to observe that instead of denying what I charged the Profession with the cutting off the Clergy in Queen Elizabeth's Days he does now absolutely cut off the greatest part of our Clergy now that is I am sure the major part of the Bishops of this Kingdom from being true Sons of the Church of England for which if you please you may read his own Words where repeating my first Inference which was to suppose that the Protestation did insinuate that from the beginning of the Reformation ever since the Church of England was restored to its Purity Passive Obedience was the Corner-stone of it for 't is call'd though he omits that Clause which perhaps is the Reason he does not understand the Epithite the distinguishing Character of the Church of England To which he replies That whatever my meaning may be in calling it the Corner-Stone he must tell me plainly That Passive Obedience has been ever the Doctrine of the Church of England And when I say afterwards So that it seems none were accounted her true Sons that did not hold it if he means that none besides were accounted to hold her Doctrines whole and entire or to hold all the Truth which she teaches the Design of the Paper is to assert it too But here I must admire the Author's Cunning extreamly though I cannot much commend either his Ingenuity or good Nature for although he does very peremptorily in his own Name tell the Person of Quality plainly That Passive Obedience has been ever the Doctrine of the Church of England yet he is so kind to Bishop Lake as to allow him the Honour of condemning all that did not receive it For he owns it was the Design of the Paper to assert they were not true Sons that did not But first I would know by what particular Priviledg it is that Bishop does take upon him to censure so many of his Brethren and in the next Place I would be willing to be informed what Authority the Author had to pronounce such a Sentence against so many of his Superiours But whether he will think fit to answer these two Queries or no we have got a good Experiment by the by for although at first he pretended Ignorance as to the Design of publishing the Paper he now owns it with a Witness by which it seems the Person of Quality was not so very much out in his Guess but however he did very wisely to lay all the Blame on the poor Bishop But by the Treatment the Living Clergy receive from him you
the Safety of my own Country ought to be dearer to me than all the World besides and I have more Reason to defend the Rights and Priviledges of that than all the Princes Titles in the World But if our Author should not allow all the Inferences I have made from his Concessions yet I have a great deal of Reason to thank him for them because they will not only be of use to me hereafter but do at present in great measure supercede what I should else have said to his History For 't is perfectly indifferent to me whether Queen Elizabeth did assist the French and Scotish Protestants or no since by his first Position he grants She might have serv'd her self of the Treachery and Revolt of other Princes Subjects For 't was the lawfulness of the Action and not the Fact it self that was the great point in question and since he allows she might have assisted them though they had been Rebels we will never quarrel about it whether they were so or no. For truly the Person of Quality is very well pleased that he has so learned an Author of his side that proves all he desires should be asserted in the point For since he will allow the French Protestants were not Rebels because they had the Law of their side Nor were the Netherlands guilty of Rebellion against the King of Spain because he first acted contrary to the Laetus Introitus and disengaged them from their Obedience when he had broke the Condition of it If he will but please to be as gracious to his own Country-men and allow them the benefit of their own Laws and suffer the Oaths of Princes to be as binding in England as it seems they then were in Spain I know no body that will desire any more of him Nay I will go farther than this for if he can name any one Person that was a Rebel to King James after the Allowances above are granted him rather than he should go unpunish'd I think I should be his Executioner for I hate those that rebel against and break the Laws as much as the Author can do And since Rebellion is so horrid a Sin I would not have England to have the Enclosure of it but only desire that we may be allowed to fight for our Laws and Liberties as other Nations do without being thought Rebels for so doing But if our Author will not allow us the same Priviledges he gives to all the World beside there would be some reason to suspect that he designs us the Monopoly of that he so exclaims against and is so particularly kind to his own Country as sometimes to lay them under the unhappy necessity of being either Rebels or Slaves And I have something the more Reason to fear this because I find he is not so sollicitous to clear the Scots from the imputation of Rebels as he is the French and Dutch But let them be what they will you see 't is evident Queen Elizabeth did not assist them she only furnish'd them with Men Money and Ammunition And when the Queen of Scots came and flung her self into her Protection and implored her Aid for restoring her to her Crown she then asserted her Cause with a witness For had that unhappy Princess trusted to the Mercy of her Subjects as great Rebels as they were I am sure they could not have treated her worse than she was used by that Queen who our Author tells us always declared against any Protection of Subjects in their Resistance which she always called Rebellion But I suppose Princes are no more obliged to speak Truth than they are tied to do Justice for which our Author gave them a Dispensation before But I think it now time to proceed to the 2d thing he undertook to prove which is That it was the Doctrine of the Church of England at that time that it is unlawful for Subjects to resist and that therefore our Divines justified the French and Dutch no otherwise than upon Principles which are consistent with this Doctrine And truly if our Author hold in the same mind he was when he promised the two Positions before enlarged on and acquitted the French from Rebellion because they had the Law of their Side and the Dutch because their King had forfeited his Right to their Obedience by breaking his part of the Pact and Stipulation between them I do not see but he and I shall agree in this as well as the Divines of this Age do with those in Queen Elizabeth's Days For I suppose the Convocation at that time did approve of Bishop Bilson his Sentiments as to that matter for the Author tells us the Book was perused and allowed by publick Authority and also dedicated to the Queen so that it seems to be that which they were all willing to stand by And I heartily wish that all our Bishops would do so too and make that very Passage he cites out of Bishop Bilson the Judg of the Controversy for then I think it would be pretty soon decided and therefore I shall transcribe the Place in the very same words he has done page 33. In France the King of Navar and the Prince of Conde might lawfully defend themselves from Injustice and Violence and be aided by other Princes their Neighbours If the King as too mighty for them sought to oppress them to whom they owe not simple Subjection but respective Homage as Scotland did to England and Normandy to France when the Kings notwithstanding had bitter Wars each with other The rest of the Nobles that did assist them if it were the King's Act that did oppress them and not the Guises except the Laws do permit them means to save the State from open Tyranny I will not excuse and yet the Circumstances must be fully known before the Fact can be rightly discerned with which I confess I am not so exactly acquainted Now in this Passage here are three several things observable First He absolutely acquits the King of Navar and Prince of Conde but their Associates only upon Supposition that the Law permitted them to oppose the King's Tyranny but the Guises Oppression they might without Law But although the Bishop says he will not excuse those that resist the King without Law yet it is pretty remarkable that he seems to suppose that even in such a Case there may be Circumstances which may render them excusable and which ought to be fully known before the Fact can be discerned and therefore he does forbear passing his Judgment on them because he is not thorowly acquainted with the Circumstances And now were all our Divines of this good Bishop's Faith in this Point or at least had they but his Charity and would not condemn their Brethren before they understood the Cause they would certainly understand one another a little better than they do or however there would be no Divisions nor Schismes about it which God grant they do not now make in the
particular Doctrine to distinguish me from that Church that holds but one And because some are to blame in making Factions and crying up Apollos or Cephas must I for fear of mixing with them distinguish my self from those that are of Christ For God be thanked there never yet was a time that Truth was left so without witness but that there was a true Church to which if we adhered we need not set up distinguishing Doctrines for our selves the Inconvenience of which I am now more than ever satisfied of And now he should come to my second Inference but he passes it over very gently only denies the Consequence for he saith This doth not imply that all who have taken the Oath have thereby renounced the Church of England And in this I must own the Author's Candor for I believe Sir you know some that are of another Mind and that have urged this very Profession of Bishop Lake's to prove it Although I never said it was Bishop Lake's Opinion as he very unjustly accuses me and although the Charge is some pages off yet belonging to this Point I think I may under it take the opportunity of clearing my self His Words are these But when this Gentleman must needs know that his Lordship at the same time received the Holy Sacrament at the Hand of a Reverend Divine who has taken the Oath to insinuate that he would hardly allow those who have taken the new Oath to be so much as out-Liers of the Church of England is a thing I confess I can scarce reconcile to any degree of Charity But yet I do not question but that all I there said is full as consistent with the great Doctrine of Charity as first the making a Falsity and then charging the malicious Inferences of it on their Brother But I must confess this is a sort of dealing that I did not at all expect from so ingenious an Adversary for I know there were weak Places enow in my Paper that he needed not have been reduced to those pitiful shifts but the confuting of the Paper would not satisfy unless he also laid an Odium on the Person whom I am sure he does not know but has the good Fortune to have a beter Character from them that do But the Passage to which he refers and does so falsly render is this After the Story of the dying Papist I say That I am confident the Bishop would not have approved of the Argument had I turned Papist on that dying Man's Declaration But it seems some think it no great matter what we turn now for I hear some are so exceeding fierce that they will hardly allow those which have taken the new Oaths to be so much as Out-Liers of the Church of England And then I add immediately after But although the indiscreet Zeal of some have made them so uncharitable I am far from supposing it the Temper of all the worthy Men of that Party Now I 'le be judg'd by all the World what there is in this Clause that refers to Bishop Lake or does so much as insinuate that he was one of those fierce ones nay any one may see that I take particular care to free the worthy Men of it and if our Author will take Bishop Lake out of that List and number him with the indiscreetly zealous who are the only People I charge I cannot help that but be it known to the World that is his doing and not mine But although he accuses me for want of Charity I think I shall shew that I have a great deal since I can forgive this For as I thank God I am whatever my Quality is above such mean Tricks so I am above revenging of them too for such Crimes are commonly their own Lictors For I am confident he will suffer more by it than I shall therefore 't is generally my Pity and not my Anger that it excites on such occasions But now to return if this be a Digression I am glad to find our Author think that there are so many accounts on which the Oaths may lawfully be taken but it is not my Task to examine any Man on which of those different Hypotheses they took it for having satisfied the Law and I am so charitable as to believe their own Consciences also I have nothing to object against it For I am so far from disapproving a tender Conscience that I would have all the liberty in the World allowed to those who are truly so so that his Question was a little superfluous as to me And must those of the Church of England only not be allowed to have tender Consciences But I am really sorry to find that any of the Church of England should think they are abridged of the liberty of theirs if they may not declaim against all those that dissent from them for as I think the Author is very free so I think 't is very fit every body should enjoy their own Sentiments and I hope I shall not be denied the Liberty I grant but that is only in private for I know no necessity of imposing them on others nor condemning all that do not approve of them And that is the main and indeed the only Exception I have to Bishop Lake's Profession for I did suspect and the Author himself is so ingenuous as to own that the design of the Paper was to assert that none were true Sons of the Church of England that is as he himself explains it did not hold her Doctrine whole and entire that did not hold the Doctrine of Passive Obedience in the same sense Bishop Lake did And now I cannot but say this looks assuming enough but however our Author assures us that the making this Profession was the most proper and the most seasonable and charitable thing a dying Bishop could do to declare that nothing but Conscience was the Cause of his Refusal And although I do verily believe it might be so in the good Man's Intentions yet I cannot not say it was so or was likely to be so in the Effects although we are told it was an Action that did naturally tend to our Peace For a Surgeon may wish very well to his Patient and yet mistake in his Applications for if he use Corrosives where Oil and Balsam were needful he will be more like to fester than heal the Sore And truly I must needs say that a dying Man's entring a Protestation against a whole Party looks as it were designed to perpetuate not compose a Dispute However I am sure it is much properer for the former than the latter For the shortning of this which much exceeds the Bulk I designed I have been forced to skip whole Pages to lay those things together that belonged to one Head but having all along cited the Author 's own Words I hope I have done neither him nor the Reader much injury But now we will go a little back and pick up what may be of use in