own soul must judge impartially and without prejudice weighing what is said on both sides As for my aims and spirit in writing this thing having found so little equity in mens censures of me about former writings I can the less trust to any sort of mens good or bad of one or other opinion or judgement of me My care I hope shall be to approve my self to God and to sollicite him by prayers for his blessing upon my labours in this thing To which I shall add as over-measure these ensuing Arguments for hearing the present Ministers as now the case is Sect. 15. An Appendix containing fourty additional Reasons against denying the lawfulness of hearing the present Ministers First I argue for the lawfulness of hearing them Preach the Doctrine of the Gospel as it is professed in the Church of England from the definition of sin which is a transgression of the Law 1 John 3.4 whence the Apostle Rom. 4.13 Where no law is that is no law prohibiting that which is done there is no transgression Whence I argue That is lawful in which is no sin in the hearing of the present Ministers Preach the doctrine of the Gospel as it is professed in the Church of England is no sin therefore it is lawful The major is undoubted that being unlawful onely in which is sin according to the notion of the terms The minor is proved because it is no breach of the Law there being neither any law of nature nor any written law of the Old or New Testament moral or positive in express terms or by good consequence against it Which is sufficiently proved by the answer to such Arguments as are here brought to prove a prohibition of such hearing and by requiring those that condemn it as unlawful to produce the law which forbids it which yet is not done that we know If it be said as it is by many of the people who scruple the doing of many things used in the publick worship as now it is that in Gods worship it is not enough that there is no law against what we do but there must be also a command to do it else it is will-worship Besides what I have answered in the examination of the first Chapter of this Treatise I add 1. That the alleadging of a command is not necessary to prove a thing lawful but to prove it a necessary duty it is sufficient to prove my present conclusion That no Law forbidding the hearing the present Ministers can be produced 2. That as express command may be shewed for hearing the present Ministers as for hearing the congregational Ministers at least those of them that are Separatist against whom there are more just exceptions then against the present Conforming Ministers of England why they should not be heard Which leads me to a second Argument for the lawfulness of hearing them which I thus form 2. Those Ministers may lawfully be heard against the hearing of whom by no exceptions but such as are extrinsecal to the duty of hearing as it is a part of Gods worship But so it is concerning the hearing of the present Ministers Therefore they may be heard The duty of hearing as it is a part of Gods worship consists in this That we apply our selves to learn the mind of God by which we come to know and obey him It is extrinsecal to this that it be delivered to us by a good or a bad man a man in Church-covenant or not our proper Pastour chosen by our selves or imposed upon us and therefore such personal exceptions against the deliverer are extrinsecal to the duty of hearing or nonâ—hearing if he declare Gods mind to us we may worship God in hearing though the Preacher sin in his conversation or entrance on his Ministery or be otherwise faulty if he be faithful in delivering the truth of God to us though other things make one mans teaching more desirable or more delightful or useful to us yet the defect of them makes not our hearing his teaching unlawful who teacheth the word of God truly because we may thereby learn Gods mind in applying our selves whereto is his worship by hearing 3. This is further proved in that where there are any prohibitions which restrain us from hearing any Teachers it is because of their Doctrine Which is an argument That in hearing others that teach true Doctrine or the truth of Gods word we are at liberty to hear them and consequently the present Ministers supposed to do so The antecedent is verified by inspection of these Deut. 13.3 Matt. 7.15 Mark 4.24 and such other Texts as cautionate men from hearing Teachers Whence may be inferred That 's not unlawful for us from which Gods cautions restrain us not But from hearing the present Ministers supposed to teach the truth of Gods word Gods cautions restrain us not therefore it is not unlawful to hear them 4. It is the character or property of one that is of God or is a sheep of Christ to hear Gods word or Christs voice without limiting it to some persons John 8.47 He that is of God heareth Gods word John 10.27 My sheep hear my voice Whence I argue That is not unlawful which may be a duty and a characteristical property of one that is of God or Christs sheep But to hear the present Ministers being supposed to teach the word of God and the voice of Christ may be a duty and a characteristical property of one that is of God or Christs sheep Therefore it is not unlawful to hear them being supposed to teach the word of God and the voice of Christ. 5. From the same Scriptures it may be argued thus That may be unlawful which may be a sign of one that is not of God nor of Christs sheep but not to hear the present Ministers when they teach the word of God and the voice of Christ may be a sign of one that is not of God for Christ saith John 8.47 Ye therefore hear them not because ye are not of God nor a sheep of Christ who saith John 10.26 But ye believe not because ye are not of my sheep as I said unto you Therefore it may be unlawful not to hear the present Ministers and consequently lawfull to hear them 6. To refuse to hear the word of God though delivered by the present Ministers is profaneness such as is condemned in Esau. Heb. 12.16 For it is the rejecting or neglecting of a holy thing as it is termed by our Lord Christ Matth. 7.6 therefore it may be unlawful to shun hearing them and consequently lawful to hear them 7. The word of God is a pearl of great price Matt. 7.6 such as a merchant man should sell all he hath to buy Matth. 13.46 a great treasure v. 44. therefore to be heard and received by whomsoever held forth and consequently it is folly and sin to shun hearing it because of personal exceptions against the bringer as it would be folly to refuse a
the often severely punishes he children of men for now in order hereunto it 's necessary that in all our approaches to God we see to the institution of the Lord both in respect of the matter and manner of worship that it be according to Divine prescript else we cannot sanctâ—fy the name of God therein nor glorify him before the people Answer This is yielded that wherein God hath prescribed it is necessary we see to the institution of the Lord both in respect of the matter and manner of worship even to determined particularities but in those things which are not determined by God yet it is requisite they should be some way determined by our selves or others we and they are not so limited but that keeping to general rules there may be liberty of variation and there may be too anxious care tending to beget unnecessary scruples perplexities divisions and censurings even in and of Saints which experience hath too much proved to cause fluctuations in mens minds and inconstancy in their practice and to produce a brood of Seekers Quakers Ranters and prophane Atheists For which reason it is very advisable that persons of good meaning but weak judgments did less busie themselves in questioning such undetermined particularities in Gods worship and were received but not to doubtfull disputations Rom 14.1 and did satisfy themselves in such things by preferring the judgment of their faithful learned wise and holy Teachers and Rulers before their own when their own capacity is insufficient to settle their Consciences He proceeds thus Hearing as was said and shall beyond contradictions in its proper place be evinced is part of instituted worship it therefore more nearly concerns Saints than many are aware of to have their consciences resolved from the Scriptures of God in the matter under enquiry whether it be lawful for the Saints to hear the present Ministers of England 'T is the negative which we have received under our maintenance because we are satisfied Christ hath so to the proof whereof we now address our selves Answer Of hearing how it is a part of instituted worship somewhat hath been said in the answer to the preface Sect. 1.2.3 what more is to be added will come in it 's proper place I grant that it concerns Saints to have their consciences resolved from the Scriptures of God in the matter under enquiry and do therefore joyn issue with this Author and whereas he denies it lawfull for the Saints to hear the present Ministers of England meaning in their teaching of the Doctrins of faith and holiness according to that which is authorized in the Church of England I affirm it and address my self to the examination of this Authors arguments Sect. 2. There is warrant in Scripture to hear the present Ministers of England Argument 1. Is thus That which there is no warrant for in the Scripture being part of instituted worship is not lawful for the Saints to practise but there is no warrant in the Scripture for hearing the present Ministers of England and hearing is part of instituted worship Therefore Answer The term warrant being a Law term notes not only an injunction requiring that a thing be done but also an allowance or permission of a thing to be done with impunity or without blame and either way the thing warranted is lawfull Instituted worship as is before shewed is either moral or meerly positive and ceremonial Parts of instituted worship may be either subjective if instituted worship be conceived as totum universale an universal whole and so hearing of the present Ministers of England may be conceived either as one sort of instituted worship or one individual of that sort or parts of instituted worship may be integrant if instituted worship be conceived as an integral whole I do not deprehend hearing of the present Ministers of England is to be conceived as an integral part of instituted worship sith it is one act which without any other act is worship or parts of instituted worship may be essential or accidental instituted worship being conceived as an essential or accidental whole Those are parts essential of instituted worship without which it is not or is not rightly called instituted worship those are accidental parts which may be present or absent and yet the Worship be or rightly be so called These things being premised for answer to this Argument I lay down these Propositions 1. Every sort or kind of Instituted Worship of God hath warrant in the Scripture by precept of command if it be lawful 2. Those things which are determined by God â—n any part or sort of Instituted Worship of God are to be counted Essential parts so as that the omission or alteration of them or any of them makes the Worship not to be or to be rightly so called Worship of God 3. Those things which are in this sense Essential parts must have warrant in Scripture by precept express or by just consequence 4. Accidental parts or adjuncts of Instituted Worship undetermined are lawful if they have warrant in Scripture by permission so as that they are not contrary to any precept or rule in Scripture about such Worship 5. Hearing of the Word of God is a sort or part of Gods Instituted Worship 6. It is essential to it that we hear it as Gods Word with honest and good hearts with attention and reverence as being determined by Gods command 7. It is but accidental as being undetermined by God that we hear it from this or that person and therefore needs not warrant in Scripture by command to make it lawful 8. The hearing of the present Ministers of England Preaching the Word of God hath warrant in Scripture by permission as being not contrary to any precept or rule in Scripture about such Worship Searching and reading the Scriptures as the Word of God is a part or sort of Instituted Worship and accordingly hearing it read When God commanded the Levites to read the Law and all Israel to hear it at the end of every seven years in the solemnity of the year of release in the Feast of Tabernacles Deut. 31.9 10 11 12 13. The reading by such persons and hearing at that time was an essential part of Worship but Shaphans reading before Josiah 2 Chron. 34.18 and his hearing of it then was a part of Instituted Worship accidental because not determined by Command but ordered by Providence and yet warrantable by Permission Gods command being not exclusive so as to forbid any other but Levites to read it or the Israelites to hear it read by others at other times there being general Precepts requiring all to hear the Word of God at all times Deut. 5.1 and even the light of Nature dictating this That a message from God is to be heard whoever brings it of which the King of Moab was sensible Judg. 3.20 and the King of Niniveh Jonah 3 6. In like manner when Christ tells the seventy Disciples Luke 10.16 He that heareth
sufficient reason of separation but such as this Author who is indeed with others like minded the true Scandalizer or he by whom the offence cometh or else it is the offended persons own inference from the real or imaginary actions of their Brethren of a necessity of separation that scandalizeth him That which this Author brings here is farr from a Demonstration We find Revel 18.4 that St. John heard a voice from Heaven saying Come out of herâ— my people that ye be not partakers of her sins and that ye receive not of her plagues But to â—erch out of this passage this Proposition Christ commands them to separate from every thing of Antichrist and to inferr this conclusion and therefore from his ministry needs a Delian Diver or cunning Alchymist or Sophister that can deduce quidlibet ex quolibet It is plain that the Exhortation is to goe out of Rome called Babylon ch 17 18. Nor do I gainsay that it is meant of it as it is corrupted by the Papacy Nor do I question but the Papal monarchy is an Antichristian state and that though the plain meaning is no more but that Gods people whereof I doubt not some are and will be in Rome when it shall be destroyed should abandon that place afore it be destroyed to avoid participation of its sins and plagues yet too it may be understood of communion with the Papacy in their Idolatry and Heresies But it is a wild conceit to make every thing done or used by Popes to be a thing of Antichrist much more is it to make the ministry of the Ministers of England the ministry of the Pope when it is so directly contrary to the Pope and Popish Doctrine and Worship expresly abjured and abhorred by them How frivolous his proofs are of the present Ministers opposing visibly Christs Kingshâ—p having the characters of false Prophets of being guilty of Idolatry is shewed already What the frame of the spirits of the present Conformists is or hath been God only who is the searcher of hearts is fit to judge what their principles were formerly and are now is to be known either by those that have conversed with them or heard them preach or read their writings sure every sincere Lamb of Christ is neither fit nor able to judge or examine the truth of any number of Conformists spirits or principles and therefore if these alterations which are here mentioned be the ground of the offence that is taken against them it cannot be a just ground of their taking offence If it were there were just ground of offence given to separate from the Separatists Not to mention what of old was charged upon the Brownists whose spirits and principles were such as made many as holy persons as England yielded to dehort the godly from joyning with them in their way of Separation Nor what either Mr. Edwards in his Gangraena or Mr. Baillee in his Disswasive or Mr. Weld in his Story of the Antinomians have written of the state of the Congregational Churches The Elders and Messengers of the Congregational Churches in the Preface to their Dâ—claration of their Faith and Order in their meeting at the Savoy Octob 12. 1658. say It is true That many sad miscarriages divisions breaches fallings off from holy Ordinances of God have along this time of tentation been found in some of our Churches yet they do not at all stumble us as to the truth of our way had they been many more And avow this as their great Principle That amongst all Christian States and Churches there ought to be vouchsafed a forbearance and mutual indulgence unto Saints of all perswasions that keep unto and hold fast the necessary Foundations of Faith and Holiness in all other matters extra fundamental whether of Faith or Order Mr. Weld in his Answer to Mr. Rathband heretofore denied not the Congregations Parochial in England to be true Churches though impure And Mr Norton in his Answer to Appollonius ch 16. saith We reject the Separatists who distinguish not between the Church and the Impurities of the Church Whence the great crime of Schism Yet this Author not considering that the Congregational men disclaim his rigid separation avows separation as commanded by Christ from the Church of England as no true Church and condemns hearing the present Ministers as the Ministers of Antichrist though they preach the Gospel of Christ because of some defects conceived in their calling and some impurities real or imaginary in their worship as if it were saying A Confederacy forbidden Isai. 8 12. and a just ground of offence given to the sincere Lambs of Christ in that they do not separate from the Assemblies of England But he hath not yet done but adds Sect. 6. The Separatists give more just cause of Offence to godly sober Christians than the Conformists do to them If it be yet further said Obiect 2. But if I do not goe to hear the Preachers of this day many truly godly and sober Christians will be offended at my forbearance so that whether I hear or whether I forbear I shall offend To this I answer 1 That granting the case to be as is suggested though perhaps somewhat else upon a serious and strict search may be found to lye at the bottom of our Conformity beyond what is here pleaded I am very apt to believe were but a Toleration granted t is not the fear of offending any would cause our conforming Brethren to attend upon the ministry of the present Priests of England Yet supposing it to be as is intimated we ask 1. Do you look upon your going to hear as your duty or meerly as your liberty If the first let it be proved from any positive precept of Christ and we are satisfied if the second you are bound by many solemn injunctions which are at least reduceable to the moral Law not to use your liberty to scandalize your Brethren 2. Let both parties be weighed in an upright ballance such as you judge to be offended with you for not hearing and such as are offended thereat I am bold to say That the last mentioned for number holiness spirituality and tenderness do farr surmount the former who will really be scandalized at your forbearance 3. Let also the grounds of the offence on both sides be weighed the one are offended at you That you build not up in practise in a day of trouble and cause thereby the enemies of the Lord to triumph and blaspheme what in a day of liberty you did in your preaching and practice pull down and destroy The other because of your disobedience to what they are satisfied and you your selves once were God is calling you to viz. to have nothing to do with separate from this generation of men But 4. That t is your duty especially if in a Church-relation to meet together as a people called and picked by the Lord out of the Nations of the world cannot be denied The neglect of which is
mouths of adversaries and if they have to be humbled for it as David was when Sâ—imei curst him and so make advantage of an opposite persons enmity to amend themselves And indeed it were very unequal that we should either be afraid to do a thing because of clamours or continue in that which we cannot justifie because mens mouths will be opened against us and perhaps hardened in their own way Such kind of blasphemies as they are termed are vented against non-Conformists Sepâ—ratists as turbulent persons and yet this Author would not have it thought that they by their course harden poor soâ—ls in rebellion and blasphemy against God Why then doth he charge this upon the Conformists as an argument by it self as if it poâ—red contempt and hardened others and not impute the same to his own way But he tells us Sect. 7. Gods people are not called out of the temples in England as places of false worship To all that hitherto hath been said we shall yet briefly add Argument 10. God calls his people out of and strictly chargeth them not to go to the places of false worship Therefore 't is unlawful for the Saints to attend upon the present Ministers of England The antecedent is clearly proved Hos. 4.15 Amos 4.4 The reason of the consequence is because we cannot go to hear the present Ministers of England without we go to their places and Assemblies of false worship as the Common-prayer-book-worship hath been proved to be Answ. This argument proceeds upon the opinion of the rigid Separatists termed Brownists who in their Apology p. 75.76 have this as their Twelfth Position That all monuments of Idolatry in garments or any other things all Temples Altars Chappels and other places dedicated heretofore by the Heathens or Antichristians to their false worship ought by lawful authority to be rased and abolished not suffered to remain for nourishing superstition much less imployed to the true worship of God Exod. 20.4 5 6. 23.13 Esa. 30.22 Gen. 35.2 3 4. Deut. 12.2 3 30 32. 17 18 19 20. 2 Kings 10.26 27 28. and 18.4 23.12 13 14 15. 2 Chron. 17.6 Acts 17.23 19.26 27. Jude v. 23. with Lev. 13.47 51 52. Rev. 17.16 18 11 12 c. which is asserted by Mr. Ainsworth in his answer to Mr. Bernard about the Twelfth Article page 128. and in his Letters to Mr. John Paget and since by Mr. Robinson in his Justification of the separation from the Church of England against Mr. Bernard about the Twelfth and last errour imputed to them p. 354. p. 356. where he writes thus I see not but as the Religion of the Papists in the opposition it hath to Christianity is rightly called Antichristianism so the Religion of the Ten Tribes in the opposition it had to the Law given by Moses may fitly be called Antijudaism And for the Baalims then and there worshipped they were even as the lesser Gods at this day which are called Patrons among the Papists The Devil to the end he might bring in again the old Idolatry craftily borrowing the names of the Apostles and Martyrs by whom it was in former times overthrown and driven away and by this means it hath put on another person that it might not be known Whereupon it followeth by proportion That as the temples altars and high places for those Baalims and other Idols were by godly Kings to be raced down and taken away and no way to be imployed to the true worship of God so are the temples with their appurtenances built to the Virgin Mary Peter Paul and the rest though true Saints yet the Papists false Gods and very Baalims to be demolished and overthrown by the same lawful authority and in the mean while as execrable things to be avoided by them which have none authority to deface or demolish them p. 357. The moral equity of those Commandments in the old Testament touching the demolition and subversion of idolatrous temples and other the like superstitious monuments doth as well bind now as then Which Commandments are also in effect renewed in the new Testament where the faithful are charged to touch none unclean thing 2 Cor. 6.17 to keep themselves from Idols 1 John 5.21 which they cannot do except they keep themselves from their appertenances to hate even the garment spotted by the flesh Jude 23. not to receive the least mark of the beast Revel 14.9 but to go out of Babylon Revel 18.4 which is also called Sodom and Egypt spiritually as for the other sins reigning in her so for her idolatry amongst the rest From whence it is that many at this day term the Temples the high places decline them bury not in Churchyards with other actions of separation in speech and gesture opposite to what other Protestants conform to And though the chief leaders of the Congrestational Churches not long ago did Preach and hear in the publique Temples in England yet it seems this Authour now holds it unlawful to attend upon the present Ministers of England not onely because of their calling and worship but also because of the places in which it is performed and therefore seems to revive the controversie about the use of places once polluted by Idolatry Concerning which I shall not need to answer what either the Brownists in their Apology or Mr. Robinson hath said about this point the thing being so fully argued and the arguments of Mr. Ainsworth and others answered by Mr. John Paget in his Arrow against the separation of the Brownists from Chap. 6. to the end of the Book wherein the supposed moral equity of those Judicial Laws is shewed not to be such and that it is a great derogation from the benefit of the Gospel purchased by Christ's death to intangle the consciences of Christians with such Jewish opinions as if any creature were now polluted by Paganish or Popish Idolatry as that it might not now be enjoyed by Christians and imployed for God contrary to what the Apostle determines concerning meat offered to an Idol 1 Cor. 10.25 26 27 28 29 30. 1 Tim. 4.4 nor do any of Mr. Robinsons Texts serve for the purpose he brings them 2 Cor. 6 17. the unclean thing not to be touched is not the place where Idols have been worshipped but the Idol it self v. 16. which by going to places heretofore abused to Idolatry but now the Idol and it's worship is removed and the living and onely true God onely served is not touched in the Apostles sense but then onely when the Idol is kissed adored or otherwise worshipped They who joyn not in any Idol-service or honour keep themselves from Idols as is required 1 John 5.21 although they go to the places heretofore abused to Idolatry The garments spotted by the flesh however it allude to legal pollution yet it is not meant of material garments as belonging to an Idol but by it is meant any tokens or means of sinful lusts Revel 14.9 and 18.4 have been
either of these speak truth The Devils we are to have no communion with God having put an utter enmity between the serpent and the seed of the woman 3. If the present Ministers of England preach truth but by halves it is lawful to hear them preach those halfs The Bishops allow them to preach all truths needful to salvation all that is contained in the Creed Lords Prayer and Ten Commandments in the 39 Articles the two Tomes of Homilies nor are men inhibited in Schools or Convocations or at some times in books published in Latine to discover any truths of God so it be done without disturbance or other evil consequence That some truths needful to be known are not permitted to be published to the vulgar auditories may have the same reason as Christ had for not acquainting his disciples with many things he had to say to them because they could not then bear them John 16.12 Some things may seem very clearly revealed in the Scriptures to some and be owned by them which are pernicious as that the Saints have all right to government that they are to smite the civil powers as part of the fourth Monarchy that justified persons are not under the command of the moral Law some disputable as about the thousand years reign That God cannot forgive sins without satisfaction to his justice Church-constitution Covenant Government and many more which it is agreeable to the Apostles rule Rom. 14.1 their practice Acts 15.28 not to vent in all sorts of auditories and if the Bishops do restrain Preachers especially those that are young raw injudicious but violent and apt to cause division they do agreeably to the Apostles rule to the example of all Churches where Government is not popular which breeds confusion yea I think the Separatists have found by experience some restraint necessary and that the universal liberty of Conscience or of prophesying as it is termed is intolerable and if Bishops who are men and may be more rigid then they should hold the reins in too hard yet there is no reason why the people should refuse to hear that truth which is necessary and sufficient to salvation because they cannot hear every truth which perhaps out of faction or a childish inconstancy or having itching ears they desire to know As for what is said about the Ministers contradicting their preaching by their practice it is answered before in the Answer to the 5 th Chapter And yet were it granted their personal evils are not sufficient to make the hearing of the truth unlawful to the hearers As for the errours they are said to mingle with the truths they teach they are not such as overthrow the foundation if they were errours and taught by them and therefore this is no sufficient reason why they may not be heard preaching necessary truths Yet to shew the futility of this allegation I shall consider each of the supposed errours The first I doubt not they will deny and require this Authour to prove it For the second it is not for ought I know preached by any of the Ministers That the Apocryphal books which have in them errours may be used in the publick worship of God nor do I think if they should so do could it well consist with their subscription to the sixth Article of the Confession of the Church of England which excludes them out of the Canon of holy Scriptures which contain all things necessary to salvation and saith The Church as Hierome saith doth read them for example of life and instructions of manners but yet doth it not apply them to stablish any doctrine And what Dr. Rainold the Bishop of Durham that now is with many of the English Protestant and conforming Divines have written about the Apocryphal Books is sufficient to clear the present Ministers from suspicion of complying with the Papists who according to the Decree of the Trent Council ses quarta put most of them though they leave out some of them into the Catalogue of sacred Books containing that truth and discipline of the Gospel which is saving and to be preached to every creature and receive and venerate them with equal affection of piety and reverence as other books of holy scripture And although the passages alleaged by this Authour are liable to exception nor do I think it fit for me to justifie or excuse them yet this I say to shew there is not a sufficient reason to withdraw from hearing the present Ministers preaching or praying 1. Some of the books are not appointed to be read at all 2. Some of those that are appointed to be read are capable of an easier censure and better construction then is put upon them by this Authour 3. That those which are not so capable of excuse yet are appointed to be read on such days and in such places as those that alleadge this for a reason of not hearing the present Ministers need not be present 4. That it was once resolved as lawful by Dr. George Abbot after Archbishop of Canterbury in his answer to Dr. Hill the Papist p. 317. from the Preface to the second Tome of the Homilies for the Minister instead of the Apocryphal books to read some other part of the Canonical Scripture of the old Testament Which things being considered there seems not for this to be a sufficient reason of not hearing the present Ministers or charging them as this Authour doth The third errour I conceive they will deny to be their tenent But concerning this and the 4th 5th 6â—â— 8th 9th 11th errours so much hath been said before chiefly in the answer to the 5 th 6 th 7 th chapters of this book that I need not here make a particular answer concerning each of these severally yet I say the things are not matters of the Ministers Doctrine however they be of their practice and therefore cannot be a reason of not hearing their Sermons And they who make this a sufficient reason not to hear or to pray or receive the Lords Supper with a person by reason of some errour he holds or teacheth or some undue practice on Gods worship or conversation with other men go against all rules and examples in holy Scripture and approved Christians and such a one must suppose Preachers infallible every Communicant unblameable or each Christian to have power to excommunicate if the person faulty be not amended upon his reproof that he must know what Tenents his Teacher holds and what is the conversation of each Communicant ere he can warrantably hear the one or communicate with the other Which with sundry other superstitious conceits or unnecessary scruples put an intolerable burden upon mens consciences and will as well prove withdrawing from the Ministers and Churches Congregational necessary as from the Conformists As for the 7th errour it will be denied by them to be their Tenent that there may be Holy days appointed to the Virgin Mary John Baptist c. For though they