Firm and Lasting Vnion among Protestants would be But my business is to shew the Vnreasonableness of those Principles and Practises which hinder men from such an Vnion and lay a Foundation for perpetual and endless Separations For upon the Principles laid down by some of our Dissenting Brethren let the Constitution be made never so easie to themselves yet others may make use of their grounds and carry on the difference as high as ever Which will render all attempts of Union Vain and leave the same weapons ready to be taken up by others So far the Dr's Mistakes which in these few words are many For 1. The Dissenters are at this time as much for Union according to the Terms of the Gospel as any can reasonably desire 'T is for Vnion they breath and Pray and most industriously and sincerely endeavour being engag'd hereunto by Interest for as long as Divisions continue they are expos'd to the worst of Miseries 2. The Principles of Dissenters are most admirably suited for a firm and lasting Union with all such as will adhere to the Terms proposed in the Gospel 3. 'T is the Dr. that falls in with Bellarmine giving the Papists the greatest encouragment to an abiding by their persecuting Principles even when he dissents from the Church of England 4. 'T is the Dr. that hath done his utmost to obstruct a firm Vnion among Protestants That all this to the Satisfaction of the Judicious and impartial Reader may be evinced I will propose in short the true state of the Controversie so far as I apprehend it and then detect the Dr's Mistakes as to those but now mention'd particulars In giving the state of this Controversie I must intimate wherein there is an agreement and wherein the Difference doth lie 1. We are agreed in Doctrinals and in all the Substantials of true Religion 2. The Difference then is about lesser matters and the Case is this The Dissenters are fully convinced in their Consciences from the strongest and most powerful arguments That the Word of God contain'd in Scripture is the onely rule of the whole and of every part of true Religion And that what is not according to this Rule is no part of Protestant or of the true Christian Religion This great Principle occasions a twofold Controversie the one with the Papist onely the other with the Church of England also 1. With the Papist for by this Principle we are engag'd to reject whatever Doctrines they impose that are not agreeable to this Rule and consequently we reject their Doctrines about Purgatory Invocation of Saints Indulgencies c. because they cannot be found in Scripture Although there is no Text expresly forbidding these things yet since they are not to be found there either directly or by consequence we must lay 'em aside The Papists 't is true make a great bussle saying where is it asserted in Scripture no Purgatory c. We reply where is the affirmative to be found They say that our Religion as distinct from Theirs is compos'd of Negatives onely which have no foundation in Scripture We rejoyn by denying their Assertion concluding That the Scripture is a sufficient Rule for our Direction concerning all Religion and what is not found there is not to be embrac'd as a part of our Religion 2. With the Church of England Though we have not this Controversie as to Doctrinals yet about Worship and Church-Government we have The Dissenters being fully perswaded that so far as any Doctrine about Worship or Church-Government is made a part of our Religion it must be brought to the Rule of the Scripture whence if not according to it though not expresly forbidden yet 't is to be exploded As for Circumstances of Worship as Time and Place pro hic nunc c. they are no part of Worship c. but as touching such Ceremonies as are made a part of Divine Service let it be Surplice sign of the Cross or Salt and Spittle or the Chrisme we reject as not sound in Scripture It being the Principle of Dissenters to adhere to the Scriptures and to comply with every Scriptural Term of Union and with no more This being so if any part of their Service that respects no Divine Precept be proposd as a part of our Religion yea and as such a necessary part as to be the term of our Communion with them we are fully convinc'd That it is a sin and not to be complyed with unless we give up the whole Cause to the Papists For either the Scriptures are the whole and onely Rule of the whole and of every part of our Religion or not If not then let us return to Popery or where shall we go for a compleat Rule of Religion But if it be a compleâ—t Rule then whatever is introduced into our Religion as a part thereof and not agreeable to the Scriptures must be considered as what ought to be rejected whence either the things imposed on Dissenters and required as terms of our Communion with the Church are a part of the Religion of the Church or not If not if no part of their Religion why do they impose 'em on us as terms of Communion or what may we be fully of their Religion and assent and Consent to every part thereof and yet be uncapable of their Communion if so who are the Dividers I leave it to the Judgement of the VVise But if it be a part of their Religion 't is either agreeable to the Scripture Rule or not if not we cannot conscientiously comply with it for this is to make that a part of our Religion which God hath not but if according to the Scripture rule why do they not produce the Scriptural Considerations that are the Media by which they would prove so much or How comes it to pass that they are judg d but Indifferent things that are neither commanded nor forbidden whereas whatever is according to the Scripture must be according to the revealed VVill of God for the Scriptures do but contain the Revealed Will of God and therefore whatever is according to the Scripture must be according to some Command in Scripture since a Command is but the Revealed VVill of our great Legislator and if according to such a Command not Indifferent but if Indifferent not according to the Scripture and consequently no part of true Religion and therefore not to be proposed as a term of Union or if proposed as such it cannot without sin be complyed with The Church of England then imposing what in their judgment is but indifferent and consequently what cannot be a part of their Religion do impose as a term of our Communion with them what is in our Consciences sinful What must be done then for Peace and Union who must yield The Dissenters will part with every indifferent thing rather than break the Peace of the Church but the Clergy hath been hitherto unwilling to part with any One Indifferent thing Yea even now
though the whole of Our Religion is in great danger yet rather than what is no part of it should be lost let Religion it self Perish The Church without sin can part with their Indifferent Ceremonies but Dissenters without sin cannot comply with them What then must be done for Union must the Episcopal comply in things wherein they can without sin or must Dissenters sin and loose their peace with God for Vnion The whole of the Controversie is this Whose Honour is mostly to be valued that of the Episcopal Clergy or that of our Lord Jesus Christ for the Episcopal cannot make any Abatement of these indifferent things consistent with their Honour They have once impos'd these things as terms of Union and cannot now Honourably recede the least Iota The Dissenters they cannot stretch their Consciences to any sinful Impositions but by dishonouring the Lord Christ What then must be done must we to the dishonour of the Lord Christ stretch our Consciences and sin rather than that the Honour of Episcopal Grandeur be fullied by a compassionate Condescention about Indifferent things wherein they can without sin Condescend and which would be really more for their Just Honour This is the state of the Case The Dissenters would Unite but cannot The Episcopals can but will not The Cannot of Dissenters and the Episcopals Will-not doth make the Division But who is the Faulty Divider If the true Reason of our Division lay on the Dissenters Will-not when they Can 't would be easie to conclude them Obstinate and Perverse what not to do what they Can for Peace But since they would but cannot without sin how can they be the Dividers From what hath been said 't is evident that as 't is the Interest and Desire even so 't is the Principle of Dissenters to Unite Of their sincerity concerning which they have ever given Illustrious instances 1. In Q. Elizabeths days In a part of the Register 't is thus expressed of the Dissenters Whoever of them in word or deed gave out any just suspition of Unpeaceable dealing Nay have not they striven for peace in their Ministerys in their writings in their Examples more than any But Notwithstanding this they have been arraigned among Felons and Theeves They have been imprisoned to the uttermost and defaced and yet they are silent And Mr. Dudley Fenner in his Defence to Dr. Bridges anno 1587. saith All this they did patiently bear and came daily to the Prayers to the Baptisms and to the Sacraments and by their Examples and Admonitions kept many from Abuses whereto rashness of Zeal would have carried them yet now for their labour to their great grief they are openly slandered c. Yea upon every irreligious mans complaint in such things as many times are incredible to be by the Pursuivants sent for to pay two pence for every Mile c. even when their Families were impoverish'd But as hath been already hinted the Providence of God gave them favour in her Majesties Council who were convinced of their peaceable disposition and the regard they had to a walking in all good Conscience before the Lord. 2. That the Dissenters at this time are fully sensible that they are engaged both by Principle and Interest against the least compliances with the Church of Rome and consequently to embrace any just proposals for Vnion will appear from what is declared by divers of them in the account they give of the Grounds and Reasons on which they desire their Liberty where 't is express That unto the Resolution of a stedfast adherance unto the Protestant Religion in Opposition unto Popery we have say they many peculiar engagements For 1. Our Principles concerning Church Order Rule and Worship wherein we differ from the Church of England are not capable of a Compliance with or Reconciliation unto those of the Papacy but are contradictory unto them and utterly inconsistent with them Where there is an Agreement in general Principles and men differ onely in their Application unto some Particulars those Differences are capable of a Reconciliation But where the Principles themselves are directly contradictory as it is between us and the Papists in this matter they are capable of no Reconciliation 2. We have no Interest that may be practised on by the Arts or Insinuations of the Papists For we are neither capable of any advantages by Ecclesiastical Domination Power Promotions with Dignities and Revenues belonging thereunto which are the principal allurements of the Papacy nor are engaged in any such Combination Political or Ecclesiastical as that the contrivance of a few should draw on the Compliance of the VVhole Party These things being utâ—erly contrary unto and inconsistent with our Principles the Papists have no way of attempting us but by meer Force and Violence 3. Our fixed Judgment being the same with that of all the first Reformers namely that in the Idolatrous Apostacy of the Papal Church with bloody Persecutions the Antichristian State foretold in the Scripture doth consist VVe are for ever excluded from all thoughts of Compliance with them or Reconciliation unto them 4. VVhereas our Principles concerning Church Order Rule and VVorship are directly suited unto the Dissolution and Ruine of the Papal Church-State whence the Papists take their VVarranty for all the evil contrivances which some of them are guilty of in this Kingdom and will so far as they are taken out of the Scripture at length effect it VVe can have no other expectation from the Prevalency of their Interest in this Nation but utter Extirpation and Destruction VVe are therefore fully satisfied that our Interest and Duty in Self-Preservation consists in a firm Adherence unto the Protestant Religion as established in this Nation and the Defence thereof against all the attempts of the Papacy So undoubtedly true it is That the Dissenters are engaged both by Principle and Interest to oppose Popery and in order thereunto must being directed by the Light of Nature use all Proper means for the strengthening themselves against this Irreconcileable Enemy the Papists The Union of Protestants being the most proper Mean they are Ruin'd if they do not vnite when they may Propose any Terms how difficult soever unto Flesh and Blood but not Sinful and they 'l close with them Thus I have shew'n 1. That the Dissenters are mov'd by Interest to desire Union 2. That their Principles also engage them to do so and consequently the Dr. is mistaken as to these Particulars I will now proceed to shew 3. That 't is the Dr. who falls in with Bellarmine entertaining the same Principles and arguing from the same Topicks with him 1. As (a) Bellarm. de notis Eccl. lib. 4. c. 10. Certum est concordiam esse signum Regni dei quod stare debet in aternum Discordiam autem Regni Diaboli quod tandem ruere debet Bellarmine doth in the general highly extol Union Peace and Concord in the Church making it a note of the true Church
on the Papists work for them that they hold such Principles as by evident consequences from them do overthrow the Justice and Equity of the Reformation preface p. 6. and out of Bishop Sanderson 't is asserted That the Dissenting Brethren though not intentionally and purposely yet really and eventually have been the great Promoters of the Roman Inte rest among us I do not say adds the Dr. that such men namely the Dissenters are set on by the Jesuits But I say they do their work as effectually in blasting the Credit of the Reformation as if they were p. 10 But if we trace the footsteps of their Separation as far as we can we may find strong probabilities that the Jesuitical Party had a very great influence on the very first beginnings of it And the Papists could not but please themselves to see that other men did their work so effectually for them p. 16. The Papists could not have met with better Proctors i. e. then the Dissenters they did the Pope very good service and he would not miss them for any thing The Pope could not have fitter and apter instruments for his Purpose The Dissenters were made the Engines of the Roman Conclave Thus t is evident that the great end of the Drs. History if not of the whole Book it self is to represent Dissenting Protestants to be but the Jesuits Instruments that is to be men not worthy of any favour from a Protestant Prince for surely such are the Jesuits Engines But as no suggestion can be more untrue even so nothing could proceed from the Drs. Pen more unseasonably what should provoke him to be so invective and satyrical in this juncture of affairs is not easie to determine or what was his end is as difficult to imagine whether it was to cast contempt on the Wisdom of the Parliament who entertain other sentiments concerning the Dissenters or whether to gratifie the Roman Faction by acting so sutably to the Jesuits measures as discovered by Mr. Dugdale and some others which is to revile the Dissenters as the Dr. hath done to the end the common People may be prepared to believe that whatever horrid Plots the Papists are carrying on are but Presbyterian The which can no sooner be believed but his Maiesties most Loyal Subjects are exposed to the merciless cruelty of the bloody Papists who will not boggle at false Oaths to accuse them of the worst of Treasons under the Name of Presbyterians or Dissenting Protestants Or whether it be to cast a Bone of contention into the Parliament House thereby to prevent the uniting and strengthening the Protestant Interest as well as for diverting the House from such other Methods as are most necessary for the impeding the Future growth of Popery or whether to raise one of the severest Persecutions against that Loyal and truly Protestant Party which cannot be weakned or impoverished but to the advancing the Papal design whether any one or all of these particulars have been aimed at by the Dr. the Searcher of Hearts and his own Conscience doth best know But whatever was the Authors end 't is most uncontroulably true that if these several Mischiefs do not proceed from the Discourse it must be considered as a signal Providence to which alone we are owing for such preventing Grace But 2. To Exercise the Charity of collecting such Arguments as are subtly Insinuated for the ensnaring the Credulity of some of his Readers The which I will with the greatest fairness set forth in their strength and then descend to a detecting the Mistakes 1. To give the Dr. the greater advantage we 'l consider his Arguments to be as numerous as is possible after this following method 1. The Dissenters have embrac'd the Jesuits Principles about Spiritual Prayer and a more pure way of worship 2. They have blasted the Reputation and Honour of the first Reformation 3. They oppose Episcopacy and innocent Ceremonies notwithstanding their Antiquity 4. They have separated from the Church of England and have caus'd great Divisions 5. They accepted of his Majesties gracious Toleration given them 7 or 8 years ago 6. They have since the discovery of the Plot closed with the people in an over fierce opposing the papists Ergo the Dissenters are the Jesuits Instruments designing the Destruction of the Protestant Religion This is the Drs. Conclusion drawn from these six weighty considerations 2. To inquire into the strength or rather the mistakes of these weighty considerations 1. The first Argument 'T is not improbable that the Jesuits were the first setters up of Spiritual Prayer in England saith the Dr. as appears from the sutableness of the Dissenters pretences about Spiritual Prayer to the Doctrine and practice of the Jesuits This is evinced from the Jesuits admiring Spiritual Prayer as may be seen in their writings preface p. 14.15.16 I answer 1. The whole the Dr. doth suggest is but a Probability not a certainty but why the Dr. should hint his probables in a matter of this moment I leave to his own Conscience 2 'T is most undoubtedly true whether the Dr. knows so much or not That Spiritual Prayer and free prayer was many an hundred years observ'd and practised before there were any Jesuits in the World whence to assert Spiritual Prayer to be one of the Jesuits Arcana is an argument of too much ignorance for who knoweth not that the Christian dispensation is the dispensation of the Spirit 1 Cor. 3.6 7 8. c 't is the Spirit that was promised as a teaching Spirit on Christs departure John 14.16 15 26.16.7 8 9. which Spirit as it doth convince of Sin of righteousness and of judgment even so doth it teach and enable the Children of God to cry Abba Father that is to pray Gal. 4.5 6. Rom. 8.26 Thus Free Prayer or Spiritual Prayer is clearly revealed in Scripture Unto whom then are we owing for the Knowledge of this Truth unto the Word of God contained in Scripture or unto the Disciples of Ignatius Loyola what must the Honour of the Discovery be ascribed to the Jesuits although thereby the Primitive Christians and the Ancient Fathers are most unjustly reproached Or because this Gospel Doctrine shines forth so Gloriously that such as are envelop'd with the Cloud of Popery cannot but espie some of its Rayes must we therefore conclude that it hath its Rise and Origen from thence What do the Papists know nothing besides those Notions of which they were the first Inventors What think you of the Doctrine of the Trinity c. is that also a Jesuits Fiction Really I am not a little surprized at the Indecent manner after which the Dr. treats the Holy Spirit the third Person in the ever blessed Trinity by ascribing its work Namely spiritual Prayer unto the Jesuits as though such are the works of the Spirit that they cannot be distinguished from the Inventions of the Jesuite and that the Dr. should thus expose himself the honour of his