the observation of Lent as a Religious Fast the Example of Christ's fasting forty dayes and nights being no more imitable nor intended for the imitation of Christians than any other of his miraculous works were or than Moses his forty dayes Fast was for the Jewes and the Act of Parliament 5 Eliz. forbidding abstinence from flesh to be observed upon any other than a politick Consideration and punishing all those who by Preaching Teaching Writing or open Speech shall notifie that the forbearing of flesh is of any necessity for the saving of the soul or that it is the service of God otherwise than as other politick Laws are VI. That the Religious observation of Saints dayes appointed to be kept as holy dayes and the Vigils thereof without any foundations as we conceive in Scripture may be omitted that if any be retained they may be called Festival and not Holy dayes nor made equal with the Lords day nor have any peculiar Service appointed for them nor that the People be upon such days enforced wholly to abstain from work and that the names of all others not inserted in the Callendar which are not in the first and second Books of Edward the Sixth may be left out VII That the gift of Prayer being one special qualification for the Work of the Ministery bestowed by Christ in order to the edification of his Church and to be exercised for the profit and benefit thereof according to its various and emergent necessities It is desired that there may be no such Imposition of the Liturgy as that the exercise of that gift be thereby totally excluded in any part of publick worship and further that considering the great age of some Ministers and the infirmities of others and the variety of several services oft time occurring upon the same day whereby it may be inexpedient to require every Minister at all times to read the whole it may be left to the discretion of the Minister to omit it as occasion shall require which liberty we find to be allowed even in the first Common Prayer Book of Edward the Sixth VIII That in regard of the many defects which have been observed in that Version of the Scriptures which is used throughout the Liturgy many fold instances whereof may be produced as in the Epistle for the first Sunday after Epiphany taken out of Rom. 12. 1. Be you changed in your shape And the Epistle for the Sunday next before Easter taken out of Phil. 2. 5. Found in his apparel as a man As also the Epistle for the first Sunday in Lent taken out of the fourth of the Galatians Mount Sinai is Agar in Arabia and bordereth upon the City which is now called Jerusalem The Epistle for Saint Matthews day being taken out of the second Epistle of the Corinthians and the fourth We go not out of kind The Gospel for the second Sunday after Epiphany taken out of the second of John When men be drunk The Gospel for the third Sunday in Lent taken out of the eleventh of Luke One house doth fall upon another The Gospel for the Annunciation taken out of the first of Luke This is the sixth month which is called Barren and many other places we therefore desire instead thereof the Translation allowed of by Authority may alone be used IX That in as much as the Holy Scriptures are able to make us wise unto salvation to furnish us thoroughly unto all good works and contain in them all things necessary either in Doctrine to be believed or in Duty to be practised whereas divers Chapters of the Apocryphal Books appointed to be read are charged to be in both respects of dubious and uncertain credit It is therefore desired that nothing be read in the Church for Lessons but the Holy Scriptures in the Old and New Testament X. That the Minister be not required to rehearse any part of the Liturgy at the Communion Table save onely those parts which properly belong to the Lords Supper and that at such time onely when the Holy Supper is administrated XI That the word Minister and not Priest or Curate is used in the absolution and in divers other places It may thoroughout the whole Book be used instead of those two words and that instead of the word Sunday the word Lords day may be every where used XII Because singing of Psalms is a considerable part of Publick Worship we desire that the Version set forth and allowed to be sung in Churches may be amended or that we may have leave to make use of a purer Version XIII That all obsolete words in the Common Prayer and such whose use is changed from their first significancy as read who smote thee used in the Gospels for the Monday and Wednesday before Easter Then opened be their witts used in the Gospel for Easter Tuesday c. may be altered into other words generally received and better understood XIV That no portions of the Old Testament or the Acts of the Apostles be called Epistles or read as such XV. That whereas throughout the severall offices the Phrase is such as presumes all persons within the Communion of the Church to be regenerated converted and in an actuall state of grace which had Ecclesiasticall Discipline been truly and vigorously executed in the exclusion of scandalous and obstinate sinners might be better supposed But that there having been and still being a confessed want of that as in the Liturgy is acknowledged it cannot rationally be admitted in the utmost latitude of Charity we desire that this may be reformed XVI That whereas orderly connexion of Prayers and of particular Petitions and expressions together with a competent length of the formes used are tending much to edification and to gain the reverence of people to them There appears to us too great neglect of this Order and of other Just Laws of method particularly 1. The Collects are generally short many of them consisting but of one or two Sentences of petition and those generally usherd in with a repeated mention of the Name and Attributes of God and presently concluding with the Name and Merits of Christ whence are caused many unnecessary intercessions and abruptions which when many Petitions are to be offered at the same time are neither agreeable to scripturall example nor suted to the gravity and seriousness of that Holy Duty 2. The Prefaces of many Collects have not any clear and speciall respect to the following Petitions and particular petitions are put together which have not any due order or evident connexion one with another nor suitable with the occasions upon which they are used but seem to have fallen in rather casually than from any orderly codtinuance It is desired that instead of these various Collects there may be one Methodicall and entire form of Prayer composed out of many of them XVII That whereas the Puplick Liturgy of a Church should in reason comprehend the summe of all such sins as are ordinarily in Prayer by
number of the members of Christ the Children of God and the Heirs rather than the Inheritors of the Kingdom of heaven Of the Rehearsal of the ten Commandements VVe desire that the Commandements may be inserted according to the new Translation of the Bible 10. Answ My duty towards God is to believe in him c. In this Answer there seems particular respect to be had to the several Commandements of the first Table as in the following Answer to those of the second and therefore we desire it may be advised upon whether to the last words of this Answer may not be added particularly On the Lords day otherwise there being nothing in all this answer that refers to the fourth Commandement Qu. 14. How many Sacraments hath Christ ordained Answ Two only as generally necessary to salvation That these words may be omitted and answer thus given Two only Baptism and the Lords Supper Qu. 19. What is required of persons to be baptized Answ Repentance whereby they forsake sin and Faith whereby they stedfastly believe the promise of God Qu. 20. Why then are Infants baptized when by reason of their tender age they cannot perform them Answ Yes they doe perform them by their Sureties who promise and vow them both in their names We desire that the entring of Infants into Gods Covenant may be more warily expressed and that the words may not seem to found their Baptism upon a real actual faith and repentance of their own And we desire that a promise may not be taken for the performance of such faith and repentance especially that it be not asserted that they perform these by the promise of their Sureties it being to the seed of Believers that the covenant of God is made and not that we can find to all that have such believing Sureties who are neither Parents nor Pro-parents of their children In the generall Wee observe that the Doctrine of the Sacraments was added upon the conference at Hampton Court is much more fully and particularly delivered then the other parts of the Catechism in short Answers fitted to the memories of children and thereupon wee offer it to be confidered 1. Whether there should not be a more distinct and full explieation of the Creed the Commandements and the Lords Prayer 2. Whether it were not convtnient to adde what seemes to be wanting somewhat particularly concerning the nature of Faith of Repentance of the two Covenants Justification Sanctification Adoption and Regeneration Of Confirmation The last Rubrick before the Catechism AND that no man should think that any detriment shall come to Children by deferring of their Confirmation he shall know for truth that it is certain by Gods Word that Children by being baptized have all things necessary for their Salvation and be undoubtedly saved Although wee charitably suppose the meaning of these words was only to exclude the necessity of any other Sacraments to baptized Infants yet these words are dangerous as to the misleading of the vulgar and therefore we desire they may be expunged After the Catechism SO soon as the Children can say in their mother tongue the Articles of the Faith the Lords Prayer and the ten Commandements and can answer to such other questions of the short Catechsm c Then shall they be brought to the Bishop and the Bishop shall confirm them We conceive that it is not a sufficient qualification for confirmation that Children be able memoriter to repeat the Articles of the faith commonly called the Apostles Creed the Lords Prayer and the ten Commandements and to answer to some questions of the short Catechism for it s often found that Children are able to doe all this at four or five years old 2. It crosses what is said in the third reason of the first Rubrick before confirmation concerning the usage of the Church in times past ordaining that Confirmation should be administred to them that are of perfect age that they being instructed in Christian Religion should openly professe their own faith and promise to be obedient to the will of God Thirdly VVe desire that none may be confirmed but according to his Majesties Declaration Viz. That Confirmatioin be rightly and solemnly performed by the information and with the consent of the Minister of the place Rubrick After the Catechism THen shall they be brought to the Bishop by one that shall he his God-father or God-mother This seems to bring in a second sort of God-fathers and God-mothers beside those made use of at Baptism and we see no need either of the one or other The Prayer before Imposition of hands Who hast vouchsafed to regenerate these thy servants by water and the holy Ghost and hast given them the forgivenesse of all their sins This supposeth all the Children who are brought to be confirmed have the Spirit of Christ and the forgivenesse of all their fins whereas a great number of Children of that age having committed many sins since their Baptism doe shew no evidence of serious repentance or of any speciall saving grace And therefore this confirmation if administred to such would be a perillous and gross abuse Rub. Before the Imposition of hands THe Bishop shall lay his hand upon each child severally This seems to put a higher value upon Confirmation than upon Baptism or the Lords Supper for according to the Rules and Orders of the Common-Prayer-Book every Deacon may Baptize and every Minister may Consecrate and administer the Lords Supper but the Bishop only may confirm The Prayer after Imposition of hands VVE make our humble supplication to thee for these children upon whom after the Example of thy holy Apostles we have laid our hands to certifie them by this signe of thy favour and gracious goodness towards them We desire that the practice of the Apostles may not be alledged as a ground of the Imposition of hands for the confirmation of children both because the Apostles did never use it in that ease as also because the Articles of the Church of England declare it to be a corrupt imitation of the Apostles practice Art 25. VVe desire that Imposition of hands may not be made as here it is a signe to certifie children of Gods grace and favour towards them because this serms to speak it a Sacrament and is contrary to that fore mentioned 25. Art which sayes that Confirmation hath no visible signe appointed by God The Rub. after Confirmation NOne shall be admitted to the holy Communion until such time as he can say the Catechism and be confirmed VVe desire that Confirmation may not be made so necessary to the holy Communion as that none should be admitted to it unless they be confirmed Of the Form of solemnization of Matrimony THe man shall give the woman a Ring c. shall surely perform and keep the vow and covenant betwixt them made whereof the Ring given and received is a token and pledge
the Church to be confessed and of such Petitions and Thanksgiving as are ordinarily by the Church to be put up to God and that Puplick Catechismes or Systemes of Doctrine should summarily comprehend all such Doctrines as are necessarily to be believed and these explicitely set down The present Liturgy as to all these seems very defective particularly 1. There is no preparatory Prayer in your addresses to God for assistance or acceptance yet many Collects in the midst of the Worship have little or nothing else 2. The Confession is very defective not clearly expressing Originall sin nor sufficiently enumerating Actuall sins with their aggrivations but consisting only of generals whereas Confession being the exercise of repentance ought to be more particular 3. There is also great defect as to such Forms of publick prayers and thanksgivings as are suitable to Gospel-worship 4. The whole body of the Common Prayer also consisteth very much of meer generals as to have our prayers heard to be kept from all evil and from all enemies and all adversities that we may do Gods will without any mention of the particulars wherein these generals exist 5. The Catechism is defective as to many necessary Doctrines of our religion some even of the Essentials of Christianity not mentioned except in the Creed and there not so explicite as ought to be in the Catechism XVIII Because this Liturgy containeth the imposition of divers Ceremonies which from the first Reformation have by sundry Learned and pious men been judged unwarrantable as 1. That publick Worship may not be celebrated by any Minister that dares not wear a Surplice 2. That none may Baptise or be Baptised without the transient Image of the Cross which hath at least the semblance of a Sacrament of humane institution being used as an engaging sign in our first and solemn Covenanting with Christ and the Duties whereunto we are really obliged by Baptism being more expresly affixed to that Aery fign than to the holy Sacrament 3. That none may receive the Lords Supper that dares not kneel in the act of receiving but the Minister must exclude all such from the Communion although such kneeling not only differs from the practice of Christ and of his Apostles but at least on the Lords daies is contrry to the practice of the Catholick Church for many hundred years after and forbid by the most venerable Councila that ever were in the Christian world All which Impositions are made yet more grievous by that subscription to their lawfulness which the Cannon exacts and by the heavy punishments upon the non observance of them which the Act for uniformity inflicts And it being doubtfull whether God hath given power unto men to institute in his worship such mysticall teaching signs which not being necessary in genere fall not under the rule of doing all things decently orderly and to edification and which once granted will upon the same reason open a door to the arbitrary Imposition of numerous Ceremonies of which St. Aug. complained in his dayes and the things in Controversie being in the Judgement of the Imposers confessed indifferent who dare not so much as pretend any real goodness in themselves otherwise than what is derived from their being imposed and consesequently the Imposition ceasing that will cease also and the Worship of God not become indecent without them whereas on the other hand in the Judgement of the Opposers they are by some held sinful and unlawful in themselves by others very inconvenient and unsuitable to the simplicity of Gospel-Worship and by all of them very grievous and burdensome and therefore not at all fit to put in balance with the peace of the Church which is more likely to be promoted by their removal than continuance considering also how tender our Lord and Saviour himself is of weak Brethren declaring it to be much better for a man to have a Milstone to be hanged about his neck and to be cast into the depth of the Sea than to offend one of his little ones and how the Apostle Paul who had as great a Legislative power in the Church as any under Christ held himself obliged by that common rule of Charity not to lay a stumbling block or an occasion of offence before a weak Brother chusing rather not to cat flesh while the world stands though in it self a thing lawful than offend his Brother for whom Christ dyed we cannot but desire that these Ceremonies may not be imposed on them who judge such impositions a violation of the Royalty of Christ and an Impeachment of his Laws as insufficient and are under the holy Law of that which is written Deut. 12. 32. VVhat thing soever I command you observe to do it thou shalt not adde thereto nor diminish from it but that there may be either a total abolishion of them or at least such a liberty that those who are unsatisfied concerning their lawfulness or expedency may not be compolled to the practice of them or subscription to them but may be permitted to enjoy their Ministerial Functions and Communion with the Church without them The rather because these Ceremonies have for above an hundred years been the fountain of manifold evils in this Church and Nation occasioning sad Divisions between Ministers and Ministers and also between Ministers and people exposing many orthodox pious and peaceable Ministers to the displeasure of their Rulers casting them upon the edge of the penal Statutes to the loss not only of their Livings and liberties but also of their opportunities for the service of Christ and his Church and forcing people either to worship God in such a manner as their own consciences condemn or doubt of or else to forsake our Assemblies as thousands have done and no better fruits than these can be lookt for from the retaining and imposing these Ceremonies unless we could presume that all his Majesties Subjects should have the same subtilty of Judgement to discern even to a Ceremony how farr the Power extends in the things of God which is not to be expected or should yeeld obedience to all the Impositions of men concerning them without enquiring into the will of God which is not to be desired We do therefore most earnestly intreat the Right Reverend Fathers and Brethren to whom these Papers are delivered as they tender the Glory of God the Honour of Religion the Peace of the Church the Service of His Majesty in the accomplishment of that happy Union which his Majesty hath so abundantly testified his desires of to joyn with us in importuning His most Excellent Majesty that His most gracious Indulgence as to these Ceremonies granted in His Royall Declaration may be comfirmed and continued to us and our posterities and extended to such as do not yet enjoy the benefit thereof XIX As to that Passage in His Majesties Commission wherein we are authorized and required to compare the Present Liturgy with the most ancient Liturgy which have been used in
in Whitsun week The two Collects for St. Johns and Innocents the Collects for the first day in Lent for the fourth Sunday after Easter for Trinity Sunday for the sixth and twelfth sunday after Trinity for St. Lukes day and Michaelmas day We desire that these Collects may be further considered and debated as having in them divers things that we judge fit to be altered The Order for the Administration of the Lords Supper SO many as intend to be partakers of the holy Communion shall signifie their Name to the Curate over night or else in the morning before the beginning of morning Prayer The time here assigned for notice to be given to the Minister is not sufficient And if any of these be an open and notorious evil liver the Curate having knowledge thereof shall call him and advertize him in any wise not to presume to come to the Lords Table We desire the Ministers power both to admit and keep from the Lords Table may be according to his Majesties Declaration of the 25. Octob. 1660. in these words The Minister shall admit none to the Lords Supper till they have made a credible profession of their faith and promised obedience to the will of God according as is expressed in the consideration of the Rubrick before the Catechisme and that all possible diligence be used as is for the instruction and reformation of seandalous offendors whom the Minister shall not suffer to partake of the Lords table untill they have openly declared themselves to have truly repented and amended their former naughty lives as is partly expressed in the Rubrick and more fully in the Cannons Then shall the Priest rehearse distinctly all the ten Commandments and the people kneeling shall after every Commandment ask God mercy for transgressing the same We desire First that the Preface prefixed by God himself to the ten Commandments may be restored Secondly that the fourth Commandment may be read as in Exodus 20. Deut. 5. He blessed the Sabbath day Thirdly that neither Minister nor People may be enjoyned to kneel more at the reading of this then of any other parts of Scripture The rather because many ignorant persons are thereby induced to use the ten Commandments as a prayer Fourthly that instead of those short prayers of the people intermixed with the several Commandments the Minister after the reading of all may conclude with a suitable Prayer After the Creed if there be no sermon she ll follow one of the Homilies already set forth or hereafter to be set forth by common authority We desire that the preaching of the Word may be strictly injoyned and not left so indifferent at the administration of the Sacrament as also that Ministers may not be bound to those things which are as yet but future and not in being After the Sermon Homily or Exhortation the Curate shall declare c. and earnestly exhort them to remember the poor saying one or more of these sentences following Two of the sentences here cited are Apocryphal and four of them more proper to draw out their peoples bounty to their Minister then their charity to the poor Then shall the Church-wardens or some other by them appointed gather the Devetion of the people Collection for the poor may be better made at or a little before the departing of the Communicants We be come together at this time to feed at the Lords Supper to the which in Gods behalf I bid you all that be here present and beseech you for the Lord Jesus Christs sake that you will not refuse to come If it be intended that these Exhortations should be read at the Communion they seem to us unreasonable The way and means thereto is first to examine our lives conversations and if ye shall perceive your offences to be such as be not only against God but also against our neighbours then you shall reconcile your selves unto them and be ready to make restitution and satisfaction And because it is requisite that no man should come to the holy Communion but with a full trust in Gods mercy and with a quiet conscience We fear this may discourage many from comming to the Sacrament who lye under a doubting and troubled conscience Then shall this general confession be made in the name of all those that are minded to receive the holy Communion either by one of them or by one of the Ministers or by the Priest himself We desire it may be made by the Minister only Then shall the Priest or the Bishop being present stand up and turning himself to the people say thus The Ministers turning himself to the people is most convenient throughout the whole ministration Before the Prefaces on Christmas day and seven daies after Because thou didst give Jesus Christ thine only Son to be born as this day for us c. First we cannot peremptorily fix the Nativity of our Saviour to this or that particular day Secondly it seems incongruous to affirm the birth of Christ and the descending of the holy Ghost to be on this day for seven or eight daies together Upon Whitsunday and six daies after According to whose most true promise the Holy ghost came down this day from Heaven grant us that our sinfull bodies may be made clean by his body and our soul washed by his most precious blood We desire that whereas these words seem to give a greater efficacy to the blood then to the Body of Christ may be altered thus That our sinful souls and bodies may be cleansed through his precious body and blood Prayer at the consecration Hear us O merciful father c. who in the same night that he was betrayed took bread and when he had given thanks he brake it and gave it to his Disciples saying take eat c. We conceive that the manner of consecrating of the Elements is not here explicite and distinct enough And the Ministers breaking of the bread is not so much as mentioned Then shall the Minister first receive the Communion in both kinds c. and after deliver it to the people in their hands kneeling and when he delivereth the bread he shall say The body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life and take and eat this in remembrance c. We desire that at the distribution of the Bread Wine to the Communicants we may use the words of our Saviour as near as may be and that the Minister be not required to deliver the bread wine into every particular Communicants hand and to repeat the words to eachone in the singular number but that it may suffice to speak them to divers joyntly according to our Saviours example We also desire that kneeling at the Sacrament it not being the gesture which the Apostles used though Christ
let them be recited if not It is hard that this should even by you be thus affirmed as is sayd by us which we have not sayd We have sayd that the Ceremonies have been the Fountain of much evil occasioning divisions but not what you charge us to have sayd in words or sense 3. And may not you alter them without approving or seeming to approve the reason upon which the alteration is desired when you have so great store of other reasons The King in his Declaration is far enough from seeming to own the Charge against the things which he was pleased graciously to alter so far as is there exprest If a Patient have a conceit that some one thing would kill him if he took it the Physitian may well forbear him in that one thing when it is not necessary to his health without owning his reasons against it If his Majesty have Subjects so weak as to contend about things indifferent and if both sides err one thinking them necessary and the other sinful may he not gratifie either of them without seeming to reprove their errour By this reason of yours he is by other men in such a Case necessitated to sin For if he settle those things which some count necessary he seems to approve of their opinion that they are necessary If he take them down when others call them sinful he seems to own their charge of the sinfulness But indeed he needeth not to do either he may take them down or leave them indifferent professedly for unity and peace and professedly disown the Errors on both sides We are sorry if any did esteem these Forms and Ceremonies any better than mutable indifferent modes and circumstances of Worship and did hazard estate or life for them as any otherwise esteemed And we are sorry that by our Divisions the Adversary of Peace hath gotten so great an advantage against us as that the Argument against necessary charitable forberance is fetch'd from the interest of the reputation of the contending Parties that things may not be abated to others which you confess are indifferent and alterable and which many of them durst not use though to save their lives And this because it will make them thought the pious tender concienc'd men and make others thought worse of But with whom will it have these effects those that you call the generality of the sober loyal children of the Church will think never the worse of themselves because others have libertie to live by them without these things And the rest whose liberties you denie will think rather the worse of you than the better for denying them their libertie in the worshipping of God You undoubtedly argue here against the interest of Reputation which you stand for your Prefaces to your indulgencies and your open Professions and if you will needs have it so your own Practises will tell the World loud enough that the things which you adhered to with so great hazards are still lawfull in your Judgement and it will be your honour and add to your reputation to abate them to others when it is in your power to be more severe And if you refuse it their sufferings will tell the World loud enough that for their parts they still take them to be things unlawful As for the reasons by them produced to prove them sinfull they have been publickly made known in the writings of many of them In Ames his fresh sute against the Ceremonies and in the Abridgement c. and in Bradshaw's Nicols and other mens Writings To the first general Proposal we answer That as to that part of it which requires that the matter of the Liturgie may not be private opinion or fancy that being the way to perpetuate Schism the Church hath been carefull to put nothing into the Liturgie but that which is either evidently the Word of God or what hath been generally received in the Catholick Church neither of which can be called private opinion and if the contrary can be proved we wish it out of the Liturgie Reply We call those Opinions which are not determined Certainties and though the greater number should hold them as Opinions they are not therefore the Doctrines of the Church and therefore might be called Private Opinions but indeed we used not the Word that we can find the thing we desired was that the materials of the Liturgie may consist of nothing doubtfull or questioned among pious learned and orthodox Persons We said also that the limiting Church Communion to things of doubtfull disputation hath been in all Ages the ground of Schisme and Separation which is not to say that the Liturgy it self is a Superstitious usage or a directs cause of Schisme And we cited the words of a Learned man Mr. Hales not as making every word our own but as a Testimony ad hominem because he was so highly valued by your selves as we suppose and therefore we thought his words might be more regarded by you than our own 2. Where you say that the Church hath been carefull to put nothing in the Liturgy but that which is either evidently the word of God or that which had been generally received in the Catholick Church We reply 1. We suppose there is little or nothing now controverted between us which you will say is evidently the Word of God either the Forms or Ceremonies or any of the rest 2. If by in the Church you mean not by the Church but by any part in the Church how shall we know that they did well And if by the generality you mean not All but the Greater part you undertake the proof of that which is not easie to be proved It being so hard to judge of the majority of Persons in the Catholick Church in any notable differences We do take it for granted that you limit not the Catholick Church as the Papists do to the Confines of the Roman Empire but indeed we can only wish that your Assertion were true while we must shew it to be untrue if you speak of the Primitive Church or of an universality of time as well as place if not its more against you that the Primitive Catholick Church was against you The very thing in question that containeth the rest that it s needfull to the peace of the Church that all the Churches under one Prince should use one form of Liturgy was not received by the Catholick Church nor by the generality in it when it is so well known that they used diversity of Liturgies and Customes in the Roman Empire The generality in the Catholick Church received not the Lords Supper Kneeling at least on any Lords dayes when it was forbidden by divers generall Councills and when this prohibition was generally received as an Apostolical tradition We have not heard it prov'd that the Surplice or Cross as used with us wree received by the Universal Church It is a private Opinion not received by the Catholick Church that it is
the land of our Nativity as Maris told Julian He thank't God that had deprived him of his sight that he might not see the face of such a man Socrat. Hist l. 3. c. 10. So we shall take it as a little abatement of our affliction that we see not the Sins and Calamities of the people whose peace and welfare we so much desire Having taking this opportunity here to conclude this part with these Requests and Warnings we now proceed to the second part containing the particulars of our Exceptions and your Answers Concerning Morning and Evening Prayer Sect. 1. Rubr. 1. We think it fit that the Rubrick stand as it is and all to be left to the discretion of the Ordinary Reply We thought the end and use more considerable than custom and that the Ordinary himself should be under the rule of doing to edification Sect. 2. Rub. For the reasons given in our Answer to the 18th General whither you refer us we think it fit that the Rubrick continue as it is Reply We have given you reason enough against the imposition of the usual Ceremonies and would you draw forth those absolute ones to increase the burden Sect. 3. Lords Pr. Deliver us from evil These words For thine is the Kingdom c. are not in S. Luke nor in the antient Copies of St. Matth. never mentioned in the antient Comments nor used in the Latin Church and therefore questioned whether they be part of the Gospel there is no reason that they should be alwayes used Reply We shall not be so over-credulous as to believe you that these words are not in the antient Copies It is enough that we believe that some few antient Copies have them not but that the most even the generality except those few have them The judgement of our English Translators and almost all other Translators of Matth. and of the reverend B of Chester among your selves putting the Copy that hath it in his Bible as that which is most receiv'd and approved by the Church do shew on which side is the chief authority if the few copies that want it had been thought more arthentick and credible the Church of England and most other Churches would not have preferred the copies that have this doxology And why will you in this contradict the later judgement of the Church expressed in the translation allowed and imposed The Syriack Ethiopick and Persian translations also have it and if the Syriack be as antient as you your selves even now asserted then the antiquity of doxology is there evident and it is not altogether to be neglected which by Chemnitius and others is conjectured that Pauls words in Tim. 4. 18. were spoken as in reference to this Doxology And as Pareus and other Protestants conclude it is more probable the Latrines neglected than that the Greeks inserted of their own heads this sentence The Socinians and Arrians have as fair pretence for their exception a ainst 1 John 5 6 7. Masculus saith non cogitant vero similius esse ut Graecorum ecclesia magis quà m Latina quod ab Evangelistis Graece scriptum est integrum servârit nihilque de suo adjecerit Quid de Graeca ecclesia dico vidi ipse vetustissimum Evangelium secundum Matth. Codicem Chaldaeis Elementis Verbis conscriptum in quo Coronis ista perinde atque in Graecis legebatur Nec Chaldaei solum sed drabes Christiani paciformiter cum Graecis orant Exemplar Hebraeum à docto celebri D. Sebast Munstero vulgatum hanc ipsam Coronidem habet Cum ergo consentiunt hâc in re Hebraeorum Chaldaeorum Arabum Graecorum Ecolesiae contra omnes reliquas tantum tribuitur authoritatis ut quod sâ—la diversum legit ab Evangelitis traditum esse credatur quod vero reliquae omnes concorditer habent orant pro addititio peregrino habeatur And that Luke hath it not will no more prove that it was not a part of the Lords Prayer than all other omissions of one Evangelist will prove that such words are corruptions in the other that have them All set together give us the Gospel fully and from all we must gather it Sect. 4. Lords Prâ—often used It is used but twice in the morning and twice in the Evening Service and twice cannot be called often much lesse so often For the Letany Communion Baptism c. they are Offices distinct from morning and evening prayer and it is not sit that any of them should want the Lord Prayer Reply We may better say we are required to use it six times every morning than but twice for it is twice in the Common morning prayer and once in the Letany once in the Communion service once at Baptism which in great Parishes is usual every day and once to be used by the Preacher in the Pulpit And if you call these distinct offices that maketh not the Lords Prayer the seldomer used sure we are the Apostles thought it fit that many of their prayers should be without the Lords Prayer Sect. 5. Glor. Patri This Doxology being a solemn Confession of the blessed Trinity should not be thought a burden to any Christian Liturgy especially being so short as it is neither is the repetition of it to be thought a vain repetition more than His mercy endureth for ever so often repeated Psal 136. We cannot give God too much glory that being the end of our Creation and should be the end of all our Services Reply Though we cannot give God too much glory we may too often repeat a form of words wherein his name and glory is mentioned there is great difference between a Psalm of praise and the praise in our ordinary prayers more liberty of repetition may be taken in Psalms and be an Ornament and there is difference between that which is unusual in one Psalm of 150. and that which is our daily course of worship When you have well proved that Christs prohibition of battology extendeth not to this Matth. 6. we shall acquiesce Sect. 6. P. 15. Ru. 2. In such places where they do sing c. The Rubr. directs only such singing as is after the manner of distinct reading and we never heard of any inconvenience thereby and therefore conceive this Demand to be needlesse Reply It tempteth men to think they should read in a singing tone and to turn reading Scripture into Singing hath the inconvenience of turning the edifying simplicity and plainness of Gods service into such affected unnatural strains and tones as is used by the Mimical and Ludicious or such as feign themselves in raptures and the highest things such as words and modes that signifie Raptures are most loathsome when forced feigned and hypocritically affected and therefore not fit for Congregations that cannot be supposed to be in such Raptures this we apply also to the sententious mode of prayers Sect. 7. Benedicite This Hymn was used all the Church over Conc. Tolet. Can.
was personally present amongst them nor that which was used in the purest and primitive times of the Church may be left free as it was 1 2 Ea. 6. As touching Kneeling c. they may be used or left as every mans devotion serveth without blame And note That every Parishioner shall communicate at the least three times in the year of which Easter shall be one and after shall receive the Sacraments and other Rites according to the Orders in this book appointed Forasmuch as all Parishioners are not duely qualified for the Lords Supper and those habitually prepared are not at all times actually disposed but may be hindred by the providence of God and some by the distempers of their own spirits We desire this Rubrick may be wholly omitted or they altered Every Minister shall be bound to administer the Sacrament of the Lords Supper at the least thrice a year provided there be a due number of Communicants manifesting their desires to receive And we desire that the following Rubrick in the Common-Prayer-Book in 5 6 Ed. 6. established by Law as much as any other part of the Common-Prayer-Book may be restored for the Vindication of our Church in the matter of kneeling at the Sacrament although the gesture be left in different Although no order can be so perfectly devised but it may be of some either for their ignorance and infirmity or else of malice and obstinacy misconstrued and depraved and interpreted in a wrong part And yet because that brotherly Charity willeth that so much as conveniently may be offences should be taken away Therefore we willing to do the same whereas it is ordered in the Book of Common-Prayer in the administration of the Lords Supper that the communicants kneeling should receive the Holy Communion which thing being well meant for the signification of the humble and grateful acknowledgment of the benefit of Christ given to the worthy Receivers and to avoid the prophanation and disorder which about the Holy Communion might else ensue lest yet the same kneeling might be thought or taken otherwise We do declare that it is not meant thereby that any Adoration is done or ought to be done either unto the Sacramental Bread or Wine there bodily received or unto any real and essential presence there being of Christs natural flesh and blood forasmuch as concerning the Sacramental Bread and Wine they remain still in their very natural substance and therefore may not be adored for that were Idolatry to be aborred of all faithful Christians And as concerning the natural body and blood of our Saviour Christ they are in Heaven and not here for it is against the truth of Christs natural body to be in more places than in one at one time Of Publick Baptism THere being divers learned pious and peaceable Ministers who do not only judg it unlawful to baptize children whose Parents both of them are Atheists Infidels Hereticks or unbaptized but also such whose parents are excommunicate persons Fornieators or otherwise notorious and scandalous sinners We desire they may not be inforced to Baptize the children of such until they have made open profession of their repentance before Baptism Parents shall give notice over night or else in the morning VVe desire that more timely notice may be given And then the Godfathers and the Godmothers and the people with their Children Here is no mention of the Parents in whose right the child is baptized and who are fittest both to dedicate it to God and to undertake to God and the Church for it We do not know that any persons except the parents or some other appointed by them have any power to consent for the children or to enter anto Covenant We desire it may be left free to parents whether they will have Sureties to undertake for their children in Baptism Ready at the Font. VVe desire it may be so placed as all the Congregation may best see and hear the whole administration In the first Prayer By the Baptism of thy well beloved Son c. didst sanctifie the flood Jordan and all other waters to the mystical washing away of sin It being doubtful whether either the flood Jordan or any other waters were sanctified to a Sacramental use by Christs being baptized and not necessary to be altered VVe desire this may be otherwise expressed The third Exhoreation Do promise by you that are their Sureties The Questions Dost thou forsake c. Dost thou believe c. VVilt thou be baptized c. VVe know not by what right the Sureties do promise and answer in the name of the Infant It seemeth to us also to countenance the Anabaptistical opinion of the necessity of an actual profession of faith and repentance in order to Baptism Thâ—s such a profession may be required of the parents in their own name and now solemnly renewed when they present their children to Baptism we willingly grant But the asking of one for another is a practice whose warrant we doubt And we desire that the two first Interrogatories may be put to the Parents to be answered in their own names and the last propounded to the Parents or Pro-parents thus Will you have this child baptized into this Faith In the second Prayer before Baptism May receive remission of sins by spiritual regeneration This expression seeming incovenient we desire it may be changed into this May be regenerated and receive remission of sins In the Prayer after Baptism That it hath pleased thee to regenerate this Infant by thy holy Spirit We cannot in Faith say that every Child that is baptized is regenerated by Gods Holy Spirit at least it is a disputable point and therefore we desire that it may be otherwise expressed After Baptism Then shall the Priest make a Cross Concerning the Cross in Baptism we refer to our eighteenth General Of Private Baptism VVE desire that Baptism may not be administred in a private place at any time unless by a lawful Minister and in the presence of a competent number That where it is evident that any child hath been so baptized no part of the administration may be reiterated in publick under any limitation and therefore we see no need of any Lyturgy in that case Of the Catechism Quest 1 VVHat is your name Quest 2. Who gave you that name Answ My Godfathers and my Godmothers in my Baptism Qust 3. What did your Godfathers and Godmothers do for you in Baptism We desire that these three first Questions may be altered considering that the for greater number of persons baptized within these twenty years last past had no Godfathers nor Godmothers at their Baptism The like to be done in the seventh Question Answ 2. In my Baptism wherein I was made a Child of God a member of Christ and an Inheritor of the Kingdom of Heaven VVe conceive it might more safely be expressed thus Wherein I was visibly admitted into the
down the Dish we offer them or whose throats are too narrow to swallow so big a morsel as we send them And when we have done to tell them the only remedy is for them to believe we love them and are tender of them And who knows not that a man may think well of his Superiors that yet may question whether all that he teacheth or commandeth him be lawful If it be objected That the Liturgy is in any way sinful and unlawful for us to joyn with it is but reason that this be first proved evidently before any thing be altered it is no Argument to say that multitudes of sober pious persons scruple the use of it unless it be made to appear by evident reasons that the Liturgy gave the just grounds to make such scruples For if the bare pretence of scruples be sufficient to exempt us from Obedience all Law and Order is gone Reply To this passage we humbly crave your consideration of these Answers 1. We have not only sayd that sober pious persons scruple the Liturgy but we have opened to you those defects and disorders and corruptions which must needs make the imposing of it unlawful when God might be more fitly served 2. It is strange that you must see it first evidently proved unlawful for men to joyn with the Liturgy you mean we suppose to joyn with you in the using of it or when you use it before you will see reason to alter any thing in it what if it be only proved unlawful for you to impose it though not for others to joyn with you when you do impose it is this no reason to alter it should you not have some care to avoid sin your selves as well as to preserve others from it An inconvenient mode of Worship is a sin in the Imposer and in the Chooser and voluntary User that might offer God better and will not Mal. 1. 13 14. And yet it may not be only lawful but a duty to him that by violence is necessitated to offer up that or none And yet we suppose the Imposers should see cause to make an alteration If you lived where you must receive the Lords Supper sitting or not at all it 's like you would be of this minde your selves 3. Why should it be called a bare pretence of scruples as if you search'd the Hearts and knew not only that they are upon mistake but that they are not real when the persons not only profess them real but are willing to use all just means that tend to their satisfaction they study read pray and will be glad of Conference with you at any time upon equal tearms if they may be themselves believed 4. Even groundless scruples about the matter of an unnecessary Law which hath that which to the weak both is and will be an appearance of evil may be sufficient to make it the Duty of Rulers to reverse their impositions though they be not sufficient to justifie the Scrupulous 5. If a man should think that he ought not to obey man even when he thinketh it is against the Commands of God though he be uncertain as in case of going on an unquestioned Warfare or doing Doeg's execution c. yet it followeth not that all Law and Order is gone as long as all Laws and Orders stand that are visibly subservient to the Laws of God and to his Sovereignty or consistent with them and when the Subject submitteth to suffering where he dare not obey On the contrary we judge that if the Liturgy should be altered as is there required not only a multitude but the generality of the Soberest and most loyal Children of the Church of England would justly be offended since such an alteration would be a virtual Confession that this Liturgy were an intollerable burden to tender Consciences a direct cause of Schism a superstitious usage upon which pretences it is here desired to be altered which would at once both justifie all those which have so obstinately separated from it as the only pious tender conscienced men and condemn all those that have adhered to that in conscience of their duty and loyalty with their loss or hazard of estates lives and fortunes as men superstitious schismatical and void of Religion and Conscience For this reason and those that follow we cannot consent to such an alteration as is desired till these pretences be proved which we conceive in no wise to be done in these Papers and shall give reasons for this our Judgment Reply If the Liturgie should be altered as is here required and desired by us that it could be no just offence to the generality or any of the soberest and most loyal Children of the Church as you speak is easie to be proved by laying together the considerations following Because it is by themselves confessed to be alterable as not having it self its former Constitution till less than two hundred years ago 2. And themselves affirm it to be not necessary to salvation but a thing indifferent while they exclude all higher institutions from the power of the Church 3. They confess it lawful to serve God without this Liturgie without which he was served by other Churches above 1460 years and without which he is now served by other Churches when the contrary minded doubt whether with it he be lawfully served 4. Those that desire the alteration desire no more than to serve God as the Churches did in the daies of the Apostles that had their most infallible Conduct 5. And they offer also such Formes as are more unquestionable as to their Congruency to the word of God and to the nature of the several parts of Worship 6. And yet though they desire the surest Concord and an universal Reformation they desire not to impose on others what they offer but can thankfully accept a Liberty to use what is to their own Consciences most unquestionably safe while other men use that which they like better So that set all this together with the consideration of the necessity of the preaching the Word and Communion that is hereupon denied and you may see it proved That to have such a Liturgy so altered that is confessed alterable for so desirable an end to the use only of those that cannot well use it without urging others to any thing that they do themselves account unlawful cannot be a matter of just offence to the generality of sober Children of the Church nor to any one And as to the reason given it is apparently none For 1. Of those that scruple the unlawfulness of it there are many that will not peremptorily affirm it unlawful and condemn all that use it but they dare not use it doubtingly themselves 2. When our Papers were before you we think it not just that you should say that it 's here desired to be altered on the pretence that it is a direct cause of Schism and a superstitious usage Have we any such expressions If we have
requisite that no man should come to the Holy Communion but with a full trust in Gods mercy and with a quiet Conscience though it be every mans duty to be perfect pro statu viatoris yet it is not requisite that no man come till he be perfect He that hath but a weak Faith though not a full trust must come to have it strenthned And he that hath an unquiet Conscience must come to receive that mercy which may quiet it It is a private Opinion and not generally received in the Catholick Church that one of the People may make the Publick Confession at the Sacrament in the name of all those that are minded to receive the Holy Communion It is a private and not generally received distinction that the body of Christ makes clean our bodies and his blood washeth our souls It is a doubtful opinion to speak easily that when the Lords Supper is delivered with a Prayer not made in the Receivers name but thus directed to him by the Minister the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ c. preserve thy Body and Soul it is so intollerable a thing for the Receiver not to kneel in hearing the Prayer that he must else be thrust from the Communion of the Church and yet that no Minister shall kneel that indeed doth pray But he may pray standing and the Hearers be cast out for standing at the same words It is not a generally received but a private opinion that every Parishioner though impenitent and conscious of his utter unfitness and though he be in despair and think he shall take his own damnation must be forced to receive thrice a year when yet even those that have not a full trust in Gods mercy or have not a quiet Conscience were before pronounced so uncapable as that none such should come to the Communion Abundance more such Instances may be given to shew how far from truth the Assertion is that the Church hath been careful to put nothing into the Liturgie but that which is either evidently the Word of God or which hath been generally received in the Catholick Church unless you speak of some unhappie unsuccesful Carefulness But we thankfully accept of your following words and if the contrary can be proved we wish it out of the Liturgie which we entreat you to perform and impartially receive our proofs But then we must also entreat you 1. That the Primitive Churches Judgment and practice may be preferred before the present declined much corrupted State And 2. If Gods Law rather than the sinful practises of men breaking that Law may be the Churches Rule for Worship For you call us to subscribe to Art 19. that as the Church of Jerusalem Alexandria and Antioch hath erred so also the Church of Rome hath erred not only in their living and manner of Ceremonies but also in matters of Faith and saith Rogers in Art 20. they are out of the way which think that either one man as the Pope or any certain Calling of men as the Clergie hath power to decree and appoint Rites or Ceremonies though of themselves good unto the whole Church of God dispersed over the universal world and indeed if you would have all that Corruption brought into our Liturgie and Discipline and Doctrine which the Papists Greeks and others that undoubtedly make up the far greater number of the now universal Church do use you would deserve no more thanks of God or man than he that would have all Kings and Nobles and Gentry levelled with the poor Commons because the latter are the greater number or than he that would have the healthful conformed to the sick when an epidemical disease hath made them the Majority or than he that would teach us to follow a multitude to do evil and to break more than the least Commands because the greater number break them we pray you therefore to take it for no justication of any uncertain or faulty passage in our Liturgie though the greater number now are guilty of it 3. And we must beseech you if the Churches Judgment or Practice must be urged that you would do us the justice as to imitate the ancient Churches in your sense of the quality and the mode and measure of using and imposing things as well as in the materials used and imposed Consider not only whether you finde such things received by the ancient Churches but also consider how they were received esteemed and used whether as necessary or indifferent as points of Faith or doubtful Opinions whether forced on others or left to their free choice If you finde that the generality of the ancient Churches received the White Garment after Baptism and the tasting of Milk and Honie as Ceremonies freely though generally used you should not therefore force men to use them If you finde that the Doctrine of the Millennium or of Angels corporeity was generally received as an Opinion it will not warrant you to receive either of them as a certain necessary truth If you finde that the General Councels forbad Kneeling in any Adoration on the Lords daies but without force against Dissenters you may not go denie the Sacrament to all that kneel nor yet forbid them to kneel in praying So if you find some little parcels of our Liturgie or some of our Ceremonies used as things indifferent left to choice forced upon none but one Church differing from another in such usages or observances this will not warrant you to use the same things as necessarie to order unitie or peace and to be forced upon all use them no otherwise than the Churches used them We heartily desire that according to this Proposal great care may be taken to suppress these private Conceptions of Prayers before and after Sermon lest private opinions be made the matter of Prayer in publick as hath and will be if private persons take liberty to make publick Prayers Reply The desire of your hearts is the grief of our hearts the Conceptions of Prayer by a publick person according to a publick Rule for a publick use are not to be rejected as private Conceptions We had hoped you had designed no such innovation as this in the Church When we have heard any say that it would come to this and that you designed the suppression of the free Prayers of Ministers in the Pulpit suited to the varietie of subjects and occasions we have rebuked them as uncharitable in passing so heavie a censure on you And what would have been said of us a year ago if we should have said that this was in your hearts nothing will more alienate the hearts of many holy prudent persons from the Common-Prayer than to perceive that it is framed and used as an Instrument to shut out all other Prayers as the Ministers private Conceptions Such an end and design will make it under the notion of a means another thing than else it would be and afford men such an Argument against it as we desire
of affairs or if you will not hear us we beseech you hear the many Ministers in England that never medled against the Liturgie and the many moderate Episcopal Divines that have used it and can do still and yet would earnestly entreat you to alter it partly because of what in it needs alteration and partly in respect to the Commodity of others Or at least we beseech you recant and obliterate such passages as would hinder all your selves from any act of Reformation hereabout that if any man among you would find fault with some of the grosser things which we laid open to you tenderly and spiringly and would reform them he may not presently forfeit the reputation of being a Protestant And lastly we beseech you denie not again the name of Protestants to the Primate of Ireland the Archbishop of York and the many others that had divers meetings for the Reformation of the Liturgy and who drew up that Catalogue of faults or points that needed mending which is yet to be seeu in print they took not advantage of their own unwarrantable Acts for the attempting of that alteration The third and fourth Proposals may go together the demand in both being against Responsals and alternate Readings in Hymns and Psalmes and Letany c. And that upon such Reason as doth in truth enforce the necessity of continuing them as they are namely for edification They would take these away because they do not edifie and upon that very reason they should continue because they do edifie If not by informing of our reasons and understandings the Prayers and Hymns were never made for a Catechism yet by quickening continuing and uniting our devotion which is apt to freeze or sleep or flat in a long continued Prayer or form it is necessary therefore for the edifying of us therein to be often called upon and awakened by frequent Amens to be excited and stirred up by mutual exultations provocations petitions holy contentions and strivings which shall most shew his own and stir up others zeal to the glory of God For this purpose alternate Reading Repetitions and Responsals are far better than a long tedious Prayer Nor is this our opinion only but the Judgement of former Ages as appears by the practice of ancient Christian Churches and of the Jewes also But it seems they say to be against the Scripture wherein the Minister is appointed for the People in publick Prayers the peoples part being to attend with silence and to declare their assent in the cloze by saying Amen if they mean that the people in publick Services must only say this word Amen as they can no more prove it in Scriptures so it doth certainly seem to them that it cannot be proved for they directly practise the contrary in one of their principal parts of Worship singing of Psalms where the people bear as great a part as the Minister If this way be done in Hopkin's why not in David's Pslams if in Meetre why not in Prose if in a Psalm why not in a Letany Reply What is most for edification is best known by experience and by the reason of the thing For the former you are not the Masters of all mens experience but of your own and others that have acquainted you with the same as theirs We also may warrantably professe in the name of our selves and many thousands of sober pious persons that we experience that these things are against our edification and we beseech you do not by us what you would not do by the poor labouring servants of your family to measure them all their dyet for quality or quantity according to your own appetites which they think are diseased and would be better if you work'd as hard as they And we gave you some of the reasons of our judgment 1. Though we have not said that the people may not in psalmes to God concur in voice we speak of prayer which you should have observed and though we only concluded it agreeable to the Scripture practice for the people in prayer to say but their Amen yet knowing not from whom to understand the will of God and what is pleasing to him better than from himself we considered what the Scripture saith of the ordinary way of publick worship and finding ordinarily that the people spoke no more in prayer as distinct from Psalmes and praise than their Amen or meer consent we desired to imitate the surest pattern 2. 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 were loath to countenance the peoples invading of that Sacred Office so far as they seem to us to do 1. By reading half the Psalmes and Hymnes 2. By saying half the Prayers as the Minister doth the other half 3. By being one of them the mouth of all the rest in the Confession at the Lords Supper 4. By being the only Petitioners in the far greatest part of all the Letanie 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 lest by parity 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 while half the Psalmes and Hymnes c. are said by such of the people as can say them the murmure of their voices in most Congregations is so intelligible and confused as must hinder the edification of all the rest For who is edified by that which he cannot understand we know not what you mean by citing 2 Chron. 7. 1 4. Ezra 3. 11. where there is not a word of publick prayer but in one place of an Acclamation upon an extraordinary sight of the Glory of the Lord which made them praise the Lord and say He is good for his Mercy is for ever When the prayer that went before was such as you call a long tedious prayer uttered by Solomon alone without such breaks and discants And in the other places is no mention of prayer at all but of singing praise and that not by the people but by the Priests and Levites saying the same words for he is good for his Mercy endures for ever towards Israel The people are said to do no more than shout with a great shout because the foundation of the house was laid and if shouting be it that you would prove it 's not the thing in question Let the ordinary mode of praying in Scripture be observed in the Prayers of David Solomon Ezra Daniel or any other and if they were by breaks and frequent beginnings and endings and alternate interlocutions of the people as yours are then we will conform to your mode which now offends us But if they were not we beseech you reduce yours to the examples in the Scripture
we dare not think a Parliament did intend to forbid that which Christ his Church hath commanded Nor does the Act determine any thing about Lent Fast but only provide for the maintenance of the Navy and of Fishing in order thereunto as is plain by the Act. Besides we conceive that we must not so interpret one Act as to contradict another being still in force and unrepealed Now the Act of 1 Eliz. confirmes the whole Liturgy and in that the religious keeping of Lent with a severe penalty upon all those who shall by open words speak any thing in derogation of any part thereof and therefore that other Act of 5 Elizab. must not be interpreted to forbid the religious keeping of Lent Reply If when the expresse words of a Statute are cited you can so easily put it off by saying it does not forbid it and you dare not think that a Parliament did intend to forbid that which Christ his Church hath commanded and you must not interpret it as contradicting that Act which confirms the Liturgy we must think that indeed we are no lesse regardful of the Laws of the Governours than you But first we understand not what Authority this is that you set against the King and Parliament as supposing they will not forbid what it commands You call it Christs Church we suppose you mean not Christ himself by his Apostles infallibly directed and inspired If it be the National Church of England they are the Kings Subjects and why may he not forbid a Ceremony which they command or why should they command it if he forbid it If it be any Foreign Church ther 's none hath power over us If it be any pretended head of the Church universal whether Pope or general Council having power to make Laws that bind the whole Church it is a thing so copiously disproved by Protestants against both the Italian and French Papists that we think it needlesse to confute it nor indeed dare imagine that you intend it We know not the refore what you mean But whatever you mean you seem to contradict the forecited Article of the Church of England that makes all humane Laws about Rites and Ceremonies of the Church to be unchangeable by each particular National Church And that it is not necessary that Ceremonies or Traditions be in all places one or utterly like we most earnestly beseech you be cautious how you obtrude upon us a Foreign Power under the name of Christs Church that may command Ceremonies which King and Parliament may not forbid whether it be one man or a thousand we fear it is against our Oathes of Allegiance and Supremacy for us do own any such Power And not presuming upon any immodest challenge we are ready in the defence of those Oathes and the Protestant Religion to prove against any in an equal conference that there is no such Power and for the Statute let the words themselves decide the Controversy which are these Be it Enacted that who soever shall by Preaching Teaching Writing or open speech notifie that any eating of Fish or forbearing of Flesh mentioned in this Statuie is of any necessity for the saving of the Soul of man or that it is the Service of God otherwise than as other Politick Laws are and be that than such persons are and shall be punished as the spreaders of false news are and ought to be And whereas you say the Act determines not any thing about Lent Fast it speaks against eating Flesh on any days now usually observed as Fish days and Lent is such and the senfe of the Act for the Lituigy may better be tryed by this which is plain than thus reduced to that which is more obscure The observation of Saints dayes is not as of Divine but Ecclesiastical Institution and therefore it is not necessary that they should have any other ground in Scripture than all other Institutions of the same nature so that they be agreeable to the Scriptare in the general end for the promoting piety and the observation of them was antient as appears by the Rituals and Liturgies and by the joynt consent of Antiquity and by the antient translation of the Bible as the Syriack and Ethiopick where the Lessons appointed for Holydayes are noted and set down the former of which was made near the Apostles times Besides our Saviour himself kept a Feast of the Churches Institution viz. the Feast of the Dedication S. Jo. 12. 22. The choice end of these dayes being not feasting but the exercise of Holy Duties they are fitter called Holydayes than Festivals and though they be all of like nature it doth not follow that they are equal The people may be dispensed with for their work after the Service as Authority pleaseth The other names are left in the Calender not that they should be so kept as Holydayes but they are useful for the preservation of their memories and for other reasons as for Leases Law-dayes c. Reply The antiquity of the Translations mentioned is far from being of determinate certainty we rather wish than hope that the Syriack could be proved to be made near the Apostles times But however the things being confessed of humane Institution and no Forreign Power having any Authority to command his Majesties Subjects and so the imposition being only by our own Governours we humbly crave that they may be left indifferent and the unity or peace of the Church or Liberty of the Ministers not laid upon them This makes the Liturgy void if every Minister may put in and leave out all at his discretion Repl. You mistake us we speak not of putting in and leaving out of the Liturgy but of having leave to intermix some exhortations or prayers besides to take off the deadnesse which will follow if there be nothing but the stinted Forms we would avoid both the extreme that would have no forms and the contrary extremes that would have nothing but forms But if we can have nothing but extremes there 's no remedy it s not our fault And this moderation and mixture which we move for is so far from making all the Liturgy void that it will do very much to make it attain its end and would heal much of the distemper which it occasioneth and consequently would do much to preserve the reputation of it As for instance it besides the Forms in the Liturgy the Minister might at Baptism the Lords Supper Marriage c. interpose some suitable exhortation or prayer upon special occasion when he finds it needful Should you deny this at the visitation of the Sick it would seem strange and why may it not be granted at other times It is a matter of far greater trouble to us that you would deny us and all Ministers the Liberty of using any other Prayers besides the Liturgy then that you impose these The gift or rather spirit of Prayer consists in the inward graces of the spirit not in ex
vary his request Gen. 18. But that 's not our case The Psalms and Prayers of David Solomon Hezekiah Asa Ezra Nehemiah Daniel and the other Prophets of Christ himself Joh. 17. are usually one continued speech and not like yours as we said before Why the repeated mention of the Name and Attributes of God should not be more pleasing to any godly person we cannot imagine or what burden it should seem when David magnified one Attribute of Gods mercy 26. times together Psal 36. Nor can we conceive why the Name and merits of Jesus with which all our Prayers should end should not be as sweet to us as to former Saints and Martyrs with which here they complain our Prayers do so frequently end since the Attributes of God are the ground of our hope of obtaining all our Petitions such Prefaces of Prayers as are taken from them though they have no special respect to the Petitions following are not to be termed unsuitable or said to have fallen rather casually than orderly Repl. As we took it to be no Controversy between us whether the mention of Gods Name is deservedly sweet to all his Servants So we thought it was none that this reverend Name is reverently to be used and not too lightly and therefore not with a causelesse frequency tossed in mens mouthes even in prayer itself and that tautologies and vain repetitions are not the better but the worse because Gods Name is made the matter of them It is not you that have expressed your offence as well as we against those weak Ministers that repeat too frequently the Name and Attributes of God in their extemporate Prayers And is it ill in them and is the same and much more well in the Common Prayer O have not the Faith or worship of our glorious God in respect of persons Let not that be called ridiculous idle impertinent or worse in one which is accounted commendable in others Do you think it were not a faulty crossing of the mind and method of Jesus Christ if you should make 6. Prayers of it he 6. Petitions of the Lords Prayer and set the Preface and Conclusion unto each as Our Father which art in Heaven hallowed be thy Name for thine is the Kingdome c. and so over all the rest Yet we know that the same words may be oft repeated as David doth Gods enduring mercy without such tautological vanity when it is not from emptinesse or neglect of order or affectation But in Psalms or Hymns where affections are to be elevated by such figurative elegancies and strains as are best beseeming Poetry or Rapture we are not against such repetitions But if we may according to the Common-Prayer-book begin and end and begin and seem to withdraw again and make a Prayer of every Petition or two and begin and end every such petition with Gods name and Christs merits as making up half the form or near nothing is an affected empty tossing of Gods name in Prayer if this be not We are perswaded if you should hear a man in a known extemporate prayer do thus it would seem strange and harsh even to your selves There are besides a preparative Exhortation several preparatory prayers 1. Despise not O Lord humble and contrite hearts Which is one of the sentences in the Preface And this That those things may please him which we do at this present at the end of the Absolution And again immediately after the Lords Prayer before the Psalmody O Lord open thou our Lips c. Repl. Despise not O Lord humble and contrite hearts is not prayer for assistance and acceptance in that Worship suited to the duty of a people addressing themselves to God But it is recited as a Scripture invitation to repentance and that those things may please him which we do at this present are no words of Prayer but part of an exhortation to the people and O Lord open thou our lips comes after the Exhortation Confession Absolution and Lords Prayer and ergo is not in the place of such an Address as we are speaking of What will not seem to justify what we have a mind to justify and to condemn that which we have a mind to condemn This which they call a defect others think they have reason to account the perfection of the Liturgy the Offices of which being intended for common and general services would cease to be such by descending to particulars as in confession of Sin while it is general all persons may and must joyn in it since in many things we offend all But if there be a particular enumeration of sins it cannot be so general a confession because it may happen that some or other may by Gods Grace have been preserved from some of those sins enumerated and therefore should by confessing themselves guilty tell God a Lye which needs a new Confession Repl. If general words be its perfection it s very culpable in tediousnesse and vain repetitions For what need you more than Lord be merciful to us sinners There 's together a general confession of Sin and a general Prayer for mercy which comprehend all the particulars of the peoples Sins and wants We gave you our reason which you answer not Confession is the exercise of Repentance and also the helper of it And it is noe true repentance which is not particular but only general If you say that you repent that you have sinned and know not where or do not repent of any particular sin you do not indeed repent for Sin is not existent but in the Individuals And if you ask for grace and know nor what grace or desire no particular graces indeed you desire not grace at all We know there is time and use for general Confessions and Requests But still as implying particulars as having gone before or following or at least it must be supposed that the people understand the particulars included and have inward confessions and desires of them Which cannot here be supposed when they are not all mentioned not can the people generally be supposed to have such quick and comprehensive minds nor is there leisure to exercise such particular repentance or desire while a general is named And we beseech you let Scripture be Judge whether the Confessions and Prayers of the Servants of God have not been particular As to your objection or reason we answer 1. There are general Prayers with the particular or without them 2 There are particular Confessions and Prayers proper to some few Christians and there are others common to all It is these that we expect and not the former 3. The Churches Prayers must be suited to the body of the Assembly though perhaps some one or few may be in a state not fit for such expressions What a lamentable Liturgy will you have if you have nothing in it but what every one in the Congregation may say as true of and suitable to themselves Then you must leave out all
have no man cast out for using the worse It is more orderly decent and edifying for the Minister to read all the Psalms than for the people to read each second verse And yet we would not cast out men from the Church or Ministry meerly for that disorder It is more orderly and decent to be uncovered in divine worship than covered And yet rather than a man should take cold we could allow him to hear a Chapter or Sermon covered why not much more rather than he should be cast out But let us come to the Application It is no undecent disorderly worshiping of God to worship him without our Crosse Surplice and kneeling in the reception of the Sacrament 1. If it were than Christ and his Apostles bad worship undecently and disorderly And the Primitive Church that used not the Surplice nor the transient Image of the Croâ—e in Baptisme but in an unguent yea the Church for many hundred years that received the Sacrament without kneeling 2. Then if the King Parliament and Conâ—ocation should change these Ceremonies it seems you would take your selves bound to retain them For you say you must not worship God undecently But that they may be changed by Authority our Articles determine and therefore Charity may well require the Magistrate to change them without any wrong to the worship of God 3. We appeal to the common judgment of the Impartial whether in the nature of the thing there be any thing that tells them that it is undecent to pray without a Surplice in the reading place and not undecent to pray without in thâ— Pulpit And that it is undecent to baptise without crossing and not to receive the Lords Supper without And that it is undecent for the Receiver to take the Lords Supper without kneeling and not for the Minister to give it him standing that prayeth in the delivery These premised we Answer to your first Reason that those things which we call Indifferent because neither expresly commanded nor forbiden by God have in them a real goodnesse a fitnesse and decency and for that cause are imposed and may be so by the Rule of St. Paul by which Rule and many others in Scripture a power is given to men to impose Signs which are never the worse surely because they signifie something that is decent and comely and so it is not doubtful whether such power be given It would rather be doubtful whether the Church could impose such idle Signs if any such there be as signifie nothing Repl. To your first Answer we reply 1. We suppose you speak of a moral goodnesse And if they are such indeed as are within their power and really good that is of their own nature fiâ—ter than their opposites they may be imposed by just authority by equal means though not by Usurpers nor by penalties that will do more harm than the things will do good 2. Signs that signifie nothing we understand not It is one thing to be decent and another to signifie something that is decent what you mean by that we know not The Crosse signifieth our not being ashamed to profess the faith of Christ crucified c. do you call that something that is decent It is something necessary to salvation 3. Signs are exceeding various At present we use but two distinctions 1. Some are signs Ex primaria intentione instituentis purposed and primarily instituted to signify as an Esoucheon or a sign at an Inne door in common matters and as the Sacrament and Cross in sacred matters and some are signs but consequently secondarily and not essentially as intended by the Institutor so hills and trees may shew us what a clock it is And so every creature signifyeth some good of mercy or duty and may be an object of holy meditation so the colour and shape of our clothes may mind us of some good which yet was none of the primary or proper end of the maker or wearer 2. Signs are either arbitrary expressions of a mans own mind in a matter where he is let free or they are covenanting signs between us and God in the Covenant of Grace to work Grace on us as moral causes and to engage us Sacramentally to him such we conceive the Cross in Baptisme to be The Preface to the Common Prayer-book saith They are apt to teach and excite c. Which is a moral operation of Grace And the Canon saith It is an honourable badge whereby the Infant is dedicated to him that died on the Cross We are signed with it in token that hereafter we shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified and manfully to fight c. now if a thing may be commanded meerly as a decent circumstance of worship yet it is unproved that a thing that in its nature as instituted and in the primary intention is thus sacramentally to dedicate and ingage us in Covenant to God by signifying the grace and duty of the Covenant be lawfully commanded by man 1. Decent Circumstances are necessary in genere There must be some fit Time Place Gesture Vesture as such Utensils c. But that there be some such dedicating engaging signs in our covenanting with God signifying the Grace of the Covenant and our state and duty as Souldiers under Christ besides Gods Sacraments this is not necessary in genere and therefore it is not left to man to determine de specie 2. If there be any reason for this use of the Cross it must be such as was in the Apostles days and concerneth the universal Church in all ages and places and then the Apostles would have taken care of it Thus much here in brief of signs and more anon when you again call us to it To the second that it is not a violation of Christs Royalty to make such Laws for decercy but an exercise of his power and authority which he hath given to the Church And the disobedience to such commands of Euperiours is plainly a violation of his Royalty As it is no violation of the Kings Authority when his Magistrates command things according to his Laws But disobedience to the command of those Injunctions of his Deputies is violation of his Authority Again it can be no impeachment of Christs Laws as insufficient to make such Laws for decency since our Saviour as is evident by the Precepts themselves did not intend by them to determine every minute and circumstance of time place manner of performance and the like but only to command in general the substance of those duties and the right ends that should be aimed at in the performance and then left every man in particular whom for that purpose he made reasonable to guide himself by rules of reason for private Services And appointed Governours of the Church to determine such particularities for the publick Thus our Lord commanded Prayers Fasting c. for the times and places of performance he did not determine every of them but
is ancient So there wants not a Bign Bellarm. c. to tell us of S. James his Liturgy that mentions the Confessours the Deiparam the Anchorets c. which made Bellarm. himself say de Liturgia Jacobi sic sentio Eam aut non esse ejus aut multa à posterioribus eidem addita sunt And must we prove the Antiquity of Liturgies by this or try ours by it There wants not a Sainctetius a Bellarm. a Valentia a Peresius to predicate the Liturgy of S. Basil as bearing witnesse to transubstantiation for the sacrifice of the Masse for praying to Saints c. When yet the exceeding disagreement of Copies the difference of some forms from Basils ordinary forms the prayers for the most pious and faithful Emperours shew it unlikely to have been Basils many predicate Chrysostomes Masse or Liturgie as making for praying to the dead and for them the propitiatory Sacrifice of the Masse c. when in one edition Chrysostom is prayed to in it saith Cook in another Nicolaus and Alexius that lived 1080 is mentioned in another doctrines are contained as de Contaminata Maria c. clean contrary to Chrysostoms doctrine must we now conclude that all is ancient that is Orthodox when one Copy is scarce like another or can we try our Liturgies by such as this The shreds cited by you prove a Liturgie indeed such as we have used while the Common Prayer-book was not used where the Psalms the words of Baptism and the words of Consecration commemoration and delivery of the Lords Supper and many other were used in a constant form when other parts were used as the Minister found most meet so Sursum Corda was but a warning before or in the midst of devotion such as our Let us pray and will no more prove that the substance of prayer was not left to the Minister's present or prepared Conceptions than Ite missa est will prove it The Gloria patri Bellarm. himself saith according to the common opinion was formed in the council of Nice which was in the 4th Century And even then such a particular testimony against the Arrians might well stand with a body of unimposed prayers and rather shewes that in other things they were left at liberty If the Benedicite the Hymnes or other passages here mentioned will prove such a Liturgy as pleaseth you we pray you bear with our way of worship which hath more of Hymnes and other forms then these come to That these Liturgies had no original from generall Councils addes nothing with us to their Authority but sheweth that they had an arbitrary original and all set together shews that then they had many Liturgies in one Prince's Dominion and those alterable and not forced and that they took not one Liturgy to be any necessary means to the Churches unity or peace but bore with those that used various at discretion We well remember that Tertull tells the Heathens that Christians shewed by their conceived Hymnes that they were sober at their religious feasts it being their custome ut quisque de scripturis sanctis vel de proprio ingenio potest provocetur in medium Deo canere Apol. cap. 39. Note here 1. that though there be more need of forms for singing then for praying yet even in this the Christians in publick had then a liberty of doing it de proprio ingenio and by their own wit or parts 2. That those that did not de proprio ingenio did it de scripturis sanctis and that there is no mention of any other Liturgy from which they fetch so much as their Hymnes And the same Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. describing the Christians publick prayers saith sine monitore quia de pectore oramus we pray without a Monitor or promptor because we do it from the heart or from our own breast And before him Just Mart. Ap. 2. p. 77. saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But if all these words seem not plain enough to some it is no wonder when they rest not in the greater plainness of the holy Scriptures where prayer is so frequently mentioned as much of the imployment of believers and so many directions encouragements and exhortations given about it and yet no Liturgy or stinted forms except the Lords prayer is prescribed to them or once made mention of no man directed here to use such no man exhorted to get him a Prayer-book or to read or learn it or to beware that he adde or diminish not whereas the holy Scriptures that were then given to the Church men are exhorted to read and study and meditate in and discourse of and make it their continual delight and it 's a wonder that David that mentions it so oft in the 119. Psalm doth never mention the Liturgy or Common-Prayer-Book if they had any And that Solomon when he dedicated the house of Prayer without a Prayer-book would onely begge of God to hear what Prayers or what Supplication soever shall be made of any man or of all the people of Israel when every one shall know his own sore and his own grief and shall spread forth his hands in that house 2 Chron. 6. 29. and that he giveth no hint of any Liturgie or form so much as in those common Calamities and talkes of no other book then the knowledge of their own sores and their own griefs And in the Case of Psalmes or singing unto God where it is certain that they had a Liturgy or form as we have they are carefully collected preserved and delivered to us as a choise part of the holy Scripture And would it not have been so with the prayers or would they have been altogether unmentioned if they also had been there prescribed to and used by the Church as the Psalmes were Would Christ and his Apostles even where they were purposely giving rules for prayer and correcting its abuse as Matth. 6. 1 Cor. 14. c. have never mentioned any forms but the Lord's Prayer if they had appointed such or desired such to be imposed and observed These things are incredible to us when we most impartially consider them For our own parts as we think it uncharitable to forbid the use of Spectacles to them that have weak eyes or of Crutches to them that have weak Limbs and as uncharitable to undo all that will not use them whether they need them or not so we can think no better of them that will suffer none to use such forms that need them or that will suffer none to pray but in the words of other mens prescribing though they are at least as able as the prescribers And to conclude we humbly crave that ancient customes may not be used against themselves and us and that you will not innovate under the shelter of the name of Antiquity Let those things be freely used among us that were so used in the purest primitive times Let unity and peace be laid on nothing on which they laid them not let
c. We reply 1. Profaneness may be opposed nevertheless for our instructing the people against Idolatry 2. The abounding of Papists who in this point seem to us Idolatrous sheweth that there is danger of it 3. The commonness of Idolatry through the World and the case of the Israelites of old shew that mans nature is prone to it 4. Prophaneness and Idolatry befriend each other As God is jealous against Idolatry so should all faithfull Pastors of the Church be and not refuse such a caution to the people and say There is no great need of it Publike Baptism UNtill they have made due profession of Repentance c. We think this desire to be very hard and uncharitable punishing the poor Infants for the Parents sakes and giving also too great and arbitrary a power to judge which of his Parishioners he pleaseth Atheists 〈…〉 Hereticks c. and then in that name to reject their children from b 〈…〉 Baptized Our Church concludes more charitably that Christ will 〈…〉 vourably accept every Infant to Baptism that is presented by the Church according to our present Order And this she concludes out of Holy Scriptures as you may see in the Office of Baptism according to the Practise and Doctrine of the Catholick Church Cypr. Ep. 59. August Ep. 28. de verb. Apost Ser. 14. Reply We perceive you will stick with us in more then Ceremonies To your reasons we Reply 1. By that reason all the Children of all Heathens or Infidels in the World should be admitted to Baptism because they should not be punished for the parents sakes 2. But we deny that it is among Christians that believe original Sin any absurdity to say that Children are punished for their Parents sakes 3. But yet we deny this to be any such punishment at all unless you will call their non-deliverance a punishment They are the Children of wrath by nature and have original Sin The Covenant of Grace that giveth the saving benefits of Christ is made to none but the faithfull and their seed Will you call this a punishing them for their Fathers sakes that God hath extended his Covenant to no more Their Parents infidelity doth but leave them in their original Sin and Misery and is not further it self imputed to them If you know of any Covenant or promise of Salvation made to all without condition or to Infants or any other condition or qualification but that they be the seed of the faithfull dedicated to God you should do well to shew it us and not so slightly pass things of so great moment in which you might much help the World out of darkness if you can make good what you intimate If indeed you mean as you seem to speak That its uncharitableness to punish any Infants for the Parents faults that a non-liberation is such a punishment then you must suppose that all the Infants of Heathens Jews Turks are saved that die in Infancy or else Christ is uncharitable And if they are all saved without Baptism then Baptism is of no such use or necessity as you seem to think What then is their priviledge of the seed of the faithfull that they are holy and that the Covenant is made with them God will be their God We fear you will again revive the opinion of the Anabaptists among the people when they observe that you have no more to say for the Baptizing of the Children of the faithfull then of Infidles Heathens Atheists To your second Objection we Answer You will drive many a faithfull labourer from the work of Christ if he may not be in the Ministry unless he will baptise the Children of Heathens Infidels and Excommunicate ones before their Parents do repent And the first Question is not Who shall be the judge But whether we must be all thus forced Is not the Question as great Who shall be the judge of the unfitness of Persons for the Lords Supper And yet there you think it not a taking too much upon us to keep away the scandalous if they have their Appeals to you And is it indeed a power too great arbitrary to have a judiciam discretionis about our own Acts and not to be forced to baptize the children of Heathens against our Consciences Who judged for the Baptizers in the Primitive Church what persons they should baptize We act but as Engines under you not as Men if we must not use our Reason and we are more miserable then brutes or men if we must be forced to go against our Consciences unless you will save us harmless before God O that in a fair debate you would prove to us that such children as are described are to be baptized and that the Ministers that baptize them must not have power to discern whom to baptize But who mean you by the Churches that must present every Infant that Christ may accept them Is every Infant first in the promise of pardon If so shew us that promise and then sure God will make good that promise though Heathen Parents present not their children to him as your grounds suppose if not then will the sign save those that are not in the promise But is it the Godfathers that are the Church Who ever called them so And if by the Church you mean the Minister and by presenting you mean baptizing them then any Heathen's child that a Minister can catch up and baptize shall be saved which if it could be proved would perswade us to go hunt for children in Turkie Tartary or America and secretly baptize them in a habit that should not make us known But there is more of fancy then charity in this and Christ never invited any to him but the children of the promise to be thus presented and baptized Sect. 3. P. 23. And then the Godfathers c. It is an erronious doctrine and the ground of many others and of many of your Exceptions that children have no other right to Baptism then in their Parents right The Churches Primitive practise forbids it to be left to the pleasure of Parents whether there shall be other Sareties or no It is fit we should observe carefully the practice of venerable Antiquity as they desire Prop. 18. Reply We conjecture the words that conclude your former Subject being mis-placed are intended as your Answer to this and if all the children of any sort in the world that are brought to us must by us be baptized without distinction indeed it 's no great matter what time we have notice of it It seems we differ in Doctrine though we subscribe the same Articles we earnestly desire you distinctly to tell us What is the Infants title to Baptism if it be not to be found in the Parent Assign it and prove it when you have done as well as we prove their right as they are the seed of Believers dedicated by them to God and then we promise to consent It s strange to
us to hear so much of the Churches Primitive practice where so litle evidence of it is produced Aug. ep 23. talketh not of Primitive practice Ab initio non fuit sic Was it so in the Apostles daies And afterwards you prove not that it was the judgment of the Catholick Church that bare Sponsors instead of Parents Pro-parents or Owners of the Children might procure to the Children of all Infidels a title to Baptism and its benefits Such Susceptors as became the Owners or Adopters of the Children are to be distinguished from those that pro forma stand by for an hour during the Baptizing of the Children and ever after leave them to their Parents who as they have the naturall interest in them and power of their disposall and the Education of them so are fittest to covenant in their names The Font usually stands as it did in Primitive times at or near the Church door to signify that Baptism was the entrance into the Church mysticall we are all baptized into one body 1 Cor. 12. 13. and the people may hear well enough If Jordan and all other waters be not so far sanctified by Christ as to be the matter of Baptism what authority have we to baptise and sure his Baptism was Dedicatio Baptismi Reply Our less difference of the Font and flood Jordan is almost drowned in the greater before going But to the first we say that we conceive the usual scituation for the people's hearing is to be preferred before your Ceremonious position of it And to the second we say that Dedicatio Baptismi is an unfitting phrase and yet if it were not what 's that to the sanctification of Jordan and all other waters Did Christ sanctify all Corn or Bread or Grapes or Wine to an holy use when he administred the Lords Supper Sanctifying is separating to an holy use But the flood Jordan and all other water is not separated to this holy use in any proper sense No more than all mankind is sanctified to the Priestly office because men were made Priests It hath been accounted reasonable and allowed by the best Laws that Guardians should Covenant and contract for their Minors to their benefit by the same right the Church hath appointed sureties to undertake for Children when they enter into Covenant with God by Baptism And this generall practice of the Church is enough to satisfy those that doubt Repl. 1. Who made those Sureties Guardians of the Infants that are neither Parents nor Pro-parents nor Owners of them We are not now speaking against Sponsors But you know that the very original of those Sponsors is a great Controversie And whether they were not at first most properly Sponsors for the Parents that they should perform that part they undertook because many Parents were Desertors and many proved negligent Sponsors then excluded not Parents from their proper undertaking but joyned with them God-fathers are not the Infants Guardians with us and therefore have not power thus to Covenant and Vow in their name VVe intreat you to take heed of leaving any Children indeed out of the mutual Covenant that are baptized How are those in the Covenant that cannot consent themselves and do it not by any that truly represent them nor have any Authority to act as in their names The Authority of Parents being most unquestionable who by nature and the word of God have the power of disposing of their Children and consequently of choosing and covenanting for them VVhy should it not be preferred at lest you may give leave to those Parents that desire it to be the Dedicators of and Covenanters for their own Children and not force others on them whether they will or no. 2. But the question is not of Covenanting but professing present actual believing forsaking c. In which though we believe the Churches sense was sound yet we desire that all things that may render it lyable to mis-understanding may be avoyded Receive remission of sins by spiritual Regeneration Most proper for Baptism is our spiritual Regeneration S. John 3. Unlesse a man be born again of Water and the Spirit c. And by this is received remission of sins Acts 2. 3. Repent and be baptized every one of you for the remission of sins 's So the Creed one Baptism for the remission of sins Repl. Baptism as an outward Administration is our visible Sacramental Regeneration Baptism as containing with the Sign the thing signified is our spiritual real Regeneration As we are regenerated before Baptism as you know adult Believers are so we cannot pray to receive remission of sins by that same Regeneration renewed As we are regenerated really in Baptism that Regeneration and Remission are conjunct benefits But if Baptism at once give Regeneration and Remission it follows not that it gives Remission by Regeneration But as Regeneration comprehendeth the whole change reall or Physical and relative so we acknowledge that as the part is given by the whole you may say that Remission is given by Regeneration but more fitly in it than by it But we are not willing to make more adoe about words than needs We cannot in faith say that every Child that is baptized is regenerate c. Seeing that Gods Sacraments have their effects where the Receiver doth not ponere obicem put any bar against them which children cannot do we may say in faith of every child that is baptized that it is regenerated by Gods Holy Spirit and the denial of it tends to Anabaptism and the contempt of this holy Sacrament as nothing worthy nor material whether it be administred to children or no Concerning the Cross we refer to our Answer to the same in general Repl. All Gods Sacraments attain their proper end But whether the Infants of Infidels be the due Subjects and whether their ends be to seal up Grace and Salvation to them that have no promise of it or whether it be only to seal the Covenant to believers and their seed are Questions yet undecided wherein we must intreat you not to expect that we should implicitly believe you and it is as easy for us to tell you that you are promoting Anabaptism and much more easy to prove it We take those but for words of course PRIVATE BAPTISM We desire that Baptism may not be administred in a private place And so do we where it may be brought into the publick Congregation But since our Lord hath said S. Joh 3. Unlesse one be born of Water and the Holy Ghost he cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven We think it fit that they should be Baptized in private rather than not at all It is appointed now to be done by the lawful Minister Repl. We must needs suppose you are disputing with Protestants who ordinarily shew the Papists that that Text Joh. 3. asserteth no absolute necessity of Baptisme to salvation But we believe as well as you that it is the regular way of solemn
Initiation into the Covenant and Church of Christ which none that indeed are the Children of the promise should neglect As Coronation solemnizeth his entrance upon the Kingdome that had before the title And as Marriage solemnizeth that which before was done by consent So Baptism solemnizeth the mutual Covenant which before had a mutual consent and none is authorised to consent for Infants but those that by nature and Gods Law have the power of disposing of them and whose will is in sensu-forensi the Childrens will It solemnly investeth us in what we had an Antecedent right to and therefore belongs to none but those that have that right And this we are ready to make good by any fair Debate that you will allow us Nor is any thing done in private reiterated in publick but the solemn reception into the Congregation with the prayers for him and the publick declaration before the Congregation of the Infants now made by the God-fathers that the whole Congregation may testify against him if he does not perform it which the Ancients made great use of Repl. Do you not say in the Rubr. And let them not doubt but the Child so baptized is lawfully and sufficiently baptized and ought not to be baptized again And after I certify you that in this case all is well done c. And yet you do not renew all the Baptismal Covenant renouncing the flesh c. and ingaging into the Christian belief And that you may see that the Church of England taketh not all Infants infallibly to be regenerated by Baptism unlesse you grant that they repent to the substance of Baptism the Baptismal prayer is here used for the fore-baptized that God will give his holy Spirit to this Infant that he being born again and made heir of everlasting Salvation c. which sheweth that he is now supposed to be Regenerandus non regeneratus Do they pray for his Regeneration whom they account regenerate already You must either confess that there they repeat much of the substance of Baptism and take the Child as not baptized or else that they take the baptized Child to be not-regenerate And then we may well take them for unregnerate that shew no signs of it at years of discretion but live a carnal and ungodly life though they can say the Catechism and seek Confirmation Of the CATECHISM Though divers have been of late baptized without God-fathers yet many have been baptized with them and those may answer the Questions as they are the rest must answer according to truth But there 's no reason to alter the Rule of the Catechism for some mens irregularities Reply If you will have a Catechism proper to those that had God-fathers give leave to others to use one that will teach them as you say to answer according to truth And let us in the same have that liberty of leaving out the doubtful Opinion of God-fathers and God-mothers and that which we think too childish a beginning What is your name and let us use one that speaks more of the necessary Doctrines of Salvation and nothing but Necessaries We conceive this expression as safe as that which they desire and more fully expressing the Efficacy of the Sacrament according to S. Paul the 26 and 27. of Gal. 3. Where S. Paul proves them all to be Children of God because they were baptized and in their Baptism had put on Christ If Children then Heirs or which is all one Inheritors Rom. 8. 17. Reply By Baptism Paul means not the Carkase of Baptism but the Baptismal dedication and covenanting with God They that do this by themselves if at age or by Parents or Pro-parents authorized if Infants sincerely are truly members of Christ and children of God and Heirs of Heaven They that do this but hypocritically and verbally as Simon Magus did are visibly such as the others are really But really are still in the gall of bitternesse and bond of iniquity and have no part or lot in this businesse their hearts being not right in the sight of God This is that truth which we are ready to make good We conceive the present Translation to be agreeable to many antieâ—â— Copies therefore the change to be needlesse Repl. What antient Copy hath the Seventh day in the end of the fourth Commandment instead of the Sabbath day Did King James cause the Bible to be new translated to so little purpose We must bear you witnesse that in some Cases you are not given to change My duty towards God c. It is not true that there is nothing in that Answer which refers to the 4th Commandment for the last words of the Answer do orderlie relate to the last Commandment of the first Table which is the fourth Repl. And think you indeed that the 4th Commandment obligeth you no more to one day in seven than equally to all the dayes of your life This Exposition may make us think that some are more serious than else we could have imagined in praying after that Commandment Lord have mercy upon us and encline our hearts to keep this Law Two only as generally necessary to salvation c. These words are a Reason of the Answer that there are two only and therefore not to be left out Repl. The words seem to imply by distinction that there may be others not so necessary and the Lords Supper was not by the Antients taken to be necessary to the salvation of all We desire that the entring of Infants c. The effect of Childrens Baptism depends neither upon their own present actual Faith and Repentance which the Catechism saith expresly they cannot perform nor upon the Faith and Repentance of their natural Parents or Pro-parents or of their Godfathers or Godmothers but upon the Ordinance and Institution of Christ But it is requisite that when they come to age they should perform these Conditions of Faith and Repentance for which also their Godfathers and Godmothers charitably undertook on their behalf And what they do for the Infant in this Case the Infant himself is truly said to do as in the Courts of this Kingdom daily the Infant does answer by his Guardian and it is usual for to do homage by proxy and for Princes to marry by proxy For the further justification of this Answer See St. Aug. Ep. 23. ad Bonifac. Nihil aliud credere quam sidem habere ac per hoc cum respondetur Parvulum credere qui fidei nondum habet effectum respondetur Fidem habere propter fidei Sacramentum convertere se ad Deum propter Conversionis Sacramentum quia ipsa responsio ad celebrationem pertinet Sacramenti itaque parvulum etsi nondum fides illa quae in credentium voluntate consistit tamen ipsius sidei Sacramentum fidelem facit Repl. 1. You remove not all the inconvenience of the words that seemeth to import what you your selves disclaim 2. We know that the effects of
The reserving of Confirmation to the Bishop doth argue the Dignity of the Bishop above Presbyters who are not allowed to Confirm but does not argue any excellency in Confirmation above the Sacraments St. Hierom argues the quite contray ad Lucif cap. 4. That because Baptism was allowed to be performed by a Deacon but Confirmation only by a Bishop therefore Baptism was most necessary and of the greatest value The mercy of God allowing the most necessary means of Salvation to be administred by inferiour Orders and restraining the lesse necessary to the higher for the honour of their Order Reply O that we had the Primitive Episcopacy and that Bishops had no more Churches to oversee than in the Primitive times they had and then we would never speak against this reservation of Confirmation to the honour of the Bishop But when that Bishop of one Church is turned into that Bishop of many hundred Churches and when he is now a Bishop of the lowest rank that was an Arch-bishop when Arch-bishops first came up and so we have not really existent any meer Bishops such as the Antients knew at all but only Arch-bishops and their Curates Marvel not if we would not have Confirmation proper to Arch-bishops nor one man undertake more than an hundred can perform But if you will do it there is no remedie we have acquit our selves Prayer after the Imposition of hands is grounded upon the practice of the Apostles Heb. 6. 2. Acts 8. 17. Nor doth 25. Article say that Confirmation is a corrupt imitation of the Apostles practice but that the 5. commonly called Sacraments have ground partly on the corrupt following the Apostles c. which may be applied to some other of those 5 but cannot be applied to Confirmation unless we make the Church speak contradictions Reply But the question is not of Imposition of hands in generall but this Imposition in particular And you have never proved that this sort of Imposition called Confirmation is mentioned in those Texts And the 25. Article cannot more probably be thought to speak of any one of the 5. as proceeding from the corrupt imitation of the Apostles than of Confirmation as a supposed Sacrament We know no harm in speaking the language of holy Scripture Acts 8. 15. they laid their hands upon them and they received the Holy Ghost and though Impositions of hands be not a Sacrament yet it is a very fit sign to certifie the persons what is then done for them as the Prayer speaks Reply It is fit to speak the Scripture language in Scripture sense But if those that have no such power to give the Holy Ghost will say Receive the Holy Ghost it were better for them to abuse other language than Scripture language After Confirmation There is no inconvenience that Confirmation should be required before the Communion when it may be ordinarily obtained that which you here fault you elsewhere desire Reply We desire that the credible approved profession of Faith and repentance be made necessaries But not that all the thousands in England that never yet came under the Bishops hands as not one of many ever did even when they were at the highest may be kept from the Lords Supper for some cannot have that Imposition and others will not that yet are fit for Communion with the Church The Ring is a significant sign only of humane institution and was alwayes given as a pledge of fidelity and constant love and here is no reason given why it should be taken away nor are the reasons mentioned in the Roman Ritualits given in our Common-Prayer-Book Repl. We crave not your own forbearance of the Ring but the indifferencie in our use of a thing so mis-used and unnecessary These words in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost if they seem to make Matrimony a Sacrament may as well make all sacred yea civil actions of weight to be Sacraments they being usual at the beginning and ending of all such It was never heard before now that those words make a Sacrament Reply Is there no force in an argument drawn from the appearance of evil the offence and the danger of abuses when other words enow may serve turn They go to the Lords Table because the Communion is to follow Reply They must go to the Table whether there be a Communion or not Consecrated the estate of Matrimony to such an excellent mystery c. Though the institution of Marriage was before the Fall yet it may be now and is consecrated by God to such an excellent mystery as the representation of the spiritual marriage between Christ and his Church Eph. 5. 23. We are sorry that the words of Scripture will not please The Church in the 25. Article hath taken away the fear of making it for a Sacrament Reply When was Marriage thus consecrated If all things used to set forth Christs offices or benefits by way of similitude be consecrated then a Judge a Father a Friend a Vine a Door a Way c. are all consecrated things Scripture phrase pleaseth us in Scripture sense The new married persons the same day of their marriage must receive the Holy Communion This inforces none to forbear Marriage but presumes as well it may that all persons marriageable ought to be also fit to receive the Holy Sacrament And marriage being so solemn a Covenant of God they that undertake it in the fear of God will not stick to seal it by receiving the Holy Communion and accordingly prepare themselves for it Is were more Christian to desire that those licentious Festivities might be supprest and the Communion more generally used by those that marry the happiness would be greater then can easily be exprest Unde sufficiat ad enarrandum felicitatem ejus Matrimonii quod Ecclesia conciliat confirmat oblatio Tertul. lib. 2. ad Uxorem Reply Indeed will you phrase and modify your administrations upon such a supposition that all men are such as they ought to be and do what they ought to do Then take all the World for Saints and use them accordingly and blot out the doctrine of Reproof excommunication and damnation from your Bibles Is it not most certain that very many married persons are unfit for the Lords Supper and will be when you and we have done our best And is it fit then to compell them to it But the more unexpected the more welcom is your motion of that more Christian course of suppressing of licentious festivities When shall we see such Reformation undertaken Visitation of the Sick FOr as much as the condition c. All which is here desired is already presumed namely that the Minister shall apply himself to the particular condition of the person but this must be done according to the Rule of prudence and justice and not according to his pleasure therefore if the sick person shew himself truly penitent it ought not to be left
to the Ministers pleasure to deny him Absolution if he desire it Our Churches direction is according to the 13. Can. of the venerable Council of Nice both here and in the next that follows Reply But the question is whether he shew himself truly penitent or not If we have not here neither a judgment of discretion for the conduct of our own actions What do we with reason Why are we trusted in the Office and Whose judgment must we follow The Bishop cannot have leisure to become the Judge whether this man be penitent It must then be the Minister or the man himself And must we absolve every man that saith he repenteth Then we must believe an incredible profession which is against reason Some are known Infidels and in their health profess that they believe not the Scripture to be true and make a mock at Jesus Christ and perhaps in a sickness that they apprehend no danger in will send for the Minister in scorn to say I repent and force him to absolve them that they may deride him and the Gospel Some of us have known too many of those that have for twenty or thirty years been common drunkards seldom sober a week together and still say when they came to themselves that they were sorry for it and did unfeignedly repent and as they said in health so they said in sickness dying with in a few daies or weeks after they were last drunk must we absolve all these Some dye with a manifest hatred of an Holy Life reviling at those that are carefull to please God yet saying they hate them not as holy but because they are all Hypocrites or the like And yet will say they repent of their sins Some forbear not their accustomed swearing and cursing while they profess repentance Some make no restitution for the wrong which they say they repent of And must we take all these for truly penitent If not the Minister must judge What you mean by your saying Our Churches direction is according to the 13th Canon of the venerable Council of Nice both here and in the next that follows we know not the second Council of Nice you cannot mean its Can. being uncertain and the 13th is of no such sense And the 13th Can. of the first Council of Nice is only that lapsed Catechumens shall be 3 years inter and ientes before they pray again with the Catechumens This shews they then took not up with every word of seeming penitence as true repentance but what it is to your purpose we know not nor is here any other Can. in that Council for you The 11th Can. is sufficiently against you The lapsed that truly repented were to remain among the penitent for three years and seaven years more if they were fideles c. Ab omnibus vero illud praecipue observetur ut animus eorum fructus poenitentiae attendatur quicunque enim cum omni timore lacrimis perseverantibus operibus bonis Conversationem suam non verbis solis sed opere veritate demonstrant cum tempus statutum etiam ab his fuerit impletum orationibus jam coeperint communicare licebit etiam Episcopo humanius circa res aliquot cogitare We know this rigor as to time was unjust and that to the dying it was abated but you see here that bare words that were not by seriousness and by deeds made credible were not to be taken as sufficient marks of penitence of which it was not the person himself that was to be the Judge The form of Absolution in the Liturgy is more agreeable to the Scriptures then that which they desire it being said in St. John 20. Whose sins you remit they are remitted not whose sins you pronounce remitted and the Condition needs not to be expressed being alway necessarily understood Reply It is a Controversy among the Learnedst Expositors how much of that of John 20. was proper to the Apostles and such others as were then to have the spirit in an extraordinary manner who did remit sin effectively by remitting the punishment of it by casting out Devils healing the sick c. according to that of Jam. 5. 14 15. Is any sick among you let him call for the Elders of the Church and let them pray for him and anoint him with Oyl in the name of the Lord And the prayer of faith shall save the sick and the Lord shall raise him up and if he have committed sins they shall be forgiven him If besides this remitting them effectively the rest be no other then a Ministerial pronouncing them forgiven by God according to his Covenant in the Gospel then you cannot plead the phrase of a Text which respecteth another way of Remission then we pretend to But must phrase it according to the nature of the thing and the sense of other Scriptures also that fullier open it There are three waies of pardoning 1. By grant or Guift whether by a general Act of pardon or a particular 2. By sentence 3. By execution that is preventing or taking off the penalty The first of these is done already by God in the Gospel The Second God doth principally and his Ministers instrumentally as his Messengers The third the taking off the penalty they can do no otherwise in the Case before us then by praying that God will take it off and using his ordinary means So that it is most evident that this Absolution that Ministers are to perform can be no other then to pronounce the penitent Believer to be absolved by God according to his Covenant And if there be no other should we not speak as intelligibly as we can Indeed there is more in absolving the excommunicate for then the Church both judiciously and executively remitteth the penalty of excommunication to which also the Text John 20. may have much respect but the penalty of damnation can be no otherwise remitted by us then as is expressed And indeed the thing is of such exceeding weight that it behoveth us to deal as intelligibly and openly in it as we can And therefore we admire that you should say the Condition needs not be expressed being always necessarily understood by necessarily do you mean necessitate naturali irresistibili so that all the wicked men in the world cannot chuse but understand us to speak conditionally Surely this is none of your meaning if it were it were far from truth Or do you mean not de necessitate vel actitudine eventus but de debito ex obligatione no doubt but it is necessary as a duty and also ad finem as a means And therefore it is that we desire it may be expressed And doubtless you think not that all men do their duties and understand all that they ought to understand no not in this particular If you mean that all sick men may be rationally supposed to understand it this can never be believed by us that are acquainted personally and have been with
so many of whom it is not true How many think the Minister's Absolution and the Sacrament will serve turn with their unsound hypocritical repentance how easily is that understood absolutely or as bad while they take you to take it for granted that they have the Condition which is absolutely expressed It is not fit the Minister should have power to deny this viation or holy Communion to any that humbly desire it according to the Rubrick which no man disturbed in his wits can do and whosoever does must in charity be presumed to be penitent and fit to receive Repl. There is no condition mentioned in the Rubrick but that he be desirous to receive the Communion in his house humbly is not there And why may not a man disturbed in his wits desire the Communion you deny things that ordinarily fall out and yet lay the weight of your Cause on that denial But why must we give the Sacrament to those that have lived in gross ignorance Infidelity and prophaneness and never manifested credibly that they repent You say that whosoever desireth the Sacrament according to the Rubrick must in charity be presumed to be penitent But where hath God commanded or approved so blind dangerous an act as this under the name of Charity the ordinary observations of our lives is not to be confuted by mens Assertions we know by sad experience that there 's abundance of the worst of men among us that are desirous to receive this Sacrament when they are sick that give no credible evidence of true repentance but some in the ignorance deceit of their hearts some as conscious of their impiety for which they seek any shifting remedy to quiet their Consciences for the time are much more eager for this Sacrament in their sickness then many better and more penitent persons And must we judge all these penitent and give them the Sacrament as such we must needs professe that we think this Course would not be the least effectual service unto Satan to deceive poor sinners and keep them from knowing their misery and seeking aright after the true remedy in time Pardon us while we lay together the parts of your Doctrine as we understand it here delivered and leave it to your Consideration what a Church and what a Ministry it would make 1. All Infants of any Parents in the world that we can baptize are undoubtedly regenerate and in a state of life and shall be saved if they so die 2. The Holy Ghost and Forgivenesse of sin being then given them it is charitably presumed that they have not totally lost this notwithstanding the frailties and slips of their Child-hood and so when they can say the Catechism they are to be confirmed 3. Being confirmed they are to be admitted to the Lords Supper 4. All that marry and others thrice a year must receive the Lords Supper though unfit 5. The Minister must absolve all the sick that say they repent if we understand you for we suppose you allow not the Minister to be Judge 6. This Absolution must be absolutely expressely I absolve thee from all thy sins without the Condition if thou repent and believe 7. Whosoever desireth the Communion in his sickness must in charity be presumed to be penitent and fit to receive 8. The Minister must not have power to forbear such Baptizing Absolving or delivering the Communion as aforesaid we now omit what 's said of the dead at Burial And if this be not the ready way to hinder thousands from the necessary knowledge of their unrenewed hearts and lives and from true repentance and from valuing Christ as the Remedy and from making a necessary preparation for death and also the way to lay by abundance of faithful conscionable Ministers that dare not take such a deceiving dangerous Course we must confess our selves much mistaken in the nature of mans corruption and misery and the use of Gods Ordinances for his recovery The Burial of the Dead IT is not fit so much should be left to the discretion of every Minister And the desire that all may be said in the Church being not pretended to be for the ease of tender Consciences but of tender Heads may be helped by a Cap better then a Rubr. Reply We marvel that you say nothing at all to our desire that it be expressed in a Rubrick that prayers and exhortations there used be not for the benefit of the dead but only for the instruction c. comfort of the living You intend to have a very indiscreet Ministry if such a needlesse Circumstance may not be left to their discretion The contrivance of a Cap instead of a Rubr. sheweth that you are all unacquainted with the subject of which you speak and if you speak for want of experience of the Case of Souls as you now do about the Case of mens bodies we could wish you some of our experience of one sort by more Converse with all the Members of the Flock though not of the other But we would here put these three or four Questions to you 1. Whether such of our selves as cannot stand still in the cold winter at the Grave half so long as the Office of Burial requireth without the certain hazard of our lives though while we are in motion we can stay out longer are bound to believe your Lordships that a Cap will cure this better then a Rubr. though we have proved the contrary to our cost and know it as well as we know that cold is cold Do you think no place but that which a Cap or Clothes do cover is capable of letting in the excessively refrigerating Air 2. Whether a man that hath the most rational probability if not a moral certainty that it would be his death or dangerous sickness though he wore 20. Caps is bound to obey you in this Case 3. Whether usually the most studious laborious Ministers be not the most invaletudinary and infirm And 4ly Whether the health of such should be made a jest of by the more healthful and be made so light of as to be cast away rather then a Ceremony sometime be left to their discretion And whether it be a sign of the right and genuine spirit of Religion to subject to such a Ceremony both the life of godliness and the lives of Ministers and the peoples souls Much of this concerneth the people also as well as the Ministers We see not why these words may not be said of any person who we dare not say is damned and it were a breach of Charity to say so even of those whose repentance we do not see For whether they do not inwardly and heartily repent even at the last act who knowes And that God will not even then pardon them upon such repentance who dares say It is better to be Charitable and hope the best then rashly to condemn Reply We spoke of persons living and dying in notorious sins suppose they were