in an Vnity in matters of Faith so that they are truly Schismaticks that are divided from the External Communion of the true Church viz that do not own all the Ordinances of the true Church or if they own them do not live in the Exercise of them these are the Persons that are guilty of Schism Now how deeply guilty of Schism you are who charge us with it I shall leave all honest Men to judge Now if you cannot prove that we own any thing in point of Doctrine or Discipline in our Church that is not according to the word of God how can you have the face to accuse us of Schism If you have any thing to Accuse us of in point of Doctrine or Discipline let us have it and I doubt not but we shall be able to clear our selves of all your false Accusations REPLY Schism he knows not well what to make of he gives me the 〈◊〉 signification of the Word it is true but when he comes to apply it he says 't is a Division in the Church of Christ consisting in an Vanity in matters of Faith either as if the Vnity of the Church consisted only in an Vnity in matters of Faith or that Schism were a Separation from the true Church in matters of Faith But besides Vnity in matters of Faith there is an Unity and Communion of Saints in Worship and whether he knew it or no if he separates from the true Church in Matters of Faith he is an Heretick more properly than a Schismatick for a Man may be a Schismatick and yet be right as to the main Articles of Faith If he is divided from the external Communion of the true Church he is a Schismatick or to explain it in other words if he does not own all the Ordinances of the true Church or if he does own them does not however live in the exercise of them viz in the external Communion of the true Church this person is guilty of Schism Now I leave all men that have sence as well as honesty to Judge whether you or we are divided from the External Communion of the true Church and consequently which are Schismaticks We own all the Ordinances of the true Church and live in the Exercise of them We are in Communion with all the sound parts of Christ's Church all the world over They own our Church as their Sister and give her the right hand of Fellowship and highly condemn you for your separation The Church of Rome only accuses us of Schism and the Charge would be good against ours with respect to her if we had no better reasons for separating from her than the Dissenters in England give for their Separation from Vs Our Separation from the Church of Rome has been sufficiently cleared from the Charge of Schism and when you have brought as good Arguments in defence of your dividing from External Communion with us we shall then pronounce you not guilty of it neither But till then till you prove that ours is not the National Establisht Church with which you lie under an Obligation to Communicate that this established Church is not a sound part of the Church of Christ and that she imposes sinful Terms of Communion till I say you have done all this I shall continue my Accusation of Schism as long as you continue in your Separation and put as good a Face upon it as the Godly Learned of old did who say That every unjust and rash Separation from a true Church i. e. when there is no just or at least no sufficient cause of the Separation is a Schism and that there is a Negative and a Positive Schism The former is when Men do peaceably and quietly draw from Communion with a Church not making head against that Church from which they are departed The other is when Persons so withdrawing do consociate and withdraw themselves into a distinct opposite Body setting up Church against Church which Camero calls a Schism by way of Eminency and farther 〈◊〉 there are four Causes that makes a Separation from a Church 〈◊〉 First when they that separate are grievously and intollerably persecuted Secondly when the Church they separate from is Heretical Thirdly when it is idolatrous Fourthly when 't is the Seat of Anti-Christ And where none of these four are found there the Separation is insufficient and Schism Now we are fully assured that none of these Four Causes can be justly charged upon our Congregations therefore you must not be displeased with us but with your selves if we blame you as guilty of positive Schism This was the Presbyterian Doctrine in those Blessed Days of 49 to those who stood in divided Congregations from them And if it was good Doctrine then I am sure it is much more so now as coming from Vs to You. In what sence you call your separate Meetings a Church I know not but if you think that they deserve that Name more than the Quakers or Anabaptists or Independants who all assume that Title to themselves then I must tell you that I take your Church to be a Schismatical Church for let your Faith be as right as that of the 3 Creeds and your Discipline if you have any as free from fault as you would have the world think you to be yet if you are divided from the external Communion of the true Church in the exercise of the Ordinances of the true Church i. e. if you do not joyn with the true Church in Prayers hearing the Word and receiving the Sacraments your own Paper makes you Schismaticks and I must freely own I do not see how any Man can be acquitted therefrom who being a Member of a particular established Church does upon any pretended Offence taken against such Rites Modes and Ceremonies which are thought convenient by that Church separate himself from the publick Worship when the Substantials and Essentials thereof are so unexceptionable as ours are But forasmuch as your Notions and Discourses about the true Church and about Schism seem to be so confused and extravagant Before I dismiss this point I desire you will give me Liberty to instruct you in the meaning of a Christian Church which I am apt to believe you do not rightly understand Now among the several Acceptations of the word Church one whereof belongs to the place consecrated and set apart for the publick Assemblies of Christians the Church in the Language of the New Testament of Intelligent Writers and indeed of all Men that understand themselves when they talk about it especially with Reference to Communion doth generally signifie the Christian Church either as it is Catholick or as it is Particular The Christian Church considered as Catholick or Universal signifies the whole Body of Christians dispersed upon the Face of the whole Earth and so it comprehends all Persons and all particular Churches professing Christianity And whosoever shall make a Defection or Separation from this Church will be found guilty
Obligations he lyes under ANSWER Although you tell us this Church is the Church we ought to hold Communion with and our Parish Church the Place we ought to serve and worship God in and that you how unworthy soever are the Person whose proper business it is to perform any Ministerial Office in this Parish this Doctrine I doubt not but will take with the Church of Rome for they will tell you that their Church is the Church you ought to hold Communion with and the Parish Church the place you ought to serve and worship God in and will give as good Proofs for what they assert as you have in your Paper REPLY I wish with all my heart that this Doctrine would take with those of the Church of Rome in this Kingdom but if he means that Papists may urge the same thing to invite Protestants into their Communion I would fain ask this Man whether he does in his Conscience think that they may do it upon as good Grounds and Reasons as we do For that 's the Question and not whether they can give as Good Proofs as any I have in My Paper for as there was not room so neither was it the Business and Design thereof to give Proofs To those who wanted them and desired them of me I offered to give the best Satisfaction I was able ANSWER Sir As to your Life and Doctrine against which you hope no just Exception can be made it is best known to God and your Conscience how you have lived and what Doctrine you have preached and believed Only I shall say this that if you can make it appear you have lived and preached according to the Rule Christ hath set us you may expect Peace and Comfort at the last day but till then you may never expect us to embrace the Exhortation altho' we tender the Peace of Church and State and the eternal Happyness of our own Souls above all earthly things and do hope through Grace stedfastly to hold Communion with that Church whereof Jesus Christ is the Head against which the Gates of Hell shall never prevail REPLY It is a strange way to put me upon the Proof that my Life and Doctrine hath been according to the Rule Christ hath set us He should rather have asked those that have heard and conversed with me If he or any of those whose Cause he espouses have any Objection against either let them in the Name of God speak and spare not let them be as inquisitive as they are desirous to find Faults I fear not the utmost Effort of their Malice But do thou O God be merciful to me a Sinner Enter not into Judgment with thy Servant O Lord for in thy sight shall no Man living be justified If nothing appears against either my Life or Doctrine you ought in Charity to believe both to be agreeable to God's Word and then according to your Champion himself to embrace the Exhortation I made you You may pretend as great a Tenderness as you please for the Peace of Church and State yet it is undeniable Matter of Fact that by the Separation both are mightily disturbed and disquieted and tho' I am unwilling to carry the Controversie so high as to dispute whether according to the Laws and Rules of Catholick Communion you do hold Communion with that Church of which Jesus Christ is the Head Yet I beg leave to tell you that Jesus Christ is not the Head of this or that particular Sect or Party of Christians only but of the whole Catholick Church of which our Establish'd Church being a true and sound Part or Branch by vertue of your Profession to hold Communion with that you will if you drive the Argument as far as in its just Consequence it will bear find your selves obliged to hold Actual Communion with this But to save my self the trouble of pursuing this Argument as far as it will go I refer you to the Case of Church-Communion stated by a learned Hand for your right information And I pray as Mr. Baxter advises you endeavour to understand the right Terms of Church-Communion especially the Unity of the Universal Church and the Universal Communion which you must hold with all the Parts And hereupon I desire you 'll let me ask you whether or no you do not really believe the Establish'd Church of England to be a true Church of Jesus Christ a Church of which he is the Head and with which he holds Communion The most eminent and sober Nonconformists as it can and has been proved have own'd Her to be a true Church that She is sound and true as to her Doctrine that her Worship for Matter and Substance is good and for Edification that her Ministry is true and the same for Substance which Christ hath establish'd Nay they have not only own'd the Church of England to be a true Church but have looked upon it as the most valuable in the World both as to the Church it self and as to the Ministry of it And I dare be confident that there is not an honest true Presbyterian in England but will say if he will be ingenuous that the Church of England by which I alwaies mean that Establish'd Church from whose Communion you separate is a true Member of Christ's Body and that Christ holds Communion with her Now as the Presbyterians of old asked their Brethren of the Separation so ask I you If we be a Church of Christ and Christ hold Communion with us why do you separate from us If we be the Body of Christ do not they that separate from the Body separate from the Head also ANSWER Sir give me leave to tell you our Separation is grounded upon real Scruples of Conscience and there is but one way I know of to Answer them and that is to take away the Cause of them for I can assure you that it is neither Humor nor Prejudice that is the Cause of our Dissenting REPLY If you have not endeavour'd all you can to have your Scruples satisfied and removed you do thereby shew your selves to be glad of them and that therefore Humor and Prejudice have the greatest share in your Separation But if after your best Endeavours for Satisfaction in those matters which make you withdraw from our Communion you cannot obtain it your Case is the more pitiable and the more excusable and I am by no means concerned at the Liberty which is indulg'd you But to Answer your Scruples at so dear a rate as the taking away our Liturgy and the abolishing of Episcopacy which you do more than intimate is the Cause of them is what I hope our Governours will never consent to for make what use of it you please I do think them more valuable than your Company at Church as earnestly as I do desire it ANSWER But if you would know I will tell you it 's the Liturgy or Service-book in which you impose such things on us in
is all Mens Worship of God and that he that will not communicate with faulty Worship must renounce Communion with all the World and all with him Mr. Calvin assigns two Marks of the visible Church the Word of God truly preached and Sacraments administred according to Christ's Institution and saith That altho' there be many Faults and Corruptions in such a Church yet as long as it retains those Marks Separation from it is not justifiable nay altho' some of those Faults be about Preaching the Word and Administrations of Sacraments for saith he all Truths are not of equal Moment but as long as the Doctrine according to Godliness and the true Vse of the Sacraments is kept up Men ought not to separate upon lesser Differences but they ought to seek the amending what is amiss continuing in the Communion of the Church and without disturbing the Peace and Order of it I had not I own the Opportunity of consulting every one of these Authors but I have given you their sence and very words upon the unquestionable Authority of those two Reverend Bishops of our Church the present Bishop of Worcester and the Bishop of Chichester The former whereof in his Vnreasonableness of Separation hath with great Evidence proved that all the Old Non-conformists did think themselves bound in Conscience to communicate with the Church of England and did look upon Separation from it to be a sin notwithstanding the Corruptions they supposed to be in it And the latter in his Case of Lay-Communion produces the concurrent Testimony of the most eminent Non-conformists that there is nothing required in the Parochial Communion of the Church of England that can be a sufficient reason for Separation from it and though he has collected the sence of a great many yet you may believe him when he tells you that for One Hundred he could easily have produced Two if the Cause were to go by the Poll. These Reverend Authors do not put their Readers off with only telling 'em that the Learned observe and some Authors say so and so but they quote Book and Page and which therefore if you have a Mind to be further satisfied you your Selves may consult Those Non-conforming Ministers might probably be under such Prior Engagements or dislike some things so far that they could not satisfie themselves in making the Declarations and Subscrpitions which are required of Ministers in order to preserve the Peace of the Church and the unity of Christians which does so much depend upon that of its Officers and Teachers But there being no Declarations or Subscriptions required of the People nor any thing more than to attend upon and joyn in the Worship practised and allowed in the Church they according to the Doctrine of those Gentlemen ought not to separate To which I shall not need to add any more than that remarkable Annotation of the Reverend Mr. Pool upon Luke 2.41 One thing says He there is observable The Pharisees and Scribes and Priests had in those days much corrupted the Worship of God by their Traditions yet they retained the Substance of Gods Institution We find both our Saviour and his Disciples and other people of God not wholly forsaking the Jewish Church because of its Corruptions Yet we cannot think they joyned with them in any thing of their Will-Worship from whence we may learn a tenderness as to a total Separation from a Church and the Lawfulness of attending divine Ministrations though attended with Vsages which we approve not provided there be no Idolatry in the Service And the Truth of it is if Separation be justifiable upon the Score of some small whether real or fancied Errors which may be in any Church then Communion must not be held with any part of Christ's Church if not with ours for she is certainly as free from Error as any Church in the whole World and the living in her Communion like Members of so Holy an Institution as safe a way to Salvation as any I know in the world And I so firmly believe what I say in this matter that I challenge all her Adversaries to Compare ours and other Churches with the word of God and the Primitive Church and if they cannot produce one that is freer from Error in Doctrine and Worship than she is or comes nearer to the Primitive Pattern nay if amongst all Competitions and contending Sects among us there is not one to be found that delivers the Truths of the Gospel with greater purity and sincerity That doth teach a Religion more holy and useful that lays greater stress upon a pure Mind and a blameless and undefiled Life that doth give more forcible Arguments for Vertue or more powerful Disswasives from Vice theâ— I hope you will have better thoughts both of her and my Invitation of you into her Communion and be convinced that you have no just grounds to continue in your Separation upon Pretences of Impurity in her or greater Purity elsewhere But I would have you speak out Is Communion with us sinful or is it not If you say it is you say it without Proof you therein contradict the Opinion of the most eminent of the old Presbyterians you oppose your selves to the Opinion and Practice of the most candid and most honest among those now alive who do not wholly separate themselves from our Communion and if your own Teaches will be true to their real Sentiments I dare be confident they will not say so nay you do herein condemn your own Practice of occasionally joyning with us now and unless you will declare you were then mistaken in your Judgments you make your selves guilty of base Hypocrisie in constantly joyning with us when the Penalties of the Law were inflicted upon those that refused it If you say that Communion with us is not sinful and that therefore you may occasionally joyn with us then let the Assembly of Divines draw the Consequence who say that to separate from those Churches ordinarily and visibly with whom occasionally you may joyn without sin seemeth to be a most unjust Separation That which you quote for One I have shewed to be no Command for you to leave our Church nor can you make it any way applicable thereto till you have proved that there is something taught or practised in our Church which is as bad as the unclean thing there spoken of But did I or ever any Man else say that it was Schism to obey God rather than Man And therefore what need he put me to prove it But that is not your Case my Brethren you causelessly and willfully separate from a sound part of Christ's Church and if that is not Schism I will yield up the cause for ever But let us more particularly examine this mans Notion of Schism and see whether even according thereto you be not guilty of it ANSWER I know Schism properly signifies a Cutting in two a disagreeing in Mâ—â—â—â— a Division in the Church of Christ consisting
Ordinances as I delivered them to you doth thus express his sence about this matter Saith He we know that every Church it left free to appoint a Form of Polity for it self because our Lord hath prescribed nothing certain And he speaks this you see not as his own sense only but as the sense and that undoubted too of his other Brethren of the Reformation Whose Judgment were it needful we might largely produce to the same purpose But there is no need of it those very persons who have been most zealous for the contrary Opinion being forced to contradict it in their practice And for Orders sake to determine such things in their several Church administrations as are left perfectly undetermined in Scripture of which might be given very many instances notwithstanding their Clamours against the Church of England upon this as modest as she is in her impositions Secondly This Notion of Christian Liberty is so great an infringment of the Liberty Christ hath left to Ecclesiastical Governours as not to leave them so much as it is certain the Governours of the Jewish Church were invested with who yet were bound up and determined in a very great number of Particulars Over and above the Multitude of Rites and Ceremonies which God himself did annex to the substance of his Worship we read of not a few others that were added by Men. We have a large Account of such in Maimonides in his Book de Cultu Devino and the Holy Scriptures themselves present us with diverse such without the least intimation of God's dislike of them Besided some of those which I mentioned He gives other Instances viz. King Solomon's Hallowing the middle part of the Temple for Sacrifices 1 King 8.64 The seâ— hours of Prayer in the Temple Acts 31. Several Alterations and particularly that of the Gesture in Eating the Passover the which Christ declared his Approbation of by his Conformity to them Mat. 26.20 Those two known Rites of the Jews not commanded in the Law viz. that of joyning Baptism with Circumcision in admitting Proselytes and that of Post Coenium or Feast after the Passover And these two our Saviour was so far from condemning upon the score of their being of Humane Institution that his two great Sacraments received their rise from them The Texts which are chiefly urged to prove the Unlawfulness of bringing any thing into the Worship of God but what He hath himself prescribed are those in the Old Testament wherein God declareth his Displeasure against some of the Israelites for doing those things which he commanded them nâ—t and one in the New but cited out of the Old where our Saviour reprehendeth the Pharisees for teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of Men. Those Texts in the Old Testament are Lev. 10.1 Deut. 17.3 Jer. 7.31 Câ—â—p 19.5 Chap. 32.35 But I wonder that those who produce these Texts for such a purpose could not see without our shewing it to them that they all speak of such things as God did not only not Command but had strictly Forbid In Lev. 10.1 the thing which God saith He commanded them not was Nadab and Abihu's offering strange Fire before the Lord which was an Act of Disobedience to a most express Law Chap. 6.12 13. That in Deut. 13.3 not commanded by God was a most hainous Sin and a black Transgression of the First Commandment viz. Serving other Gods and Worshipping of them the Sun the Moon and the Host of Heaven That not Commanded Jer. 7.31 was not only contrary to the Law of God but a horrible Wickedness condemned by the Light of Nature viz. the burning of their Sons and their Daughters in the Fire in the Valley of Hinnom That which God saith He commanded not neither came it into his mind Jer. 19.5 was the same Unnatural Wickedness viz. the burning their Sons with Fire for Burnt-offerings to Baal and that in Jer. 32.35 was the causing of their Sons and their Daughters to pass through the Fire unto Molech But what doth God's condemning such abominable Practices as these signifie towards the proving it unlawful to use or impose certain innocent Rites and Circumstances in Divine Worship which are not expresly and particularly required by God but may be truly said to be in the general required by him as such are necessary to the decorous management of his Worship and agreeable to the foremention'd Rule of doing all things decently and in order And whereas the Urgers of these Texts for tire ' foresaid purpose do reply to us that tho' they cannot deny but the Instances of the things not commanded mention'd in each of them are things also prohibited yet they are pertinently insisted upon by them because it is tacitly implied in God's expressing them as things only not commanded that things not commanded in his Worship offend him as well as things prohibited To this I briefly Answer that this is subtile Arguing indeed except it can be shewed that God doth any where condemn the doing in his Worship what is lawful in its own nature and no where forbidden by him under the notion of a thing not commanded which I dare affirm cannot be shewed And I add that nothing is more absurd than ' to build Doctrines upon Idioms of the sacred Language but this is too commonly done by the Men we are now dealing with as I am able to shew in too many instances And if we should turn the Scales and argue thus such and such things are not forbidden by God therefore they are commanded we should not be guilty of a grosser Absurdity than they are in inferring from God's not having Commanded them that he hath therefore Forbidden them And as to that Text in the New Testament Mat. 15.9 But in vain do they worship me teachâ—â— for Doctrines the Commandments of Men. It is manifest that that which is condemned in the Pharisees here is the setting up of their own Constitutions instead or in the place of God's and those too contrary to God's Commandments This is evident from the Context Our Saviour saith ver 3 Why do you transgress the Commandments of God by your Traditions That is saith Irenaeus upon these words They did not only frustrate the Law of God by Prevarication mixing Wine with Water but they also set their Law in opposition or contradiction to the Law of God c. And that so they did appears by what follows ver 4 5 6. for God commanded saying Honour thy Father and Mother c. But ye say Whosoever shall say to his Father or his Mother it is a Gift by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me and honour not his Father he shall be free Thus have you made the Commandment of God of none effect by your Tradiction And next follows a Citation out of Isa 29.13 according to the Septuagint whereof these words are part viz. Ye Hypocrites well did Esaias prophesie of you saying This people draw nigh unto me with their mouth and honoureth me
own and study to honour God by abstaining from these things by which he never said that he was dishonoured O that all tender Consciences would seriously consider this for they would soon discern that your Ministers by forbidding those things now in dispute lay greater Burthens upon the Consciences of their Brethren and clog them with more duties than God hath laid upon them Whereas we who think those things may be done lay no other Burthen upon the Conscience than what God himself hath laid which is to obey our Governours in all things wherein he himself hath not bidden us to do the contrary ANSWER I shall only touch of Additions in the Service Book there are added three whole Verses to the Fourteenth Psalm and one Verse to the Thirteenth Psalm REPLY If it be granted that there are those Additions he speaks of yet it was not the Mistake of the Common Prayer Book but of the Translations which the Common Prayer followed viz. the Septuagint and Vulgar But I wonder how he came to be so cautious as not to call these Additions to Scripture for that certainly was his meaning The Additions to the 14th Psalm are accounted for in one of the old Bibles by this Note That of this 14th Psalm the 5th 6th and 7th Verses which are put into the Common Translation and may seem unto some to be left out in this are not in the same Psalm in the Hebrew Text but are rather put in more fully to express the manners of the wicked and are gather'd out of the 5th 140th and 10th Psalms the 59th of the Prophet Isaiah and the 36th Psalm and are alledged by St. Paul and placed together in the 3d to the Romans But the saying that there is a Verse added to the 14th Psalm is a notorious Falshood there are only these words I will praise the Name of the Lord most Highest which are in the seventh Psalm and the last Verse What then can this Man be thought to mean Would he insinuate that these Additions are Inventions of our own or that they are inserted by the Church upon some wicked selfish design I hope it appears that they were not nor we upon the score thereof obnoxious to the Penalty of Deut. 4.2 before quoted by him But I would fain know whether they are not deeply guilty of the Crime they charge us with who teach That nothing is to be used in the Worship of God but what is prescribed by God himself for if that be not a Scripture Truth then what an Addition is this Do not they who teach this for a Scripture-Rule and Precept impose upon Mens Consciences as much as Papists and like them and the Pharisees of old teach the Traditions of Men for the Doctrines of God Nay is not this directly contrary to the Gospel it self which tells us that Sin is the Transgression of a Law and that where there is no Law there is no Transgression And thus you all along see with how keen an edge those Weapons turn upon you which you make use of in fighting against us ANSWER In a word I may say of all the Ceremonies in the Service Book as one of your own Church saith of the Succession of Church-Officers and in particular that of Bishops He tells us That our English Bishops received their Orders in the Communion of the Church of Rome and ergo they had as good Orders as any of the Church of Rome they must needs be as good when they are the same But 't is but a weak Proof for the Succession of their Bishops when they must go to Rome for it REPLY One would think it were high time for you to have done with this old Accusation of Popery and that you should have more Prudence than to give us Occasion to upbraid you with your fawning upon and sneaking to it in the late Reign while the Bishops and Clergy of our Church made such a brave and vigorous Defence against it even to the hazard of their ALL. If indeed it be true that our Bishops received their Orders in the Church of Rome then his ergo is good and the only good one he has made in this Paper and the Argument is a good one against the Papists and no weak one neither for the Succession of Church-Officers against you if you pretend to impugn it which if you do it lies at your door to prove a failure in their Succession since our Bishops are in possession of their Authority He ought to have quoted his Author for a Reason before mention'd But what if it be true is therefore Episcopacy unlawful or the Succession of our Bishops not good He may as well argue that the Water is not good or comes not from the Fountain-head because the Conduit thro' which it is convey'd is faulty But since this Man questions the Succession of our Bishops and upbraids us with having our Orders from the Church of Rome it is but reasonable to demand Whether your Preachers have any Orders at all and if they have Whence they had them and thro' what Channel they were convey'd down to them and whether you have any Arguments to urge for the Validity of Their Orders which we cannot with much more reason make use of to prove the Goodness of Ours But we may see how far Envy and Malice will sometimes make People overshoot themselves This Man rather than not send forth his Bolt at our Bishops and Clergy will strike at the whole Reformation and call in Question the Validity of the Orders of all the Reformed Churches of Luther and Calvin himself nay even the Authority of their own Ambassadors As for our Ceremonies tho' they be superstitiously abused by the Papists yet that is no Argument against the present use of them in the Church of England who retains them not because they are of Rome but of an Ancienter date than that now corrupted Church and if they are therefore unlawful because they are used by her then every thing done in that Church is so which I suppose you will not say We only reformed from the Errors and Corruptions of that Church and not from what was Apostolical Primitive and Innocent because they used it And whatever Opinion these People would have others entertain of them yet their admired Mr. Calvin declares in express words that He would not have any Man think him so Austere or bound up as to forbid a Christian without any Exception to accommodate himself to the Papists in any Ceremony or Observance for says he further it is not my Purpose to condemn any thing but what is clearly evil and openly vicious But for a full Answer to all you Object against us upon this score I refer you to the Case of Symbolizing with the Church of Rome by Dr. Eowler our present Bishop where he quotes those very words of Mr. Calvin ANSWER Sir we desire not Separation but Reformation for I hope we have all of us so tender
a regard for the everlasting Salvation of our own Souls that we shall endeavour to make choice of such a Minister as may be able to divide the Word of Truth aright and give to every one their Portion in due season REPLY I have observed but very little Coherence in any part of this Paper but I see none at all in this Clause on the contrary the very design of chusing another Minister is a Proof beyond denial of your Desire of Separation Your Reformation was the drift of my Paper and 't is Nonsense for you to retort it upon us till you have given some better Proofs that there are really such Faults in the Constitution of our Church as ought to be amended But if the Reformation you desire be as to Matters which you either have proved or can prove to be really evil I doubt not but the next Convocation that sits will readily gratifie you herein nay I verily think that they would take away some of those Ceremonies you scruple or however leave the Use of them to every ones liberty as the Canons of 40 have done Bowing towards the East if you could secure them against the evil Consequences of unnecessary Alterations or give them sufficient Grounds to believe that the Dissenters of this Kingdom would then Vnite in the Communion of the Church or that the major part of you who are distinguish'd from the other Sects by the Name of Presbyterians would thereupon come over thereto or indeed that such a Method of proceeding would not drive more out of the Church than it would bring in But if the Reformation you talk of be such as would maim and wound at least if not Vnchurch us or however lay us open to all manner of Confusion it is unreasonable you should be complied with and you do thereby plainly shew your Desires to be either after Ascendency over us or Separation from us Of which another Evidence is that you use no Endeavours to get your selves satisfied of the Lawfulness of joyning in our Worship You only read Books and hear Persons of one side You are full of Prejudice against us and are glad of any Pretence to separate from us You cry out against the Common-prayer but pray let me ask you and answer it to your Consciences Have you ever seriously and impartially read and examin'd that Book Have you a desire to hold Communion with us if you could perswade your selves that you might lawfully do it Have you proposed your Scruples to the Divines of our Church or Have you read what they have written in order to your satisfaction If you have done all these things then you have acted fairly But then let me ask again Have you met with any of your own Teachers that are able to give a sufficient Answer to their Arguments They may possibly put you off with Noise and Clamour instead of true Reason but certain it is they have none of them yet answer'd those excellent things that have been writ in the defence of our Church If they think their Cause so good and themselves able to defend it let them try their Skill at Mr. Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity and the several Treatises writ by our Divines in the Reign of King Charles the Second not above two of which were ever answer'd but those Answers were Replied to without ever a Rejoinder some or all of which I would have those among you that have Time and Capacities for it to peruse particularly those that I have already had or shall have occasion to mention or refer to as also a Perswasive to Communion with the Church of England by the late Bishop of Chichester and The Case of Indifferent Things by the present Bishop of that Diocess The Discourses about Conscience and a Scrupulous Conscience by the present Archbishop of York and Dr. Calamy wherein you will be inform'd how far that Pretence will and will not bear you out in your Separation Our Church is freed from the Imputation of Popery by Dr. Hooper and all your Objections against the Common-Prayer answer'd by Dr. Claggett and Dr. Comber which latter has largely and devoutly Explain'd and Paraphras'd upon every part of it Mr. Evans has in two parts stated and resolved for you the Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament And several more Discourses there are all writ with that Candour and Calmness which if you have leisure is sufficient to invite you to peruse and consider them And indeed one would wonder that after so many excellent Tracts writ in vindication of our Church there should be such a Person as a Dissenter in England I have all or most of these things by me and the Use of them is at the service of any of you that will desire and accept of it but you must put in practise the Advice of Epictetus which is to seek after Truth with the indifference of Travellers who matter not whether their way be to the right or left or forward so that it lead them to their Journeys end ANSWER Sir as for your accusing us of Schism the keeping it up in the Church of God and rending and dividing the Body of Christ and all for separating from those Errors the Church is guilty of from which we have a Commandment to separate our selves Come out from amongst them saith the Lord and touch not the Unclean thing and I will receive you now whether it be right to obey GOD or Man judge ye Now if you can make it appear that it is Schism to obey GOD rather than Man and that it 's a rending and dividing the Body of Christ when we contend but for the pure Administration of his Ordinances according to his own Appointment Now if you can prove this I will yield you the Cause REPLY Your saying that I accused you of Schism the keeping it up in the Church of God and rending and dividing the Body of Christ is false I did not positively charge you therewith I signified to you the Guilt and Danger of that Crime that you might take care not to incurr either by separating upon Humor or Prejudice without just Grounds and Reasons And I was purposely thus cautions in expressing my self that I might not baffle my own Design by saying any thing that might disoblige or exasperate Persons whom I had some Grounds to suspect were self will'd and too inclinable to be soon angry but since you will force me to speak out I 'll tell you my Mind freely and because this Man seems to exult in vindicating you from that Charge and says it wholly upon us I will endeavour to make it appear that notwithstanding any thing he has said you are Schismaticks still That therefore which I do say and for which I have both good Reason and good Authority is this that forasmuch as you withdraw your Communion from that Church that I mean to which I invited you with which you lawfully may and with which therefore you ought to
of a manifest dangerous most abominable Schism or rather Apostacy This general and Universal Church tho' but one body is yet made up of several particular Members or Churches and by a particular Christian Church we understand a Number of Men of the same Country professing Christianity formed into a Society under lawful Governours and governed by such Laws and Rules as are not different from but agreeable to the Laws and Rules of the Catholick Church And if any Man or number of Men who are Members of that Society shall without just cause separate themselves from the Communion thereof he or they so doing are certainly guilty of Schism Such a Church as this was the Church at Corinth the Church at Jerusalem the Church at Ephesus the Church of the Thessalonians the Church of Laodicea the Church of Smyrna the Church of Pergamus the Church of Thyatira the Church of Sardis the Church of Philadelphia and such a Church as this is the National Establisht Church of England which through a Collection of several Parochial Congregations is yet properly but one particular Church by reason of the same bond of Faith Worship and Government whereby they are all United and so make one true sound and pure part of the Catholick or Universal Church Except then there be a more just cause of Separation than you either have alledged or can alledge it must be a very great sin to erect new Churches and separate in the Acts of Prayer and Sacraments from the Body of a Church and Nation For so at Corinth St. Paul told them whilst one was for Paul and another for Apollos and there were divisions among them they were Carnal and walked as Men 1 Cor. 3.34 And at Rome he bids them mark them who cause Divisions and Offences and not adhere and associate with but avoid them Rom. 16.17 or to enforce this in the words of the Presbyterians whereby they of old pleaded for Unity and Uniformity We are loth to speak any thing that may offend you yet we entreat you to consider that if the Apostle call those Divisions of the Church of Corinth wherein Christians did not separate into diverse formed Congregations of several Communions in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Schism 1 Cor. 1.10 may not your secession from us and professing you cannot joyn with us as Members and setting up Congregations of another Communion be more properly called Schism And I must tell you further that it is never the less so in you upon the Account of the Act of Toleration which cannot nor does not pretend to exempt you from the Duty of Conformity but only from the Penalties of Nonconformity Your Separation is not one Jot the more reasonable or more just than it was before and those that were concerned in the drawing up of this Paper seem to be sensible of this in that they do not urge the Plea of Toleration but put their cause upon another Issue viz. the Merits of it But however Mr. Norris has cleared this case in his Charge of Schism continued notwithstanding the Toleration And now that I may be even with my Gentleman for his Idol-syllogism I shâ—â—â— Sum this whole Matter in a Syllogism all the parts whereof have been sufficiently proved to be as true as that was proved to be false and it runs thus Whoever separate from a Church with which they may lawfully communicate are guilty of Schism But you separate from a Church with which you may lawfully communicate Therefore you are guilty of Schism Or if you would rather that I should put the Argument into form in your own Words it stands thus Whoever are divided from the external Communion of the true Church are Schismatiks But you are divided from the external Communion of the true Church Therefore you are Schismaticks The Major or first of these Propositions is your own The Minor or second Proposition is true also because it is undeniable that the Church of England is a true Church and too sadly apparent that you separate from external Communion with her in the Exercise of Prayers and Sacraments the Ordinances of the true Church whence the Conclusion necessarily follows that you are Schismaticks And if so then I beseech you lay to Heart the words of Mr. Ball one of the most learned and judicious Non-conformists before the Wars as Dr. Stilling fleet stiles him in his Mischief of Separaton where he quotes him for them speaking of Separation he calls it a Renting the Church the Disgrace of Religion the Advancement of Pride Schism and Contention the Offence of the Weak the Grief of the Godly who be better setled the Hardning of the Wicked and Recovery or Rising again of Anti-Christianism nay even persecuting the Lord Jesus in his Host which they revile in his Ordinances which they dishonour and in his Servants whose Footsteps they slander whose Graces they Despise whose Office they Trample upon with Disdain ANSWER And I hope God will so direct us in Choosing our Minister that we shall make choice of such a one as will eandeavour to keep with in the Bounds and Limits of the Laws of God and Man and in particular the Act of Toleration and one I hope that will give no Disturbance in the Parish unless you will be disturbed as I fear you are and have been for the Preaching of the Gospel you know such Men there were in the Apostles days these Men say they do exceedingly trouble our City you know who they were that were accused those who were the Faithful Ambassadours of Jesus Christ REPLY I did not desire you to take care in the choice of a Minister there is no Room for that as long as I live and I am not legally dispossessed But if you must have another Preacher who in your Judgements is better qualified than I am I wish still that he may be a Man of Prudence and Temper one that will strictly confine himself within the Bounds and Limits of the Act of Toleration which restrains him wholly to the Meeting-House where he is licenced in the Exercise of his Talent of preaching gives him no Indulgence to perform any other Ministerial Office either there or in any other place nor to Rail and Revile or speak against the Church and Common Prayer either in his Sermons or elsewhere nor to go about to seduce People from the Established Service and their own Proper Minister There is no Toleration that I know of for these and the like Practises to either him or any other and therefore I think it is good and kind Advice both to you and him to keep within the Bounds of that Act for fear an Enquiry should be made whether all such who do not observe the Conditions of the Indulgence be not as liable to the Law as if they had none But let him be as cautious as he will not to transgress that particular Law he must not pretend that he observes all the Laws of God and
Man if he sets up Altar against Altar Church against Church and Heads a Separation from the external Communion of the true Church of Christ and be he who he will and let his Pretence be what it will if he sets himself here in Opposition to me and that true Church of which I am a lawful Minister I must say of him that he does exceedingly trouble our City and that too by Teaching Customs which are not lawful for us to Receive neither to observe being Members of the Church of England for if any Man seem to be contentious we have no such Custom nor the Churches of God from whence we may by the way observe that the Apostle disputing concerning an Ecclesiastick Ceremony with the Corinthian Church appeals to the Custom of the Churches of God as sufficient to confute even the most contentious without any express Determination of the word of God in matters of that Nature I know very well who they were that said these men do exceedingly trouble our City and of whom they spake it and upon what Principle they spake it and I know that your Application of it to me is not Parallel in any of these but I am sure that the Expression as applied by me is as to the matter of Fact true and I know further that they were the Children of Edom that cryed out upon Jerusalem Down with it Down with it even to the Ground It is I do own a daring and provoking piece of Impudence to have a Company of Vzziah's unto whom it appertaineth not to burn Incense unto the Lord but to the Priests the Sons of Aaron that are consecrated to burn Incense compared with the Holy Apostles of our Blessed Saviour who gave such undeniable Proof of the Divinity of their Commission And a good Man cannot but be troubled at the Injustice and Confusion of breaking in upon sacred Rights and invading Holy Offices But however I do assure you that having as I hope now discharged my Duty to the full in this particular I shall give no farther Disturbance to my self than to lament our Divisions and beseech God to compose them and to take what care I can to secure the Rigths and Priviledges which do yet belong to the Church and Minister of this Parish from being either withheld or encroached upon And this as it is all the Disturbance or indeed Incivility that I have offered you notwithstanding sufficient Provocation during the time that I have been in this place so need you not be apprehensive of any other from me for the future Only forgive me that Wrong and give me leave to maintain my Fidelity to the Church to be firm to my Subscriptions and my Vows of Ordination constantly to use and as well as I am able to defend that Liturgy which I have solemnly testified my Approbation of in the Presence of God and in the face of his congregation Pardon me in these things and excuse me that I am resolutely bent not to speak beneath the Dignity of my Function and the Station I am in and you may depend according to the Opportunities you give me of performing them upon all the good Offices which can reasonably be expected from either a good Neighbour a charitable Christian or an honest Minister ANSWER Sir You charge us with causing Divisions among us by bringing in another Preacher as if the Preaching the Gospel by the Authoriz'd Ambassadors of God were the only Cause whom alas you do not consider it 's the unlawful Impositions Superstitions Traditions that is the principal Cause of those Divisions that we are among us for all those are removed we cannot be united REPLY And notwithstanding this impertinent Cant I say still that the bringing in another Preacher does and will maintain the Divisions among us and further that such Preachers are the main if not the only true Causes of them thro' the just Judgment of God upon a sinful People who have not lived answerably to their holy Profession and that Excellent Church which God in wonderful Mercy and by miraculous Providences hath established and preserved among us And I shall alwaies be of that Opinion till it is proved that those Men are Ambassadors authorized by God to preach the Gospel in this Nation and that there are any unlawful Impositions Superstitions and Traditions in our Church which are a just cause for the People to forsake their own Pastors and give themselves up to the guidance of those Intruders And this is a sufficient Reply to his complemental Conclusion with the false Accusation of Vnlawful Impositions Superstitions and Traditions clamorous Phrases which every ignorant Wretch can make use of when he has a mind to reproach our Church Methinks it would have been but fair dealing to have made good this Charge by shewing what Vnlawful things we impose wherein we are superstitious and by what Traditions we make the Word of God of none effect But he knows that to cry out against any Man of a different Opinion is enough to raise the whole Discontented Party against him If he thinks he has given sufficient Proof of Vnlawful Impositions in our Church I think I have proved he has not and in reference to whatsoever is imposed upon us meerly by the Churches Authority I shall only further say That none of the things imposed are Unlawful in themselves that to abridge Authority is the exercise of their Power in things of a middle nature that are of themselves indifferent and neither simply good or evil is to cancel and make Authority useless because their Power lies mainly in things of that nature since things that are simply and absolutely good are commanded by God himself and things that are in themselves evil forbidden by him that if where some are impower'd to give Orders others are not under an Obligation to observe them Authority is nugatory and ridiculous and that before these latter days there were never any Christians in the World that held themselves bound not to do a lawful thing meerly because it was commanded and imposed upon them which makes Obedience and Observance of those things a Duty in us which before they were clothed with a particular and punctual Command were no ways obligatory What this Man means by Traditions I can hardly guess As for Traditions about Matters of Doctrine we hold none but those which are deliver'd to us in the Writings of the Penmen of Holy Writ and for the proof of the Authority of those Sacred Books we look upon the written Tradition of the Church to be a good Argument If by Traditions he means the Customs and Ceremonies of the Church then they have already been consider'd as far as he gave me occasion to do it And I shall only add that I do believe what the Church of England declares in the 34th Article of her Religion That whosoever thro' his private Judgment willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions i. e. Customs and