Church of England in her Liturgy or Common-Prayer commonly called Divine Service is Communion with the Church-Visible in Solemn and Publique Worship and then the Conclusion must be Therefore Communion with the Church of England in her Liturgy and Common-Prayer is an Essential part of the sanctification of the Sabbath or Lords day and a positive indispensable duty c. and by consequence Non-Communion c. must be a breach of duty and therefore a sin viz SCHISM REMONS Honoured Friend My Answer to this shall be threefold Viz 1. By way of Concession 2. By way of Distinction 3. By way of Retortion 1. By way of Concession That the Church of England That is the Community of Christians in this Nation concorporated by Baptism professing the true God and Jesus Christ and subjected to the Word and Sacraments c. is a true Church cannot in justice be denyed Her Primitive Constitution being by History Times Index and our best Intelligencer touching Antiquity known to have been Apostolical administers to me no occasion of doubt in the thing But whoever were the Seminary Founders thereof whether Simon Zelotes or Joseph of Arimathea Christs Immediate Emissaries or Aristobolus or Augustine the Monk 't is no matter of Faith only let none despise-his Birth-right as Esau did his O what a happinesse is it that our Native Land should be a thus Consecrated Soil and that we should be by birth in this respect Sons of the Church Visible Church Members The Inroades of Popery into this Iland since the Sun of Righteousnesse first rose herein have been both various and violent and what they may further be God knows but God hath safe-kept his English-Ark in the midst of that Deluge the Rock of Ages hath hitherto been her Ararat By no Antichristian Inundations was she ever as yet totally overwhelmed Popery spoiled her Beauty but did not destroy her Being Mr. Crofton turning Confessor hath acknowledged this Churches present Corruptions as well in Things viz Worship and Ordinances therein administrable by as in Persons both Ministers and People Visible Members the Integral Parts thereof But a True Church is one thing a Pure Church another Here is the New-Creature Hereafter onely the Pure-Creature Now the question is not about Church-purity alas Adulterate Mixtures and Innovations in the Worship of God are a too too plain confutation of this now but Church-Entity the Truth and Being of the Church which our English Donatists Mr. Crofton may know whom I mean having formerly well nigh confounded did like their Progenitors most sacriledgiously monopolize the Church of Christ in this Nation confining the Formality and therefore the Truth and very Essence of a Church within the narrow compasse of their Confederate Members as if it had not been possible for their Ark to contain a Cham or for Tares to grow within their Inclosure God will I hope humble them for it Truth we must needs ascribe to the Church of England while She professedly owns the Faith of Christ and the True Religion For the Truth of Religion proves the Entity or Being as the Power of Religion the Purity of a Church while She owns the Head she must not be disowned for a Part of the Body the Church Catholick-Visible while She separates not from Christ we have no warrant totally and positively to separate from Her She may be Christs Spouse viz Visibly and Professedly though not a Chast-Virgin-Spouse a Wife though an Adulteresse retaining her Affinity though not her Virginity Corruptions in the Church are either 1. Personal or 2. Real Real again either or 1. Substantial and Intrinsecal 2. Circumstantial and Extrinsecal The latter is Mr. Croftons own distinction though possibly he and I may differ in the application of it Personal Corruptions in Scandalous Professors or Visible Church Members Ministers as well as others the Hophnie's and Phinehas's of our age defile a Church Corruptions Objective and Real though onely Circumstantial and Extrinsecal in Outward Rites and Ceremonies or corrupt Modes and Methods of Administration as the Antiquated Jewish Vestments Crosse in Baptisme Kneeling at the Supper c. adulterate a Church Corruptions Substantial and Intrinsecal which are Church-wasting Corruptions the very Vitals and Intrinsecals of Religion being by them destroyed do ipso facto actually divorce a Church from Christ those are the steps of Church-Apostacy when the Wife becomes a Lewd-Woman Single Fornication in the first Adultery in the second A Bill of Divorce in the last The Church of England is too truly chargeable with the two first but not with the last as is the Church of Rome she having not as yet I pray God she never may with her degenerated from a Christian Church into an Antichristian See nor her Members with hers from Professors to Persecutors of the Faith not holding the True Head but setting up ANOTHER NAME being in Doctrine damnably Heretical in Worship grossely Idolatrous in both Antichristian The Essentials Constitutive of a True Church are 1. the Head 2. the Body 3. the Vnion that is between them which three concurring in the Church of England Christ being her professed Head she being Christs professed Body and the Catholick-Faith being the Vnion-Bond whereby they are coupled together She cannot in justice be denyed to be a True though the Lord knows far from a Pure Church Vid. Jun. lib. de Ecclesia Herein I agree with Mr. Crofton 2. By way of Distinction Two things are here to be distinguished viz. 1. Communion with the Church-Visible 2. Solemn and Publick Worship 1. There is a twofold Communion viz. One by Profession Another by Participation 1. Church-Communion by way of Common Profession of the same true Religion Faith Doctrine and institured worship of Christ by vertue whereof all the Members of the Church Catholick Visible throughout the World are concorporated and embodyed one with another and all of them with Christ as a Publick Head Catholick Faith being the ground of Catholick Communion the main Ligament of the great Body Mystical is not only a Duty but a Priviledge too indispensably necessary to salvation Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus is a severe Maxim not more known then true no Salvation ordinarily without the Churches Line of Communication The Church is Gods Inclosure Cant. 9.12 his Nursery planted with the Trees of Righteousnesse without whose Pale and Boundaries all that die doe perish Ah my Dear Friend Let me rather be a Myrtle in the Vineyard then a Cedar in the Forrest 'T were better England should be unpeopled then unchurched A Church-lesse People is a Christ-lesse People and if Christ-lesse then Hope-lesse Ephes 2.12 Christ is the Head of the Body the Church Coll. 1.18 No Vnion with this Head without Communion with this Body Christ must be professed or else never possessed no Saint-State without a Church-State no Call by the Spirit without a Call by the Word first so that no Word no Life Rom. 10.13 14. Whosoever shall call upon the Name of the Lord
shall be saved Worship is necessary to Salvation How shall they call on him in whom they have not beleeved Faith is necessary to Worship How shall they beleeve in him of whom they have not heard Hearing is necessary to Faith How shall they hear without a Preacher Preaching is necessary to Hearing so that without Worship there is no Salvation without Faith no true Worship without Hearing no Faith and without Preaching no Hearing therefore a primo ad ultimum the Word preached is necessary to Salvation no Word no Life ah may this loathed Manna never fail from amidst our Brittish-Israel Thrice miserable are they whose Sun sets where the Sun of Righteousnesse never rose with healing in his Wings Solomon the great Sophi of the World hath long agoe read the Destinie of such Where there is no Vision â—â—eunt pereâ—â—t the people perish Prov. 29.18 a sad Exit There is Visio Salvifica in the Church Militant as well as Visio Beatifica in the Triumphant There be no true Saints who are not in this sense SEERS This is the first Communion wherein I am chargeable with no Breach while I professe my self a Christian All Professors throughout the VVorld are in this respect Communicants 2. Communion with the Church Visible by way of Participation or actual Enjoyment of the Ordinances and celebration of the instituted Worship of Christ in a particular place the Communion in question is I grant a Duty oblieging semper but not ad semper To explaine my self A Particular Church such as is the Church of England having her rise as such not from a Common Call by the Word onely for the catholick-Catholick-Visible Church hath her rise from that but from a Particular Providential Call for so I may term it whereby Persons whether Natives or Forreigners are called to inhabit reside or live there where there is fit Opportunity of enjoying the Publique Ordinances and celebrating the instituted Worship of Christ by way of Social-Joynt-Communion as Providence Opportunity or necessary Occasions shall vary the Obligation to Joynt-Communion must vary also Mr. Crofton cannot deny that there may be many Members of the Vniversal Catholick who yet never had opportunity of associating themselves with or of Joynt-Communion in the Solemn Publique Worship he speaks of in a Particular Church and many have had it who have been deprived of it as Merchants and Marriners professing the true Religion who in pursuance of their Secular Callings are distanced from a true Constituted Church some of them living in Spaine others in India others in Turky c. or such as through sickness are kept from the Enjoyment of Publick Ordinances c. We cannot say that Communion with a Particular Church in such Persons under that providence is an Indispensable duty or Non-Communion Schism unless we also say which were very hard that they are bound to an Impossibility Providence gives a Dispensation as it were in case of Necessary and Inevitable Non-Communion In a word Where Opportunity is serving Violence not obstructing Corruptions not barring no Necessity hindering there Joynt-Communion in Solemn Publique Worship is an Indispensable duty otherwise That which gives a Call gives also a Discharge viz. Providence Those that disclaim all Church-Fellowship out of a peevish petulancy slighting all opportunities thereof are justly to be disclaimed as Self-out-lawed such as the Vagrant Seekers c. led by the Ignis Fatuus the wild-fire of their own deluded Fancy Surely Communion of Saints is no Article of their Creed the maintaining of which should be in our respective Capacities every ones endeavour But to proceed Sir I own an Obligation lying upon me whereby I am bound to communicate with the Church of England whereof I professe my self a Member she being as is acknowledged a True Church notwithstanding her many Corruptions in these Parts of Gods Real-Solemn Publick Worship wherein Violent Impositions Prevalent Corruptions or some or other Inevitable barrs necessitate not a withdrawment and Non-Communion and if I should not I should greatly sin But what does this make for Communion with her in her Liturgy and Common-Prayer Yes sayes Mr. Crofton 'T is an Act of Solemn Publick Worship c. and therefore matter of duty That is next to be tryed The Second Thing to be distinguished is Solemn Publick Worship Religious Worship may be said to be Solemn and Publick in respect of a threefold Community or Solemnity viz 1. Personal In respect of Persons worshipping 2. Local In respect of the Place of worship 3. Real In respect of the Matter and Constitution of worship 1. That Worship which is celebrated by a Plurality or Society of Persons wheresoever convented is Solemn and Publique in respect of Persons now our English Liturgy-Service may I confess in this respect passe for Worship Solemn and Publique and so may the Popish-Masse-Service too 2. That Worship properly is in respect of Place Solemn and Publick the particular Place whereof as well as the Worship it self is appointed of God Now the Jewish Worship celebrated in the Temple Tabernacle was in this respect as shall appear by and by the onely Solemn and Publique Worship in the world 3. That Worship whereof God is the Author as well as the Object the Word the Rule as well as the Matter The Catholick-Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles That Worship which Christ Himself the Churches Lord-Regent and Law-giver did appoint and institute which the Apostles His Seminary Disciples did by vertue of Authority derived from Him commend and command which the Gospel the Christian Churches Directory doth Licence and Warrant which hath been by a Continued Series and Succession of Christian Professors Faiths Defenders from Christ and his Apostles uninterruptedly maintained and at length through the Current of Sixteen hundred years happily as to substance at least transmitted and conveyed to us is in respect of Matter Authentique Constitution and Reality the onely Solemn Publique Divine Worship in the Christian world Now to apply 1. Communion with the Church-Visible in that Worship which is in respect of Matter and Authentique Constitution Solemn and Publique namely That which was instituted by Christ Himself the Churches Publique Head preached and pressed by the Apostles the Churches Publique Guides recorded as the onely Evangelical Worship in the Gospel the Churches Publique Rule and in conformity to this Rule observed and performed by the Primitive Christians for the first two hundred years the purest Ages of the Christian Church This and all other Churches Publique Example is I readily grant an Essential Part of the Sanctification of the Lords Day and a Positive indispensable duty to be upon perill superseded or intermitted upon no less Warrant or Authority then that which imposed it with this assurance that God will have mercy and not sacrifice In Conscience whereof I own my self oblieged to joyn with some Society in a Particular True Church a Part of the Church Catholick-Visible while opportunity serves and no Real Inevitable Obstruction
being preached by him as Prophet John 4.21 Insomuch that Two or Three wheresoever met in his Name have the Solemn promise of his presence now Mat. 18.20 whereas if the Solemnity of his worship were tied to any one place his presence and the Concomitant blessing of his worship should be tied to that place also Who would have thought that * Vid. lib. 3. De Cultu Sanctorum Bellarmine that great Light of the Romish Firmament the chief Atlas of that Orbe should have been so much in the dark as to think that Prayer or any other part of worship performed in a Material Church c. is of more Efficacy then if it were celebrated elsewhere as if Stone and Timber did contribure vertue to our devotion or Prayers Efficacy depended on Locality I wish there be not many Bellarmines in this respect foolish Superstionaries that cry The Temple of the Lord The Temple of the Lord Jer. 7.4 c. like their silly blind Pharisaical Progenitors But Sir You and I are taught of God assured by Holy Record that Prayer or any other part of Divine Worship in what place soever performed will be accepted of God through Christ so he be but worshipped according to his own Canon viz. In Spirit and in Truth John 4.24 Let none then presently conclude from a necessary declension of Local Society in a Publique place a breach of Real Community in True Solemn Publique Worship which may indeed be maintained in any place indifferently Yet 3. The Church of England while she holds the Head Christ and professeth the True Religion being a True Church a Part of the Church Catholick-Visible as is acknowledged and a Publique Place being dictated by the light of nature and judged by men to whose Prudential Determination the Conveniency or Inconveniency of Place of worship as a Natural Circumstance is left though it be a meer matter of Indifferency under the Gospel and in it self to be fittest for Publique Joynt-Communion and therefore though not sanctified yet prudentially sequestred and devoted thereunto I must needs own my self called to communicate and in answer to that call I do communicate with her and that in the Place of Publique Assembly in all the Parts of Real-Solemn Divine Worship wherein I may without either let or sin And thus Sir 't is my known Practice which you are no stranger to to joyn with the present Assemblies in Prayer though not their Common-Prayer Praise or Singing of Psalms Hearing of the Word all which are Substantial parts of True Solemn Divine Worship what and yet a Separatist Judge how little I deserve that name while this is my practice and I exhort you and others to the like Onely give me leave to tell you that what was Reverend Beda's advice to him that should chance to read the Books of that Heretical Bishop Julian I desire and it may be so will you to improve in the hearing of ours Ita carpat botrum ut spinane caveat Take of the Cluster but beware of Prickles be sure they be of Canaans Grapes I would not willingly be starved but God keep me from being poysoned Take heed of Choaking chew before you swallow a Proselyting Romanist a Seminary Priest will tell you otherwise once swallow his Churches Infallibility and any thing will go down then there is no room left for dispute more no need of the true Ballance of the Sanctuary But I have not as yet laid finger upon the soar therefore consider 4. That the Church of Englands Liturgy or Common-Prayer the great apple of strife c. is a Part of this Real-Solemn worship of God and that Communion with her therein the thing urged is therefore a Positive Indispensable duty I must take leave at least till I see more cogent Arguments for it then have as yet been pleaded by the best that ever undertook the patronage of it utterly to deny This I know would seem strange to many what a Convocation-Master-piece the Summum quod sic of the Wit of men and Angels the Monopoly of Divine Service the Prayers of the Church c. and yet no Part of True Solemn Worship but that it is written for private satisfaction and by way of private Apology Sir 't is a fixed Principle with me which I should not fear to publish to the world had my tongue the liberty of mine Accusers in the case viz. That there is no True Divine Worship whereof God is not the Author as well as the Object the Alpha as well as the Omega What is not Instituted Worship is none of His Worship but meer Will-Worship for God will be worshipped Desuo his Soul loathing all that Service though possibly nick-named Divine wherein there is more of the Creature than of Himselfe more of Man than of God What Reason either from Scripture or Common Light can perswade me otherwise Now can Mr. Crofton say Bona fide 't is not a matter to be dallied withal that Liturgies or stinted Set-Forms of Prayer were ever Instituted by Christ Practised by the Apostles Intended in the Gospel or observed by the Primitive Christian Church in the best and purest ages after Christ whose Practice in the case was to be a Leading Case and an Imitable Example to all succeeding Churches In a word Can he prove Englands Common-Prayer part of Christs Instituted Worship Let him produce Authentick either Precept or President for it which will be a hard matter for him to do else surcease his censure for what other can it be then a meer Humane Ordinance Super-erogatory Worship Arbitrary Service even Scripture-bitten Will-Worship one of the justly condemned Commandements and Ordinances of men Col. 2.22 23. What is Will-Worship if this be not Yea but the Matter of it is good this is the ordinary plea but so is a great part of the Popish Missal with which it so much symbolizeth especially their Letany the first Edition of ours and so of the Turkish Alcoran But will that prove it a Divine Constitution Now the Question is not whether it be Divine Matter or not but whether a Divine Constitution or not and therefore I joyne Matter and Constitution together The Matter proves not its Legitimacy unless such a Frame Method Composure and Constitution of VVorship can be proved Jure Divino to be Christs Own Prayer is Christs own Institution I communicate with them in that but here is my Crime I joyne not with them in Prayer in such a Dresse or Form which though I neither question the Wisdome that composed it nor the Authority that imposed it yet I professedly declare is in my weak judgment meerly Humane and therefore I do not a little wonder that such a man as Mr. Crofton should become its Mecoenas and Advocate who cannot be ignorant of the unhappy occasion of the first introduction of such man-devised Forms and Frames into the Christian Church administred by the prevailing Arrian and Pelagian heresies above three hundred years after
Christ nor of the approved Testimonies of Justine Martyr Tertullian c. witnessing the immunity and freedome of the Church in their dayes from such impositions alleadged by his SMECTYMNVAN Brethren But the grounds of my doubts herein shall be disclosed in the next answer however you may judge from what hath already been said how unjustly Non-Communion with the Church of England in her Liturgy and Common-Prayer is interpreted sinful Separation it being a necessary declension of meer Will-Worship 5. The Sacrament of the Lords Supper is indeed a Substantial Part of Real-Solemn Divine Worship being one of Christs Fundamental Institutions but the knowne Violence of Imposition the Will-Worship and Superstition which attends the celebration thereof in the Church of England so that I cannot communicate with her therein without sinne does warrant and necessitate my present Non-Communion and Withdrawment this being clearly Mr. Croftons alleadged case of Real Inevitable Necessity Thus then Though the Church of England be a true Church so that a Total Separation from her is unwarrantable and therefore Communion with her in all the parts of Real-Solemn Divine Worship wherein I may joyn with her without either let or sin be a Duty yet her Liturgy and Common-Prayer appearing to be no part of Real-Solemne Divine Worship but a meer humane Constitution and the Supper though a Substantial Part of Real-Solemn-Divine VVorship yet being by corrupt Mixtures and Appurtenances much adulterated so that I cannot communicate therein without sin my present Non-Communion with her in both the one and the other which is a Partial Separation is so far from being a breach of Duty that it is a Duty therefore no Schism the thing charged which is a Causless Separation c. This may acquit me and all men in my Capacity from Mr. Croftons Nick-name of Separatist in the Case But I refer you Sir to my next answer for further satisfaction in both 3. By way of Retortion Communion with the Church of England may be superseded in case of Real-inevitable Necessity ex Concessis by Mr. Croftons own Doctrine and Assertion but mine that I may put in for a Supersedeas is a case of Real inevitable Necessity therefore by Mr. Croftons own Acquittance my Non-Communion c. is no sin no Schism There be two things wherein I cannot communicate with the Church of England viz. 1. Her Liturgy and Common-Prayer 2. The Sacrament of the Lords Supper under her present method of administration for Non-Communion in both which I alledge a Real-Inevitable Necessity 1. The Necessity of my Non-Communion in the Liturgy and Common-Prayer is grounded on Invincible doubts about the very Lawfulnesse of such a Constitution and those upon three Maxims shall I call them or Principles which Mr. Crofton possibly would term Schismatical as well as my Practice Viz 1. Ecclesiastical Constitutions that are not Vseful are Vnlawful 2. Ecclesiastical Constitutions that are not Needful are Vnlawful 3. That Constitution of Worship which is not commanded is forbidden Which though they may seem to be very Paradoxes and strange Positions in this age yet I professe to you without any censorious reflection upon either the Principles or Practises of others they hamper me The Assumption peculiar to each of those Propositions containeth my doubt But the Liturgy or Common-Prayer of the Church of England is an Ecclesiastical Constitution which is neither 1. Vseful nor much less 2. Needful nor 3. Commanded Ergo c. 1. That Ecclesiastical Constitutions which are not Vseful are not Lawful which are Vnprofitable are Vnwarrantable where by that which is unprofitable I understand that which is un-edifying is a Truth bottomed upon a great Canon Apostolick in respect of which all Church-Constitutions ought to be Acts of True Canonical Obedience viz 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let all things be done unto edifying 1 Cor. 14.26 Now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Edification according to the language of the Holy Ghost is not only 1. a Freedom from positive dammage nor 2. a Single but 3. a Successive and gradual Benefit For Confirmation hereof I might produce the Joynt-determination and Vote of a whole Jury of the Orthodox-Learned Calvin Junius Tilenus Alstedius Hospinian Beza Pareus Prof. Leidens Jus Canonicum Perkins c. who unanimously conclude the same whose several Testimonies I should here insert but that I must shun prolixity 'T is observable what is left upon everlasting Record namely That the Ceremonial Law of Moses was disanulled because of its weaknesse and unprofitablenesse Heb. 7.18 that which may be urged in my mind invincibly against the retention of Jewish Ceremonies in the Christian Church whence I argue If a Divine Law one of Gods own making must be reversed disanulled and abolished the Holy Ghost himself being Judge because unprofitable as the Ceremonial was Christ the Substance being exhibited then surely A fortiori all Humane Laws those of Mens making especially Ecclesiastical which are unprofitable are hoc ipso unwarrantable I should not fear to assert this in the face of the world Now That the Liturgy or Common-Prayer is a Constitution unprofitable which is the Assumption will need no great labour to prove 'T is hurtfull and is that usefull who cannot witness the unhappy Consequences Mischiefs and Inconveniencies attending it I should say but little if as some call Ignorance the Mother of Devotion so I should call it The Nursery of Ignorance Nay what greater Schismatick this day in England what hath more divided between Faithful Pastors their dear People the Service hath stopt the Prophets mouths pad-lock't those lips which should preserve knowledg alas those are but few amongst the many thousand Malignant Influences of this Convocation-Wildfire And yet There is no hurt in it say some that 's strangel but admit there were not doth it any good the Negative will prove it an Illegitimate brood yes may some Commoner say and so may I say of the Popish Missal it may accidentally profit me but neither will Collateral nor single Benefit prove the Legitimacy either of the one or of the other Further Is it an Edifying Constitution if not cashier it for Apocryphal 't is an Adulterate piece The waters of the Sanctuary must rise higher and higher now what influence hath it in building of a man a Church-member up in his most holy Faith were this to Edifie In a word It must * Instit lib. 4. c. 10. Sect. 32. Manifestam utilitatem prae se ferre according to Calvins Rule It must conduce to the neanifest advantage of the Church of God to her growth and gradual Prosiciency since the riper she is for age the riper she should be for knowledge c. to the perfecting of this Mystical Building Ephes 4.11 12. else beleeve it it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and if un-edifying then unwarrantable Now how little our Liturgy or Common-Prayer is contributary hereunto let the Impartial judge 2. That Ecclesiastical Constitutions which are Vnnecessary are also Vnlawfull
thankfullnesse under the reception of an Extraordinary Blessing and not as an Act of Piety Necessity or Worship And though I shall not at this time at least go so far as some namely to assert that the Consecrated Bread purposely set before Superstitious Kneelers Protestants and the supposed Transubstantiated Bread purposely placed before Idolatrous Kneelers the Papists is the same In Esse Ad. rabili yet two things I shall say First A Papists Idolatrous Kneeling before the Bread supposed to be Transubstantiated is in some respect more Excusable than a Protestants Superstitious Kneeling before the Bread being onely Consecrated for his Creed doth though not Justifie yet in part excuse his gesture Did I beleeve that the Sacramental Bread is no sooner Consecrated than really Transubstantiated into the Body of Christ I should think I should greatly â—â—n if I did not forthwith exhibit Worship thereunto since as the O thodox-Learned generally grant there is Adoration and Worship due to Christ even as Man viz by vertue of the Personal Vnion of his Humane with his Divine Nature Secondly The gesture of Kneeling at the Sacrament c. in the Church of England having Necessity placed in it else why is it imposed and not seft Arbitrary yea and holinesse and worship too as its * The Arch-Bishop of Spalato Dr. Burgesse Dr. Mortoun Paybody c. learned Patrons inform us and so becoming a dangerous piece of Superstition and Will-Worship I am warranted to withdraw and refuse Communion with her therein by a Supersedeas of Mr. Croftons own grant viz in case of Real-Inevitable Necessity with this assurance that God will have mercy and not sacrifice The Sacrament is a Priviledge but Superstition is Sin now I may often warrantably wave a Priviledge but never am I warranted to commit the least Sin and therefore for fear of Poyson I deny my self Food Alas Mr. Croftons Instances in Stinking Fish c. Pudled water c. An Vncleane Vessel c. yeeld not the least satisfaction to me what if there be poyson in the dish though never so well garnished My Dear Friend The case is very hard but what shall I do If I must dye let it be by famine as soon as by poyson If I must be fourty years without a Passeover even as long as the Israelites were in the Wildernesse without theirs The will of the Lord be done I had rather be in the Wildernesse without it than go back to Egypt for it while I know that I am in the way towards Canaan not so getting St. Bernards Maxim Non privatio sed contemptus damnat The want of a Sacrament is my Affliction but the Contempt of it onely under that want is my Sin only my prayer is that God would forgive them Who make the Lords offering to be abhorred Thus Sir I hope you are by this time satisfied in the case namely That Non-Communion with the Church of England in her Liturgy and Common-Prayer as also in the Lords Supper under the present method of Administration in those who yet joyn with her in Prayer Praise The Word Preached Parts of True Solemn Divine Worship as you and I do is no breach of duty but a duty the one being no True Divine Worship but Will-Worship the other being though a Substantial Part of Worship yet Adulterated and extreamly Corrupted Worship therefore no SCHISM which was the thing charged Now give me leave before I conclude this to produce my Warrant and Protection in the case from the Church of Englands own Canon and Constitution namely the 9th made in the year 1603. Entituled Authors of Schisms in the Church of England censured the words whereof are these viz Whosoever shall hereafter separate themselves from the Communion of Saints as it is approved by the Apostles Rules in the Church of England and combine themselves together in a new-Brotherhood accounting the Christians who are conformable to the Doctrine Government Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England Prophane and unmeet for them to joyn with in Christian Profession let them be excommunicated Ipso facto c. Now 1. I separate in case of Real-Inevitable Necessity only therefore not contrary to the Apostles Rules 2. Mine is not Positive Separation therefore no Combination in a New-Brotherhood 3. I am not only a Professor of the same Faith which is all the Canon seems to require but a Partaker in the same Ordinances though not in all with those who are Conformable c. and therefore that very Canon which censureth Schismaticks protecteth Me. Now Honoured Sir Though I perswade my self that your request is satisfied in the case touching Non-Communion c. Yet cannot I satisfie my self unless I give a brief touch upon Mr. Croftons other Considerations and before I come to them assoile what is objected from the High Places amongst the Israelites A Recocta crambe with him and an ordinary Allegation with all that are of his perswasion in the case in hand Do men complain saith he as they have cause Page 39. That some Roman Rites were retained when this Church was reformed let them consider many pious Kings of Judah have their reforming-Governments stained with a But the High Places were not taken away but the People went thither to worship yet I find not that any God-fearing Israelites who loathed those Reliques of Idolatry ever barred themselves because thereof from Gods Altar and Worship Ans 1. The Retention of Jewish Ceremonies in the Christian Church is God knows a just cause of Complaint since by reason of them the condition of the Christian Church is become more intollerable than was that of the Jewish Infant Church the Jews being subjected to Divine Impositions the Christians oh sad to Humane Presumptions the Arbitrary Lawes and Lusts of Men witnesse Sr. Augustine Ad Januar. Epist 119. c. 19. Item Epist 118. c. 2. 2. If the Retention of Jewish-Popish Ceremonies in the Church of England at first when Reformation was but Early was a just cause of Complaint how much more grievous must the Reduction of them after Sacred and Solemn Expulsion be the First compared to that of the last 20 years being as the Twilight to a clear Sunshine It St. Augustine complained of the intollerable burthensomness of Ceremonies in his dayes as in the places before mentioned what cause have we to complain c. in our dayes For if the first Introduction of them into the Roman Church was a Reduction of Judaisme how like does the Reduction of them into the English Church look to the Introduction of Romanisme what and not complain 3. Mr. Croftons alleadged case of the Israelites and their High Places c. is alass infinitely wide of Ours and therefore I marvel that a man of such Parts as he is should once plead the thing For 1. Though the High-Places of old were even under Reforming Governments both retained and frequented which I deny not yet what makes this against me who dispute not about the Retention
but about the Restitution of a piece of Superstition and Will-Worship When did any one of those Pious Kings of Judah first reforme and then restore the High-Places spoken of Can Mr. Crofton instance when the high-Places were restored by the King and frequented by the People after sacred and solemn expulsion of them to use his own words by Both O but Retrogradations in Religion are dangerous Let me rather sojourn in a Wildernesse then return to Egypt Alass this is our Case Who can be insensible of the Retrograde Motion of Englands Sun Our high-Places are restored after sacred and solemn Expulsion 2 Kings 18.4 a blasted Nehushtan reintroduced Ah! this is the Spot in our Moon 'T is happened to us according to the true Proverb 2 Pet. 2.22 The Dog is turned to his Vomit and the Sow that was washed to her wallowing in the Mire 2. The Israelites were confined in their Sacrifices and Oblations to Gods Altar viz. at first in the Tabernacle Lev. 17.3 4. and afterwards in the Temple Deut. 12.5 6 11. from which it was not lawful but upon extraordinary occasions or by divine Inspiration to separate God having determined upon the Place as well as the Manner of his Worship in the Jewish Church No wonder then if the God-fearing Israelites did not barr themselves from Gods Altar and Worship notwithstanding those Reliques of Idolatry since they should have in so doing transgressed a Positive Law Now will Mr. Crofton argue from hence against the Practice of Christians amongst whom the Place of VVorship is a meer Matter of Indifferency Local-Liberty being a part of Gospel Liberty as hath been cleared above 3. Though the High-Places were originally devised by the Idolatrous Israelites in imitation of the Heathenish Groves yet the use of them was changed by the God-fearing Israelites who even the Priests and Levites themselves being of the number 1 Chron. 16.39 performed Religious Worship in an Idolatrous Place Now will Mr. Crofton infer from the Israelites worshipping in an Idolatrous Place a necessity of Communion in a Superstitious Worship My Friend I distinguish between Presence and Communion The Devout Israelites were present in an Idolatrous Place but did not therein partake of Idolatrous Worship Now What does Mr. Crofton plead for Is it my Presence only in the Church at the time of Divine Service as it is called or is it Communion in that Service To be plain with you The former I could give and yet refuse the latter but so as That also shall be the fruit of cogent Necessity not of Choice hoping in that case for Naamans Dispensation 2 Kings 5.18 19. it that sense be received Presence is a Civil but Communion a Religious Act so that should I in Obedience to a Poenal Law or out of Necessity of hearing of a soul-saving Sermon give my Personal Presence in the publick Congregation in time of Common-Prayer knowing that an Idol is nothing in the World 1 Cor. 8.4 let none conclude from my Presence in the Place Communion in the Worship or rather Will-Worship Naaman's Servile presence in the house of Rimmon being granted would not prove his Communion in the Worship of Rimmon 2 Kings 5. Elijah could look upon Baals Prophets Sacrificing and condemn them 1 Kings 18. God-fearing Israelites did frequent the High-Places but that proves them not Communicants in the Superstition or Idolatry of those Places Their Practice then herein are but weak Premises to Mr. Croftons Conclusion Once more 4. The disparity between the case of the Israelites and that of ours lies greatly in this viz. There the Worship was good the Place only bad but here the Place only is good and the Worship being meer Will-Worship bad So that Mr. Croftons Inference drawn from the Jewish Practice in that case against Non-Communion c. is with me a manifest non sequitur CONSID. 2. Communion with the Church under many and great Corruptions is not inconsistent with Zeal Care and Contest for Reformation Remons 1. That the Reformation of the Church is a Duty incumbent upon every Man and Member thereof to be pursued within the Verge of their respective Places and Capacities by all Just and Lawful Means is a Truth here supposed and hereafter Page 28.34 asserted by Mr. Crofton himself Certain it is that every Church-Member ought to be in this respect a Church-Reformer And according as his Capacity shall vary whether in respect of Power Interest Office or Opportunity c. accordingly doth his Obligation hereunto vary also 2. Mr. Crofton had done well to have stated the question aright de Ecclesia Reformanda de Ecclesia Reformata The Question with us is not Whether Communion with the Church under many and great Corruptions be consistent with Zeal Care and Contest for Reformation thereof Who will deny that But this Whether Communion with the Church of England under many and great Corruptions be consistent with due and constant endeavours of reforming after sacred and solemn Expulsion of the same Nay Sir more particularly yet 'T is this and I would Mr. Crofton had well considered it viz. Whether Communion with the Church of England not under but in those very Corruptions which he says we are by a Duty-Obligation bound in our Capacities to reform be consistent with due and constant endeavours of reforming the same More particularly yet Whether Communion with the Church of England in her Liturgy and Common-Prayer That once Exploded Will-Worship and Corrupt Constitution be consistent with that Tie whereby we are bound to constant endeavours of Reformation The Question thus stated who cannot but resolve into the Negative Especially if he consider that the Liturgy and Common-Prayer is not a Luxurious Branch which ought to be lopt off but an Adulterate Plant Math. 15.13 which ought to be rooted out as being none of those Plants which our Heavenly Father hath planted so that the Reformation herein oblieged to must consist not in an Alteration but in the outer Ejection and Abrogation of such a Constitution but such as is to be endeavoured only in our several Places and Capacities and by Lawful and Warrantable Means Schism and Sedition Faction and Rebellion I am taught of God to abhor as well and as much as doth Mr. Crofton himself Now then If I be bound to contribute by all lawful endeavors what in me lies in my capacity to the Reformation that is to the Extirpation of such an Adulterate Constitution viz. the Liturgy or Common-Prayer how inconsistent with such a Tie must my Communication in that worship be VVere not this to plant what I am bound to root up and to build what I am bound to destroy Or if I should after sacred and solemn Ejection thereof re-embrace or countenance or communicate in it were not that to return with the Dog to the old Vomit to re-build our once demolished High-Places and is this to reform Connivance is to Mr. Crofton Page 28. an Argument of Affection and
a Not holding of the Head the thing there charged upon those Circumcised Sects and as justly chargeable upon all Judaizing Christians who contend for the Introduction and Retention of the Antiquated Jewish Rites and Ceremonies in the Christian Church 1 Joh. 4.3 Qui negat Christum in Carne venisse Ive est Antichristus Tertul lib. de carne Christi for this is virtually to deny that the Son of God is come in the flesh He being the Body and Substance presigured and shaddowed thereby This is Real Antichristianism Enough to turn a Bethel into a Bethaven Now who in England are most Criminal herein who most exposed to the Apostolick Censure let an Altar and Organ and other Romish Reliques and Jewish Popish Ceremonies witnesse Ah * Judg. 6 32. Jerub-baals are rare in our age Is this Reformation Yes such another as was that of King Henry the Eighth when he had renounced the Popish Jurisdiction but retained the Ceremonies whom Luther that great German-Reformado upbraided with a He hath killed the Popes Body but saved his Soul Yet 2. That the Church is Gods Ark of Salvation and therefore not to be totally and universally forsaken upon perill of inevitable Ruine is a received principle with me The Church is both an Ark of Safety and an Ark of Plenty It saves both from drowning and starving Noahs Ark saved from the Deluge all that were in it and none but those The Ark under the Law contained in it three things viz Aarons Rod the Tables of Testimony the Pot of Manna Heb. 9.4 This Ark represented the Church Aarons Rod Discipline the Tables of Testimony the Word and the Pot of Manna the Sacrament Where is either Soul-Safety or Soul-Plenty to be had but within the Verge and Limits of the Church This is the only Ark that can land us safe at the Heavenly Haven the Land of Rest so that Vniversal Separation must needs forestall Salvation But enough of that Generalia non pungunt CONSID. 3. Page 37. Scandal is an Argument of no strength when pleaded to supersede or condemn a Positive duty Remons 1. Who denies that But Communion with the Church of England in her Common-Prayer it being none of Christs Instituted Worship is not as yet proved to be a Positive duty What Communion hath light with darkness 2 Cor. 6.14.16 But 2. Scandal is an Argument of strength when pleaded in matters of Indifferency by his own confession P. 39. now such I hope he will grant which I cannot as yet do our Liturgy and Common-Prayer to be unless he say as a Reverend Bishop one of the greatest in this Nation once upon occasion said to me who when I humbly desired to know wherein the weak were to be indulged was pleased to resolve it into Things Indifferent and I assuming that a Liturgy or Common-Prayer is a Thing Indifferent replyed 'T is not Indifferent when imposed And then sarewell Christian Liberty for there is nothing Indifferent in Actu exercito or when imposed But Right Reverend Fathers c. what a wofull case is this You tell us that in things Indifferent we are to indulge the weak and yet by reason of your Impositions you leave nothing Indifferent far be it from You to render that Necessary by Your Law which you grant should be left Arbitrary by Gods Own There is an Indulgency you grant allowed us by the Law of God Rom. 14.13 15 21. 1 Cor. 8.9 13. and yet how are we abridged of it by the Laws of Men Is this Charity or is it Sacriledge Now 3. VVhy may not Scandal accrue from Mr. Croftons Communion in as well as from his Conformity to the Common-Prayer May not a weak Brother hereby suffer in the tortures of a Scrupulous Conscience being racked between his own doubts and the Offenders Practice Or may not this administer to him an occasion of sinning either in his condemning of that which may be Lawful to Mr. Crofton seeming Vnlawful to him or in doing what yet he condemns or doubteth of being animated thereunto by Mr Croftons Practice Or may not this tend to the hardening of men in sin And is not this Real Scandal being Factum quo alius deterior redditur Amandus Polanus Synt. Theol. l. 6. c. 3. I dare say many Non-Conforming Ministers who have judged a set Form of Prayer to be Lawful in it self and therefore a thing which might be used without any trespass upon either the Law of Piety the Word or the Law of Purity Conscience who yet would have totally declined it upon the account of the Law of Charity fearing least they should destroy him or them with their meat for whom Christ died Rom. 14.15 Now 't were strange if this were an Argument strong enough against Conformity and yet an Argument of no strength against Communion But Scandal in this case is Offence taken only not given This is as Common as the Prayer it self but 't is assumed gratis However 4. Admit it were scandalum accep um an offence taken and groundless Shall there be no Indulgency shewed in that case What shall we think of the Christians in the Primitive times the weaker had no cause or ground to be offended with the stronger about their Indifferent use of mean Christ having purchased for them an absclute liberty therein yet what strict laws are by St. Paul enacted against the scandalizing of such and is it nor his own Personal Resolve in the case to become a perpetual Debtor to 〈◊〉 Bell rather than a Debtor to the law of Charity 1 Cor. 8 13. This was my Reply to that Reverend Bishop when he was pleased to assert that the weak are not at all to be indulged where there is no cause or ground of offence and if there be any real ground of offence how can they be called weak strange Diocesian Doctrine CONSI 4. I am not without the Caution and Conduct of the seber Godly Learned Promoters Purjuers of a Perfect Compleat Reformation Remon 1. 'T is strange Mr. Crofton should argue from Communion amongst Distinct Churches against the present Non-Communion of Particular Members of one the same Church since that which is between the other Reformed Churches and this of England is a Communion not by way of Participation or Joynt-Fellowship c. but of Profession of the fame true Religion only which I have here owned and asserted 2. There are indeed Liturgies used though not imposed in some of those Reformed Churches But though they are not Mala peruse yet this proves them not Authentique more than the Priests and Levites Sacrificing in the High Places 1 Chr. 16.39 proves those Lawful why then may they not be looked upon as Spots in their Feasts God conniving at those in Christians as He did at Polygamy amongst the Jews which yet he did not approve of 3. Mr. Croftons Instance in the Primitive Non-Conformists is wide of that of the Modern for our Communion in the Liturgy and Common-Prayer were a Relapse and Return into I am loath to say an Egyptian darkness after a Noon-day Sunshine of the Gospel and that by Mr. Croftons own grant after Sacred and Solemn Ex ulsion thereof now Promâ—ters of Reformation are no Patterns of a Retrogradation ah this may humble Englands declining Sun lengthned Shaddowe Jer. 4.6 'T is Low Water in the Sanctuary out English Ark is retarded in Her Voyage Heaven-ward Wind bound by Ser-Forms c. saint Gailes of the Spirit perswaded I am were those Worthies now alive they would be loth to become Baals either Advocates or Adherents 4. What does Mr. Crofton think of the thousands of Non Conforming Ministers in our days who in my mind deserve the name of Church as well as any Papal Conclave or Prelatical Convocation in the world But however 5. I must not draw every Example into a Rule Judaizing Peters I must not pattern by Mr. Crofton and his Liturgy-Communicant-Fellow Presbyters I respect and reverence but he he a MOSES be he an AARON I have no warrant to follow him any further then he is a Follower of Christ 1 Cor. 11.1 Now Dear Sir The good Spirit of God be your Convoy to guid you through the Syrtes of this World in a straight course Canaan-ward that you may not split upon the Rock either of Church-rending Separation on the one nor Church-Adulterating-Superstition on the other hand till he at length land you sale within the Vail T. P. FINIS