that it is lawful for such to use more suitable helps though Men forbid it A Soul is precious God Worketh by Means and according to the suitableness of Means That agreeth not to some which others can make shift with Two or Three words from a Conformest that saith God can Bless the weakest Means to you or the Fault is in your self will not serve instead of needful Helps The King or Bishop have not Authority to Tie a Sick Man to Eat that which he cannot Digest or Hurteth him Every Man is neerliest concerned for his own Soul and most Entrusted with it Parish-Order it self is but a humane alterable Circumstance which I am not bound to observe at the hazard of my Edification and Salvation XXVII What if the Magistrate grant a Toleration of divers Modes of Worship as the French and Dutch Churches are here Tolerated and many in Holland and in many other Countries Are these separating Schismaticks that differ from each other If so it is not because they disobey the Magistrate for he Tolerateth them all If not then meer diversity of Modes of Worship maketh not Schismaticks XXVIII If it be no true Political Church in the strict sense as an Organized Society which hath not true Authorized Pastors and if any Parish have either Vncapable Persons or such as were never Consented to by the Flocks and so have no True Pastor and if the Bishops hold That Parishes are not proper Political Churches but parts of Churches having no Pastors that have the Power of the Keyes or the whole Essence of the Pastoral Office but only Half-Pastors that want an Essential Part of the Power If on any such Account any Parishes are no true Pastoral Churches Qu. Whether to Separate from such a Parish be to Separate from a Church in the sense in question XXIX The mutual Condemnations in the times of the Novations Donatists Nestorians Evtychians Monothelites Phantasiasts Image-Patrons c. tell the World how needful mutual forbearance is to prevent worse Divisions and Confusions And the Papists take themselves to be all of one Church though they differ even in Doctrines of Morality as dangerously as the Jansenists against the Jesuits have shewed and though many Sects and Orders be permitted to Live and Worship God with very great diversity in their several sorts of Monasteries Why then should the little differences of our questioned Assemblies be thought to be so great as maketh us not to be of one Church XXX Some good Christians think That though an undisciplined Church may be Communicated with occasionally yea and constantly while there is a hopeful Tryal of its Reformation yet when there is no hope after Patient Tâ—yal a better Course and Communion should be chosen where it may be had And they think that Multitudes whom they know to be prophane Swearers Cursers Drunkards Fornicators Haters of serious Piety Hobbists Infidels Atheists Sadduces c. are continued in the Church of England And they say they scarce ever heard one Man of all these Excommunicated nor one Man of them all ever brought to Publick Confession and Repentance And they think Lay Chancellours having not rightfully the Power of the Keys there is no ordinary Means of hopeful Reformation and Exercise of Discipline especially the Largeness of the Diocesses making it impossible to be used to One of an Hundred that according to the Law of Christ it should be used on And they think That the Church-Discipline is not only None as to the Right Use and made Impossible but worse than None while it is used most to Excommunicate from Christ's Church the True and Conscionable Members of Christ that dare not Conform and so to lead to their Imprisonment and utter Ruin And they think That no Man hath true Authority to confine them to such an Undisciplined and Illdisciplined Church and forbid them the Use of better where Christ's Discipline may be used Whether these Men be in the Right or in the Wrong if the Matter of Fact be true I should desire rather the Reformation of such a Church than the Reproach or Afflicting of Men as Separatists and Schismaticks that choose another sort of Communion as to their more Ordinary Practise not denying this to be a true Diseased Church And so much in these Thirty Instances about that which I think deserveth not the Reproach of any dangerous Separation I told you Thirty Instances also of Unlawful Separation which I named And now you may judge whether you spake to Edification when you said That the People are Condemned by their own Teachers without telling whom and for what and how far they Condemn them and how far not § 34. And Did you think the Consequence good That because we think it Lawful to Hear you yea and to many a Duty therefore we Condemn them for Hearing any one else that Conformeth not As if they that have Communion with your Diocesan-Church must have Communion with no other So far am I from your Opinion that I take it to be wofully Separating and Schismatical And will never be a Member of a Particular Church which will forbid me Communion with all others that differ from them yea that doth not hold its Communion in Unity with all the True Christian Churches on Earth Though a Schismatical Disputer for Prelacy tells me That though I Communicate with the Church of England I am a Schismatick for Communicating with Nonconformists who saith he are Schismaticks But he that will Communicate with no Church that hath any Guilt of Schism when the Christian VVorld is broken into so many Sects I doubt will be the greatest Schismatick and will Communicate with few on Earth And as Smith Baptized himself not liking any other Baptism this Man may become a Church to himself And indeed the word Condemn them sounds Harsh when it signifieth no more than that we Judge them to be Mistaken and Culpable If I Condemn every Man or every Church which I judge to be Sinners I must Condemn all Mankind I use not so harsh a Phrase of your Self as to say I Condemn You When yet I Judge your Book to be more Schismatical than the Meetings of most that I am acquainted with which you Accuse § 35. But yet your Mistake is Greater than I have hitherto mentioned I know not many if any that use to Hear Me who Separate from You Many of them are Episcopal and for your Liturgy and Ceremonies I think most of them go to the Parish-Churches and few if any that I know do deny it to be Lawful How then can you prove it True that we Condemn them What is it for Is it because they neither Separate from the Conformists or Nonconformists This is it that we Exhort them to It was an ill Slip to put our Condemning them for Commending them But a fair Exposition will make it Lawful § 36. But you say How they can preach lawfully to a people that commit a fault in hearing them I do not
doubt they will by this take you for somewhat worse 2. What doth your National Church differ from a Christian Kingdom which we deny not 3. Do you think there is no other Species of a Church besides that which is Constituted by the Christian Magistrate as Head 1. All the Christian World as far as I can learn by History no considerable part excepted have been in all Ages and to this Day are of another mind And who then is the great Nonconformist and Separatist You or I if this be your mind 2. The Magistracy and Pastoral Office are of different Species Therefore the Churches Constituted by their Regency are of different Species 3. Constantines words have hitherto been commonly received That He and so Christian Kings was Bishop without the Church and the proper Bishop within that is That he was the Governour of the Church by the Sword as the King is of all Scholars Physitians Families c. but not the Governour by the Word and Keys as the King is not a School-Master Physitian or the formal Specifying Governour of School Colledge Family as such Bishop Bilson of Subjection most clearly openeth the difference and I think Christians commonly agree to it between the Office of Governing by the Sword and by the Word even about the Church it self 4. Christ settled immediately the Pastoral Office and did not leave it to Princes to make it And He settled Churches under the Pastors when there were no Christian Princes And when the Emperours became Christians they never took themselves to be the intrinsick Constitutive Rectors of the Churches but Accidental Heads as is aforesaid And all the Councils and their Canons fully shew that the Bishops were still of this mind And our greatest Defenders of the Power of Princes Bilson Andrews Buckâ—ridge Spalatensis c. were of the same mind and ascribe to them no more 5. Else Heathen and Infidel Princes might be Essential to the Church in the Gospel-Notion For they are the Governours of it by the Sword and may possibly by the Counsel of Christians make them as good Laws as many Christian Princes do Julian made no great Change of the Church-Laws But I Labour in vain in proving that there is a Sacerdotal or Clergy-Church-Form or Species for I suppose you cannot deny it and if you do few others will I suppose it is only the National Form which you take to be Constituted by a Lay-Head But few Christians will deny That the Sacerdotal or Clergy-Form of a particular Church is of Divine Institution and that Men have not power to destroy that Form or change the Office there Instituted by the Holy Ghost Though the Forms of Assâ—ciated Churches Diocesan Metropolitan Provincial Patriarchal are judged by very many to be of Humane Invention And what Man may make Man on good Reason may unmake or alter But if you Grant us the Divine Form before mentioned I shall Grant you that a National Church is also of Divine Command if you mean but a Christian Kingdom But when one Form is Denominated from the Pastoral Office related to the Flock and the other from the Magistrates Office What hath a Man that can understand the State of the Controversy to do here but to shew what is the Pastoral Office towards the Church and what is the Magistrates For sure they are not the same And yet because that it is the Pastoral Form which the word Church denoteth in the strict and usual Christian Sense Our Sovereignes in England to avoid the Papists Exceptions have forsaken the Title of Head of the Church lest they should seem to claim a Constitutive Headship of a Church strictly taken and use only the Term Governour Even as Christ is said by St. Paul Eph. 1. to be Head over all things To the Church Over and To much differ And I yet see not why on the same Reason that we call a Christian Kingdom or Republick a National Church we may not 〈◊〉 call Loâ—don York c. a City-Church as Headed by the Mayor as the Christian Magistrate and so talk of Provincial Consular and Proconsular Churches Monarchical Aristocratical Democratical Churches and make all the Controversies which Church-Form is best as Politicks do what Form of a Common-Wealth is best And thus they that chide the Independents for making the People Governours of their little Congregations which I think yet most of them disclaim do this way quite exceed them in Popularity and in Democraties will make the People Governours of all the Churches even National including the particulars For I suppose they will not say that Democratical Civil Government is unlawful And whereas Cyprian saith Vbi Episcopus ibi Ecclesia you will say Where the Mayor or Bayliffe is there is the Church But I trow the Bishop of London believeth that there is another sort of London-Church-Form besides my Lord Mayors Relation to them But what abundance of Church-Forms Supream and Subordinate may diversity of Magistracy make § 29. Sermon p. 19. I do not intend to speak of the Terms upon which Persons are to be admitted among us to the Exercise of the function of the Ministry but of the Terms of Lay-Communion i. e. those which are necessary for Persons to joyn in our Prayers and Sacraments and other Offices of Divine Worship Answ 1. But your work would have been done more effectually if you had begun at the part which you intend not to speak of I suppose it is not for want of Charity nor Concern that you intend it not and therefore suppose that somebody else will do it at last I have heard of some above your order that could better spare the Nonconforming Ministers than the People and said plainly that they increased the Impositions because they could do better without us than with us And some have said If this will not cast them out more shall do it I take it for granted that this pretermitted part of your Work is indeed the All that you have to do in the Works of Accusing and Afflicting the Nonconformists and till this be done the rest of your Accusations will confute themselves and I doubt not but it will be attempted and if it be truly and satisfactory I will give you thanks 2. Your Term of lay-Lay-Communion remembreth me that if as you seem you Essentiate your Church of England by a Lay-Ruler and his Laws viz. the King and the Laws made by him for Religious Government the People that you accuse are no Separatists though they Separate from the Diocesanes because they hold this Lay-Communion that is though they are not perfectly Obedient they are Subjects of the Lay-Governour and so Members of the Kingdom which is the National-Church 3. And as to your Lay-Communion here spoken of So far as it is Lawful where you have Preach'd or Written for it once I think I have done it many times I shall be far from Contradicting you in that § 30. Sermon p. 20. I will not say there
are called Separatists but not if they play work or drink at home VI. Q. I am confident you know the need of many Curates in your own Parish for my part I profess I am so far from thinking my self capable of a Bishops work that I would not take many 1000 l. a Year to take the Pastoral Charge of your Parish without many assistants seeing then you and I as I see by your Treat of Satisfaction and other Doctrinal Books do Preach the same Doctrine and I perform but the part of a Curate or Assistant to you for nothing Why think you that it is worse than that so many be untaught VII Q. Do you not think that culpably to alienate an Ordained Minister Vowed to the Sacred Office is far worse sacriledge than to steal Church-plate or Moneys And that it must needs be so culpable either in our selves for not Conforming or for ceasing our works or else in those that hinder us VIII Q. What then is it that you would have us do when after our best endeavours we are no more able to see the Lawfulness of Conforming or forsaking our Calling than of many great notorious sins IX Q. Do you think that for qualification and number there are so many better than the silenced Ministers in the Land as may so far sâ—pply the Peoples wants as that 2000 such as we may better be spared than employed unless we can Conform X. Q. Are none of our Hearers more competent Judges than their Accusers what profiteth their own Souls And if the 〈◊〉 what is the great harm that such as I do that weighs down the Peoples profit while all your power is for edification and all your Churches that I come in are full XI Q. What is it in us that warranteth a humble 〈◊〉 to think that his Ministerial duty is so much better than ours that in comparison of his Ministry ours is unnecessary and we unsufferable in the Land Is it our ignorance or our wickedness that makes the difference so great I have studied many years longer than you though perhaps with less advantage We know nothing in the world that we prefer before the pleasing of God and edifying his Church Though you excel us do all others so My meaning is would you have none tolerated in England that are as ignorant and as bad as I Consideratis considerandis Doth bare Conforming make all this difference XII Q. And as I ask all these Questions for my self and earnestly intreat your Answer pardon me while in true love to you I put this Question to you for your self Whether do you think if you lived in the pain and as near the Grave as I do and by the sentence of death had the lively apprehensions of your account should you not tremble to think of becoming a Preacher against our Preaching and justifying or owning the silencing and ruining of so many hundred devoted Ministers of Christ who are no worse and for no worse Cause Such as truly desire to serve God as faithfully and diligently as your self and with as little respect to preferment riches applause or any worldly end And whether you will never wish that you had never put your hand to such a work as to argue with the Magistrate and harden others against the enduring of such mens labours even on the hard terms that we willingly perform them Sir Many importune me to publish an Answer to your Sermon 1. As to my self I am more concerned to crave your help for my conviction if I live in sin at so dear a rate even to my slesh 2. And as to you you have deserved so well of this Land especially for so stoutly opposing Popery at such a time and are so much loved and valued by us all that I would take tho-least provoking way us knowing what contention and exasperatiou tendeth to and how glad the Papists will be to turn your Pen from themselves and leave you and such as I together in a fruitless conflict waiting your Answer I rest May 29. 1680. Your unworthy fellow-servant Ri. Baxter Dr. Stillingfleet's Answer to Mr. Baxter's Letter SIR I Lately received a Letter from you wherein you complain of my exposing you to the Magistrates and the World as one guilty of sinful Separation whereas I never mentioned your name when I Preached and when I Printed the Sermon I have quoted it several times against Separation But if your meaning he that you think your self concerned in those practises which I charge with that guilt I should have been very glad to have found in your Letter an Answer to those Reasons in my Sermon which moved me to judg as I then did and still do concerning them Which in my opinion had been a far more likely way for your Conviction which you seem to desire in your Letter than my Answering those Queries you propose many of which do very little relate to the matter in debate between us What you mean by knowing their capacity for whom I preached and wrote I am not willing to understand but if I have any the single Question between you and me as to this matter is Whether tâ—e upholding Separate Meetings for Divine Worship where the Doctrine stablished and the substantial parts of Worship are acknowledged to be agreable to the Word of God be a sinful separation or not By separate Meetings I mean such as 〈◊〉 to a purer way of Worship and are kept up in opposition to the legal establishment of Religion among us And now Sir I pray consider First To what purpose I should resolve the Queries you make concerning our great Parishes since 1. The separate Meetings 〈◊〉 kept up in the City and adjoynenâ— places as Hackney Newingten c. without any regard to the greatness of Parishes or capacity of Churches 2. You cannot but know that the People do not go to them because they cannot find room in Churches but because they look upon the Worship of God as purer there 〈◊〉 our Parochâ—â—l Churches and most of those who frequent them would not come to the publick Worship were our Churches never so great or our Parishes nevâ—â— so small 3. The preaching in them is forbidden by Law which the greatness or smallness of our Parishes doth not make more or lâ—ss 〈…〉 unless those who preach in â—hem do Conform to the 〈◊〉 established and so I grant you the Tabeâ—â—acle in St. Martin's Parish is â—â—wah 〈◊〉 to the Parish-Church which before was a separate Meeting And I wonder a Person of your segacity should think to satisfie your self or others by such slight evasions as these which scarce any of my Auditors or Readers how mean soever their capaâ—â—ies were but could discern the weakness of them Secondly Others of your Queries relate to the Qualifications and number of the ejected Ministers and comparing their Gifts with Ours But what is all this to the business of Separation unless you suppose
would be so bad in us but also to accuse us so publickly to Magistrates for not forbearing to preach the Gospel when we were solemnly devoted to it and pleading against the toleration of it when Non-toleration must be by Imprisonment Banishment or Death or such Disablement against such as believe they are bound to preach while they are able § 5. Yet you can tell that they are ill Men that reported you stir up Magistrates to Persecution If that much will prove it it 's like they will be emboldened to call you an ill Man too for such faults are so common that we may say as Seneca Quid ulcus leviter tangam omnes mali sumus Indeed they do not well that use that word Persecution when your words are but against Toleration and the Church of England ' s endeavour after Vniformity which are publickly known § 6. And no wonder if they are ill Men when you are but finding out a certain Foundation for a lasting Vnion which is impossibâ—e to be attained till Men are convinced of the evil and danger of the present Separation c. That is you are but proving our Union impossible for I have elsewhere proved that the Conviction which you speak of is morally impossible to become the terms of a common Union It is impossible that we should all be convinced that none of the Particulars imposed are sinful which I have named in my first Plea And secondly 't is as impossible that we should all be convinced that it is any more lawful for us to forsake our Ministry to which we were vowed in our Ordination than to break our Oath of Allegiance and deny our Duty to the King So that you do no worse than for Union to prove our Union impossible and who is it that makes it so § 7. And this Impossibility you infer from this Principle That it is lawful to separate on a pretence of greater Purity where there is an agreement in Doctrine and the substantial parts of Worship Answ 1. Was there not this Agreement in the case of Cyprian and the Council who persuaded the People to separate from Martial and Basilides And is not Union possible with such as Cyprian and the Carthage Bishops 2. We that are accused by you do not say that we differ not from you in Doctrine absolutely viz. in the Doctrine about Diocesan Church-Forms or their imposing Power we never denied this difference But we say in the Doctrine of the 39 Articles as distinct from the Form of Government and imposed Abuses we agree And suppose that we agreed in such Doctrine and Worship with a Church that yet held only that the Pope is jure divino the Constitutive Vicarious Head of the Vniversal Church and would take none that confess it not for Christians were it a Sin to separate from that Church 3. Suppose that Usurpers should thrust out the Bishops and you and make themselves our Pastors against our wills is it unlawful to separate from them though they agree with us in Doctrine and Worship And if the Churches and Councils have been in the right which for 700 yea 1000 years held that the calling of a Bishop was null that had not the Clergies Election and the Peoples Election or Consent I need not tell you how far this will reach 4. What if a Church that you agree with in Doctrine and Worship will not receive you unless you will deliberately profess or subscribe an Untruth or covenant against some Duty or commit a known Sin is it intolerable for you rather to separate from them than to sin And must we have no Union till we can in all things think as you do § 8. I think you need not expect the Censures of the chief makers of our Divisions And as to the inferiour Sectaries if you are a Sacrifice it will be an unbloody one You well admonish us in the end not to complain too much when we are silenc'd impoverished and imprisoned The counsel is good But for the Dean of Pauls c. that is deservedly loved and honoured by us all whom you thus deal with and by those great Men whose esteem he deservedly more valueth while he liveth in this Plenty and Honour to call himself a Sacrifice if a few poor Men say He wrongeth them when he pleadeth against the Magistrates enduring them or against their Judgment that think they should be endured Doth not this seem to another greater tendency than for me only to say de facto I was laid in the Common Gaol and fain to make away my Goods and Library to save them from Distress But so much to your Epistle The Sermon followeth § 9. And what could a Man have desired more to end the main differences among us than the serious consideration of your Text in its very plain import and drift 1. That the Text speaketh for Unity and Concord is past question 2. And that it speaketh both to the Pastors and the Flocks 3. And that it speaketh to all Christians though of various degrees of Attainment And therefore requireth all to live in Concord that are Christians notwithstanding other differences 4. All the doubt is what is meant by the same Canon or Rule And there are these several Expositions pleaded for 1. That by the same Rule is meant only the General Concord idem velle nolle to agree and live in Peace and to mind the same things 2. That by the same Rule is meant the Essentials of Christianity received by all Christians which they should have concordantly practised notwithstanding other differences 3. That by the same Rule is meant the Doctrine which the Apostles had concordantly delivered to all the Churches 4. That it was the Churches Creed which is supposed then to be in use as the Symbol of Christians 5. That it is the Canonical Scriptures in the times that they were written and delivered to the Churches 6. That it is the Example of S. Paul before described or the matter of itâ— that is to hold fast what he had attained and press forwards towards the heavenly perfection by desire hope diligence and patience 7. Some take the one Rule to be the end as it is to be attained by the means that is the common good of the Church and furtherance of the Gospel and our Salvation Let all be done to edification 8. Some say that it is the great Duty of Love which is made the Rule for our undetermined actions or that the fundamental duties are made a Canon to the Superstructures as it seemeth to be meant Gal. 6. 15 16. And by Christ Go learn what that meaneth I will have mercy and not Sacrifice To tell you which and how many of these I take to be meant in the Text and why is none of the work which you call me to but to tell you that which-ever of these it is or if all these we fully consent All these Canons we must all walk by 9. But some say
personal presential Communion and yet they meet not all at once but some one day and some another and some not at all which is a fault in exercitio but overthroweth not the being of the Church while it is personal present Communion which they associate for and profess and that states the Church-relation And they meet not all in one place but some in the Bishop of Ely's Chappel and it is pity but you had many more and yet Chappels of Ease consist with some Obligations on the whole Parish ordinarily to have per vices sometime personal Communion in the Parish-Church If you would have told us plainly that Parish-Churches are no Churches or that God never ordained such single Churches as are associated for personal Communion in Presence in Doctrine VVorship and Conversation which have their proper Pastors we should have known what to say to you But if you deny not such which we undertake fully to prove plainly confess their Constitution VVorth and Privileges and we shall readily next debate the Case with you how far Men may associate these into larger Churches of another species But still we say that as Families cease not to be Families when they are combined into a Village or City no more do particular Churches lose their Constitution or Administration by being associated into any lawful larger Churches § 25. Serm. And if there be one Catholick Church consisting of multitudes of particular Churches consenting in one Faith then why may there not be one National Church from Consent in the same Articles c. Ans 1. I pray confess first that your National doth consist of a multitude of such particular Churches of God's Institution and cannot destroy them or their Power and Privileges Secondly And once tell us what you mean by a National Church whether Regal or Sacerdotal If you mean a Christian Kingdom who denies it If you mean all the Churches of a Kingdom associated for Concord as Equals we deny it not If you mean that the Nation must be one Church as united in one Sacerdotal Head personal or collective Monarchical or Aristocratical we must have further satisfaction about this First whether it be of Divine or of Humane Institution Secondly whether if humane its Power be from the Prince or from the Consent of the particular Churches Thirdly what it is empowered to do 1. Not to make necessary Laws for the Churches of the same sort with Christ's already made 2. Not to cross any of his Laws 3. Not to destroy any Privilege of the particular Churches instituted by Christ 4. But if it be only to determine of such Circumstances as the Christian Prince may determine of we shall obey them as his Officers And now to your Why not I answer Man is not God God made the Form of the Vniversal Church of which the particular are parts whose Form also is of his making And if God hath made National Regent Churches as distinct from Christian Kingdoms and Commonwealths we will obey them if not we must know what Men made them and by what authority and whether God authorized them thereto if not your Why not is answered § 26. Serm. p. 18. Nay if it be mutual Consent and Agreement which makes a Church then why may not National Societies agreeing together in the same Faith and under the same Government and Discipline be as truly and properly a Church as any particular Congregation Ans 1. Is it only de nomine or de re that you ask If de nomine we grant you that a Parliament an Army may be truly called Ecclesia if de re we grant you that it is truly a Church of another kind 2. Mutual Consent makes a Church but God's Consent or Institution must go first to warrant that Consent and make it a Church which he will own Else mutual Consent may make it but Jeroboam's Church or a false and sinful Policy Prove if you can that God hath authorized Men to make as many new Church-Species Policies or Forms as they please or any against or above or equal to those of his Institution besides Magistracy § 27. Serm. p. 19. Why many of these Cities united under one Civil Government and the same Rules of Religion should not be called one National Church I cannot understand which makes me wonder at those who say they cannot tell what we mean by the Church of England Sacrileg Desert p. 35. Answ 1. Admiratio est ignorantis I am as ignorant of you as you are of 〈◊〉 therefore may answer wondering with wondering 1. That such a Man should not know the reason when I so plainly and distinctly wrote it down 2. And that while you wonder you should not vouchsafe to give me the least means of Satisfaction For I suppose few will think that you do so much as attempt it here 3. You make it still as if the Controversie were de nomine what it may be called when I only spake de re and bid you call it what you will if you will but tell us your meaning 4. Yea in my Plea sect 4 5. and in the Addition I fully shewed what we grant de re de nomine and what we deny and what the state of our Controversie is and do you think to satisfie us after all this with Wondering that we understand not what you mean § 28. Serm. In short we mean that Society of Christian People which in this Nation are united under the same Profession of Faith the same Laws of Government and Rules of Divine Worship Answ And will not they that know not your Heart any otherwise than by such Words deride us if we should pretend by these Words to be ever the nearer understanding your Resolution of the Controversie 1. The essential constitutive Parts of a political Society are the Pars regeâ—s pars subdita as is aforesaid And here is no mention of the Regent part at all can any Man tell by this whether it be the King or a Clergy Head that you take to be the Constitutive Head 2. Laws and Rules are part of the Administration and our question is of the Constitution Is this then any satisfying Definition 3. The Papists by this Definition are the national Church They are a Society of Christian People which in this Nation are united under the same Profession of Faith the same Laws of Government and Rules of Divine Worship viz. Papâ—l If you say They are not all the Nation I answer 1. nor doth your Definition require it 2. You are not all If you say that they are not the major part I answer 1. Whether you are I know not 2. In Ireland they are and so are there the National Church by your Definition If you say that you mean the Laws of Lawful Governours I answer 1. The Papists take the Pope for their lawful Governour 2. If a Usurper get Possession as K. Stephen and many others is the National Church then dead or null 3. There is
no mention of lawful in your Definitions 4. But though you will not tell us whether you mean Divine or Humane Laws and Rules yet I may confidently conjecture that it is Humane you mean for else 1. I am of the same National Church that you are yea if I prove that I am more conformable to God's Laws than you and such as you I shall prove that it will be a harder question whether you are of the Church of Eng. than whether I am 2. And you might know that such a Church we no more deny than you do at least 3. But then it can be but sincere not perfect Obedience to God's Laws and Rules which must prove one to be of this Church or else no Man is of it And then you must shew us whether a mistake in as small a matter as Meat and Drink or a Ceremony or Liturgick Form or Diocesan order do cut one off from that Church If yea than how much more would such Conformity to sin do it which we fear But supposing that you mean Humane Laws 5. Why may not Divine Laws make a Church If Humane Laws were necessary ad bene esse the Christians that I have read and converst with think that they are not necessary to the Being of a Church in sensu famosiore why then should they be in the Definition and only they 6. But the difficulty recurreth as to Humane Laws which of them are necessary to the Being of the Church For your Definition distinguished not The King hath great and excellent Laws which we all conform to Doth not our Conformity to these seem to prove us of the National Church though we conform not to your Formalities and Oaths and Ceremonies Imperfect Obedience serveth to continue men Subjects to the King It is not every Drunkeness or Oath or Fornication much less the miss of a Complement or Ceremony that makes a Man a Rebel or an Outlaw Why then should the refusal of a Prelates Subscription or Formality unchurch a sound and honest Christian 7. And if the humane Laws and Rules which you mention what ever you mean by them be subordinate to God's Laws and so be honest good and obligatory why should they cut off those from the Church which Christ's Laws cut not off yea which Christ receiveth and commandeth us to receive Receive him for God receiveth him and receive him as Christ receiveth us notwithstanding our Infirmities were good reasonings in St. Paul's Judgment which I prefer before any Bishops that I know 8. And a Man of less Acquaintance or Wit than you cannot be ignorant what abundance of Differences there are among your selves I have named you no small number in my â—d Plea some of you are hot against that which is called Arminianism and some hot for it some are for Bishops and Presbyters being of one Order and some of divers all are not of the mind of the Bishop of Hereford that wrote Naked Truth some even Bishops think that the damnatory part of Athanasius's Creed is not approved by Conformity others think that it is all to be approved A multitude such differences there are among your selves And why should not this as much unchurch some of you if it be being under the same Laws that maketh you one Church as the forbearing of a Declaration of Assent and Consent or of a Surplice c. 9. Especially tell us whether the Conformist's difference about the Constitutive Regent Part of the Church of England some being for one species and some for another do not plainly make them to be of two distinct Churches of England and further different from each other than we are from any part We justly say the Papists who are for two species of Soveraigns some for the Pope and some â—â—r a general Council are plainly of two Churches for the regent part is essential And I am sure that one part of the most Eminent Disputers for the Church of England and Conformity say that the King is the Extraneous Civil Governour but the Bishops are the Constitutive Essential Internal Governours of the Church as a Church and that if the Bishops command the use of one Translation Version Metre Liturgie and the King another we are to obey the Bishops and not the King And that the efficient cause of a National Church is the Bishops Agreement among themselves to associate into such a Church And others say that it is the King and his Laws that are the efficient of such a Church and are to be obeyed in matter of the Circumstances of Worship c. before the Bishops Can you prove that this difference between the Conformists about the very Constitutive Regent Power is not greater than Mens differences about a Ceremony or Form and doth not more to make them to be of two Churches 10. If all this confused stir be but about a Christian Kingdom be it known to you that we take such to be of Divine Command And if you know it not or dissemble it after I have said so much of it in the first Plea and elsewhere I cannot help that viz. if you will talk publickly against what you know or know not when told because you will not know But I have there largly told you what the Power of Princes about Church matters is which if you will not read I will not repeat 11. Your Words Laws and Rules would induce one to think that you joyned the Kings Laws and the Bishop's Canons together in your meaning as the bond of Uâ—ity If so is it two sorts of Governours by the Swoâ—d and by the Word Magistrates and Pastors which you take for the constitutive regent parts of the Church If so then either in Cooâ—dination and Coalâ—tion or in Subordination The first cannot be that the two Species in Coalition should make one Head unless both were in the Kings as Persona Mixta both Lay and Clergie as some affirm him to be like Melchizâ—deck But this both King and Clergie disown Nor can the second be because a subordinate Power is not essential to the whole body politick but only the supreme And the Magistracy Ministry are coordinate Species both depending immediately on God and Subordinate Mutually only Secundum quid Nor is the Legislative Power in England any other than one which is in the King and Parliament conjunct The Bishops Canons are not Laws Ejusdem Speciei till the King and Parliament make them such If this be your Judgment there are I think but few Conformists of your mind 12. I must Conjecture therefore by your words That the Laws and Rules which you define the Church by are the Laws of the King and Parliament and that it is the Civil Christian Sovereign that you take for the Constitutive Head of that National Church which you plead for or else I know not what to Conjecture And if this be your Meaning I add to what is said 1. Erastians have hitherto been distasted by the Bishops and I
They are Puritans Presbyterians Fanaticks Separatists Schismaticks Hereticks Rogues is effectual arguing and convincing and some preachers it seems take their hearers for such Judges But men will be men and reason will be reason and truth will be truth and innocency will be innocency and pride and slander will shame their Authors more than the slandered when you and I are dead and gone § 50. Serm. p. 30. But suppose the first Churches were barely Congregational by reason of the small number of believers at that time yet what Obligation lies upon us to disturb the peace of the Church we live in to reduce Churches to their infant State And here is mentioned the community of Goods washing Feet and then They believe that the first civil Government was appointed by God himself over families Do they therefore think themselves bound to overthrow Kingdomes to bring things back to their first institution c. Ans 1. We call them not barely Congregational but associated for personal Communion If all the Kingdom had but one Bishop that were another Species of Government and Communion than Parochial 2. If one like you should plead for turning all the families in London into one and making only one Common Father or Master of a families who should send Stewards to every house of his own making to give them their victuals he only being the proper Governour and this man should plead as you do that it is disturbing the peace of the great family to reduce them to their Infant State by restoring particular families more wit or reputation than yours would not keep his cause from shame Or if he pleaded that all the Schools in a Diocess or many 100 or 1000 should have but one Schoolmaster with Ushers that have no power to take in or put out or use the Rod and that to retrive this to the Infant State is seditious the reason of mankind would shame his reasoning And when men know what Pastoral Guidance is the case here will be as plain 3. Our Reason for desiring not the Primitive paucity of Christians but the Primitive form of Christ is 1. Because Christ by his Apostles instituted it Mr. Thorndike once spake well to that 2. Because we can prove that he was faithful in forming his house and Church as Moses was in forming that of the Jews 3. Because we never heard it proved that man had power to alter what Christ by his Spirit in the Apostles founded neither having their infallibility nor commission 4. At least we think it is the surest way to hold to that which we are sure God setled till we can prove that men have power to change the very form 4. Teach us what to say to the Papists when they shall accordingly say to us what though there was no Vniversal Pastor in the Primitive times what though many things in discipline and worship be changed since why must you disturb the peace of the Church by reducing things to the infant State what though there were no Cardinals nor General Councils of Prelates to make universal Lawes for the Churches what though the Sacrament was given in both kinds and there were no private Masses or prayers for the dead must the Church be still in infancy What though the Apostles instituted the Lords day for publick worship and holy Communion may not the Church put that down and set up one day of her making once a month or year instead of it But I will not be one of those that will fight for man against God for I know who will overcome If you can prove that Christ gave your Church authority to pull down the Church Offices and form which he appointed and set up another and call it the Churches growth or emendation I will obey them But I have elsewhere asked who they were that made your new Church form If the first Church of Gods making it was only the universal headed by Christ and particular Churches for personal Communion if these made the new forms tell us who when and by what power and why they may not unmake them if there be cause and whether the efficient Church be not better then the effected as the Parent than the Child If you say that Bishops of Parishes did 〈◊〉 by consent in Asia or elsewhere above a thousand years ago how come we in England to be bound by them If you say that Princes were the makers of the new Church Species 1. Heathen Princes did it not 2. The Bishops will give you little thanks if you grant not that it was done before there were any Christian Princes to do it 3. One Prince cannot make Laws for anothers Country 4. Prove that ever Christ authorized Princes to change the Constitution of the Churches instituted by him and make new ones above his form except making officers for the Circa Sacra or variable accidents 5. And what Princes do they have power to undo And it concerneth us to enquire much more then about ceremonies how far this power of man extendeth May they make as many new Church Species as they please Why then may they not make as many forms as there are Kingdomes if not an universal Pope by the consent of most 5. But that which the Papists take for the Churches growth from Infancy the Protestants take for its gradual depravation And have written many treatises to shew when and how such corruptions were introduced And the forementioned book of Paulus Sarpi Servita lately translated tells us by what degrees much of that evil did spring up which some take to be the Churches Man-hood and the amending of the defects of Christs institutions 6. And you that wonder that I know not what you mean by the Church of England may next wonder that I know not what it is that you call the Protestant Religion In my full satisfaction I have told you that I mean by it simple Christianity expressed in the sacred Scriptures as the Recorded rule with the rejection of all humane additions which suppose the Scriptures imperfect as to their regulating use But if you suppose that men may without any Scripture proof of authority take down and change the Church Species which Christ by his Apostles made and make new ones instead and thus add to Christs Laws equal yea superior and derogating Laws of their own this is not that Protestant Religion which I am of and therefore I intreat you to define what it is you so call 7. When you have as well proved the very essential form of the first Churches to have been instituted but pro tempore as a mutable thing as we can prove the like of washing Feet and community of Goods we will submit And so we will when you have proved that God that made families made not Cities or Republicks that is did not institute civil Government of many families or that men who diversifie the forms of Republicks may overthrow families or their proper power Yea and that God hath
done more than yet is done And if you think you can or do prove it must none have Christian Communion who think your proof invalid and that you do it worse than Bishop Taylor that maintained hurtless lying § 56. But the other half of the definition of a separatist is they administer Sacraments by other Rules and after a different manner than what the Church requireth Ans 1. Why will you so reproach your Church we do it by no other rule but the Scripture and doth not the Church require that the Scripture be a Rule You know Polydore Virgil and other Papists ordinarily make this signal difference of Protestants and Papists that the Protestants make the Scripture the only Rule of their Religion On which supposition Francis Peron formed his act of disputing against them And are not the Church of England Protestants If you add another rule it followeth not that we have another than you have though you have another besides what we have 2. You say we deny the fact which is evident to all persons and you speak of me Is this true What Sacraments do you mean I never ordained any I never confirmed any I have married very few if those be Sacraments I have baptised no one these twenty years I gave the Lords supper to none for about eighteen years and rarely since as I told you But others do Ans And if they have no better reason to justifie the forsaking of their Ministry than you give well may they go on to do it 3. Do you mean here by Rulers the same as before by Laws or what mean you I suppose it 's the Canon and Liturgy that you mean And if by the Church you mean any thing but the King and Parliament you are unintelligible For the Church hath but two visible essential parts the Regent and the Subject parts And of the Regent only the supream is essential the rest being also subjects and but Integrals And it is a Requiring Church which you mention And so it seemeth that it is but a lay Church And nothing but a Christian Kingdom 4. I have told you that the French and Dutch Churches here administer the Sacraments by another rule than your Liturgy and yet are no Schismaticks 5. And your rule hath many parts It requireth Preaching praying reading the Psalms and two Chapters and delivering baptism and the Lords Supper in Christs words and repeating the Creed the Lords Prayer and the Decalogue And all that I do when I officiate for any man for I have no Church and others do it with whom I converse But if it be omitting any thing else in your rule that maketh a separation what is it I oft hear Conformists omit divers prayers I have seen Dr. Horton give the Lords Supper I think to the greater part that sate I doubt most Parishes separate if every omission make a separatist 6. But thus far you satisfie me that you judge all for separatists that preach without all your Assent consent subscriptions that the Covenant bindeth no man living no not the Parliament men that took it to endeavour any alteration of Church Government that it is not lawful to resist any commissioned by the King without exception and much more such That all are â—â—â—â—ratists that administer not Sacraments according to your rule which pronounceth baptized Infants saved so dying without excepting Atheists Infidels or any and this as undoubted and certain by Gods word which requireth the Minister to refuse Baptism and Christendom where the dedicating Image of the Cross is not submitted to when the Parent or adult judge it an unlawful Sacrament And where Baptism must be denyed to all that will not make Godfathers and Godmothers the Sole Covenanting undertakers for their Children without speaking a Covenanting word themselves And when your rule requireth all Ministers to deny Sacramental Communion to all that scruple kneeling in the reception and yet excommunicateth them and ruineth them for not Communicating when they are rejected And also ipso facto Excommunicate To omit much more such this is your rule which he that swerveth from it is a separist 7. But I had thought that we had not been like those late cavilling Papists that will not distinguish fundamentals from any little points lest it lose them a paultry advantage of abusing men Doth not every good Law and Rule distinguish between Essentials Integrals and Accidents and make more Accidents than are Integrals and Integrals than are Essentials And doth your rule do otherwise If not tell us what parts of your rule are necessary to one and what to the other or you say nothing to resolve the case Is every line and Ceremony Essential to the Church and to each member If not how cometh our omitting a form of Ceremony to cut us off as a separated Church any more than every breach of Law cuts off a man from the Common-wealth Yea if your Church be but a Christian Kingdom do not you cut off all from that Kingdom too that refuse your Forms or Ceremonies or Subscriptions 8. But Sir to be short with you I will yet believe that Christ is the Institutor of the Church and that he hath himself made Laws which are sufficient to be at least the bond of their unity yea for more than Essentials even the Integrals and many Accidents and hath given Laws to regulate all mens Laws that determine of needful undetermined accidents And that no man should be cut off from the Church or taken as separated that breaketh no Law of God yea those that are necessary to Church unity and Communion And that the grand Schismaticks of the world are the Engineers that fabricate needless impossible dividing terms and conditions of unity and Communion § 57. But you tell me that we do the same things in the same manner as the separatists Ergo we are disingenuous for denying your accusation Ans 1. Judge of the fact by what is said 2. We do not say 1. That you are no true Ministers or Churches 2. Nor that it is unlawful to communicate with you Ergo it is not true that we do the same things 3. But it is the External action the whole same that maketh a separatist A Parson in the Ale-house lost his Common prayer book When he came to Church he told them his mishap and only read what was in the Bible Query whether his Flock and he were separatists An old Parson that I was bread under could scarce see but could say most of the Prayers without book He said what he could remember and got a day Labourer one year and a Taylor another to read the Chapters Query Whether we were all separatists § 58. But you undertake to tell the Reason why I am unwilling to confess a separation because we have formerly severely condemned it in others and yet do the same things for which we charged others as guilty of a sinful separation Ans If this be not true it is not well shew
excel in Love and Tenderness as much as in Knowledge and as mothers quiet crying Children and not therefore cast them out of doors 7. They Cross the ends of the Ministry if they take the Converting of Souls to be any of its end For as Generation so Regeneration maketh Infants and Children before they are grown Men and Children will be weak and troublesome And he that would have no such Children must not endeavour mens Conversion 8. Yea they greatly increase the Disease which they would Cure Men will not love those that hurt them so easily as others And when they are displeased with you they are the hardlier pleased with your Doctrine 9. Driving men into the Church maketh it like a Prison and corrupteth it as composed of involuntary Members 10. Yea they must destroy the Church if they will suffer none in it that have as great weaknesses as these Thus I declared both the evil of passionate Separation and of mistaking the way of Cure I would repeat the Sermons were it not for fear of being tedious 6. I have Printed in my second Plea for Peace what our Non-conformity is not containing as much in this point as he can reasonably desire as it was approved by many others named in our Judgment about the Interest of Reason in Religion so that he cannot say that I speak but of my self 7. I suppose he believeth that I am acquainted with more Non-conformable Ministers than he is or else he will not think that I am any such Antesignamâ—s as Bishop Morley calleth me And I meet with few or none that contradict what in this case of Separation I have Published They are commonly for Reformed Parish Churches not taking all in the Parish for the Church but bounding Churches in Parishes for Order and Preach elsewhere but on necessity and as Assistants and not as Adversaries 8. Doth not our Practice who go to the Parish Churches shew our Judgments to the People if we said nothing 9. I could not have drawn the People so much from too great distance if I had not preached to them At Acton I constantly heard Dr. Rieves and his Curate and I preached only in my house between his Sermons and then led the People to the Church which Judge Hales my neighbour thought was good service to the Church And the very Sermon that I was sent to the Common Gaol for was on Matth. 5. Blessed are the meek perswading to submissive peace and patience 10. When Bishop Morley forbad me to preach in his Diocess and I could not get leave at my departure to Preach to my hearers one farewel Sermon in publick I Preacht in a private house to them on David's words Bring back the Ark of God into the City if I have found favour c. purposely to perswade them as my last advice not to depart from the publick Parish Assembly though the Liturgy be there the publick worship But if the Minister that is there shall be intolerable 1. As utterly unable 2. Or a Heretick 3. Or so malignant an Enemy of Godliness as to do more hurt than good I advised them not to own any such Minister nor encourage him in his Usurpation And it was on that account that they long forbore till the Vicar was dead and a better succeeded him 11. Since then I have written to my old Flock to perswade them to joyn in the Parish Assembly and I hear not of three that do refuse it And all this I have said as to that matter of fact to shew you how farr to believe this Reverend Doctor 's intimated ironical accusation If he say that Other Preachers do not so I Answer First How knoweth he the Negative that never heareth them but like a separatist avoideth it as unlawful 2. Is it not likely that in season they preach their judgment 3. But I confess they may find more profitable work than to preach over all the suspected passages in the Liturgy and other parts of Conformity and answer all the Peoples objections against them The Builders and Owners of the houses are the fittest to do such offices to maintain it § 65. Is it that they fear the reproaches of the People which some few of the most Eminent persons among them have found they must undergo if they touch upon thiâ— subject Ans 1. So farr as your accusation is untrue as to the fact it 's but a further ill intimation to ask why they do not that which they do 2. If they that should better know what their auditors most need must preach what you appoint that know them less you may make their Sermons for them as well as their prayers 3. Those few Persons it seems at least toucht on what you say they preacht not And for my part whom I know you mean for one I never felt my self much tempted to grudge at the Dissenters that therefore will not hear me If they hear others more suitable to them by whom they can more profit as more esteeming them what hurt is that to me Would I have none taught the knowledge of Christ but by my self While we have all one Faith it 's some convenience for men to assemble and hear where they do it with unprejudiced undisturbed minds 4. If those persons you mention have before and since such censures as you intimate done what you would perswade men that they do not your self-contradiction is most palpable § 66. Serm. For I know not how it cometh to pass that the most Godly people among them can least endure to be told of their faults Ans 1. Did you not intend the Most Godly for a scorn you would confess it false 2. If you mean those that we esteem most Godly it is not true neither 3. If you mean those that think themselves so it 's no wonder if they mistake if not it 's not true 2. I pray you take warning by them or by your own reproof and do not now shew that you are one of the most Godly by less enduring to be told of your faults If otherwise you have forecondemned your own impatience 3. Verily they have dealt much more patiently with me than the Bishops and Canoneers have done Though some have spoken their dislike of me none of them even when they were in power did ever silence or imprison me nor ever forbid me to Preach save once at an Assizes How can you think that we can feel their censures when we have so much worse to feel from the Canoneers And when you ask Is it for fear they should have none left to preach to If you separated not from us you would see that such have some left still § 67. Serm. p. 42. Whence we see the Church of Englands endeavour after uniformity is acquitted from Tyranny over the Consciences of men by the Judgment of the most Learned of the Assembly c. Ans 1. Of the Assembly I have said enough 2. If you think the Assemblies Vniformity or
their endeavours for it were the same with th◠Church of Englands none that know the case will be of your mind 3 If you are intelligible we must suppose that you cite them to defend this as the conclusion which you own The word Tyranny is too harsh to be used without need But I suppose you include that the said Endeavours for Vniformity have no culpable severity in them That is that the Acts for Vniformity the Canons the Executing of them in Declarations Subscriptions Oaths Practices Punishments Corporal and Spiritual are no Sin but Lawful In your Epistle you say They are ill men that say This is stirring up to persecution All that I will say is that if you own these Endeavours for Vniformity I do not and the judge is at the door § 68. Serm. p. 44. If they form their judgments rather by prejudice and passion and interest than from the Laws of God or just Rules of Conscience c. Ans 1. This is true and good If we make not Gods Laws the Rule of Conscience no wonder if we err God preserve us from all corrupting prejudice passion interest and Canons 2. But when you compare our temptation from interest with yours I hope you will not say as Dr. Asheton that as going to the Bar of God he undertakes to make good that it 's through Pride and Covetousness that we conform not that is that we choose the contempt of high and low and to live on Alms and multitudes in pinching poverty § 69. Serm. p. 46. We find Vniformity and Order condemned as Tyrannical till men come into power themselves and then the very same things and arguments are used and thought very good and substantial which before were weak and sophistical Ans A true and sad confession when I read your Irenicon and this Sermon I the more believe you Therefore it hath been my happiness that I was never in Power no nor ever on the uppermost side unless as I am for the King I remember Dr. Rieves told us in the Pulpit that the reason why we were against Diocesan Bishops was because we could not be Bishops our selves And many others have said the like § 70. Serm. Those that now plead for Toleration did once think it the Mother of Confusion the nurse of Atheism c. Ans 1. Sure though you often cite Dr. Owen you mean not the Independents 2. If they spake either for or against Toleration as you do without distinction and were for all or against all and distinguished not the tolerable from the intolerable it 's no great heed to be taken what they say If there were but one false word imposed on you which you could not assent to and on 2000 such as you should you be no more tolerated than a Mahometan § 71. As to your advice to us p. 47. 48. 1. Did you think that because we must bear with much that is amiss in the Church that therefore we must either consent to it or practise it and Covenant against all endeavours of amending it or prefer it before better The man you talk of out of Mr. Ball was near Bremicham and was Melancholy to a kind of madness To your second I answer It followeth not that because we must not judge too hardly of Impositions therefore we must say swear and do all that is now imposed on us Or that he that dares not do it is unpeaceable I would we knew in what cases only you would deny Obedience and Conformity your self Doubtful passages and undoubted evils somewhat differ A fault-finding disposition and the Roman art that Boccaline mentions to swallow a Pimpion have a mean between them Papists Socinians or any that are uppermost may call for Conformity under the names of Unity and Peace To the Third separation was not the same thing in the mouth of the old Non-conformists as in yours They took it first for unchurching the Parish Churches 2. Or holding it a sin to communicate with them if they might be excused as to kneeling Crossing c. You take it for preaching when forbidden I have named to you the old Non-conformists that preached when they could And half of them I think got into small priviledged places exempt from the Bishops power and there preached most of them without the Liturgy and all without the Ceremonies And was not this against Law Sure Bishop Bancroft that describeth their attempts to set up new Churches and Discipline was not of your mind concerning the Non-conformists judgment We had but two in all Shropshire and Dr. Allestree when a boy was the Catechiz'd Auditor of one of them being his next Neighbour in a peculiar Chapel without the Liturgy c. And yet I think not that his Father and all that Assembly were separatists for hearing him Bradshaw thought we should submit to a silencing Law where our Ministry was unnecessary and so do I. Dr. Gouge was a Conformist when he wrote the Book which you cite To your Fourth Woe to them that believe our divisions indanger the Land and let in Popery and yet will cause them and no intreaty can procure them to forbear dividing us when they may and then revile them that have no way to remedy it unless wilful heinous sinning be the way § 72. That it is diseases that love not their own names in mens hearts that make the trouble more than our different judgments and Assemblings experience telleth us I was never a settled Teacher but in two places saving a Lecture at Coventry in the War viz. An Assistant at Budgnorth and a Pastor at Kidderminster And in both places there is an honest Conformable and a Non-Conformable Minister And the People go to the publick Assembly and many hear the Non-conformist privately between the publick Meetings And both parties as I hear live in very much love and peace and why might it not be so in other places if there were the like Ministers and People without all this envyous clamour and bugbear words of Anti-christian on one side or Separatists and Schismaticks on the other § 73. As to your next advices p. 53. 54. First Qui monet ut facias c. We speak so much against rash ignorant Zeal that you commend us against your purpose 2. We thank you for the admonition not to be always complaining of hardships and persecutions Doubtless our mercies are so great as forbid us to be over querulous nay leave us unexcusable if we are not very thankful For my own part my sufferings have been very small from man in comparison of what I endure in Soul and Body from my self They are few days in which I am not a heavier burden to my self than all my Enemies are But First I may not be senceless of the case of many better men who have great families and no bread but what they have by Alms in poor Countreys where the people are fitter to receive than to give And if they remove to bigger Towns
Psalm and was against swearing and drunkenness he was made the common scorne as a Puritane and the Bishops Articles and their reproach of Non-conformists occasioned all this in the Rabble against those that were no Non-conformists If you believe not me believe a Conformist Robâ—rt Bolâ—on that saith more of the horrid abuse of Piety by the name of Puritane And since then the same spirit hath used the Name of Presbyterian Schismatick Separatist Fanatick to the like reproach of seriousness and diligence in Religion though not so universally as the name Puritan was Yea if a man had but been for Lectures and such like helps as Arch-Bishop Grindall was for to his cost or for afternoon Sermons or would not read the book for Sunday dancing c. he was worse than suspected and reproached My neighbours that I once was a Teacher to did never presume to preach nor invade the ministerial Office nor do anything but the work of private Christians that is to pray and repeat the Sermon and sing a Psalm but because many ignorant Families that could not read could not do any of this in their houses they joyned with the Neighbours that performed it and this not at time of Publick worship yet because that more than four such met they were distrained on and laid in Gaoles Compare all this and the removal of many hundred families our of the Land heretofore with the consequents of the Bishops zeal against the Priscillians But remember that it is not in my thoughts to lay any of this upon the Bishops that came in since the Impositions and actions aforesaid and had no hand in them and cry not to Magistrates to execute the Laws much less on men of such known moderation as divers of them are nor on the Peaceable Conformists that own none of this 7. And it must be remembred that Martin was but an odd man and seemed singular against the Synods of all the Bishops and a man of little Learning like one of our Trades-men that is Religious And therefore I have wondred that Baronius and Binnius and our Rich. Hooker did so openly decry the faults of the Bishops here and take part with Martin and not rather turn the reproach on him as an unlearned Separatist and Fanatick But his Miracles silenced all reproaches with the rooted esteem which serious Christians will still have for serious Piety when the Reproachers have said and done their worst Else one unlearned Man that went in sordid attire and lived in a small thacht Cottage and lay on the ground and eat worse than our beggars do and pleaded for the Gnosticks persons was liker to have been born down as a mad Fanatick than such men as Dr. Twisse Thomas Gataker Richard Vines Anthony Burges Mr. Hughes Joseph Allen and about 2000 more 8. Lastly Let it be noted that the Cause of St. Martin was his judgement that Heresie and Schisme even as bad as the Gnosticks was not to be punished by the sword but only by Church censures and therefore that the Bishops did wickedly in calling for the Magistrates sword against them for then if the Heretick can get the Magistrate to be for him the same sword may be drawn against the Orthodox And so the Priscillianists once got a great Courtier to be for them and a while turned the sword against their adversaries which occasioned sufferings in Spain and other parts And I wonder how Baronius Binnius or you that plead for the silencing and other afflicting of Non-conformists under the name of Non-toleration and the Churches endeavours for Vniformity can possibly keep out the light which would tell you that we may give you twenty to one in weighing your case and ours with Ithacius and Martins if any impartial hand do hold the ballance Is not your whole cause who cry out for the execution of the Laws and against our Toleration that is that we are not to be endured clean contrary to Martins cause § 75. As to your 3 d. Advice pag. 55. Not to Condemn others for that which themselves have practised I Answer 1. Prove that I or any of my Acquaintance ever practised Ejecting Silencing Ruining men for things unnecessary yea or for greater things Whom did we ever forbid to Preach the truth Whom did we cast out of all Church Maintenance Whom did we imprison 2. If any in new-New-England had done it is that our doing They that are against Christs Righteousness impated I hope will not joyn with you in imputing to us the sins of those that were no Kin to us and we never saw 3. What a pitiful Case is Mankind in if such an Harangue of confounding words can make them believe that Tolerating or not-Tolerating in Causes vastly different are the same Is it all one to deny men Liberty to seduce men from the essentials of the Faith and to forbid many hundreds to preach Christs Gospel unless they will openly profess that they Assent and Consent to three Books and Covenant never to endeavour the Reforming of the Government of the Church c Might not the Papists have said to us just as you do it is the same thing for us to burn Protestants as Hereticks as for you to expel the Subverters of the Faith But you that are for silencing us all for not consenting to You know what have less excuse for calling it the same thing unless you think Christ and a Liturgy to be same It is therefore fitter to be answered with Compassionate Tears than Words when you say pag. 56. that every one of them would practise the same were it in their Power and think it very justifiable so to do Ans O whither may he rowl that is tumbling down the Hill I was never in Power The Independents once were They used it not as I would have had them But did they or the Presbyterians Eject or Silence one another Is it a good Consequence you would silence a Quaker that denieth the Essentials of Christianity Ergo every one of you were it in your power would Silence Imprison and Ruine them that differ from you in Ceremony Form or Subscription like ours O how incredible are the words of some applauded men I remember that at the Savoy when it was said how some had used the Episcopal Bishop Walton excused and reproved me and said that indeed I had then written against Ejecting or Troubling any honest worthy man for being Episcopal or against the Parliament but that the incompetent and vicious of all sorts equally should be Ejected But saith he did not you write that if the Sword interposed not but meer liberty to Volunteers were granted to all parties the Prclatical Liturgick Church would be like a Tavern or Inne where many sober Persons come but so many others also as would make it a place of no very great inviting Fame I confessed the truth and still confess it § 76. To your 4 th Advice not to make our differences seem greater than they are I