Service of your Hypothesis and on the Judgment and Practice of the Faithful in the purest Ages alias the most Popish Ages so that you presume your Inference is clear That all those who have separated without just Cause from the outward Communion of that Church with which they ought or with which you will say they ought to hold Communion and so persisting in that Separation tho' otherwise never so Orthodox or Holy have hereby so cut themselves off from the Body of the Vniversal Church that they can do nothing that can qualify themselves or others for Communion with it So that by this your Rule of Catholick Vnity in outward Communion all those Persons and Churches that herein agree not with you are not of the Body nor united to the Head and then must necessarily be in a state of Damnation Woe be then to all those poor Churches that are to your Constitution and way of Government and Worship Strangers But by the way give us leave to ask you How it comes to pass that Baptism and Ordination received in the Church of Rome are accounted valid in your Church of England and yet Ordination in any Protestant Church that 's not of your Constitution accounted Null Or for what politick Reason is their Baptism allowed and their Ordination only Condemn'd Is it because the Church of Rome never separated from you nor you from it as all the other Protestant Churches have done Who must therefore be all abandon'd by you as Harlots that deserve to be ston'd while Rome is own'd for your Sister or your Mother and of the same Catholick Body with you Either own the Relation or renounce the Title of Protestant Will you say that these Churches were never in Communion with you and therefore did not go out from you Suppose this were true of the main Body of them that they were never in particular outward Communion with the Church of England tho' before the Reformation they were in the same Church with you and many of those and of their Children who were once actually in particular Communion with you went out from you on the same Account as we do yet supposing it otherwise How little will this help Them more than Vs as to the Oneness of the outward Communion of the universal Church in the Sense that you take it and urge it on Vs And now that we are upon Enquiries with you Pray be not offended if we ask you once more What think you of our first Protestant Reformers Before they actually separated from the Church of Rome were they not Members of that Church and in outward Communion with it If not how could they be said to separate from it But if they were let us ask you again was that Church of which they were then Members a true Church of Christ or not If not then that Church and all the Members of it was not united to the Head and consequently was no Church nor by your Rule of Catholick Vnity could do any thing to qualify themselves or others for Communion with any part of the Catholick Church and from whom then did your Church of England or any of the Reformed derive their Succession and Authority from the Apostles But if it was a true Church how could they according to your Notion of Catholick Vnity separate from it without involving themselves in the guilt of Schism with which you now charge us May we not hence conclude that to separate from a true Church of Christ that retains the Essentials of a Church is not always Schismatical nor a Solution of Catholick Vnity Will you tell us that these had a Warrant by a Call from Heaven to justify their Separation Rev. 18.4 2 Cor. 6.17 But on what Reason was this Call grounded Come out of her my People that ye be not Partakers of her Sins And doth not the same Call reach Vs as far as the Reason is the same Tho' the Sins of the Church of Rome were greater than those of the present Church of England yet what is Sin is Sin still and will by your own Concessions so far justify our Separation and on no other Account do we desire or pretend to justify it The Separatists condemn'd in Scripture and with whom you would sort Vs and so represent us to the World were Men of very ill Character as to their Morals Persons given up to Sensuality walking after their own ungodly Lusts tho' veild under a Form of Religion yet by their corrupt Lives they were visibly to be discern'd Now let the impartial part of the World judge whether this be so much our Character as the Character of those by whom we are thus Censur'd That the Fathers and Bishops of the first Ages were very jealous of the Union of their Churches and an intire Obedience to their Ecclesiastical Rulers very Passionately and sometimes Hyperbolically declaiming against Separation or setting up Pastors without the Approbation of their own Bishops is not to be denyed and for which they had some prudential Reasons The Christian Church was then in its Infancy and therefore requir'd a stricter Hand of Government over it for the preservation of its Unity in Communion the Faithful were not so well settl'd and experienced in their Way their Dangers were many ways extraordinary not only from the Heathen Persecutors but from the Jewish Bigots which were in so many Places dispers'd among them and had so troublesome and ensnaring an Influence on the young Gentile Converts Besides the many false and seditious Teachers which the Devil had Sown as his Tares almost every where among them the Orthodox Presbyters too few and generally too weak to deal with so many so potent and so subtil Enemies or to be entrusted with the Conduct of the Church without the Counsel and Direction of its prime Guides and Governours Besides the Honour and Satisfaction of Sovereign Rule and Dictatorship is what was ever very pleasing to Nature So that all these things consider'd we have no reason to wonder at the Heat of their Spirits in this Case And indeed the Church had then very great Reason to bless God for this their Zeal and most religiously to observe them in it especially while they had no cause to dissent or divide themselves on the account of any Heresies they Taught them or any disputable unscriptural Impositions that were required as the Conditions of their Communion with them There were no such Things exacted of Them as have been of Vs and our Teachers which made their Obedience easy and indisputable And you may observe that the great Reason of their Care to preserve the Unity of the Churches outward Communion was not to uphold a few unnecessary Ceremonies but to preserve the Purity of its spiritual Worship and Doctrin which was infinitely more valuable and consequential a circumstantial variety of the external Forms of Church-Administrations would have done the Church no more harm than the variety which we see in every Species
if a Company withdraw themselves from it and shake off all Dependance on it and Communion with it all Communion if you speak this to us you must mean all outward Communion in those Ceremonious Acts of Worship and Matters of Discipline that lie in Controvesie betwixt us they cannot be of the same Body that they deserted And then it must needs follow That Your Church being Politically in Communion with the CATHOLICK and Ours out of Communion with you we are but as so many dead Branches that have lost their Union with the Body and all the Influxes of Life from the Head How gladly then would you see us in the Fire that you may warm your selves by us Sure 't is well for those of us you are so angry with that the Act De Haroticis comburendis is repeal'd But this Inference of yours you pretend to illustrate by several pat Instances The Empire of Persia you say was one Body under Darius but was not so when divided into several Kingdoms under the Successors of Alexander Very critically observ'd when thus divided they were not One particular Political Body as before yet were they true parts of One and the same Universal World still tho' divided into particular National Polities yet united still in all the common Interests of Human Nature and Society So a City is one Body but the Colonies that issue out from it and are form'd into other Cities under their own proper Laws and Jurisdiction cannot be Numerically and perhaps are not Specificially one Political Body yet they are one Kingdom and govern'd by the same common Laws and Statutes of the Kingdom And what the Kingdom is the worse for this Variety or Diversification of particlar Political Forms no Man can tell Nay suppose this Separation be made by a Revolt or Dislike of the Constitution of the Government of the City or of their Manners and Formalities and without the Publick Consent we hope this will not Out-law them nor Disfranchize them of any of their National Privileges and Rights as long as they behave themselves with due Loyalty to their Sovereign and peaceably to their Fellow-Subjects Now you say a Church hath this Communion with a City and with all Corporations Very true so the Church at Jerusalem was once the Vniversal Church and Gospel Metropolis But if all those particular Churches that have been separated from it into Political Bodies not only Numerically but Specifically distinct under their own Laws and Forms of Government Worship and Discipline and different from that of the first Mother-Church from which they issued be no more Churches because of these different outward Communions wherein they are not one with the first Church nor with one another then it must needs follow that You are no more a Church of Christ than We and so you have thus far set us on even Ground with your selves nor hath any one need to renounce the use of the Words or affront the common Sense of Mankind to draw this Conclusion from your Premises 2. You plead from a supposed Inconsistency it hath with Church Government and its Destructiveness of the Church it self and a vain excuse you say 't will be for Men to say that they are at an Agreement with the Church in Doctrin while by their Divisions they are tearing the Church in Pieces And this you are at the Pains to Illustrate by Comparisons Military Civil and Domestick as if it were an hard Matter to beat this Notion into Mens Heads But when all is done you won't imagine how little We think our selves concern'd in it for you have granted us and we cannot forget it that it must be a Causeless Separation or else it is not what you are declaiming on therefore till it appear that our Separation from the Church of England is Causeless we are not the Persons that are like to be hurt by your Arrows And as for our Officers by whose Conduct we are guided in the Matters of God and of our Souls they are neither Mutinous nor Seditious nor Self-Intruders as by your Comparisons you would Insinuate but generally as well qualify'd and altogether as lawfully call'd and commission'd and as fully invested with the ministerial Office according to the Rules of the Holy Scriptures as any of your Selves as we have already prov'd so that this Argument you may now lay aside among your broken Weapons till you find a proper Occasion for it 3. You argue from its Inconsistency with the Notion of Schism as it is express'd in the Holy Scripture i. e. If the Scripture Notion of Schism were the same with Yours And for this your only Instance is the Schism that was once in the Church of Corinth where every one said I am of Paul or I of Apollas or I of Cephas But this Faction among the Disciples at Corinth you told us in your second Section was but a Schism within the Church not from it and therefore will not give us the full Notion of Schism according to your own apprehension of it But we will let this pass for an Impertinence having already granted you more than this Instance can pretend to prove viz. that Oneness in Doctrin is not always enough to justify a Separation from outward Communion 'T is in your misapplying it to us that your great Mistake lies supposing that our Separation from you is as Causeless as were the Factious Divisions of those in the Church of Corinth which is the Thing that 's yet to be prov'd But it seems to us by the Tenour of your Discourse from top to bottom that let a Church be what it will either as to its Constitution or its individual Members ever so Corrupt in Doctrin Superstitious in Worship or Filthy in Conversation and degenerated from Scripture Rules and Institution yet while they hold together in outward Communion as the Church of Rome hath done both before and since the Protestant Reformation there is nothing in it that deserves the Name of Schism or that will justifie a Seperation from it Pray tell us plainly whose Cause it is you are pleading under the Name of the Church of England Have you never consider'd the Differences that there were in the Apostle's Days between the Churches of the Christian Jewes and those of the Gentiles in respect of Rites and Ceremonies and outward Communion and don 't you know to what a height these Differences were kept up by the Churches that were still so fond of their old Way that there was no Uniting them in this Point That Paul for his Non-Conformity to 'em could not shew his Face among 'em at Jerusalem without danger of his Life Have you not read what a feud there was once between Him and Peter on this Account Gal. 2.11 12 13 14. And how much ado the Apostle Paul had to preserve the Churches of the Gentiles from being bigotted to their Superstitions Now pray tell us whether the Church at Jerusalem or that at Antioch were the
to Preach Christ here so near to your Noses wherein you make your self a Judge of evil Thoughts 4. By your implicit complaint how much they exercise your Patience and Self-denial as those of old did Paul's Yet would you but lay aside your own Envy and Prejudices you might on much more comfortable Grounds conclude as the Apostle there doth that this their Preaching would be to your Advantage and Beneficial both to the Church and to your selves too V. The next Argument that you can afford us is this That we are only returned to those whom we had forsaken before and that we might do this since we had the Indulgence or the Liberty granted to us by the Law Before we meddle with this Argument let us turn it into Form after its Fellows and see how it will look then and who they are that will own it But in Syllogism it makes this Figure For a People to return to those Ministers whom they had forsaken before when they have Liberty granted them by the Law so to do is no Schism But we have now Liberty granted us to return to those Ministers whom we had forsaken before Erg. Sir It would look very ingeniously if you would now at last please to tell us from what Author of Ours you took this Topping Argugument which perhaps you think and would have others to think is one of the best we have to defend our selves with The truth is were it not for the Law that protects Us we should be badly able to defend our selves against Church-violence and doubtless there are Summer-flies enough among Us whose Devotion depends on this Liberty which the Law hath given us But had we not better Reasons to justifie our Cause against your Argumentations we should think our selves in an ill Case 'T is hardly worth our labour to follow you in all that you harrangue on this Head You say If our Separation was Sinful before we Conform'd our return to it must be Sinful And we think so too For the Law hath not alter'd the Case as to the Nature of the thing Wherefore your first Enquiry upon it is very pertinent viz. Whether our Separation before we Conformed were Sinful But instead of Enquiring you take it for granted that it was so and say 't is clear from what went before i. e. from your notion of Catholick Unity which we have examin'd and think that by this time you have little Reason to Glory in it But if this prove to be no clear evidence against us then it is not yet clear that our Separation from you is Causeless and therefore Sinful and Schismatical And we hope we have already said enough to destroy that Infant-notion of Catholick Unity in your Sense if we may but obtain an unbyassed Judgment upon it Neither do we need that Objection you here make for us That many of us were never Members of the Church of England and therefore no Deserters of it We commend you that you will be careful to raise no Objections but what you think you can Answer But you must first better prove that our Separation is Causeless and then we shall think our selves concerned to take notice of what you say Sir We are ashamed to hear a Protestant pleading so like a Papist for a Priestly Succession concluding that the Office of the Gospel-Ministry is utterly extinct without your Episcopal Ordination Had not this Antiscriptural Uncharitable Church destroying Pretension been so long ago baffled and therefore deserted by the Wisest and most Learned of your own Communion as well as by the Judgment of all Foreign Protestant Divines we should not have wondered so much at you Wherefore we shall not now Rem toties actam agere but leave you first to answer what hath been by so many and with so convincing Evidence written on this subject whose Names we need not mention to one that is so well acquainted with Books as you are In the mâ—an time we cannot but make a very particular Observation on the Ebullition of your Gall against the Liberty we now enjoy by the Benefit of the Law 't is well for us that this was not granted us as once by a Dispencing Power to which the late Reigns pretended but by a Better-design'd and Well advised Act of King and Parliament For to give us here a Taste of the Volatility of your Spirit of Charity you are bold to suggest that We are not the Persons that come within the intent of that Act and therefore can justly expect no savour from it because you say that Act was only design'd to give ease to Tender Consciences but ours are not of that number because not of the same Latitude with yours Oh how do your Fingers itch to be at your old Work with us again What a grief of Heart is the Indulgence which our Governours have so Graciously and so Necessarily granted us How fain would you cut us off from the Protection of the Laws under which we live as Loyally and Obediently as any of your selves And all because we have forsaken your Ceremonies and desire to Worship God in a way more agreeable to the Scripture Simplicity of the Gospel and more experimentally conducive to the Spiritual Good and Eternal Happiness of our own Souls We see by this that Paul was never in greater danger at Jerusalem on the account of his Nonconformity than We should be of You should the Government but once more let you loose upon Us. But that We are none of the Tender Consciences that come within the intent of the Act you pretend to prove by our former Conforming to you and Communion with you wherein you presume that we were then satisfied and thought it lawful Ay Sir we once thought it lawful i. e. not absolutely or in it self Sinful when we either knew no better or could get no better and we are of the same Mind still as we have once already told you and to which to avoid repetition we would referr you having for illustration of the Case first given you this Familiar Similitude 2 Kings 6.25 There was a time in Samaria when an Asse's Head was sold for Fourscore Pieces of Silver and the fourth part of a Cab of Dove's Dung for Five Pieces of Silver There was nothing so Ceremonially or Naturally unclean but was Hungrily fed upon and not one questioned the Lawfulness of it so that there were no Murder in the Case To the Hungry Soul every bitter thing was sweet But when the Siege was broken up and the Gates were opened and a Plenty of all Good Food was come should the Princes have Monopoliz'd it and by a severe Edict interdicted the free use of it and confin'd the People to the use of such things for kind and measure as they had found in their extremity would pass down with them and was just enough to keep Soul and Body together and condemn all such to Fines or Prisons or Banishment that should dare
though never so peaceably and temperately to make use of the Plenty that God had given them would not your Charity think this to be a little hard And truly while we think our Souls so much better and nearer to us than our Bodies we cannot take it very kindly to be so dealt with by You. Lastly To take your fair leave of this Argument you tell us that you are far from derogating from the Authority of Secular Princes But we must tell you that you are not so far as would better become you from reflecting on the Wisdom and Justice of those that are in Supream Authority over you and by whose distinguishing Favour it is that you enjoy your Ecclesiastical Preferments and We our Christian Liberty of Conscience and Immunity from the rigour of Penal Laws VI. You have now brought us to what you Call our Sixth Argument and that you may shew how bountiful you can be and how willing to make the most of what we have to say for our selves you have subtilly divided this One for us into Three The Bulk of the Argument we perceive lies thus That the way of the Separation is preferable to that of the Church i. e. Of the Church of England Erg. We Answer that to chuse that which is the more excellent and having now Liberty given us so to do we hope is no Schism at least in our Case And to suffult our Major you have found out for us Three other Subservient Arguments which yet you say are cut off by the Sinfulness of our Separation So that it seems your Goodness never intended they should do us any real Service And thus you could have found it in your Heart to have dismised them without farther Consideration But because you apprehend there is some stress laid upon 'em and to make your Triumph the greater You thought fit to bring them under a distinct Examination wherein we shall follow you with a very obsequious diligence 1. It hath been said that in the way of Separation we enjoy purer Ordinances Ordinances that are freer from Ceremony and the addition of things not commanded that set us at a greater distance from Popery c. But to rid your self of this way of Arguing you endeavour to smother it under a Heap of Absurdities which they fall into who would exclude from Religion all things not commanded and who make the greatest distance from the Church of Rome from which you seem Jealous of being drawn too far the Standard of the best Reformation And then you make us a long Quotation of the gross Absurdities of those Men whom you call the more Rigid Separatists out of Baylie's Disswasive and Paget's Arrow against Separation wherein we are not concerned unless it be as you well advise to caution us against the like wild Extravagancies This we take kindly enough from you and that we may not lye long in your Debt in this kind we think it as seasonable to desire you to consider by what Means and Degrees the Church of Rome arriv'd to its 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Superstition and Idolatry Whether some such few uncommanded Ceremonies which you so zealously retain and unwarrantably impose were not the first Nest-Eggs to which all the rest were laid Whether they are not now as productive of more as ever they were when an occasion shall offer and whether there are not enough now in England that do expect it and have prepared their Nests for it Whether your few Ceremonies have not the same relation and subservient tendency to the grosser Superstition and Idolatries of Rome as the High Places of the Jews which some of their Reforming Kings through the instigation of their Priests were so loth to let go were of the grosser Idolatries of the Heathen And whether you are not as much concerned to beware of leading your selves and others into the Gulph of the foulest Superstition by an abuse of your Power as we have to beware that others run not out into Extreams by our doing but our Duty You seem to grant us with the generality of your Conformists That there is nothing to be admitted as an Essential part of God's Worship that is not the subject of a Divine Precept But would you not then by an innuendo have us to believe that some Integral Parts may be admitted without any such Precept Which you had need to prove before we can be very forward to believe But then you say indefinitely That External Rites and Circumstances of Worship whether English or Romish Jewish Greek or Barbarian are of another Nature and indeed we think so too but being not forbidden of God expresly or by consequence are not Sinful And herein we should agree too could it but be once agreed what is by consequence forbidden For our parts we are apt to think that the consequence of those first words of the Second Commandment and all those Scriptures of the Old Testament that condemn the using of any thing in God's Worship which He hath not commanded or required That that of Matth. 15.9 and that of the Apostle Colos 2.20 21 22. will go far to condemn all those Rites and Ceremonies us'd in Divine Worship which are of Men's Invention and not necessary ex natura rei whatever their pretended usefulness on the account of their significancy be Besides for the aggravation of our Guilt and our fuller Conviction you would have us to consider how few of these are required of us as Private Men. To which we reply that this brings to our Minds how Lot on a better Principle and to better Purpose once pleaded for Zoar Is it not a little one But whether there be few or many we know no Power you have to require nor any warrant we have to admit of any for he that may require one may on your Principles require ad libitum as many as he will But that it should be impossible to preserve Peace and Order in the Church without a Conformity to these things is owing only to the disorder of your own Spleens and your pertinacious Zeal for them Would you but give every one his Liberty in these things which your selves call indifferent according to the Apostle's Rule Rom. 14. alibi we know not who would disturb the Churches Peace about them You say That in the Primitive Church as many Ceremonies were used as now are required by the Church of England and what if we grant that there were as many and more will you argue from the Primitive Churches using to your Churches requiring and imposing Or do you know which way to prove that their Effects of Charity or Kiss of Peace or the Woman's Vail were of the Apostles Appointment or Institution 'T is true the Apostle argues the Decency of the Woman's being cover'd and of the Man's being uncover'd in the Place and Time of God's solemn Worship 1 Cor. 11. But as for the Matter or Mode of the Covering he hath left this to every
A LETTER TO Mr Robert Burscough In ANSWER to his Discourse of Schism IN WHICH I. The Notion of Catholick Unity is Considered II. The Separation of Dissenters not Schismatical Proved III. The Ordinations of Dissenting Ministers Justified IV. Pretended Pleas for Separation Examined V. The Case about Ceremonies Argued c. Acts 24.14 But this I confess unto thee that after the way which they call Heresy so Worship I the God of my Fathers believing all Things which are written in the Law and the Prophets Christianus mihi Nomen est Catholicus vero Cognomen illud me Nuncupat istud Ostendit Pacian Epist ad Sympron LONDON Printed for J. Clark at the Bible in the Old Change near St. Pauls 1700. A LETTER TO Mr. Robt. Burscough IN Answer to his Discourse of SCHISM Reverend Sir THE Discourse which under a Pretence of Charity to our Souls you lately addressed to Vs who conform'd before the Toleration and have since withdrawn our selves from the Communion of the Church of England We think our selves oblig'd for our own Vindication and the better information of such as have ill Thoughts of us on that Account to acquaint you what Entertainment it finds with most of us and for what Reasons we can make it no better Welcome Your Introduction addresses us with a Declaration of a glorious Design you have to do us all the good you are able Introduct and thereupon think it very reasonable to desire our impartial and candid perusal of what you offer us in order to that good End tho' as you say it be more than you can expect from those amongst us whom your Charity judges as byass'd with Prejudice false Zeal and worldly Interest But of all others you assure your self of contributing something to their Satisfaction And that they are not like to meet with any thing from you that may give any just Cause of Offence yea nothing but what proceeds from a Spirit of Charity But of what sort this your Spirit of Charity is and how well it agrees in its Vertues with that of the Apostle's 1 Cor. 13. and how eminently it hath appear'd throughout your following Discourse every one that reads it may easily discern This Spirit of Charity is doubtless some rare Arcanum a highly refin'd volatile Thing some fiery Tincture which agrees not with every Constitution but prepar'd with a peculiar Art as a Cordial for one sort of the Cholerick Church of England Men with whose bilious Blood it agrees by Sympathy And as for your meek Endeavours herein you hope that what use soever may be made of them by some Men yet that God will graciously accept them Sir What Acceptance they find with God you will better understand in the Day that you must give your Accounts to Him but what Reason we have to accept them you and others that will may see by that time you are come to the other end of these Pages This Ostentation of the Meekness of your Spirit and the Charity of your Design to reduce us to the Truth and to the way of our Duty is the Sum of your Introduction besides an invidious Fling at parting which we may not pass by without some Animadversion You say Your Business at present is chiefly with Vs who think we may lawfully conform with you and yet have deserted your Communion a thing indeed which is very agreeable to Flesh and Blood and which may make several Turns of Affairs more easie to Vs but wise and good Men would suspect an Opinion and Practice which are so much on the side of the World Sir This is the first Specimen of that singular Charity you have for us the plainer English of which is this That unless we will fully Conform to you and for ever abandon those Ministers of Christ whom we now hear tho' we have so much Charity for you as not to censure You as you censure Vs it is not fit that we should be employ'd in any Office in Church or State and in effect that none should Buy or Sell or Live but such as have received your Mark You know what effectual Provision you have made for this as far as the Times would bear by your Sacramental Test whereby many Persons of good Figure and Character have been precluded from Publick Service whose Consciences have been too tender to surmount that Difficulty and which perhaps the Government hath no great reason to be fond of But now to deliver our Brethren who better understand their Liberty in the Gospel from this end of your Spear wherewith you strike at them we have this to offer I. We do not think it utterly unlawful or absolutely Sinful to Communicate occasionally with the Church of England at least in a Lay-communion we have a more Catholick Charity than so to judge of it tho' we know it to be a very Faulty yet we take it to be a True Church of Christ and are ready to testify as need requires our general Communion with it as a part with us of the same universal Body tho' we enter not into a stated Communion with it under those unjustifyable Terms on which it is offer'd us II. It is every Man's bounden Duty to serve God and his Country as also to provide for Himself and his own Family with all those intellectual and corporal Abilities wherewith God hath blest him according as there are Occasions and Calls to it therefore nothing that is tolerable and not plainly sinful tho' burdensom and uneligible ought to restrain us from the Service of God or Man which we are sitted for and called to For who knows of what consequence the Service of such may be especially in a publick Post to the preservation of Religion and Property or to the support and establishment of the Government Which are Considerations sufficient to preponderate all tolerable Inconveniencies III. That it may appear we are not acted herein merely by the Principles of Humane Policy or Self-Ends we have the Example of the great Apostle of the Gentiles to warrant our Practice You may see what his Opinion was of the Jewish Rites and Ceremonies and how zealously he had in several of his Epistles declar'd against them as weak and beggarly Elements and enslaving Things Gal. 4.9 Antichristian Ch. 5.2 Inconsistent with the Liberty of the Gospel ver 1. Another Gospel than that which he had Preached unto 'em Ch. 1.6 7 8. And pronounces Anathema on them that had troubled 'em with it ver 9. Besides what he writes in some other Epistles to the same purpose This is more than ever we heard from any Nonconformist against the Ceremonies of the Church of Enggland and yet for all this the Wise and Holy Paul to avoid the offending his weak Brethren would not scruple for once to Circumcise Timothy Act. 16.3 At another time to shave his Head and observe the Jewish Rites of a Religious Vow Ch. 18.18 And at another time to save himself from the Rage of a
Company of Bigots at Jerusalem appear'd there as a Nazarite with all the Formalities the Law required in that Case Ch. 21.24 This he could do occasionally according to the Liberty he had in Christ which he was careful to preserve and not to be brought under the Power of these Things which is contrary to the Nature and free State of the Gospel And having this apostolical Precedent our Consciences are at ease in this Matter Yet IV. If there be any that have made these external Compliances renuente Conscientia or but with a doubting Conscience let them look to it and repent of their Sin for whatsoever is not of Faith is Sin But to pass this Censure on any without clear Evidence is far from that Charity which thinketh no Evil. Your first Section it but Preliminary to what you pretend to be more Argumentative Sect. 1. wherein you tell us that the Church of Christ being but One and that in the highest and strictest manner of Vnion that is possible for a Society of Men all the Question will be wherein this Vnion does consist or in what things it ought to be maintain'd To this you answer That all Christians ought to be united 1. In Faith 2. in Love 3. in outward Worship and Communion On the Two former you touch lightly because you perceive that the stress of the Question lies on the Third So that tho' We Dissenters be One with you in Faith and Love which whatever you think we have alwaies taken to be the main fundamental Principles of our Christianity and the strongest Nerves of our Christian Union and all that is as absolutely necessary requir'd of us 2 Tim. 1.13 Gal. 5.6 Philem. ver 5. Yet we must by the Rules of your Charity be all Damn'd if we dare to dissent from you in any of your outward Acts and Modes of Worship and Communion Here you run on a large and learned Harangue on the excellency and necessity of Church-Concord in the external Forms of Worship and Discipline as if a few variable unscriptural and confessedly indifferent Ceremonies were the only true Cement and Badge of Christian Union and without which 't is impossible as a visible Society to appear in the Eye of the World as One. And for this you think you very pertinently quote both Scriptures and the Fathers Now as to what you say as to the necessity of Union in Essentials we are ready to say with you and take Communion on in Externalls and Circumstantialls where it may be had without Sin to be on several Accounts as desirable as you can represent it to be But when you say that Faith and Love being invisible Principles are not capable of being a publick Badge of the Christian Profession And Argue from thence that 't is only Vniformity in the external Rites and Ceremonies of Worship that evidences the Oneness of Faith and Affection as if Faith and Love had no other way to express their Efficacy and Sincerity but this you do not only traduce those Divine Principles but shamefully expose the Church of which you are so very tender For should it be said that no one would ever believe the Members of the Church of England to be any of Christ's Disciples did they not see them so Zealous for the Ceremonies of their Church how little would this be for the Credit of their Christianity And indeed this is lamentably too true of very many not only of the common Members but of the Teachers and Leaders of the Church that have little else to distinguish them from Heathens or to perswade a belief of their Christianity but an empty Name and a blind Zeal for what they call the Church That the Church Universal is One and in some respects may be said to be one visible Society and Political Body we readily grant so that the Unity be made to consist only in what is Essential to it else we must inevitably cut the Catholick Church in Pieces according to the variety and differences of the external Rites and Communions of the many particular Churches of which the whole is constituted And when we have done so where shall we find that Oracle that shall infallibly determine and assure us which of all these Parts is that which we ought to own and to Communicate with as the Church of Christ in which alone Salvation is to be had Must you be the Oracle May not others claim it as well as you Or will you send us to Rome to be determin'd Yet this is that you so charitably direct us to and are so strenuously contending for If then the Rending of the Church be Schism let all the unprejudiced part of the World judge who are the Schismaticks You or We. We are ready to Communicate with you in all that is Essential to the Church of Christ and profess our selves to be so far One with you but because we dissent from you in some Circumstantials of your own devising which God hath no where requir'd of us and which are justly Offensive to the Consciences of very many of the Faithful yet which you make the indispensable Conditions of Communion with you therefore we must be cut off and cast out as no parts of the Catholick Church of Christ Is not this to cut the Church in Pieces and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of a Schismatical Church The Catholick Church of Christ indeed is One therefore he that is duly admitted as a Member in any one true part or particular Congregation of this Church has a right of Communicating in all and he that is justly Excommunicated out of one is cut off from all because all are but the integrating Parts of one and the same Body But then they can be one only in those things which are essentially common to all and not in those peculiar Forms or accidental Differences which are one way or other become proper to 'em as particular Parts Will you cut off the Foot as no part of the Body because it differs in Form from the Hand Are you offended with your Nose because it is not in Figure like your Ear When you have dismember'd all the Dissimilar Parts what a comely useful uniform Trunk will you have left Yet this is what you are Pleading for Where then is your Charity Or your Policy You say You see not what just Cause there can be that they should be divided in Worship who are united in Faith And we say so too But why then have you thus divided us from you Whose Fault is it that we do not Worship God together but yours that will not suffer it but on such Terms as we cannot without Sin submit to and which you have devis'd and impos'd with a design to keep so many of us out of your Communion That the Church is a Regular Society we grant A Body fitly joyn'd together consisting of many Members of which all have not the same Office as you quote it from the Apostle Neither
have all the same External Form or manner of Operation in the Service of the Body Order is to be preserv'd in the Church but how shall we agree what and whose Order it shall be Let us ask you soberly Is there no true Church in the World but yours If there be may not every one of these Churches which differ from you and from one another as much as we magnify their own Order as a Law to all the Rest as you now do And then tell us whether it be Order or Confusion that these Positions lead to or whether this be not the way to set all the Christian World by the Ears Here you complain that Men are generally averse from enduring any thing of Subjection to which we may add and altogether as prone to Domineering and Imposing Now the Obedience which is prescrib'd in the Texts of Scripture which you have cited you say is to be paid by the Faithful to those that are over them in the Lord But by the whole tenour of your Discourse you plainly insinuate that the Wisdom which is in effect the same with the Will of those that have obtain'd the Government of the Church must be the Rule to all their Inferiours And by their being over them in the Lord you give us to understand nothing else but their Power de facto in the Church where they sit in Moses's Chair as the Representatives of Christ in Government so that they must be obey'd without asking any Question for Conscience sake But for our parts we understand not how we can be secur'd against the danger of Church-Tyranny and Superstition if those Words of the Apostle 1 Thes 5.12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Lord do not import the Bounds of our Obedience as well as the general Matter of it and Motive to it Church-Rulers may be forward to Labour and to Admonish too but if it be not in the Lord and according to the Lord woe be to them that are guided and influenc'd by ' em But let the Apostle's Exhortation be taken in the true intent and meaning of it and we will be as forward to obey as you There 's nothing in the World that we covet more than to see such Bishops and Pastors in the Church of England as the Apostle exhorts us to obey in the Lord that is without any personal Reflection such as require nothing of us but what the Lord requires that the World might see how much we would disdain to be out-done by any but Flatterers and Sycophants in our Love and Obedience to ' em What you say of the Oneness of Church-Government and of the People that are under it we agree to if you will but stand to your own Distinctions That what you say of both is to be understood of them so far as they agree to Christ's Institution And if Christ be not divided neither are they They are not divided I mean so far as they act according to his Will and the Rules of their Order If by these Rules you mean the Sacred Rules which Christ hath given them and not the Arbritary Rules which they give us We mean so too That the faithful People under their lawful Pastors we hope you mean Lawful by the Law of Christ and not only by the Law of Man make up one Body This you say is evident from their Duty and from their Rights From their Duty you plead 1. They are oblig'd to Honour and Obey their Spiritual Rulers Ay Sir In the Lord and according to the Lord. 2. It is their Duty to joyn together in publick Acts of Worship with that Company of Christians which they sind Established and in some Cases tho' only tollerated yea tho' Persecuted under a lawful Pastor where they reside This we acknowledge is their Duty where they may do it without Sin From their Rights which are the same every where you Argue That this Vnion is founded on a Divine Institution and the Baptismal Covenant in which they are all alike engag'd and not on a formal positive League amongst themselves No Sir nor on any thing that is merely Humane or of an Indifferent much less a doubtful Nature wherein the Substance or Essentials of Christianity do not consist What you object against the Independent Congregational way or any others of the same Practice and Persuasion in this Point we take not our selves to be concern'd in unless you mistake us all for such who have not that Dependance on and Communion with you which you are Quarrelling with us for Having been at great Labour to prove what none of Us nor perhaps any one else that is call'd Christian ever deny'd viz. That the universal Church is One Body you make your Application of this profound Doctrin by way of Encouragement to your selves and draw a most delightful Contemplation from it That it is now the same Body that it was from the beginning The same indeed is every true Church of Christ as it was from the beginning that is in all things that are absolutely necessary to Salvation but we would gladly understand where that pure Church is now to be found which hath not at all deviated or degenerated from what the Church of Christ was in the beginning 'T is true every true Church of Christ now in the World is deriv'd by Succession from Christ and his Apostles but dares the Church of England say that it is now the very same in all it's Circumstantials and external Modes and Forms of Worship Discipline and Ceremonies with those of the Apostles own Planting Where do you read your apostolical Rules or Precedents for any of those Things which you so zealously Practise and so arbitrarily impose on us as the Terms of our Communion with you and which are the only Matters in debate between us Yet you would have the World believe that without our full Conformity to these Things and our Communion with you in 'em we cannot be one Body with the Vniversal Church nor in Communion with the Apostles Nor is this all but that consequently we are out of Communion with the Father and the Son and so are in a state of Infidelity and Damnation Have we not herein a special Instance and Evidence of your Catholick Charity just like theirs of the Church of Rome who call those only Christians that are of their own Communion Let us be ever so Orthodox in all the Articles of the Christian Faith ever so right as to the Object of our Religious Worship or Reverent and Devout in the Acts of it ever so Sober Just and Righteous in our Conversation or ever so wiling to walk in Communion with you as far as we may do it without Sinning against God and our own Souls Yet for want of Conformity to you in all those unnecessary Things which you would impose on us we must be cut off from Christ and left to Perish with the Heathen World But if we will tamely put our Necks under your
Yoke and prostitute our Consciences to your Authority and adventure our All to Eternity on the safe Conduct of your Direction and Benediction let us be ever so ignorant of the Articles or Nature of the Faith we profess or ever so Scandalous in our Lives yet if we Live and Die in your Communion you will on our Death-Beds bring us the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of our Saviour which you will pretend to Consecrate to us and so Absolve us and tell us we are safe for the other World May we not tell a Popish Priest now Mutato nomine de te Fabula Narratur And now Sir having taken this brief View of your first Section wherein had we followed you Line by Line in every thing that might have offer'd us a just Remark it would have carried us too far beyond the due Bounds of a Letter Wherefore for brevity sake we will now summ up the Argument of it in this categorical Form The Universal Church of Christ is One Body But the Church of England and those of the Dissenters are Two Erg. Dissenters are not of the Church of Christ Or which may be concluded altogether as Logically Erg. Either the Church of England or the Dissenters are not the Church of Christ Both of these are alike true In what University learn'd you this Logick Or by what Pretence can you hope to hide the shame of so staring a Fallacy That we have not wrong'd you in the Syllogism Sect. 2. we have drawn upon your first Section appears by your own Inferences in your Second where you conclude That a Breach of Vnion in any of these Things viz. Not only in Faith and Love but in External Communion and particularly with the Church of England in its present State and in all its Rites and Ceremonies which is the main thing in dispute betwixt us where-ever the Fault is as you express it with very good caution must needs be Sinful i. e. so Sinful as according to your Hypothesis cuts a Person off from all saving Communion with the Church of Christ Now this Inference so generally yet cautiously stated you begin very Orthodoxly to defend in your next Paragraphs where you say I. That if there be but one Faith deliver'd to the Saints for which they must earnestly contend they grievously offend who add new Articles to it or take away from it such as are already reveal'd or otherwise deprave it by a mixthre of Falshood And so far as they do so we ought to depart from them and not betray or deny the Truth in complyance with them Sir We sincerely thank you for this and wish that we may always sind you sixt on this good Principle This is all that We and our Teachers have been so long wrestling and waiting on the Church of England for Grant us but this and then there will need but one thing more besides the Grace of God to reconcile and unite us If we unite with you in all that the Word of God requires us to unite in the Fault will not be Ours if we depart and separate from you in those Articles which are not of the Faith that was once delivered to the Saints or in those Acts of Worship and outward Communion which we have no Warrant in the Scriptures for but general Cautions against then our Separation will not by this Principle of Yours be damn'd by you as Schismatical but must be acknowledged as we verily believe it to be a part of our bounden Duty And when you speak with so much keenness against our Division and Separation from you do Us and the Cause but so much right as to prefix the Word Causeless and you will find us ready to say as to the Theory of your Doctrin much the same as you do All that you quote out of the Scriptures or out of your Saints or any other more modern Authors of your own or of our Persuasion against Schism is nothing at all to us unless you first prove our Separation to be Causeless and consequently Schismatical Now in order to this you undertake 1. To shew us what the Nature of Schism is 2. What Grounds you have to apprehend that we are deeply concern'd in it 3. You examine the Arguments that have been offer'd on our part to excuse us from the guilt of it 4. You represent to us the sad Consequence of it According to this Method we shall now endeavour to follow you I. You say That Schism in the Notion of it that we are now upon is a causeless Breach of outward Ecclesiastical Communion By this Limitation of your Desinition whereby you warily explain your self you give us to understand that what your Discourse is so hotly affected with is not the Whole but only a Branch of Schism and indeed one of the least and remotest Branches of it yet which if Causeless we will grant it to your Desinition to be Schismatical And we again thank your Ingenuity in inserting the Word Causeless by which Specifick Difference of your Genius you leave us to conclude that there is a Breach of outward Ecclesiastical Communion which is not Causeless but Necessary and if we can prove this to be our Case then are you bound by your own Definition to Absolve us of that Guilt with which we stand charg'd by you This Schism you say is sometimes within a Church sometimes from a Church sometimes sets up opposite Churches and Officers All which if the Separation be Causeless must needs carry the Schism to higher degrees of Guilt And much more when it constitutes Pastors without any lawful Authority or Ordination So that in all this we are like to agree in Notion till it comes to be try'd whether the Separation with which we are charg'd be Causeless or no and whether our Pastors be constituted without any lawful Authority or Ordination But before we come to the Examination of this part of the Question wherein the main stress of all lies we are diverted by what you say you need not enter upon viz. The Debate Whether Episcopal Ordination and Baptism conferr'd in Schism be valid And yet you so far enter upon it whether you had need to do it or no as to resolve it in the Negative Now we hope that you would have us to understand Schism here in the same Notion of it as you give it us in your Desinition viz. A causeless Breach of outward Ecclesiastical Communion tho' in all other respects wherein the Essentials of the Christian Faith and Profession do consist there be no Schism but a good Agreement both with the Holy Scriptures and with the Catholick Church and that all Ordinances administer'd by such as are under the guilt of this piece of Schism are null you conclude from the Notion you have conceiv'd of Catholick Vnity which new-found Notion of yours you strongly fancy is grounded on the Scriptures you have before quoted i. e. as you understand and apply them to the
of the Creation doth do them as long as that wherein the vital Substance of Religion consists is preserv'd You having prov'd that a causeless Separation from the Church is highly Schismatical wherein we do not oppose you in the Theorie but in the Application of your Doctrin in which you all along beg the Question you tell us That for Separatists to set up opposite Churches and Officers is a degree of Sin much worse than Separation it self And we will say as you do when once you have prov'd the Separation to be Causeless But till then we hope your Christian Charity will allow us to provide for our own Souls that we may not be as Sheep without a Shepherd when we are either unjustly cast out by you or most justly separated from you And if you will not allow us this we will bless God and thank our more merciful Governours that do allow us without your Leave so to do Lastly You proceed to a yet higher Degree of Schism viz. When they that are engag'd in it constitute Officers without Authority or take to themselves Pastors that have no lawful Mission or real Ordination This is another of your orthodox Hypotheses which it is a thousand Pities that it should be dishonour'd by a Miss-application Sir We are as little for Uncommissionated Preachers and Self-intruders into the ministerial Office as You. Tho' bare Mission without Ministerial Qualification make but an Idol-Shepherd and wherein the Church of England is more deeply concern'd than perhaps you are willing to own yet Qualification without a rightly deriv'd Comission makes but a Thief or a Robber So that herein You and We agree in Thesi But when on this Head you apply to Us and to our Ministers that tragical Story of Korah and his Complices we cannot take it so kindly of you tho' you are not the first Man that in great Wrath hath thrown this heavy Stone at our Heads however we have not been hitherto hurt by it The History of the Case we need not repeat the Principles by which they were acted notwithstanding their popular Pretensions were Seditious and sacrilegiously Rebellious and the Judgment of God on them and their Followers as Just as it was Dreadful But before your Charity had apply'd this dismal Story and Guilt to Us and to our Teachers you ought to have drawn a true Parallel of the Case and have pro'd that our Ministers have no more Call nor Right to the Gospel-Ministry than Korah and his Company had to the Priesthood and that God hath set as strict Bounds about your English Episcopacy as it is now Established exclusively of all others as he then had done about Moses and the Aaronical Priesthood And till this be done there is no Man of sober Thought but must suspend his Judgment on us Out of this Preamble you lead us to your third Section where you tell us You are now come to our Case for indeed we think you have hitherto been far enough from it here then we hope for a fair Trial may we but be determin'd by what is written in that Book out of which both You and We must shortly be judged And in Order to our Conviction you are pleas'd to mind us how nearly it concerns us to enquire I. Whether we have not contracted the guilt of Schism in our Separation from the Church of England II. Whether we have not increased this Guilt by setting up opposite Churches and Officers or joyning with them III. Whether our Pastors have any just Title to the Ministry Sir Had we not to the best of our Power and Skill with the greatest Diligence and Sincerity enquir'd into all these Things long before this Day we had acted very precipitantly and dangerously but yet such an Admonition as this however design'd shall never be out of Season with us But seeing you offer your Interrogatories not in the form of an Enquiry but of an Indictment we are ready to answer to each Article in our just Defence 1. The first Article of our Indictments runs thus That we have contracted the Guilt of Schism by our Separation from the Church of England that is to wave all Disputes about the Ambiguity of the Word what you are pleas'd to call the Church of England Tho' we have varied your Form of Speech we have done you no wrong it being a known Rule in Rhetorick that a Negative Interrogation is but a more vehement Affirmation And to convict us of the Schism you charge us with you plead thus Was your Communion with it lately Lawful and have any new Terms been added to make it cease to be so Or was Conformity then a Duty and is it now become a Sin This you take to be a Dead Blow which must needs convince us and make us cry Guilty or stop our Mouths for ever But be not too Consident before you have heard our Defence 1. By way of Concession you shall have all that you here suppose that you may see we are not froward 1. That we once thought our Communion with your Church of England Lawful we grant for had we not been so perswaded we had been self-condemn'd by our own Practice Yet whatever our private Thoughts were once of it that was not it that could make the thing to be in it self either Lawful or Unlawful our private Judgment being only a Rule to our selves And if we were therein mistaken thro' our Weakness or any Prejudices of our Education we hope you will allow us the Liberty of rectifying our Judgments upon better Information of which if you think us uncapable what do all your Arguings with us signify But 2. We will grant you yet a little more that we are still of the same Opinion that it is Lawful to Communicate with the Church of England i. e. that it is not absolutely and in it self Sinful so to do But then we hope that if your Charity will not your Logick must grant us that what is to be consider'd but as simply Lawful is Matter of Liberty and not of Necessity We say Liberty granted us by the Nature of the Thing without any Relation to what the Government hath pleas'd so much to your regret to grant us But where we are thus at Liberty to Censure us for using it is Inhumanity 3. If this be not yet enough to please you we will grant a little more we once thought the Conformity you contend for i. e. our Lay-Conformity to be our Duty nor have we repented of these our Thoughts to this Day nor acted any thing that is inconsistent with them We hope the Ingenuity of your cultivated Reason will allow at least in Thesi that what is a Duty at one Time and under some Circumstances is not always so at another Time and under other Circumstances This you must grant or you know with what a Crowd of senseless Absurdities you will be pester'd and of which you will not be able to rid your self Now having
granted you all this we will see what we have left for our selves and Answer you 2. By way of Confutation of your Supposition you suppose 1. That because our Conformity was once Lawful therefore it is not only so still especially because there have been no new Terms added by you to alter the Case but that therefore it is still Necessary which is Illogical enough But to this we say as the Apostle doth in a like Case 1 Cor. 6.12 Ch. 10.23 All things are Lawful unto me but all things are not Expedient i. e. All things that are Lawful to me as all indifferent Things in their own Nature are are not always Expedient and when they come to be Inexpedient they cease to be in their use Lawful for Quicquid non expedit in quantum non expedit non licet All Things are Lawful for me but I will not be brought under the Power of any q. d. In the use of all Lawful Things I have my Liberty to do or to forbear as it consists with the Expediency of my own or others Edification and this Liberty I will not betray by being brought under the Power of any of any what Why if it be Sense it must be of any of those Lawful Things he is now speaking of for if he be by any weak Scruples or ill Principles of his own or any impoling Humour of others brought under the Power of 'em or to look upon them as Necessary he superstitiously enslaves his Conscience and renders himself uncapable of serving the more noble and useful Ends of his Liberty Now in Conformity to this apostolical Rule we lately conformed to the Church of England because we thought it in it self Lawful and on some accounts then Expedient so to do but under our present Circumstances and since that Providence hath given us the Experience of other Publick and Peaceable Christian Communions we find it Inexpedient to continue where we were with relation to the eternal safety of our own Souls which is the highest Concern we have under Heaven tho' this be one of those Things which in your next Section you upbraid us with So that tho' it lately was and still is simply Lawful to communicate with you yet we now find it to be on some of the most important Accounts very Inexpedient and Prejudicial both to our selves and others and the use of our Christian Liberty herein no way really injurious to the Edisication or to the Peace of the Church besides those private Disorders it accidentally occasions in the uncharitable Spleens of a few 2. You suppose that what was once our Duty cannot now become a Sin to us to do But we wonder that this should be such a Paradox to a Person of your Capacity must you not allow it in Thousands of other Cases that what is a Duty at one time would be very inexpediently and sometimes scandalously sinful at another Why then should it look like such a Contradiction in our Case 'T was indeed our Duty to provide for our own and for the Souls of our Families in the best manner we could while we were in Communion with you that is while we either knew no better or could get no better we thought it our Duty as we do still rather to joyn with You than to ly at Home on Lord's Days or do worse But now that God hath enlarged our Steps and made a more plentiful Provision for us we should Sin against our own Souls and theirs too that are committed to our Charge if we should not make use of what God hath given us in this kind and not hazzard the loss of our eternal All for the sake of a few unnecessary offensive Ceremonies and humane Institutions wherein you would Popishly perswade us to believe that the vital Union of the Catholick Church doth consist And thus we briefly answer to the first Article of our Indictment II. The second Article against us is That we have added to our Sin by setting up opposite Churches and Officers or joyning with them And this hath more alienated our Minds from those whom you say we have unjustly forsaken This you suppose is generally our Case and that hence it is that you hear of an Old Church and a New in so many Towns in this Kingdom the latter labouring to establish it self on the Ruins of the former To this we reply That the Separate Churches which we now commonly frequent are not set up in Opposition to Yours but by a necessity which your obstinate Uncharitableness hath brought us under Could we have enjoy'd those Gospel-Privileges with you which our dearest Saviour hath by his precious Blood purchased for us and by his Last Will and Testament bequeathed to us we had never forsaken You. But now if the more we come to understand the Wrong you have done us the more our Minds are alienated from you you must thank your selves for that And wherein you have wronged us you have already often enough heard and we are ready once more to declare in part according as the Discourse we are now waiting on you in shall give us the particular Occasions All the Opposition that is between our Churches and yours is certainly of your own making And for our setting up Church-Officers i. e. Teachers and Pastors over our selves we flatly deny without a good Distinction 'T is true we take it as our natural Right that the Pastor to whom we are to commit the Care of our Souls be of our own free Election and not impos'd upon us against the majority of our Votes by any that shall pretend to a Power so to do as the common manner of the Church of England is and which was not the least of our Grievances while we were in Communion with You. But if by our setting up of Officers you mean our conferring the Pastoral Office upon them or the Authoritative Investing them with it we deny your Supposition If you know any such among Dissenters let them answer for themselves we assure you We are not the Persons And because you fear that we are Labouring to establish our Selves on your Ruins we openly declare your great Mistake of us 'T is our Union and joint Establishment on a Reformation according to the Scriptures that we are Labouring and have been so long praying and waiting for And if such a Reformation will be your Ruin Miserere Deus In vain do you complain of our separate Churches which yet are no Independant Congregations as you suggest tho' they have not that Dependance on Yours which you contend for while your selves are the only Causes of the Separation For let your calmer Reason tell us Who are they that cause Divisions and destroy that Union and Communion of the Churches which you seem to be so Zealous for Are they those that stick to the Primitive Apostolical Rules and Institutions or those that make their own dangerous Innovations the Terms of Communion with them What we have here to
say in behalf of our Ministers must be referr'd to your Third and most consequential Article of our Indictment as its more proper Place and which we are now next to enter on and it runs thus III. That the Pastors we have chosen have no lawful Call to the Ministry This indeed if it could be prov'd were enough to convict both Vs and Them for Schismaticks Those Dissenters that think themselves unconcern'd in this Matter we are not now to answer for nor are we concern'd in what you say of them And as for the Philadelphians we know not what they are expecting but might we once see the Church of England reform'd according to the Scriptures we would expect a better Clergy than most of them now are I. The Ministers whom we profess to own and to follow you confess to have had some of them Episcopal Ordinations and others only Presbyterial Of the former you are willing to allow for the Honour of your own Church not only the validity of their Ordination but an eminency of Personal Abilities but in the exercise of their Abilities you fancy that they are some of those of whom Ignatius says they serve the Devil and your great Reason is not that they are Men of debauched and scandalous Conversation or of false and corrupt Doctrin but because they refuse to obey their Ordinary as you say they solemnly promis'd to do that is you think they have broken their Oath of Canonical Obedience To this we answer for them that if any of 'em have inconsiderately enslav'd themselves and betray'd the Liberties of the Church by an Oath or Promise to any Man Ordinary or Extraordinary to obey them any further than the Apostle requir'd to be obey'd by the Churches 1 Cor. 11.1 viz. as far as he himself obey'd or followed Christ we think 't is time for them to repent of such an Oath And whereas you tell us They can't expect a blessing on their Work while they continue in the Breach of such an Engagement We have as great Reason to think they can't expect a Blessing in keeping it at least being now perswaded of the Evil of it But yet our Charity obliges us to believe that they took that Oath in no larger Sense than is consistent with the Rules of the Gospel and are sure that it is no otherwise binding to ' em And this we hope you will not call a new or strange Doctrin in the Christian Churches Neither is this to degrade all Bishops or to abrogate their Office or overthrow their Chairs as you with so ill Design suggest but to reduce them to that Scripture-Foundation on which alone they may be more gloriously and firmly Established We cannot but remark with how light a Touch you pass by the Foreign Protestant Churches as one that is afraid of burning his Fingers pretending to have nothing to do with them on a Supposition which you are willing to allow that you may so rid your Hands of 'em that their Call to the Pastoral Office was extraordinary for which you quote something out of Calvin and Beza tho' little to your Purpose In what Sense these Churches understand the extraordinariness of their Call they themselves are best able to inform you Did they ever any of them pretend to be rapt up into the third Heavens where Paul once was there to receive a new Call and Commission differing from what Christ and his first Apostles delivered to and left with the Churches By what Angel or Bathkol or Vision do they say this Extraordinary Call was given them When and on whom was it that the Holy Spirit came down in the Form of Cloven Tongues to Seal them a Commission to go out and Preach another Gospel and to lay a new Foundation of the Gospel Ministry Can you bring us any Tidings of any thing like this out of their Writings or if you could would you not easily answer it by Gal 1.8 But how far are they from such vain Dreams as these Mons Turretin will tell you in what Sense they take their Call to have been Extraordinary Turretin de Necessâ—ria Secessione 〈◊〉 Eccles Rom. p. 228. Si Ordinarium dicitur quod Ordini primitus divinitus instituto est Consentaneum potest dici nostra Vocatio Ordinaria sed si equivoce pro eo sumiâ—ur quod inveterata consuetudine qualiscunque illa sit publice est acceptum extraordinaria dicenda erit quia plurimum abfuit ab ea Consuetudine More qui in Ecclesia Romana inoleverat If Ordinary be taken for that which is agreeable to the Order of Primitive and Divine Institution then our Call is Ordinary but if it be taken equivocally for that which is by long Custom of any kind commonly receiv'd then may it be call'd Extraordinary because so very different from that use and manner which had so long obtain'd in the Church of Rome You see now in what Sense they take their Call to be Extraordinary The Deliverance of the Church out of Mystical Egypt and Babylon was indeed an Extraordinary Deliverance but their Call to the Ministry was the Ordinary Call of the Gospel that Spirit of Wisdom Faith Patience Zeal Self denyal by which they were divinely influenced in their Reformation was Extraordinary and it had been better for the Church of England if her's had not been in this respect too Ordinary In the same Sense as the Reformation of Johosaphat Hezekiah and Josiah was Extraordinary in comparison of that of some other Good Kings who are noted for sparing the High Places so may the Call of these Foreign Churches be said to be Extraordinary M. Claud History of the Reformation Part 4. p. 86. 89. but that they acted by the ordinary Rule of the Holy Scriptures and the Practice of the Primitive Church they constantly affirm O Sir How poor an Escape have you endeavour'd to make this way that you may seem to be a little more Courteous to Foreigners than to your own Country-Men how pitiful a Go by is this and as foreign to Calvin's Sense as these Churches are to Your's What a strain will it cost you now to deliver your self from the Hornes of this Dilemma either to acquit Vs of what you have charg'd us with or condemn all the Protestant Churches in the World that are not of your Constitution and Communion And Excommunicate us all as Heathens and Hereticks that have no Gospel-Ministry nor Ordinances among them as the Church of Rome doth whom you hereby justify in all their Persecutions and barbarous Severities against them which looks very ill in a Protestant especially at such a Time as this But that our Ministers have not taken upon them the sacred Function in a new Way that was never approv'd in ancient Times shall be prov'd as you demand by a sight of their Patent and Commission if you have Eyes to read it in its proper Place II. Next you prepare to bring on your Tryal against a
Ordained whereas it is Christ that communicates the Pastoral Power and Authority by his Charter of the Gospel the Power is deriv'd from Christ not from the Ordainers As the Major of a City has his Authority from the Charter granted by the King and not from the Recorder who invests him in his Office And yet neither is this true that an inferiour Officer may not invest one of a superiour Order in his Office else what have the Bishops to do at the Coronation of Kings unless you will make the Regal to be an Inferior Office to that of the Bishop which if you do you may next pretend to an absolving and deposing Power too But you tell us again That we do not find in Scripture That to mere Presbyters any such Authority was ever committed nor are there any Footsteps of it in Antiquity And we tell you That we find not in Scripture nor in Antiquity that this Authority was ever committed to any other than Presbyters But if you insist That they must not be mere Presbyters we Reply 1. How do you prove that either Simeon that was called Niger or Lucius of Cyrene or Manaen who were commanded from Heaven Act. 13.1 2. to ordain Paul and Barnabas were any of them at that time more than mere Presbyters as to Matter of Office 2. Where do you find in all the Books of the New Testament not only that a mere Bishop but that any one single Person whether Bishop or Evangelist or Apostle or any other besides our Lord Jesus Christ himself did ever celebrate this Ordinance of Ordination without the assistance of some others more or less of the Presbytery If you instance in Paul's ordaining Timothy with his own Hands will that prove that it was with his own Hands alone especially while he tells us so expresly in words at length and not in figures That it was done by the Hands of the Presbytery 3. We will propose you a Case which is possible tho' we hope will never be real Suppose the Churches of Christ should be reduc'd to a very few and the Bishops of these few should all turn Hereticks or Persecutors of the Orthodox and cast them out of their Communion the Presbyters retaining their Integrity These Presbyters by your Doctrin cannot ordain so much as a Presbyter to continue a Succession much less can they create a Bishop to do it Must the whole Church then be extinct for lack of a Bishop to Head them Or would you expect to have one rais'd from the Dead or sent back out of Heaven to do it 4. As for Antiquity There is nothing more clear than that in the Primitive Churches the Bishops and their Presbyters alway acted in Conjunction in all Acts of Church Discipline both of Excommunication Restauration Confirmation and Ordination And in the Banishment or Absence of their Bishops the Presbyters alone without the presence of any other Bishop did by his order and allowance which he could not have done had it not been a thing in it self lawful execute all that the Bishop was to have done in Person among them Nay St. Jerom will tell you that the Presbyters have Power to Ordain a Bishop over them and invest him with his Episcopal Authority as they did at Alexandria Sir There was a Time within the Memory of Man that Our Bishops were banished from their Clergy in England and what was the Whole Church of England then extinct and cut off from the Head Christ Doth eternal Salvation go and come with Lawn-Sleeves Yet once more you tell us That the Office which Timothy had was given him by Prophecy 1 Tim. 4.14 Or according to the Prophesies which went before of him 1 Tim. 1.18 His Ordination therefore must have been an extraordinary Thing and not to be drawn into Precedent except in parallel Cases But our Pastors you suppose do not pretend that they are mark'd out by Prophecy 1. We answer These Prophesies whatever they were concerning Timothy respected his Person and not the manner of his Ordination 2. It is very probable that the Apostles had a more than ordinary Direction relating to the choice of Ministers or Church-Officers many times in their Days Acts 20.28 It is there said That the Elders of the Church of Ephesus were made Overseers of their Flocks by the Holy Ghost i. e. as some think their Choice and Nomination was by Direction of the Holy Spirit of God And Clemens Romanus says That the Apostles in those Days ordained Bishops or Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Discerning by the Spirit and having a perfect Knowledge whom they should Ordain But what is all this to the way of Ordaining by Presbyters is an extraordinary Thing and not to be drawn into Precedent It 's probable that it had been foretold by some one or other that Timothy would be a faithful and eminent Minister of Christ who but you would have concluded from thence That his Ordination by Presbyters was an extraordinary Case 3. May you not as pertinently argue That none of the Ordinations done by the Imposition of the Hands of the Apostles are to be drawn into Precedent because these were extraordinary Cases the Apostles being extraordinary Persons who had an extraordinary and immediate Mission from Christ himself nor do we know of any Bishops that now pretend to be marked out by an immediate Call from Christ or any Prophecy of their extraordinary Vsefulness that have gone before of ' em But Sir Before you had given your self and us all this Trouble to so little purpose you had done much better to have sate down and considered how you could have answered Mr. John Owen's ten Arguments from Scripture and Antiquity Owen's Plea for Scripture Ordination proving Ordination by Presbyters without Bishops to be valid to which to save Labour of Transcribing we refer those that are willing to see much more on this Subject III. The Declamation which you make against popular Ordination we are not at all concern'd in but join with you in our hearty Wishes that they that are would deeply consider it Now to conclude this your third Section Having read out our Indictment in all the Articles of it and examin'd it after your manner you come to sum up the Evidence or what you call Evident and bring in the Bill against us that we have in all these Respects exceeded the Novatians Donatists and Meletians But before you proceed to your Damnatory Sentence we hope your Charity will take into Consideration what we have already so briefly offer'd in our own Defence and what we have yet further to plead for our selves as your following Discourse shall give us Occasion Your fourth Section in which you pretend to blow us wholly up Sect. 4. and to beat us out of all our Fasinesses and not to leave us a Rag to cover our Nakedness with is a Collection of just half a dozen of some little Things which you have pickt up some-where behind
true Church or whether of these Two you will please to cut off for the Schismatick or whether the Catholick Vnion were preserv'd between them both notwithstanding these wide Deffences and Dissentions in external Rites and Communion But if these were still One in Catholick Vnion we understand not How less Matters than these should make the Conformists and Non-Conformists of England to be Two so as that We must be condemn'd for Schismaticks rather than You. 4. You argue from the Scripture Distinction of the Schismatick from the approv'd and then tell us that those that live in Corformity to your Church are the approved and the beloved of God ay Sir the approved Drunkards and Swearers the beloved Woremongers and Adulterers c. for such are too many of those who are allowed Communion with you but we are the Schismaticks and the Reprobates because you have cast us out and will not admit us to your Communion without Conformity to your Ceremonies Doth not the Church of Rome tell us the same thing How generally and loosly do you talk of Conformity to the Church without making any difference of what is Good or what is Evil in it or what will justify a Separation from it and what will not the same Argument serves indifferently both Rome and You. The high Presumption you have of your Purity and the Inoffensiveness of your Terms of Communion is no more than what is common to the Biggots of the corruptest Church and Faction in the World But till it be better prov'd than hitherto it hath been you must excuse us that we cannot take You to be the Approv'd so as to condemn our Selves for the Schismaticks in not Communicating with you on such Terms as the Holy Scripture doth not require and our own Consciences are not satisfy'd in II. Your Second It has been said which you call our Second Argument runs thus That in the Apostle's Days there were independent and separate Churches planted in the same City But still you think it too much to be at the Charge of producing our Author or putting it into Form of Argument without which you do but juggle with us and misrepresent us to the World How far you intend to stretch your Independency of Churches we cannot Divine or whether by Independent Churches you mean Churches or Congregations only Separate as to outward Communion in the same City How then shall we form this into an Argument but in your own ambiguous Terms And then it will Hypothetically look thus If there were Independent and separate Churches planted in the Apostle's Days in the same City then are not the Independent and separate Churches now in England Schismatical But there were Independent and Separate Churches planted in the Apostle's Days in the same City Erg. And now that it is brought into this Logical Order for you we know not who will own it either Major or Minor If those that among us are call'd Independents will own it let them Answer for themselves But as far as it concers us we doubt you will have no great Reason to triumph in it by that time we have examin'd it The Consequence of the Major we deny because in the Apostle's Days there might be and we have Reason to think there were but too many Independent and Separate Churches planted in the same Cities by those false Teachers who then crept into the Churches and drew Disciples after them and of whom the Apostles often complain'd Act. 20 30. Jud. 19.3 Joh. 10. Yet thus your invidious Charity represents us that you may if possible perswade the World to believe that we are the Persons whom the Apostles prophecy'd and complain'd of and whom the Scripture condemns for Schismaticks c. As for your Minor That there were such Independent Churches planted in the Apostles Days if you mean by such as Schismatically Separated themselves we will grant it but if you mean planted by the Apostles themselves as your following Discourse on it plainly intimates let them that think themselves so highly concern'd in it Dispute it out for 't will be even all one to Us on whether side the Victory shall fall On this Argument you have left us little to do but to expect the Issue of the Squabble betwixt you and your Learned Dr. Hammond who tells you That as St. Peter was the Apostle of the Circumcision and St. Paul of the Gentiles so whensoever these Two great Apostles came to the same City the one constantly apply'd himself to the Jews receiv'd Disciples of such form'd them into a Church and left them when he departed that Region to be Govern'd by some Bishop of his own Assignation And the Other in like manner did the same to the Gentiles And this is what you endeavour very Learnedly to Refute Sir We will not presume to intrude our selves as Moderators between you however you may give us leave to gather up some of the great Spoyles of the Field at least a few of the broken Arrows to warm our selves by Now that the Apostles themselves were free to Communicate on all Occasions both with Jews and Gentiles is most certain knowing that the Partitian-Wall being now broken down they both made but One Catholick Church under Christ the Catholick Head But it is as certain that it was long before the Old Bottles could hold the New Wine without bursting Hence it is that there were for the first Age such Differences and Distances between the Jewish and Gentile Converts that they could endure no Religious Communion with one another 'T is true this Heat arose on the Jew's Side who were still so superstitiously Zealous for their Old Ceremonies and 't is a common Observation that the Weaker and more Superstitious are always the more obstinately Hot for the Exteriors of Religion and more for the Shadow than the Substance of it But so it was that they would admit no other than a Jew or Jewish Proselyte into their Communion or into any of their Synagogues at least not into their Temple as appears by Paul's hard Case at Jerusalem Act. 21.20 c. So that whether or no they were at first Apostolically Constituted as distinct Churches under their proper Bishops in one and the same City this is most evident that they had their different Forms of Woship and Religious Rites and distinct Communions and Assemblies whether under one City or Diocesan Bishop or more Neither do all these Arguments wherewith the Apostle laboured to defend his Gentile Converts against the Old-Leaven of the Judaizing Zealots and to convince the Jews of their unchristian Bigottry against the Simplicity and Liberty of the Gospel and to maintain the sacred Bond of Union and Peace among them prove that they were not of different Outward Communions yea else why should he say to the Jews I became as a Jew c. 1 Cor. 9.20 c. But he only endeavours to calm the Heats of their Spirits towards one another that they should not lay the
mighty stress of eternal Salvation on these little Things but notwithstanding these Differences which could not be cur'd but by Time they should receive and embrace one another as Fellow-Members of one and the same universal mystical Body And now I will tell you in few words how far You and We are concerned in this your Dispute with the Dr. Either there were Independent and Separate Churches planted by the Apostles in the same City or there were not Utrum horum c. If there were then 1. Your Dr. was in the right and you under a mistake in opposing him 2. What was done by the Apostles rules the case under the like circumstances to Us and to all other Churches to the World's end 3. If there were such a Division of Outward Communion among the Churches of the Apostle's own planting and by their Allowance and Order then the Differences of Outward Communion destroy not the Catholick Union But the Church is truly One by some surer and more adequate Bond than that of Uniformity of Outward Communion On the other side if all the Churches of the Apostles planting were always One in Outward Communion then were not the Ceremonies in Controversie between the Jews and Gentiles ever made the necessary Terms of their Communion but every one had his Liberty according the Sentiments of his own Conscience and private Judgment of using or not using them Because otherwise Outward Communion had been utterly impracticable Now whether of these two you will chuse is very indifferent to Us because either of them will answer well enough for Us in what you here Object against us And what now is become of your Notion of Catholick Unity let any one judge that hath but the command of one sober Thought III. The next thing that you are pleas'd to produce in our Names and call one of our Arguments is this That Jesus Christ hath declar'd that where two or three are gathered together in his Name he is in the midst of them And that we Assemble in this manner and are therefore assur'd of his favourable Presence Here also Justice would have quoted us its Author and Art would have lick'd it into Form for us that so we might have seen the proper Dimensions and Strength of it as an Argument Now in Logical Form we humbly conceive it will look after this fashion and speak to this effect Those that are gathered together with Christ in the midst of them are no Schismatical Assembly But we are gathered together with Christ in the midst of us Erg. But because the stuff you have here laid together for Us will not regularly be comprehended within the compass of one ordinary Syllogism it will be needful to support the Minor which seems to to be most in danger with another to this purpose Those that are gathered together in the Name of Christ have Christ in the midst of ' em But we are gathered together in the Name of Christ Erg. SIR Though we own the Scripture out of which you quote us these Words Matth. 18.20 in the true sense and meaning of them and bless God for the Gracious Promise contain'd in them yet as we never offered them as a Reason of our Separation from your Communion so neither do we own them as an Argument to justifie our so doing You herein trifle with us Had you durst to have engaged our Arguments you would not have made your self sport with these little Things which are justly enough liable to so many exceptions But this it seems is a Reed which you have borrowed from the Old Novations to smite Us with and with these you should have left it or some others of that Character and not in imitation of the Old Woman at Endor have raised up the Ghost of St. Cyprian to read us a Doom till you had first substantially proved that we are the Persons of whom St. Cyprian spake But this indeed is an Argument that you make light of and so do we IV. Your Fourth It hath been said is of the same Complexion and Value with the former The Postulatum that lies in quest between us is Whether our Separating from the Church of England in outward Communion be Schism And to prove our Innocency herein you pretend that we produce the words of the Apostle Paul Phil. 1.15 and 18. That Paul rejoiced that Christ was Preached even by those Men that did it out of Envy and Strife and if the Case of our Preachers were as bad as this as long as they Preach Christ We have no reason to be sollicitous about their Call nor You to be offended at their Work This we suppose you put in to make up the Half Dozen But if you would represent it as one of our Arguments you should have squeezed it into such a Syllogism as this that we might have known what to make on 't If the Preaching of Christ though out of Envy and Strife were matter of rejoicing to Paul then the Preaching of Christ though out of Envy and without a Call which you force into the Argument is not Schismatical But our Ministers do Preach Christ whatever their Principles or their Call to the Office be Erg. We wish you would do us the right to tell us from whom of Us you got this Argument Possibly some good Body or other that was not so well-pleas'd with your Rigours in stopping the Mouths of so many Hundreds of our Ministers at once may have said That if Paul did rejoice that Christ was faithfully Preached though by such as envied his Fame and Liberty in the Gospel then you of the Church of England have done very unlike to the Blessed Paul in silencing so many of the Able and Faithful Ministers of Christ who would have Preached him Sincerely and Peaceably and from a Principle of Love to the Souls of Men and that had as much a Call to Preach as You And if you will as you ought take it thus and call it an Argument We will own it as a sober Reasonning of the Case with you whoever were the first Author of it But when you mock us with the Man of Straw of your own stuffing you deal with Us as they dealt of old with the Christians whom they put into Bears Skins and Fools Coats to be laught at by the Mob and worried by the Beasts And so you deal with our Ministers 1. By representing them to be such as take on them the Work of the Ministry without a Call to that Office the contrary whereof we have already proved 2. In saying that Paul's Enviers Preached to none but the Infidels which is more than you pretend to prove intimating that if you could but get our Ministers banished into America or any other Infidel part of the World to Preach the Gospel to them that never yet heard of it then you will rejoice too as Paul did 3. In accusing them of Envy and Strife as the main Principle that sets them on work
one's Liberty for any thing we have yet heard of and this being a Matter of natural Decency as he there argues at Ver. 14.15 we take it for our Duty to observe as one of our Ministers in an Essay on that Subject hath not long ago taught us But the Inference you drew from this had need of a little better proof Viz. That if the Church hath Power to lay aside such Rites for you confess they are Alterable tho' yours be like the Laws of the Medes and Persians so it hath Power also to appoint others of the like Nature and is oblig'd to do so upon Emergent Occcasions as the Prudence i. e. as the good Pleasure of your Bishops may direct But for our parts we cannot think that your Consequence is good Viz. That because the Church hath Power to Purge it self of some unnecessary and offensive Vanities therefore it hath Power to Introduce others much less that it is oblig'd so to do For we cannot believe that because Hezekiah had Power to take down the Brazen Serpent and to cast it away as a Nehushtan which had been a Symbol of God's own Appointment and of so long standing that therefore he had Power or was under any Obligation to erect another Gambol of his own Invention to stand in the Room of it 1. Then we will say with you It is certain that the publick Worship of God ought to be Celebrated with such Ceremonies as are suitable to the Dignity and Solemnity of the Work and agreeable to the general Directions of the Holy Scripture and you might have added to the Purity and Simplicity of the Gospel and which are Necessary to the right Performance of the Work 2. That Ceremonies us'd in Divine Worship ought to be Significant of some Spiritual Grace or Expressive of some Christian Duty is certain because else they are but Herb John Useless and Impertinent which would but Affront the Deity we pretend to Worship And so indeed we find that all the Ceremonies of Christ's Institutions were Symbolical and Expressive but to argue that because Christ did institute symbolical Ceremonies in his Church therefore you may do so too is what you may not expect our Assent to till you have prov'd your Power in and over the Church to be equal to that of Christ or shew us the Patent he hath given you to justifie your so doing The little Instances which you produce of Smiting the Breast Lifting up the Hands in Prayer Kneeling on the same Occasion and the putting on some new Garment at the time of Baptism have been indeed things taken up into common Use as naturally Expressive of some inward Devotion or Affection of the Heart or of outward Decency and almost common to all Mankind and when you shall have discover'd and prov'd any Divine Institution of them we will acknowledge our Sin if at any time we disuse them on such Occasions but to Argue from the Antiquity of their Use to the Churches imposing Power is as Orthodox and Valid in England as it is in Rome or Spain or any other Church true or false in the whole World 3. That the H. Scripture directs us in general to do all things Decently and in Order we do as zealously own as you But then why should not that of the H. Scripture from which we take our Rules of Gospel worship determine to us what is Decent and Orderly Or if by the Old Testament you would justifie your Ephod and Organs and Festivals and Ceremonious Consecrations or any thing else that the Christian hath borrowed from the Jewish Church why do you pick and chuse and follow your Rule at halves Are not the Harp and the Trumpet and the Viol and Cymbol the Holy Oil and all the rest of the Priestly Robes and Utensils of the Divine Service which you have left out altogether as Decent and as Significant as what you have taken from thence or have been borrowed from any others and which have as much to shew of a Divine Institution 4. Your next Paragraph looks more like Banter than Argument for you tell us in Effect that we ought to satisfie our selves with an implicit Faith of the Lawfulness of the Ceremonies impos'd on us and of their Consormity to the End for which they are appointed because it is not Necessary that every one that uses them should know the Reasonableness of their Institution so that we ought to make no Question of the Lawfulness of what you require of us even in the High and Important Concern of God's Worship and our own Salvation how Unreasonable soever it appears to us and are we not like to be edefi'd much by what we don't understand Is this one Article of your Faith too That Ignorance is the Mother of Devotion Must we put out our own Eyes and make no Question for Conscience sake either of the Lawfulness or Reasonableness of what you require of us but follow the Conduct of your Customs believing as the Church believes Is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Reasonable Service that God now requires of the Gospel-worshipper And is this some of your Protestant Doctrine But to satisfie our Consciences herein you Instance in the customary Way of taking an Oath by kissing the Book which you say may safely be done by such as know nothing of the Original of that Ceremony nor are satisfi'd of the Fitness of it what nor of the Lawfulness of it nor whether the Common-Prayer be in the Book or no If Custom will serve for a Rule in Civil Matters must it be so in the highest and most sacred Acts of our Religion too 5. And this now brings you home to your main Topick Custom from which you profess to take the Significancy of your Ceremonies and the Measures of Decency as that which gives Rules both for Words and Actions and Habits and Gestures 'T is true Custom hath a great stroak to conciliate a Decency and Significancy to these things and may serve very much to excuse the Use of them in Civil Conversation and to offer any thing to the holy God in Worship which Civil Custom hath made Undecent or Ridiculous is horribly Prophane But will you hence argue that what Custom hath made Decent in Civil Conversation is therefore so in Religious Worship and fit to be impos'd as a Condition of Christian Communion Or that what Religious Custom hath made Decent and Significant in the Opinion of the Superstitious and Idolaters is therefore lawful to be us'd and impos'd by you Tho' the Apostle pleaded from the Custome of the Churches for what he call'd on the Corinthians for 1 Cor. 11.16 yet this was but one of his Arguments and which if you observe he urges only negatively he doth not plead for it because it was a Custom but pleads against their contrary Practice because they had no such Custom And pray which of those Ceremonies which you contend for and make the indispensible Condition of Communion
Gift of Prayer may upon occasion be of Benefit to others But if it chance to touch your Noli me tangere and seem though but by consequence to reflect on the Honour of your Liturgy and the Forms by which you Pray that 's enough without any other Fault to render them most Dangerous Snares and instead of promoting cannot but hinder their Edification And this indeed is Canonical enough For your part you say you think a well-compos'd Liturgy has much the Advantage of our Way of Praying and is much fitter in Publick Assemblies then we hope you will bear with us in our Private Families where we thank God you cannot yet reach us And for this your Opinion you produce several Reasons which are no new things to us and which have been already Answered by such as on our side have Written on this Subject You say it secures the Honour of Religion in the Solemnities of Worship i. e. from such Expressions in Prayer as agree not with the Genius of your Fancy or the Fineness of your Stile or which on some account or other you might be ready to ridicule or to quarrel at And then it affords the greatest help in the part that you bear in it i. e. It eases you of one and that the more Spiritual half of your Ministerial Work so that you are more beholden to your Prayer Book than to the Spirit of God in that Duty which indeed is great pity but yet ingeniously enough confessed Again by this means You have no occasion to be in Pain or Fear as you think we are about the next words that shall fall from your Minister as you might have Reason enough to be were it not for his Form which he hath before his Eyes or which he hath made as perfect as the Child hath his Lord's Prayer Well may you be in Pain for one that never accustomed his Tongue to Holy Discourse more than what he hath prepared for his Pulpit That never studied his own Heart nor hath been experimentally affected with the Cases of Tender or Wounded Consciences No wonder if such a one be at a loss that is a Stranger to these things And Lastly By the Benefit of your Forms You have no Doubtful Expressions to exercise your Thoughts or disturb your Devotion with as you suppose there are in our Ministers Prayers before you can say Amen And this you take as a great Commodity both to the Minister and to the People for which it ought to be preferred before our way of Praying And why are not the same Arguments as cogent for the use of Homilies That so the whole Work may be cut out for him that Officiates which would be a great ease to his Studies some charge sav'd in Books A small Sallary would serve to maintain him as a Curate the more time to spend all the Week in the Satisfying of his Lusts and the Debauching of his Neighbours How happily would this conduce to the comfortable Assurance of your performing an acceptable Service to God and agreeable to his Will when the whole of the Ministerial Work is thus wisely prepared that there can be no Errour in it if the Man can but read English What you quote us out of a Sermon of Dr. Beveridge on 1 Cor. 14.26 in the Praise of your own Liturgy we shall not stay now to make Remarks upon there having been enough already said by others on this Point and of which you cannot be ignorant How your Liturgy was compil'd in that juncture of the Reformation or rather Accommodation the true History of these Times would inform you but that this was that that was Defended or Confirmed by the Martyrdom of many or of any was the Doctor 's great mistake and yours too That it hath been Established by Acts of Parliament and fenc'd with the sharp Thorns of Penal Laws too often Arbitrarily and Despightfully executed we have known to our sorrow but that ever it was yet established by an Act of Scripture we could never yet learn 2. You come next to Animadvert on our Ministers Way of Preaching which you represent as a Sect of Pharisees in which they have no meaning or a bad one and that we think our selves Edified by a Sound of Words when we understand nothing by it Sir this is Written with Scorn enough Then you fall out as well you may with the Antinomians But to set us forth in such Bear-skins as these is but a trick of the old Enmity and Policy But yet if for Argument sake you should suppose that we have better Praying and Preaching yet you say we do not preetend that there is any thing wanting with you that is necessary to Salvation Sir We do not pretend that Salvation is not to be obtained in the Church of England but whether there be any thing wanting with the most of those that are set over our Souls in our Parish Churches which is necessary to our Salvation or no of this we are sure there is something wanting that is necessary to our Edification or if you had rather have it in your own words to our Conversion and Advancing and Perfecting in Knowledge and Piety and Faith and Practice When we hear what for Airiness of the Notions or the Affected Quaintness of the Language we can't understand or for the Obscurity of the Method which seems to be generally affected and is become the Mode amongst your Modern Church-men in opposition to the more Plain and Instructive Method which was once called the Puritannical and now in derision called DRUM Preaching we can't comprehend or for the tumbling celerity of its utterance we can't remember when we must be Entertain'd with such jejune insipid stuff as a School-boy would be ashamed of in his Exercise or have Stones given us instead of Bread and Raileries instead of sound Doctrine or a good Sermon in the Pulpit and a Vicious Life all the Week after we can't think this to be very Edifying or the Way to make any great Advance Heavenward And 't is hard to perswade us thus to neglect our own Souls to keep up the honour of your Ceremonies 'T is true a Publick Good is to be preferr'd to a Private of the same kind We ought to deny our selves and to lay down our Lives for the Brethren but we know not by whose Law besides yours we are required to Damn our own Souls to please or to save others III. Your next Enquiry is Whether it be a good Rule that we may or ought to follow those Teachers whosoever they are by whom we can most be Edified or whose Praying and Preaching we approve as most beneficial to our selves To which as you have here more tuo stated it we Answer much as you would have us to do Sir We have no such Licencious Rule as this to walk by We are for Discipline and Order as much as you But when we are driven out of your Communion by your unconscionable Impositions or have
in our Names and which you would have the World to believe is all that we have to say for our selves which Arguments we have already reply'd to and shewn how far we own or disown them Sir If you were as ignorant of the Controversie that hath now almost this Forty Years been depending between us and hath past through so many Hands on both sides as your Discourse represents you to be you were very unfit to meddle in it But if you have supprest your own knowledge in it you have not rightly consulted the Honour of your Charity Sincerity or Wisdom What we have further here to add in Defence of what you call our Schism you shall have in very few Words that we may not fill up Paper with what hath been by others already Written Something we must say for our Selves and something for our Ministers I. For our selves we say thus What we cannot do without Sinning against Christ and against our own Souls we ought not to do But we cannot hold that Communion with the Church of England which is required of us without Sinning against Christ and against our own Souls Erg. The Minor only is to be prov'd And First That we cannot hold that Communion with the Church of England which is required of us without Sinning against Christ That is that Stated Communion to the disowning or forsaking of the Non-conforming Ministers and their Assemblies without Sinning against Christ which we prove thus To forsake the Ministers of Christ without cause is to Sin against Christ But to forsake the Non-conforming Ministers whom we hear is to forsake the Ministers of Christ without Cause Erg. The Minor only is what you can except against but if it hath been already substantially prov'd that our Ministers whom you condemn as no Ministers for want of Episcopal Ordinations or for not Conforming to the Laws and Rites of your Communion be in truth the Ministers of Christ as we are abundantly satisfi'd it hath been then is our Minor good And to forsake them especially in their Sufferings and when you have without cause cast them out of your Communion and out of their Places in their Master's Vineyard we are in our Consciences convinc'd is to forsake Christ for so he himself hath told us Matth. 10.40 He that receiveth you receiveth me and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me And Luke 10.16 He that heareth you heareth me and he that despiseth you despiseth me and he that dispiseth me despiseth him that sent me Nor can we but tremble to think of that dreadful Doom foretold us by that very Mouth that shall at last pronounce it Matth. 25.41 c. Depart from me ye Cursed into Everlasting Fire prepared for the Devil and his Angels for I was an Hungred and ye gave me not Meat I was Thirsty and ye gave me no Drink I was a Stranger and ye took me not in Naked and ye Clothed me not Sick and in Prison and ye visited me not For inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these ye did it not to me Sir if you can make light of these things we can't 'T is in vain for you to tell us They are none of Christ's Ministers when we are assur'd they are In vain to go about to perswade us that you are the Men when we see how you disown and hate your Brethren In vain for you at this time of the Day to call Light Darkness or Darkness Light when our own Eyes are open to see the difference In vain to tell us They are no Ministers of the Church of England because you have so unjustly cast them out and keep them out In vain to tell us They are Intruders when we see who they are that have extruded them and why In vain to insist with us on your Parish-Bounds when we know by whom and for what Reasons these Bounds were first set when we see and hear with what Stuff most of our Parish Pulpits are fill'd when we see in what a Condition our Parishes generally lye as to Ignorance and Immorality and what crying Need there is of more and better Ministerial Help and when we know that the Ministers of Christ are Ministers where-ever they be and are bound to preach the Gospel to any that will hear them Yea when we remember that they had once the Pulpits and Parishes which you now possess till you came upon them with the Advantage of a Secular Power and turn'd them Headlong by Hundreds Ex Officio Beneficio and exchang'd their Pulpits for Prisons and their Maintenance for Mulcts and Fines and Confiscations And in vain do you tell us of your Charity and meek Spirit when we taste and see what the bitter Fruits of it are Sir We dare not thus to sin against Christ to please you nor hazard his Favour to keep up the Credit of those pitiful little things you are so fond of 2. We cannot do what you require of us without sinning against our own Souls and that both in respect of the Danger we are in by turning our Backs on the Ministers of Christ and neglecting to hear them whom he hath sent us which is not only a Contempt of his Bounty but an Affront to his Authority especially when we read Matth. 10.14 15. Whosoever shall not receive you nor hear your Words when ye depart out of that House or City shake off the Dust of your Feet Verily I say unto you it shall be more tolerable for the Land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the Day of Judgment than for that City By what Names soever you may now call them and by whatsoever Glosses of yours you may tempt us to believe that this Scripture doth not concern us in this Case we know that you shall not be our Judges nor our Compurgators in that Day nor can we think our selves safe should we refuse to receive and hear those Ministers of Christ whom he hath sent but you have cast out But besides we dare not so despise our own Souls nor the Souls of our Families which are committed to our Charge as to neglect that which we find to be the best and most successful Means to promote their Growth in Grace and Good Works here in order to their Eternal Happiness hereafter nor ought we to be wheedl'd or ridicul'd by you from this our Way And tho' we must suffer all the Reproaches and hard Censures that you can load us with for so doing we will take it patiently and thankfully at God's Hands tho' unkindly at yours Had we no more but this to say for our selves it were enough to justifie our Non Communion with you and our owning and adhering to the Ministers of Christ whom we hear but you cannot but know that there are many other things with clear Evidence of Reason and Truth urg'd by several others who have travell'd in this Province and to whom that we may not here be too tedious to you we
do referr you assuring you that we are not carry'd by a Sense of Liberty but by a Sense of Duty as many of us as have any Religious Principles to act by either in our or in your Communions not because allowed by Men but because commanded of God to do what you so uncharitably condemn us for II. For our Ministers we say 1. That it was never desir'd nor design'd by those that influenc'd the Revolution of Church Affairs on the Restauration of King Charles the Second that any of those of the Presbyterian Way should be comprehended in that Act that was then made for Uniformity And tho' they pretended to treat with them about it the Design was but to know what they would stick at that so they might be sure to shut them out as appears not only by the Measures they took but by what is credibly reported of Archbishop Sheldon that he should say Now we know their Minds we 'll make them all Knaves if they conform Defence of Mr. M. H. of Schism Append. p. 143. And of another Reverend Dean that reply'd to a sober Gentleman complaining that they had made the Door of Admission too strait If we had thought so many of 'em would have conform'd we would have made it straiter So then they must Sacrilegiously have renounc'd their Ministry to have put their Necks under the Yoke of your Tyranny for into the Ministry you were resolv'd not to admit them if by any Means you could keep them out as you did the far greater part of them to the number of about Two Thousand 2. It is most certain that they neither could then nor can now obtain their Ministerial Communion with you without sinning directly against their own Consciences For 1. How can they without the most horrid Perjury declare upon Oath their full Assent and Consent to such things as they are perswaded in their Judgments to be unsound in Doctrine and superstitious in Worship can this be done without lying to the Holy Ghost And yet having thus shut them out of your Communion and hitherto kept the Door so strongly barr'd against them will your Charity accuse them for their Separation from you How unsincere is this You should have spoken out the very Truth that when you first threw them out of your Communion you repent you had not thrown them out of the World could you have found any Pretence for it That when you stopt their Mouths you had not stopt their Breath too Pray Sir upbraid them no more with their Nonconformity nor charge them with Schism on that Account till you can assure them which way they can conform to you in their Ministerial Capacity without Perjury or in a Lay capacity without Sacriledge 2. How can they submit to your Reordination without condemning and renouncing their first Ordination as null and consequently not only condemn Themselves and all their former Ministerial Acts but all those Protestant Churches in the World that have no other than Presbyterial Ordinations which while they are as they have Reason to be otherwise minded they can't possibly do without sinning point blank against their own Consciences against the Truth and against the greater part of the Church of Christ in the World So that they must either do this which is tremendous to think or must abandon their Office which they can't do without a Sacrilegious Desertion and sinning against Christ who hath put them in Commission and to whom they have sworn Fidelity and against so many Thousand Souls too that are perishing for want of more and better Ministerial Help almost every where throughout the Kingdom This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this little we think is enough to justifie their Practice in preaching the Gospel of Christ to us and to as many as will hear them And for you to brand Them or Us as Schismaticks for so doing is openly to fight against God Sir We wonder what you could propose to your self as the Merit of such an Undertaking what is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you please your self with the rare Discovery you have made after the most inquisitive Researches that have been made for these 38 Years by the most learned and sharpest Wits on both sides What have you to add to what hath been by the greatest Names in your Church already urg'd and which hath been over and over answer'd If your Design had not been to impose a Wheedle on such as never read much nor are capable of making a Judgment in controversial Cases and under a Pretence of Charity and Zeal for their Souls to affright them with the black Name of Schism and so to lick them into your Communion you would have taken other Measures If you would have pleaded the Case like a Man of Sense and Integrity you would have taken up the Arguments on our side in their Strength as they have been offered on every part of the Controversie by Mr. Baxter Mr. Clarkson Mr. Owen the Defender of Mr. M.H. Mr. Corbet Mr. Rule and many others more than it is needful for us here to mention and too tedious to make Collections from while the Authors themselves may so easily be consulted To conclude In what you have herein done it appears to Us that you have shewn your Charity and your Discretion much alike who are Reverend Sir Your Brethren in the Catholick Unity of the Christian Faith tho' those Dissenters who some of us conform'd before the Toleration and have since withdrawn our selves from the Communion of the Church of ENGLAND April 12th 1700. FINIS