do it It was made also a consecrator of Water Bread and Wine and all other Holy things in time of Popery for the which corruption we ought to abhorr it Again we Sign this child in token that he shall continue Christ's faithfull Souldier to his Lives end These words shall continue to his lives end compared with the like in the Epistle of the 22 Sunday after Trinity God shall continue the work in you to the end shew unto us that we use the cross for a pledge to give assurance to the child to continue in grace to the end which if it be so then it serveth to work faith and is used effectually saith Parker Hooker saith that there cannot be a more forceable means to avoid that which may deservedly procure shame If it be in some sort a means to secure from confusion Everlasting then it is in some sort effective of Grace In a word suppose there were no sinfull use of it for the present the horrible abuse of it in times by-past and the danger and peril of these same abuses are sufficient to remove it out of this Holy Sacrament where it is set up in such honourable State beside the Lord 's own Altar 2. Of the Lord's Supper I 'll not mention all is said of this I 'll only apply my self to what is said of Kneeling which gesture though not according to Christs example nor the nature of the Ordinance is imposed as a necessary condition of our Right in the Lord's Supper whatever right Faith and Repentance may give unto this Ordinance no jus in re no right in it is acknowledged to any among us but such as Kneel whereby Kneeling is made by the Church of England a necessary Term and yet look'd on but as indifferent as if a man had been invested with a power of making a thing in it self indifferent to become a necessary part of Christs Religion But to give you what I find in the Altar of Damascus Where 't is said That without any farther he and they viz. Minister and People Communicate Kneeling after the Popish manner that is with a gesture of Adoration when they are beholding the signs taking eating drinking and inwardly in their minds should be meditating on the signification and the fruit and benefit which they reap by Christ Crucified and consequently cannot without distraction of mind from this employment of the Soul and Meditation pray a set and continued prayer to God or cannot meditate and be employed in the present action without distraction of mind from the prayer and therefore either they pray irreverently which they will not grant or do Communicate this Gesture of Adoration to the other imployments of the Soul and of the outward senses and members of the body about the objects presented which they must grant and so nill they will they they must be forced to confess that they commit idolatry Kneeling is no decent gesture for a Table for commodity they say maketh decency but this gesture is confessed not to be commodious as sitting is It is then enjoyned for another reason to wit for Reverence but to kneel for Reverence and Religious respects is ever Adoration in the highest degree To kneel for reverence that is to adore is not enjoyned here for prayer neither may prayer lawfully be enjoyned in time of another action and part of God's worship to be performed by the same person And suppose it were enjoyned for the short prayer uttered by their priest yet are not the outward senses and inward faculties employed principally on that prayer but upon another action principally and directly intended in the institution whereas the other is only super-added by man Let them frame their Canons and Acts as they please and suppose that they kneel for reverence of the Sacrament common sense may teach us that it is done for that respect either totally or principally but let it be in the least part yet that least part is idolatry Beside the idolatry of this gesture it cannot stand with the right manner of celebration and rites of the institution For when they kneel for adoration they cannot carry the cup from hand to hand nor divide the elements among themselves as Christ hath commanded In many places the people are raised from their kneeling to come about the Table there to receive kneeling and then are directed to their places again saith the Author of the Survey The priest giveth the Bread and the Wine to every one severally out of his own hands When the cup is to be carryed from one to another the communicant is too prophane in their opinion to reach it the Priests Holy hand must take it from one and give it to the other but Christ willed his Disciples to divide it among themselves and it was carryed from hand to hand indeed after the manner of the last paschal cup. When Christ therefore gave the Bread and the Wine he said in the plural number take ye eat ye c. The English priest speaketh in the singular number when he giveth the elements he annexeth not Christs words containing a comfortable promise and uttered in an Enunciative form but other words invented by man and in form of a prayer converting one part of God's worship into another or else confounding them By this 't is manifest that many Ministers may conscientioufly refuse to conform to the Termes imposed on the people They can no more satisfie their consciences in complying with the Termes of Lay-Communion than others can with those of the Ministers Conformity Moreover II. As they cannot hold Communion with the Church in the Holy Sacraments and consequently not comply with what is required of the people in order thereunto so neither can they with a safe Conscience joyn in the ordinary Lord's dayes Service They cannot conscientiously approve of many things in that service unto which they must give their approbation if they conform thereunto Whoever conforms doth thereby shew his approbation of what he conforms unto To what a man conforms to that he manifests his good liking why is it that some cannot conform unto the By-Offices but because they do not approve of them and why do any conform to the ordinary Lord's dayes Service but because they approve of it which is as much as if it had been said Conformity is an Overt Act of Approbation 't is in practice an Approving the thing But some scrupulous Dissenters cannot conform unto the ordinary Lord's dayes Service without conforming to several things to which they refuse the giving their approbation By the ordinary Lord's dayes Service they understand all that Office that is according to the Liturgy and Canon of the Church appoynted to be read Ordinarily on the Lord's day or to speak in the Common Prayer Dialect that Service that is appointed to be read ordinarily on Sundayes against the use of which they do more generally argue thus I. If they must conform to the ordinary Lord's dayes Service it must be to all according to the Rubrick and Canon or only to some part But If the latter it will not satisfie the Church for by refusing to be present at any part thereof they are to be denyed the Lord's Supper and if when call'd to
the Anabaptist Here I 'll give the sense of the moderater sort of those who look on the present Liturgy as what cannot by them be used without sin The which I 'll do without an engaging my self so far in their defence as to espouse their quarrel As for my part I think moderation becomes all Christians especially English Protestants in a day wherein they are in danger of being destroyed by the common enemy the Papist This is not a time to fall out with one another and quarrel about lesser things for now the great and weighty matters of our Religion are in hazard there must be an exercise of Christian charity towards each other Let every man give that liberty to the conscience of another which he expects should be given his own for while the World endures there will be as different apprehensions about lesser matters as there are different complections among men and therefore there must be mutual forbearance or there will be no peace among us Methinks it lookes ill when men assume to themselves an unaccountable infallibility the which is attended with a proportionable severity in imposing their own sentiments on others This is not only common among the Papists but also to be observed too much among all sorts of Protestants whether Episcopal Presbyterian Independent or Anabaptist and is I verily believe one great reason of those violent Dissentions that are among us every one thinks that such as dissent from them do so without any solid reasons and therefore not to be tolerated Thus some of the Conforming Clergy esteem the Non-conformists dissent from them to be both unreasonable and intolerable and some Dissenters it may be are even with the Episcopal in those censures they pass on them and among the Non-conformists some who only desire that the subscriptions and abjurings of Covenants be remov'd are willing enough that the Liturgy be established with but a few amendments the which may be done by a Comprehensive Bill that hath nothing of Indulgence in it But really how weak soever the greatest part of the Non-conformists are 't is too manifest that they think that there are other Blocks which lye in their way to Conformity than subscriptions and abjurings whose Consciences should be regarded and who stand as much in need of an Indulgence as others do of a Comprehension If the Bill of comprehension should be comprehensive enough to take me in I think my self oblig'd to do my utmost that such Conscientious persons who through weakness cannot do as much as my self be at least indulg'd Conscience is a tender thing and is really the immediate directer of our actions against the plain convictions of which we must not go No Authority is sufficient to oblige any man to act against the plain convictions of conscience For which reason seeing the Dissenters are fully convinc'd in Conscience that they cannot lawfully conform to the present Terms of Lay-Communion there must be either some alteration of the Termes or some must suffer for Conscience sake whence then to shew the necessity of altering some things even for a comprehension and the indulging in other things for the ease of tender Consciences I 'll give the Reader an Historical Account of some of their reasonings against the Termes of Lay-Communion the which I will produce only to this end namely to shew that the reasons are such as may lay convictions on the Consciences of good and honest if not learned men Though men of great learning may be able to answer them yet if they be such as are unanswerable in the judgmenr of the Dissenters 't is sufficient for the purpose for which I produce them Those arguments may be strong in the judgment of some which are not so in the opinion of others My province then is only to propose not to defend the arguments that are cogent in moving some Dissenters to conclude that as Lay-men they cannot conform unto the imposed Termes of the Church of England For to the compleat Communion of Lay-men there is required a conformity not only to the ordinary Lord's dayes Service but moreover unto their Modes of Administring the Sacraments But that unto this they cannot conform I will essay particularly to evince by shewing more generally why they can't conform to the Terms impos'd on the people and then more particularly why they can't submit unto the Rubrick about baptizing their children nor Communicate with them in the Lord's Supper and in fine give several reasons why others can't with a safe Conscience attend on the Reading of the ordinary Lord's dayes Service 1. Why some cannot Conscientiously comply with the Termes of Communion imposed by the Church on the people 1. More generally Because there are so many things which the Church of England acknowledges to be in their own nature indifferent that are made so necessary apart of Religion as to be Termes of Communion with them They take the Word of God contained in the writings of the Old and New Testament to be the only Rule of the whole and of every part of their Religion whence what is enjoyned them as so necessary a part of Religion as to be made a Term of Communion they cannot conform thereunto unless it be agreeable to the Word of God A Term of Christian Communion is a very necessary part of Christ's Religion the non-embracing which deprives a person of the benefit and advantage of the Sacraments and therefore they must be no other than what our Lord Christ has in his Word made so If any man or society of men assume unto themselves a power concerning matters of Religion which Christ never gave them they think they cannot be faithfull unto Christ if they subject themselves unto them in their exercise of such an irregularly assumed power Christ Jesus is the Sole Lord of his Church and Law-giver in it and therefore the alone Author of the whole of Christian Religion for which reason they cannot receive any such additions as are made meerly by men as parts much less as necessary parts of Christian Religion they know that there are some who say the Imposition may be sinfull when a compliance therewith is a duty But this in matters of Religion especially in the present case they do not understand because when lawfull Authority commands any thing sinfully the great reason why 't is sinfull is because 't is in other manner than according to the Word of God but if the command be not according to God's Word how can their obedience be so All obedience is to a command and such is the connexion between the command and the obedience that we must consider the obedience to be as is the command If the command be out of the Lord and sinfull the obedience thereunto cannot be in the Lord and a duty If the command be not for the Lord but against him the obedience cannot be for the Lord. But that our obedience must be in and for the Lord is acknowledged by the
Church of England But there are many things in their own nature according to the confession of the Church os England indifferent which yet are made so necessary a part of Christian Religion as to be enjoyned as Termes of Christian Communion Whoever conscientiously refuses to be present at their publique Prayers or to kneel at the Sacrament is by the 27th Canon deprived of the Sacrament yea and though the Minister who shall wittingly administer the same to notorious offenders and perjur'd villains incurres not for such a default the pain of Suspension Yet no Minister when he celebrateth the Communion shall wittingly Administer the same to any but to such as kneel under pain of Suspension nor under the like pain to any that refuse to be present at Publique Prayers according to the Orders of the Church of England Thus not only a form os Prayer but this particular form of Prayer in which form there are many things with which these Dissenters cannot comply are made so necessary a part of Religion that if they conform not unto them they are denyed the Lord's Supper and what Minister soever admits such unto the communion is lyable unto a suspension a greater punishment than is threatned against those Ministers who admit such as commit the horrible sin of perjury Moreover though they are convinc'd in conscience they sin if they kneel yet they cannot be admitted unto the Lord's Supper unless they kneel Let us put the best sense on these things and 't is this As the notorious offender and perjur'd villain cannot be admitted to the Sacrament because he complyes not with God's Terms the Holyest man on earth cannot be admitted unless he complies with Man's Termes But what is this less than setting up mans posts with Gods or a setting as high if not a higher value on the precepts of men as on the commands of God But seeing our Lord Christ has purchased a liberty for them whereby they may be admitted to the Sacrament on easier Termes than Man will permit they must abide by this liberty in doing which they do but discharge their duty in asserting the Lord Jesus Christ to be the Sole Author of the whole of Christian Religion and of all the Termes of Christian Communion But 2. To be more particular in shewing why they cannot joyn with the Church in the Sacraments In doing which I 'll contract my self in giving you no other than what I find in the Altar of Damascus 1. Of Baptism I 'll only offer a very little that is insisted on in my Author and therefore will pass by that passage in the Second Prayer before Baptism where the Remission of sins is defired by Spiritual Regeneration As if the pardon of sin consisted rather in the Sanctification of the soul than the dissolving the obligation to punishment and consider the Interrogatories which are these Dost thou forsake the Devil and all his works c. Dost thou believe c. Wilt thou be Baptized in this Faith The Child hath not Understanding nor Faith nor desire of Baptism And how be it the child had Faith can the God-father tell absolutely and in particular that this Child whom he presenteth doth Believe desire Baptism or forsake the Devil It is a foolish thing and great mockery of God's service to demand that of Infants which was at the first demanded of such as were come to years of discretion and were converted from Gentilism The children of Faithfull Parents are within the Covenant of Grace whereupon it is that they are made partakers of the Seal of the Covenant The Covenant being made with the Parents in their Faith and not the Faith of the child the Parents should give confession of their own Faith and not of the Faith of the child which is not because their own Faith is the condition of the Covenant upon their part whereupon God promiseth to be their God and the God of their Seed Whereupon also it followeth that the Father of the child should present the child and give confession and not another because the Covenant is made with him and his Seed and the child is his Seed not the Seed of another whom we call Godfather The Natural Father is the proper God-father Others may be Witnesses of Baptism but that the Father should or can resign this duty to another I deny After that the child is dipped or sprinkled and Baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost the Priest maketh a Cross upon the child's Forehead Saying We receive this child into the Congregation of Christ's Flock and do sign with the sign of the Cross in token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ Crucified and Manfully to fight under his Banner against Sin the World and the Devil and to continue Christ's Faithfull Souldier and Servant unto his Lifes end He saith not we have received but we do receive as if the child were not received by Baptism but by Grossing or as if the child were again received by Crossing which was before received by Baptism This signing with the cross is no decent gesture it is rather like a jugglers gesture than a gesture of decency and comeliness It must then be used as a Symbolical and Significant Rite But we have no such sign set down in the Word of God as to make two Cross Lines in the Air with our fingers to represent the cross of a Tree or to signifie unto us that we should not be ashamed of the Cross of Christ c. Thou shalt make unto thy self no Image that is any Representation forged in thy own brain to be set up in the Worship of God Admit once the Aerial Cross in Baptism ye cannot refuse to set up the material Cross and the Rood in the Kirck nor the Wooden or Stone Crosses in the High-way For all may signifie the same thing that the Cross on the forehead And by this reason every one may wear a Silver Cross upon his forehead also Further not only other significant crosses material may be brought in upon this ground but also the rest of the beggarly ceremonies of Baptism to deface and deform the purity plainness and simplicity of Christ's institution As to put salt into the mouth of the child to anoint with Oyl the breast and shoulders and the top of the head with Holy Crism and to put a burning Taper into his hands c. for these Toyes had their own glorious signification as well as the Cross Lastly What doth it signifie but that which is already signified in baptism The same valour and courage and constant profession and fighting under Christ's banner is a part of that Grace which is sealed by baptism But besides that it is a significant toy it is also esteemed effective for they say that the infant by it is dedicated to the service of him that dyed on the cross Who did sanctifie this sign for such an use Are men able to
aside the Translation that is most exactly agreeable to the Original and use one that is not only imperfect absurd and senseless but in some things so contrary to the Original But some Dissenters think that their Conformity in this respect cannot but prove pernicious to the Christian Religion as it casts a reproach not only on the last and best translation but even on the Original it self They know how jealous God is about his word unto which no additions diminutions or alterations can be made but to the provoking the most high and the wounding their Consciences and therefore are afraid to conform Argument III. III. The third Argument doth more immediately concern the very Service it self unto which the Dissenters refuse to Conform because of that similitude likeness and agreement there is between it and the formes of Prayer which the Papists use That the Reader may be the more fully acquainted with the true State of this controversie about the agreeableness there is between the English and Roman Service Books and what 't is the Dissenters aim at by their insisting so very much on it I must shew 1. What they say concerning the agreableness that is supposed to be between these Service Books 2. How this came to pass What occasion'd our adhering so closely to the Popish Service Book even when we forsook their Communion 3. The Reasonings of some Dissenters from that agreeableness is suppos'd to be between these two books against the English Service First What they say concerning the agreableness that is suppos'd to be between these two Service books The Dissenters do out of King Edward's Letter unto the Devonshire and Cornish Rebels give this following account of it namely As for the Service in the English Tongue thus manifest reasons for it and yet perchance it seemeth to you a new Service and indeed is none other but the old the self same words in English which were in Latine The difference is that you our Subjects should understand in English that which before was spoke in Latine If the Service of the Church was good in Latine it remaineth good in English for nothing is alter'd but to speak with knowledge that which was spoke with ignorance Furthermore these Dissenters add as I find in their Anatomy of the Service Book That every piece and parcel of the Liturgy word for word is out of these Popish peices namely the Breviary out of which the Common Prayers are taken the Ritual or book of Rites out of which the Administration of the Sacraments Burial Matrimony visitation of the sick are taken The Mass-book out of which the consecration of the Lord's Supper Collects Epistles and Gospels are taken As for the book of ordination of Arch-bishops Bishops and Ministers that is out of the Roman Pontifical These things being so whoever pleads for the English Service book doth so far defend the Romish Mass-book not that 't is a defence of the whole Romish Service for in the Anatomy of the Service Book 't is acknowledged that every thing in the Mass-book is not in our Liturgy though all that is in our Liturgy is word for word in the Mass-book But so far as our Liturgy is defended so far that part of the Romish Service is defended for which reason the greatest Champions who among our Church men have most zealously written in defence of the Liturgy and have been consider'd by the Church of Rome as men who have done great Service to the Roman Religion Thus Whitgift and Hooker have had their applauses from the Romanists 'T is not unworthy observation to find Arch-Bishop Whitgift reproaching Cartwright and the Dissenters as a people eminently serviceable to the Papist and Dean Stilling fleet to give the utmost countenance he could thereunto whereas the truth is that that on which Whitgift grounds his censure will not bear it and though none of Dean Stilling fleet 's adversaries have taken any notice of it that I can find yet Whitgift himself is the man who has had from the Jesuites great thankes for what he has written against Dissenters in defence of the English Service and Discipline That Whitgifts Censure concerning the Dissentes subserviency to Popish designes is groundless being rather the product of his indiscreet passions than of sound arguings is evident in that the great reason given to shew that the Dissenters are the Papists promoters is because they assert that the Papists ought not to be compel'd to receive the Supper of the Lord so long as they continue in their Popery that is they ought not to act contrary to their Conscience nor dissemble with Almighty God by professing themselves to be Protestants even when they are really and in heart Papists whether this be to gratifie the Papist let the impartial Reader judge But that Whitgift has gratify'd the Papist in his writings against Dissenters I 'll evince by producing what the learned Parker in his Ecclesiastical policy lib. 1. chap. 33. insists on in answer to this objection of Whitgift Bancroft and others where he shews how William Reignolds the Jesuit asserts that John Whitgift in his discourse against Cartwright has defended the Catholick Cause and accordingly the said Reignolds in the preface against Whitaker makes great use of Whitgift and in the book it self he sends Mr. Whitaker unto Dr. Whitgift for a supply of reasons for the confirming their notion about putting of our caps and making curtesie at the hearing the Name of Jesus Scultinyns and Stapleton give the same Character both of the writings of Whitgift and Bancroft against the Puritanes even as Gretzer the Jesuit triumphs in Saravias and Sutcliff's defence of the Episcopal Authority in Civils And as Whitgift even so Hooker for the service done the Church of Rome by what they have writ in defence of the worship and discipline of the Church of England hath had the praises of the Romanists This Mr. Walton in the life of Hooker has observ'd which is no more than what Dr. King Bishop of Chichester was acquainted with as he himself expresses in a letter to honest Isaac I am glad you mention sayes the Bishop how much value Robert Stapleton Pope Clement the 8th and other eminent men of the Romish perswasion have put upon this book having been told the same in my youth by persons of worth that have travelled Italy And what doth this discover less than that such is the agreement between the Service and Discipline of the Church of England and that of Rome that whoever pleads for the one defends the other Furthermore in the Anatomy of the Service Book we are furnished with an Historical Account of the Papists approving our Liturgy There be sayes the Author thereof abundance of instances for the Papists approving our Liturgy witness Mortons Appeal Pope Pius the 4th and Gregory the 13th offered to Queen Elizabeth to confirm the English Liturgy Witness Dr. Abbot then Prelate of Canterbury and Mr. Cambden in the life of Queen Elizabeth who
sayes the common fame went for truth that the Pope promised to confirm out of his own authority the English Liturgy provided her Majesty should rank her self with the Roman Church To thefe I adjoyn Dr. Boyes who was a bitter expositor of the English Liturgy as Heiga by the Doctors of Dowayes appointment was of the Mass after he hath whetted his teeth upon the Schismaticks in his Epistle to Bancroft he produceth the letter of Pope Pius for the approbation of the Service Book and notes also the Testimony of approbation from Bristow in his motives Queen Elizabeth being interdicted by the Popes Bull. Secretary Walsingham wrought so that he procured two Intelligences to be sent from the Pope as it were in secret into England to whom the Secretary appointed a State Intelligencer to be their Guide who shew'd them London and Canterbury service in all the pomp of it which the popish Intelligencers viewing and considering well with much admiration they wondred that their Lord the Pope was so ill advised or at least ill informed as to interdict a Prince whose Service and Ceremonies so Symobiliz'd with his own and therefore returning to Rome they possest the Pope that they saw no Service Ceremonies or Orders in England but they might very well serve in Rome whereupon the Bull was recalled to this also Doctor Carrier consid p. 45. a dangerous seducing Jesuit gives ample evidences The Common Prayer book saith he and the Catechism contained in it held no point of Doctrine expresly contrary to Antiquity that is as he explaineth himself contrary to the Romish Service c. Much more might be spoke to this purpose but I wave it judging that what hath been already offer'd is sufficient to evince that there is at least in the judgment of many a very great agreableness between the two service books 2. What is it that occasion'd the Church of Englands adhering to so great a part of the Romish Service Book even when she forsook the Communion of that Church Whoever considers the State of the Church in Edward the sixth his time will find that Cranmer and others discover'd a propension to drive on the Reformation much farther than they did but were hindred by the iniquity of the times Thus Bullinger as I find it in a difcourse of the troubles of Franckford reports to Mr. Williams Whittingham Gilby and others that Cranmer Bishop of Canterbury had drawn up a book of Prayers an hundred times more perfect than this we now have but the same could not take place for that Cranmer was matched with a wicked Clergy and Convocation with other enemies There were also reasons of a like nature that might hinder the furtherance of the reformation in Queen Elizabeths dayes for even then the ignorance of the vulgar accompanied with a proportionable hatred to true Religion was very great Whence 't is that Cambden assures us that the change of Religion was not suddenly made but by little and little by degrees for the Roman Religion continued in the same State it was first a full Month and more after the death of Queen Mary The 27th of December it was tolerated to have the Epistles and Gospels the Ten Commandments the Symbole the Litany and the Lords Prayer in the vulgar Tongue The 22 of March the Parliament being Assembled the order of Edward the sixth was re-established and by act of the same the whole use of Lord's Supper granted under both kinds The 24th of June by the Authority of that which concern'd the Uniformity of Publique Prayers and Administration of the Sacraments The Sacrifice of the Mass was abolished and the Liturgy in the English Tongue more and more Established In the Month of July the Oath of Allegiance was proposed to the Bishops and other persons and in August Images were thrown out of the Temples and Churches and broken and burn'd Furthermore as the illness of the times did impeed a sudden Reformation in like manner the moderate temper and favourable disposition the Queen had to some part of Popery was such as hindred a full Reformation whereupon it was not so far carryed on by this Queen as 't was sometime before by her Brother Edward the sixth That Queen Elizabeth had a natural propension to favour some part of Popery is not only manifest from her I hope Conscientious conforming so far in Queen Maries dayes as to hear Divine Service according to the rule in the Romish Church and her oft going to confession and afterwards when she came to the Throne her choosing to be Crown'd by a Popish Bishop according to the order of the Roman Pontifical which had so much in it of the Ceremonies and Superstitions of the Church of Rome that 't is thought very probable the Protestant Bishops would not act in it but with great alterations and that therefore she desired 'em not to be ingaged in it But beside this Dr. Burnet gives us the same Character I have suggested for sayes he in his History of the Reformation Queen Elizabeth receiving some impressions in her Fathers Reign in favour of such Old Rites as he had still retain'd and in her own Nature loving State and some Magnificence in Religion as well as in every thing else she thought that in her Brother's Reign they had stript it too much of External Ornaments and had made their Doctrine too narrow in some points therefore she intended to have some things explained in more general Termes that so all parties might be comprehended by them She inclin'd to keep up Images in Churches and to have the manner of Christ's presence in the Sacrament left in some general words that those who believed the Corporal presence might not be driven away from the Church by too nice an explanation of it So far Dr. Burnet In pursuance of these resolves the Queen attempts the accommodating matters of Religion so unto the Romish Clergy as to take 'em into the Communion of the Church of England the which end as Dr. Heylin affirmes she so effectually compass'd that for several years the Papists continued in the Communion of the Church and when they did forsake it it was not because they approved not of our Liturgy but upon political considerations and because the Councill of Trent had commanded it and Pope Pius the 5th had Excommunicated the Queen and discharg'd her Subjects from their Allegiance and made the going or not going to Church a sign distinctive to difference a Roman Catholick from an English Protestant I 'll give you the words of Dr. Heylin they are in his History of Queen Elizabeth There past another Act for recommending and imposing the book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments according to such alteration and corrections as were made therein by those who were appointed to revise it as before is said In the pursuance of which service there was great care taken for expunging all such passages in it as might give any scandal or offence to the
Popish party or be urg'd by them in excuse for their not coming to Church and joyning with the rest of the Congregation in God's publique worship In the Litany first made and published by King Henry the Eight and afterwards continued in the two Liturgies of King Edward the sixth there was a Prayer to be deliver'd from the Tyranny and all the detestable enormities of the Bishops of Rome which was thought fit to be expung'd as giving matter of scandal and disaffection to all that party or that otherwise wish'd well to that Religion In the First Liturgy of King Edward the Sacrament of the Lord's Body was deliver'd with this benediction that is to say the body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for the preservation of thy Body and Soul to Life Everlasting The blood of our Lord Jesus Christ c. which being thought by Calvin and his Disciples to give some countenance to the gross and carnal presence of Christ in the Sacrament which passeth by the name of Transubstantiation in the School of Rome was alter'd into this form into the second Liturgy that is to say take and eat this in remembrance that Christ dyed for thee and feed on him in thy heart by faith with Thanksgiving Take and drink this c. But the Revisers of the book joyn'd both formes together least under colour of rejecting a carnal they might be thought also to deny such a real presence as was defended in the writings of the antient fathers Upon which ground they expung'd also a whole Rubrick at the end of the Communion Service by which it was declared that kneeling at the participation of the Sacrament was required for no other reason than for the signification of the humble and gratefull acknowledging of the benefits of Christ given therein unto the worthy Receiver And to avoid that prophanation and disorder which otherwise might have ensued and not for giving any adoration to the Sacramental Bread and Wine there bodily received or in regard of any real and essential presence of Christ's Body and Blood And to come up closer to the Church of Rome it was ordered by the Queens injunctions that the Sacramental Bread which the book required onely to be made of the finest Flower should be made round in fashion of the wafers used in the time of Queen Mary She also order'd that the Lord's Table should be placed where the Altar stood that the accustomed reverence should be made at the name of Jesus Musick retained in the Church and all the old festivals observ'd with their several Eves By which complyances and the expunging of the passages before remembred the book was made so passable amongst the Papists that for ten years they generally repair'd to their Parish Churches without doubt or scruple as is affirm'd not only by Sir Edward Cook in his Speech against Garnet and his charge given at the Assizes held at Norwich but also by the Queen her self in a Letter to Sir Francis Walsingham then being her Resident or Leiger Embassador in the Court of France the same confessed by Sanders also in his book de Schismate To this Heylin within a few years following adds And now we may behold the face of the Church of England as it was first setled and established under Queen Elizabeth The Government of the Church by Archbishops and Bishops The Liturgy conform to the primitive patterns and all the Rites and Ceremonies therein prescribed accommodated to the honour of God and encreafe of piety The Festivals preserved in their former Dignity observ'd with all their distinct Offices peculiar to them and celebrated with a Religious Concourse of all sorts of people the weekly Fasts the Holy time of Lent the Embring weeks together with the Fast of the Rogation severely kept by a forbearance of all kind of flesh not now by virtue of the Statute as in the time of King Edward but as appoynted by the Church in her publique Calendar before the book of Common Prayer the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper celebrated in most reverend manner the Holy Table seated in the place of the Altar the people making their due reverence at their first entrance into the Church kneeling at the Communion the confession and the publique prayers standing up at the Creed the Gospels and the Gloria Patri and using the accustomed reverence at the name of Jesus Musick retain'd in all such Churches in which provision had been made for the maintenance of it or where the people could be trained up at least to plain Song All which particulars were either Established by the Lawes or commanded by the Queens injunctions or otherwise retained by virtue of some antient usages not by Law prohibited Nor is it much to be admired that such a general Conformity to those antient usages was constantly observ'd in all Cathedrals and the most part of the Parish Churches considering how well they were presidented by the Court it self in which the Liturgy was Officiated every day both morning and evening not only in the publick Chappel but the private Closet celebrated in the Chappell with Organs and other Musical Instrments and the most excellent voices of men and children that could be got in all the Kingdom The Gentlemen and Children in their Surplices and the Priests in Copes as oft as they attended the Divine Service at the Holy Altar The Altar furnished with rich Plate two fair Gilt Candlesticks with Tapers in them and a Massy Crucifix of Silver in the midst thereof which last remained there for some years till it was broke in peices by Pach the fool no wiser man daring to undertake such a desperate Service at the sollicitation of Sir Francis Knolles the Queens near Kinsman by the Caries and one who openly appeared in favour of the Schism at Franckford The antient ceremonies accustomably observ'd by the Knights of the Garter in their Adoration towards the Altar abolished by King Edward the 6th and reviv'd by Queen Mary were by this Queen retain'd as formerly in her Fathers time for which she received both thankes and honour from her very enemies i. e. the Papists as appeares by Harding's Epistle Dedicatory before his answer to the Apology c. So far Heylin Thus from what the sons of the Church Cambden Burnet and Heylin have affirm'd 't is apparent that Queen Elizabeth had a natural propension to favour the Papists and that this was discover'd by her making the Termes of Communion much more easie to the Papists than in King Edward's time whereby they became the more difficult and arduous to the Protestant Dissenter I 'll only add one observation of the Jesuit Reignold against Whitaker whereby the Reader may perceive not only that the Papists take notice how the practice of the Church of England contradicts their Rubrick but also that in the Rubrick concerning Apparel which is now to be found in the Communion Book even the beginning before morning prayer 't is order'd That the Minister
O Lord and the people make their Answer Because there is no other that fighteth for us but only thou O God as if Almighty God alone had not been able to defend them in the time of War whence they Pray unto God for the sending Peace But cannot that God who sendeth Peace by putting an end unto Wars preserve and protect in the day of Trouble If he can to what purpose is this Argument urg'd Again an alteration is made in the State of this Affair The Minister gives instruction or rather as a beginner of the Prayer mentions the Matter or Thing to be prayed for and the people must proceed to the making it a formal Prayer whence 't is that whereas the Minister in the publick Assembly should be the Mouth of the people unto God The Minister being silent the people altogether with a loud voice a distracting Murmur are their own Mouth Thus From Fornication and all other deadly Sin as if some sins were not Mortal but Venial and from all the Deceits of the World the Flesh and the Devil so far the Minister proceeds and then make a stop from whom the people take it adding Good Lord deliver us Again O Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the World says the Minister with the greatest seeming fervour and affection but yet in the midst of the sentence his warm affection is ended and the people proceed to say Grant us thy peace O Lord. Again they must be as they were in Statu Quo and the Minister prayes O Lord let thy Mercy be shewed on us to which Petition the people either add their sence or Limitation or Reason of the Prayer as we put our Trust in thee Beside at some one meeting of the Assembly the Pater-Noster or Lords Prayer is to be repeated Six or Eight several times and the Gloria Patri Twelve beside the many Kyrie Eleesons and Christe Eleesons Lord have mercy on us Christ have mercy upon us the Responces the Versicles c. Alas how ridiculous would this be interpreted by the generality of those who are now Sons of the Church should the Dissenters have us'd such a practice This Argument receives strength from what I find insisted on by by some of His Majesties Commissioners in the Account of all the proceedings of the Commissioners of both perswasions where 't is thus Argued Vid. As we find that the Minister is the Mouth of the people to God in publick which Scripture and the necessity of Order do require So we are loath to Countenance the people's Invading of that Sacred Office so far as they seem to us to do By reading half the Psalms and Hymnes 2. By saying half the Prayers as the Minister doth the other half 4. By being the only Petitioners in the far greatest part of all the Letany by their Good Lord deliver us and We beseech thee to hear us good Lord. While the Minister only reciteth the Matter of the Prayer and maketh none of the request at all we fear least by purity of reason the people will claim the work of preaching and other parts of the Ministerial Office 3. And we mentioned that which all our Ears are witnesses of that until half the Psalms and Hymns c. are said by such of the people as can say them the Murmur of their Voices in most Congregations is so unintellgible and Confused as must hinder the Edification of all the rest for who is edified by that which he cannot understand This you 'l find page 29 but in page 60 we have account of the Rule and Order of Prayer with a full Demonstration That the Common Prayer is not agreeable unto any just Rule or Order There are say they Two Rules of Prayer One is the Nature of the things Compared in Matter and Order with Nature and Necessity The Other is the Revealed Will of God in his word in General the Holy Scripture more Especially the Lords Prayer The Liturgy for the greatest part of the Prayers for dayly Vse is Confused by whichsoever you measure it You seem much to honour the Lords Prayer by your frequent Use of it or part of it we beseech you dishonour it not practically by denying it by Matter and Order to be the only Ordinary and Perfect Rule We know about particular Administrations where it is but certain select Requests that we are to put up suited to the partcular Subject and Occasion we cannot follow the whole Method of the Lords Prayer which containeth the heads of all the parts where we are not to take in all the parts we cannot take them in that Order But that none of all your Prayers should be form'd to that perfect Rule that your Letany which is your Comprehensive Prayer and that the Body of your dayly Prayers broken into several Collects should not as set together have any considerable respect unto that Order nor yet to the Order which reason and the Nature of the thing requireth which is observed in all things else and yet that you should so Admire this and be so tenacious of that which is conceived Prayer you would call by worse names than Confusion this sheweth us the power of prejudice By this the Reader may perceive how much the Non-Conformists are for a decent Order and Comely Method in Prayers but the Conformist against it and how much the Non-Conformist are for the right use of the Lords Prayer even when the Conformist are not at least practically for it Whence we may see how unreasonable it is to make such a Noise and Clamour as if the Dissenters rejected the Lords Prayer or were against its use whereas in truth the Dissenters are much more for the Right use of the Lords Prayer than the Conformists are Whoever will understand the true State of this Controversie must consider what the great design of the Disciples in Asking and of Christ in granting their Request about Prayer was the which he can no sooner with just deliberation and impartially do but will be satisfied that the thing the Disciples desired was to be Taught how to Fray Lord Teach us as John taught his Disciples How to Pray and they desire to be taught not that they prescribe unto Jesus Christ a Method in which he should teach 'em for that became not Disciples even Scholars who are to Learn but not to teach This being the desire of the Disciples to be taught to pray not to have a form of VVords to be Verbally and Syllabically rehearsed or repeated but Rules or Presidents for the directing 'em how to pray The answering of their Request was the Design of Christ in giving 'em the Lords Prayer which was principally intended for the Direction of the Disciples who were as Matthew expresseth it Oblig'd by that Command when ye Pray say Our Father so say after that manner when you pray or whenever you pray The Command is perpetual Obliging at all times of prayer so far as the particular Occasions
under the Gospel that he thought good to teach that by other mystical Ceremonies besides the ordinary Sacraments and not this And of this Judgment is Calvin Bullenger Chemnitius Danaeus Hospinian Arucularius our book of Homilies Dr. Humfrey Dr. Rainolds Dr. Willet and others All which Divines do teach that to bring insignificant Ceremonies into the Church of Christ is plain Judaism Besides this 't is a special part of that Christian Liberty which Christ hath purchased for us by his death and that which all Christians are bound to stand for that the Service we are to do unto God now is not mystical Ceremonial and Carnal as it was then but plain and spiritual And of this Judgment were the Divines within the Territories of Hamborough in an Epistle they wrote to Mèlancthon and Virel Piscator Dr. Rainolds and others 6. This will open a Gap to Images Oyl Lights and Spittle Cream and all other Popish Ceremonies especially if they shall be judged as fit to Teach and Admonish by their signification as these which we retain And indeed this is a chief Reason whereby both Papists and Lutherans justifie the Use of Images and whereby Bellarmine commendeth all other their Ceremonies that they are fit to teach and put men in remembrance of good things The Popish Custome of the Priests sprinkling men with Holy Water and using with all these words Remember thy Baptism as their manner was in some Countries can with no reason be held for Unlawful if such significant Ceremonies as ours are to be defended With such Respects and Relations Remembrances and Apprehensions saith Dr. Fulke all Idolatry and false Worship may be defended 7. VVe are further confirmed in this our Argument by the Judgment of the Godly Learned who besides the Testimony they have given to every several proof we have brought for it do also speak directly with us in this General That no Mystical and significant Ceremony devised by Man and appropriated to Gods Service may be retained in the Church of Christ Of this judgment is the Church of Wittenberg the Churches of France and the Low Countries in their Observations upon the Harmony of Confessions Mr. Calvin Mr. Beza Mr. Perkins and others Yea Dr. Whitgift himself professeth that he did not like that any prescript Apparel should be used in Gods Service for Signification And no good reason can be given why the Church may not as well enjoyn a prescript Apparel for signification as any other Ceremony To all which I 'le add one Argumentative Consideration which the Church of England doth afford us which is given in their Discourse of Ceremonies before the Common-Prayer-Book as a reason why they did put away any of those many Ceremonies with which the Church was burthen'd which reason is distinct from that of their Multitudes and 't is taken from their significancy and the likeness they had with those in use among the Jewes on which account they were not suited to the Gospel Dispensation After mention is made of the great excess and Multitude of Ceremonies in the dayes of Popery they add And besides this Christ's Gospel is not a Ceremonial Law as much of Moses Law was but it is a Religion to serve God not in Bondage of the Figure i. e. significant Ceremony or Shadow but in the Freedom of the Spirit As if it had been said a great part of Gospel Liberty consists in being freed from those significant Ceremonies which are not now of Gods appointment These words do seem to suggest that one reason of the abolishing the significant Ceremonies of the Papists was because they being significant were so like unto the Jewish Service and so different from the Gospel State and such as have been so much abus'd to Superstition that 't was not easie to retain the Ceremony and abandon the Superstition This being the Sense of the Church of England seeing the Ceremonies retained are of the same significant or Jewish Nature with those abolished that have been as much abus'd to Superstition as others and have no other Foundation than Mans VVit and VVill for their support why were not these that are left rejected for the same reason those still retained by the Papists have been If you 'l argue from the significancy the likeness that is between Popish Ceremonies and the Jewish and therefore reject 'em seeing the English are of the same kind is not the Argument as strong against them Is not a Surplice as like the Jewish Garment as some of the Popish Rights are to the Jewish Ceremonies why then shall the one be abolished because of that likeness and the other kept or if their being abus'd to superstition and the Difficulty of separating the Superstitious abuse from the useing 'em be sufficient to abolish the Rites of Salt and Spittle Lights c. why not as sufficient for the abolishing the Surplice the Sign of the Cross in Baptism Kneeling at the Lords Supper Bowing at the name of Jesus Have not all these been as much abus'd to Superstition and still are as any of the rest especially considering what Divisions they have made in the Church why not then abolish'd Or if it be a sin to conform to the Popish Rites How a Duty to Conform to these that of the same kind with ' em Or if these without Sin may be appropriated to Gods VVorship by Protestants which may not the Papists where they have Authority by their Impositions impose 'em on the people as in France c. and appropriate 'em to God's VVorship Methinks Mr. Greenham expresseth himself very full on this particular in his Answer unto the Bishops of Ely as 't is in the Register If your VVisdom think says he that I deceive my self in my Supposition for that in Lutheranism more and worse abuses be maintained I answer that Consubstantiation excepted they be all ejusdem generis of the like kind This he speaks of the Ceremonies of the Lutherans who keep up Images comparing 'em with our Ceremonies seeing they are not retained ad Cultum Dei to the VVorship of God but as they say Ad Aedificationem Decorum et Ordinem Ecclesiae to Edification c. and differ only from us secundum Majus Minus as great things and less Therefore as more and worse Ceremonies are less to be tolerated so no more are the fewer or lesser evils to be allowed and as you and other good men have great Consciences in the Multitude of Ceremonies I beseech you to think that I and others may have some Consciences in the fewer sort when they be of the like nature with others Seeing what has been said doth sufficiently prove the unlawfulness of the Ceremonies in the judgment of many a Dissenter they are afraid to Comply with or joyn with any in the use of those Ceremonies They are fully convinc'd they should sin if they did the which they durst not do least they provoke God to jealousie There are in the VVritings of the Old Non-Conformists
Church by Baptism nor can be by meer Cohabitation even so they never were by their own Consent either expresly or interpretatively They never held Communion with the Church of England in all Ordinances were never confirm'd by the Bishops nor ever did participate of the Lord's Supper and therefore I think it cannot be truly said That they Separate How can they cease that Communion which they never had For which reason to prove these Schismatical Separatists who never separated from the Church seems an Impossibility Surely their exercise of that Right and Power with which they are invested as Christians in chosing their own Pastor cannot be an Act Schismatical By this 't is manifest That those who never expresly nor implicitly consenting to hold communion with any Parish-Church in all Ordinances were never actually obliged to hold Communion with such particular Parishes and consequently their forbearing such Communion or their Assembling in places distant from the Parish Church cannot be a Separation and if not a Separation it cannot be a Schism Thus the Reader may easily perceive how necessary 't is that the Conformists prove that those Dissenters who now meet in Assemblies locally distant from the Parish Churches were once Members and under an Obligation of holding external Communion with the Parish Churches if they will prove 'em Separatists Furthermore they must prove 2. That this people do ordinarily Separate themselves from the external Communion of their Parish Church For seeing the Sin of Schism consists in causeless Separation there must be a Separation or there can be no causeless Separation that is there can be no Schism but how the Conformist can prove a Separation any otherwise than by insisting on the people's not holding Communion in the same manner or same place with the Church is difficult to suppose And if they take either of their ways without the Addition of some other Consideration they must either make many of their own Meetings Separate which are in places locally distant from the Parish Church where their Modes of Administration are different or clear many Dissenters from the Reproach of Separation what do they think of such Meetings in which the Common Prayer is read are they Separate and Schismatical But after they have prov'd both these they cannot prove all Dissenters Schismatical unless they can also evince 3. That the Separation is Causeless and Sinful But how they can prove that those who if they separate do so on no other Account than that they may forsake Sin is a point worthy of Consideration If there be any sinful Imposition made the term of Communion 't is sufficient to justifie the Separation of those who withdraw themselves from the external Communion of that Church If a Church that is sound in the Doctrine of Religion though it detests an Idolatrous Worship yet if it make the least Sin the Term of Communion whereby the people cannnot have Communion with that Church but by a deliberate committing that Sin Separation from the Communion of this Church is justifiable For whatever some may suggest we must not commit the least Sin that good may come thereof To insist then so much on the Peace and Vnity of the Church as if it were a Good for the Obtaining which we might venture on a little Sin is a Notion of a very dangerous Tendency giving too great Countenance to a Doctrine of the Papists whereby they justifie all their Villanies A Little evil say they may be done for the Obtaining a great Good for instance The Salvation of the many Souls in Three Kingdoms is a great a very great Good the Killing One Two or Three Hereticks in order thereunto at most is but a little evil which may be done for so great a good Moreover this justifies all their Officious Lying and Equivocating they tell a Lye that some great good may come thereof But this is so contrary to the pure Nature of a Holy God and his Holy Good and Just Command that whoever will indulge himself in a practical embraceing such a Notion doth but prepare the greater Damnation for his own Soul God is a great God and the least Sin being an Offence to his Dread Majesty cannot knowingly with deliberation and allowance be committed but the person that does it exposeth himself to Divine Indignation who ever breaketh the least of these my Commands says Christ Matth. 5. 19. is in danger of loosing Heaven for though a man keep the whole Law and yet offend in one point he is guilty of all James 2. 10. We must not speak nor act wickedly for God he is not glorified by Mans lye and therefore Wo unto them that will do evil that good may come thereof Rom. 3. 8. If the least sin be made the Term of Communion no Consideration of Peace and Vnity or of Obedience to the Magistrate can excuse those from guilt that will venture on that sin Whence 't is evident That all those who by the Reasons insisted on in this Treatise are fully convinc'd That somewhat sinful is imposed as a Term of Communion with the Church of England they do but discharge their Duty and keep a good Conscience in separating and yet by separation do not accuse the Church as if she had been no true Church or as if Salvation could not by others be had in it A Church that is sound in the Faith that 't is a true Church in a Theological Sense being lyable to Error may even while Sound in the great things of Religion impose some Error as a Term of Communion from which those who are convinc'd of the Sin must separate A sound Church in the great things may err in lesser matters and may Impose Assent and Consent unto that Error as a Term of Communion with the which these Dissenters durst not comply but seeing they cannot have Communion on easier Terms must separate There is a great Difference between the Errors or Corruptions of a Church which are made Terms of Communion and those which are not 'T is not to be question'd but that a man may joyn with a Church that is less pure than another even with a Church that hath several Spots in it or he must joyn with none and may be under an Obligation of continuing with that Church although he may go elsewhere and be better edifyed otherwise there being variety of Gifts those who are more eminent than the rest among the Ministery must have most of the people round when other honest though not so able Preachers have few or none However if they make the least Spot or Impurity a Term of Communion he dares not comply As long as he may may continue Communion without being made a partaker of the impurities as in many instances he may he must not separate but when they impose their corruptions as Termes of Communion so that he cannot have Communion but by complying with the corruption he must not sin for the sake of Communion nor on any
other consideration whatsoever But seeing they cannot hold Communion with the Parish-Churches The next great quaerie is what they must do whether live without some Ordinances all the dayes of their Life or Assemble themselves together for Communion in all Ordinances in such a way as they are fully convinc'd is agreable to the Sacred Scriptures That they must not constantly neglect any Ordinance of God nor the publick attendance on his worship somewhere is so clearly reveal'd in the word of God that whoever is not so far in love with Quakerism as to neglect the Testimony of God's written Word cannot but acknowledge it That the Lord Jesus who has instituted a Ministry and made it the peculiar work of some men in special to preach the Word not only for conversion of sinners but for the edisication of the converted for the help and benefit of whom there is instituted not the Ordinance of Baptism alone but that of the Lord's Supper which is design'd for the strength and encrease of Grace in Christians I say this Lord Jesus who hath so graciously instituted a Ministry and Ordinances hath made it the duty of Christians to assemble themselves together to the end they may be made partakers of the Blessings of his Institutions and Ordinances And such is the Relation between Minister and People that is between a Gospel Minister and an orderly Christian Assembly that the one cannot be without the other neither can the one ordinarily perform some Relational Duties but in an Assembly with the other and therefore must assemble themselves together 't is their duty I cannot at present enlarge on this head and therefore as to this I can only add that the sense of all Protestants generally is that all Christians ought to assemble themselves together for publick worship Viz. for Prayer the Word and Sacraments and that 't is the duty of a Pastor to take heed to himself and the Flock over which he is made over-seer and that 't is the peoples duty to attend Ordinarily on the Ministry of their own Pastor The great difference between the Church of England and Dissenters is not so much about the peoples duty of assembling themselves together for publique worship as about the place where and the Minister with whom The Church of England sayes it must be in the Parish Church with the Minister of the Parish but the Dissenter asserts that every Christian is invested with a right to choose his own Pastor and that therefore he must go where he finds the worship to be in a way most agreable to God's Holy word but when he is once fix'd he is under those Obligations of Duty unto his Pastor that the Church of England do say a Parishioner is unto the Minister of the Parish But seeing on these things I cannot now enlarge I will conclude with an humble and affectionate request to all good Christians whether Episcopal or Dissenter I beseech you to consider that conscience is a tender thing its wounds unsupportable frequently accompanied with such horror as is very like unto the pains and torments of the damned No man therefore must act contrary to the plain convictions thereof What man soever does what he is convinc'd in Conscience is a sin does greatly dishonour and provoke Almighty God All care must be taken to obtain the knowledge of the truth and gain a freedom from error but there must not be an acting against the plain convictions of conscience though erroneous On this I insist as a sound part of the Protestant Doctrine strenuously defended against the many feeble assaults of the Papist by several worthies of the Church of England And really this is a Rule all good Christians must walk by in doing which seeing there are almost as many different perswasions of conscience about some lesser things as there are considering mindes there will be as many different practices where there are different Sentiments about matters of practice there the practice will be different for which reason the strong must take heed that they despise not the weak and the weak look to it that they judge not the strong For whether we conform or conform not if we do what we do conscientiously to the Lord we shall be accepted of him I verily believe that many do think themselves bound in conscience to conform the which they would not do to gain a world if they did think it a sin and 't is as true that many among the Dissenters are as conscientiously Non-conformists and would really have conform'd did they not think that so conforming they should sin against God Both these must be tenderly regarded by such as will walk by the Christian Rule A Non-conformists censuring a conformist as one that acts against his conscience is unchristian and a Conformist's censuring all Dissenters as Hypocrites looking on their conscience to be but fancy their Religion to be faction is no less unchristian than the former But to be more particular my humble desire is 1. That those who are of the Communion of the Church of England would continue it so long as they can with a safe conscience Let not every little dissatisfaction with some men drive you off from those wayes you have nothing beside the miscarriage of some men of that profession to object against 't is true your duty is to mind the glory of God in the edification of your own Soul and if your Parish Minister be one whose incapacity for the Ministerial work is such as not to answer the end of the Ministry you must look out for a better and be where you may have more than the shadow of a Minister even one who is competently qualified for the workes But do this in a way as little offensive to the Church of England as your conscience will permit Why will you separate from that Communion where you may be without sin especially seeing by doing so you do what you cannot justifie But if you cannot continue your Communion without complying with sin you must rather withdraw than sin 2. That such as are not actually of any Communion i. e. neither joyn'd with the Church of England nor with the Dissenter of which fort there are many especially among the younger people would remember that they have as Christians a right to choose their own Pastor in the exercise of which right 't is their duty to have a special regard to the Glory of God the good of their own Soul and the peace of the Church and therefore if you may have all these ends answer'd by joyning your selves to the Church of England and you can with a safe Conscience do it you do well in joyning with that Church but if you can't with a safe Conscience joyn with the Church of England but can with the Non-conformists you must apply your selves to those of the Non-conformists who do in your judgments keep most exactly to the rule of the Gospel You must regard God's Glory as your ultimate