the Waters and through wonderful Grace hath given down much of a spirit of love and mutual forbearance amongst the Nonconforming Separatists though in some small matters of different apprehensions And I hope that such carriage as this Adimadverter useth towards them will engage us to press more than ever after it that this stone of offence may be rolled out of the way and the mouth of absurd and unreasonable men may be muzled that they may have nothing justly to object against us while they behold our Love as the Disciples of Christ to one another and to all the Saints and our godly conversation accompanied with fear As for the promiscuous prophesying mentioned though we dare not quench the Spirit in any Believer nor despise its operation and breathings yet I know not any that are in the Animadverter's sense for it Gifts and abilities for that work with the consent and approbation of the Church which is before satisfied in their personal holiness and soundness in the Faith is â—equired in those to whom a constant libeâ—ty of propâ—esying is granted As for the vain fancies and opinions destructive of true Religion I must crave leave to profess I know not any such vented amongst the Congregations of mine acquainâ—ance And if they were they could not rationally be charged upon the Congregational way more than that horrible Ignorance Atheism those wretched Oaths Blasphemies Adulteries horrid Abominations not to be named amongst the Saints daily hourly committed by the members of the Church of England are to be charged upon it or any principles owned by such as walk therein which are as they have manifested to the world directly and â—iametrically opposit thereunto That the practices of the Separatists have caused a disturbance of Ecclesiastical and Civil peace in those places where they have had any considerable duration is another crimination And it brings to my mind that passage Acts 17. 6. These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also I shaâ—l crave leave to add that there is a wicked false peace a very conjuration and conspiracy against Christ and Truth where the Gospel comes in power it breaks and dissolves this peace There is an Ecclesiastical peace that is the result of such a confederacy and Mr. T. knows who pleads this on the behalf of the most Idolatrous Church so call'd in the world And am sorry to find him writing after so sorry a copy on the behalf of one of her daughters There was an Ecclesiastical peace amongst the Heathens when the Gospel was first promulgared as it was received in power this peace was broken and dissipated without any just reflection oâ— disparagement to the Gospel or the way thereof being rather its glory manifestly discovering it self hereby to be the power of God When the Animadverter proves that any Ecclesiastical peace of the appointment of Christ is broken and disturbed by the persons he inveighs against we shall conceive our selves concerned till then these words are but scar-crows vain and tâ—ivial As touching the distuâ—bance of the Civil peace we have already spoken some what we shall only add That it was not Elijah but the whoredoms of Jezebel that was the troubler of Israel though he good man must â—ear the blame of all And Mr. T. knows that if any trouble or evil had befallen the Empire the voice was Christianos ad Leones they are presently charged and dealt with as the only occasions and causers of it Nor can he be ignorant that not the Separatists but some others have been the disturbers of the Nations peace I suppose a so that he is no stranger to a Treatise written by Mr. Pryn displaying the Treasons committed against the peace of Kings and Kingdoms by the Prelatical party and I should be sorry if he can produce one parallel instance among the Congregational Churches These are the reasons the Animadverter is pleased to give of his present undertaking which I thought it my duty to examine I shall detain thee Christian Reader no longer in this Epistolary Preface but desire from my very soul that thou wouldst impartially weiâ—h what is offered on each side in this Controversie and beg of God for his good Spirit to lead thee and guide thee that thou mayest judge righteous judgment and walk in the good old paths that thou mayest find â—est to thy soul And if we differ in opinion as to the whole or part of any thing herein controverted let us keep up Love and a Spirit of Christianity be labouring to reduce each other into the way of Truth Which is the earnest request of him who is in truth Thy souls friend and servant for Christ's sake C. A. JERUBBAAL OR A Review of the Sober Testimony The Vindication of the Preface thereof from the Exceptions of Mr. Tombs CHAP. 1. Sect. 1 A twofold Worship of God Natural Worship what it is What the Law of Nature teacheth with respect to Worship That God is to be worshipped Of Atheism The sayings of Cicero and Seneca touching the Opinions of the Nations with respect to a Deity That God is to be worshipped in a Community that he is to be worshipped according to his own will The pretences of Zaleucus Lycurgus Minos Numa the most famous Lawgivers amongst the Gentiles and their imposition of Laws The famous saying of Socrates in Plato touching the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or manner of Worship prescribed by the Godds That the Voice of God is to be hearkened unto when and in what manner he shall be pleased to speak The Gentiles owned but one chief Deity The custom of the Nations in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Diabolical Oracles leading them thereunto which they supposing to be the voice of the Godds obeyed Instituted or Ceremonial Worship wherein it consists Hearing the Word such a Worship Mr. T. declines the matter in controversie Men do not worship God in Hearing when they hear 1 Thess 2. 13. opened and explained HAving already answered what Mr. T. was pleased to premise in his Epistolary Preface to the Reader so far as we are or can be supposed to be concerned we are now ready to attend his further motion toward the discussion as he phraseth it of the Book it self which is as he saith distinguished into a Preface and ten Chapters How suitable the method is or comprehensive in his judgment I am little concerned it seem'd to me to answer my aim and intendment which was solely the clearing Truth and satisfying the Scruples of tender Consciences in the matters we were enquiring after The first thing Mr. T. is pleased to take notice of is an Assertion of mine in the Preface to the ensuing Discourse wherein I affirm that the matter we were to treat of is one part of the instituted Worship of Christ under the Gospel from whence he takes occasion in his first Section to run forth into a discourse touching the derivation of the word Worship and very learnedly tells us that it
the Sabbath Baptism Lord's Supper c. and I do so in this dispute Answ Egregie dictum excellently said indeed as if because we affirm that whatever is to be practised in Instituted Worship in the time of the Gospel is to be wholly bottom'd as to the Law and Precept instituting it upon some Commandment of Christ in the New-Testament therefore we assert that no use may be made of the Scriptures of the Old-Testament treating thereabout by way of prophecy or otherwise which is a Consequence this learned Animadverter will never be able to make good 'T is true many learned men do make use of some places of the Old-Testament to prove the morality of one day in seven or the seventh part of time not as I remember except Psa 118. 24 which some conceive by way of prophecy speaks of the Lord 's honouring the first day for the confirmation of the observation of the first day which they conceive Christ's resurrection on that day the practice of the Primitive-Church meeting together for the solemn Worship of God 1 Cor. 16. 2. Acts 20. 7. the appellation the Lord's Day which they judge is given to it c. is a sufficient warrant for their observation thereof in Gospel-times They plead not for Baptism or the Lord's Supper upon any other bottom than Gospel-Institution or their preception by Christ in the New-Testament Though 't is true as touching the subjects of the one and the other they judg they may by way of analogy argue somewhat from Old-Testament-Scriptures from which apprehension they see nothing so weighty in what is tendred by Mr. T. notwithstanding his brag and immodest Assertion pag. 18. Sect. 14. that such a way of arguing is irrational as if wisdom rested with him and he had the measure of it and a man could not differ from him but he must be a block or bruit to influence their departure That because the granting the Assertion would be disadvantagious to the Author and the Separatists therefore it should be in Mr. T. his opinion an unreasonable postulatum to devolve the question upon the Scriptures of the New-Testament I understand not He takes not a measure I presume of the reasonableness or unreasonableness of requests from their advantagiousness or disadvantagiousness to such contemptible creatures as we and should he do so he were much to blame as to infer from hence therefore I see no reasonableness in his Postulatum which is introduced not as the natural issue of any thing premised which he knows it is not but meerly for pomp and shew Sect. 3. The judgments of the Antients no sufficient substratum to build my practice upon in the Worship of God The opinion of the Antients â—hemselves in this matter None but the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures can satisfie the consciences of any dissatisfied in matters relating to Worship Our Faith not to be resolved into the Testimony of men which is a principle decryed by the Antients and Protestant Churches The consciences of none can be satisfied in what is written by the Ancients before they are assured 1. that what they read as or are told is theirs be indeed so and not counterfeited nor adulterated 2. That in their Writings they were as the Apostles and Prophets guided by an unerring Spirit The true use of the Testimony of the Ancients Congregational-Principles owned by them Of Councils and Schoolmen THe fourth Section is fronted with this The judgement of the Ancients not useless in this Controversie as if the Author of the Sober-Testimony had asserted it to be so which Mr. T. knows he no where doth This indeed the words of the Author not perplexing our selves nor the consciences of any with the judgments of men in generations past wherein they cannot acquiesce fairly intimate 1. That the judgment of none of the children of men though never so famous in their generation since the Apostles fell asleep is a sufficient Substratum to build my faith and practice upon in the Worship of my God In which we have the concurrence of the Ancients themselves Basil tels us that it is necessary and consonant to Reason that every man learn that which is needful out of the Scriptures both for the fulness of Godliness and lest they be inured to humane traditions Regul contract 95. p. 902. And Austin Epist 112. ad Paulin. saith If a matter be grounded on the clear authority of the holy Scriptures it is to be believed without all doubt but as for other witnesses and testimonies upon whose credit any thing may be urged unto us to believe it it is lawful for thee either to credit or not to credit them according as thou shalt perceive them of weight to deserve or not to deserve credit Origin saith Homil. 1. in Hierem. We must of necessity call the Scriptures to witness for our senses and interpretations without them are of no credit Famous is the saying of Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem Catech. 4. p. 15. We must not deliver any thing though never so small without the holy Scriptures neither may we be led away with probabilities and shews of words neither yet believe me barely saying these things unto you unless you also believe the demonstration thereof from the Scriptures for the security of our faith ariseth from the demonstration of the holy Scripture 2dly That not the sayings or judgment of the Ancients but the clear Testimony of the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures is sufficient and efficacious for the satisfying persons that are dissatisfied in any thing relating to Faith or Worship Come to a poor soul under real scruples of spirit with respect to these and tell him this Father is of this opinion and that Father of that you do but oleum operam perdere when you have said all he remains as he was dissatisfied and so will do without evidence from Scripture More than these two things the Animadverter cannot righteously infer from the expression he discants on What saith he to these not a word more or less And I am apt to believe of Mr. T. that he is a man of greater modesty than to oppose them He tells us indeed that it may be of good use to satisfie mens consciences that no such separation as now is from the present Ministers of the Church of England was allowed of by the first Fathers and Writers what truth there is in this suggestion shall by and by be manifested He will not say surely of what good use he supposeth it to be that the faith of any is to be resolved into their testimony which it must be if what they say satisfie the scrupling conscience i. e. I must believe what they say is true because they say it else that they say it will never tend to my satisfaction which yet is an homage and duty that we owe to none but the Lord. A principle decryed and abhorred by the Ancients themselves The saying of Austin Epist 48. is known
besides the Church of England but of the Church of Rome the Basis upon which her pompous Worship is built which being removed would fall to the ground and perish with its own weight Yea but Thirdly The Ceremonies of the Church of England are for Decency and Order To which I shall onely say what one said of the like speech of the Monks of Burdeaux when they affirmed That the Signs added to Baptism were an Ornament to it We Reply saith he to them Num igitur sunt c. Are they wiser than Christ Jesus who hath ordained his Sacrament in so great Purity and simplicity and who knoweth better than all the men in the world what Ornament was sittest for it If it be but the Covenant of a man when it is confirmed no man abrogateth it or addeth any thing to it What arrogancy is it then to add to the Institution of Christ What the Animadverters private thoughts of the Ceremonies of the Church of England are with respect to their Decency and Oâ—der I know not as wise men as he think the contrary The Ceremonies which have been abused to Superstition as the Ceremonies of the Church of England have been can never serve for Order or Comeliness say the Divines of Germany who stood against the Ceremonies then enforced And for the Surplice one calls it A Player-like apparel Gualt in Hos 2. and Calv. Instit Lib. 4. Cap. 10. Sect. 29. A vain Vizard Another Baleus in Declar. of Bon. Arti. p. 100. A pretty Toy And Dr. Taylor Act. and Mon. p. 1659. An Apish Toy Another Baecon p. 1. Cathe p. 486. Histrionical Scenical and Scorner-like As for their being 4thly Imposed by Publick Authority So were the Jewish Inventions Jeroboam imposeth them upon the People who are so far from being excused upon that account that they are condemned for their fearful and slavish subjection to him Hos 5. 11. and elsewhere But Fifthly Their Inventions were such as drew them to serve other Godds and forsake the Lord. Answ If he means that they were by these immediately influenced to the rejecting the true God that made the Heavens and the Earth he talks like himself confidently and without proof This indeed they did draw them to a rejection of Divine Appointments and casting off that Obedience and Subjection they owed to God and so do the Inventions and Ceremonies of the Church of England No Innovation in Worship but is a stealing from God that Obedience and Service that is alone due to him and giving it to another viz. the Innovator In time also God gives them up in a judicial way as a punishment of this their departure from Divine Institutions to the Inventions of man to blindness of mind and strong delusions Thus he dealt with Israel Isa 6. 9 10. and 29. 10 13. So that they at last grew so sottish as to fall down before the stump of a Tree yet without the utter rejection or denial of the true God whom they worshipped through that false Medium They sware by the Lord i. e. Worshiped him when they sware by Malcham Unto what blindness of mind God hath given up many of the Pleaders for and Conformers to the present Inventions and Ceremonies I had rather leave to the silent thoughts of the Reader than express And what in time as a punishment for mingling the Worship of God with the Inventions of men and departure from Divine Institutions befel the Synagogue of Rome in respect of their Icolatria or Image-worship and the Church of England in dayes past and now in their falling down before the Sacrament of which in its proper place we must speak is known to all And I heartily wish that the review thereof might make us to tremble to provoke the Lord to jealousie by the works of ourhands But he adds None of the Inventions of men mentioned in the places cited are such as can be charged upon the Church of England for that I take to be his meaning nor are any threatned by the Lord or did he contest with the Jews upon the account of any Customs of the Nations but such as were Idolatrous and of this he saith Let all the Texts alledged be viewed Answer And we are contented they be reviewed only we crave leave to premise 1. That this Animadverter doth not deny that the Ceremonies of the Church of England at least some of them are derived from the Customs of the Nations nor indeed that mediately through the Church of Rome from whom we immediately received them they are so can be denied The Surplice Durandus indeed thinks Rational Lib. 3. Cap. 1. was borrowed from the Jews It was rather as we said from the Heathen Priests who were clad in white in their Ministration The Riâ—g in Marriage the Cross in Baptisme the distinction of the Priests from the Roman Heathen Flamins and Arch-Flamins and many of their Feasts as Eostar or Easter Epiphany c. smell of the same Forge which is directly contrary to many Precepts of the Lord in the Scripture Lev. 20. 23. Deut. 12. 30. So will I do i. e. not unto Idols but unto the Lord aâ— the next verse manifests Hereupon the Hebrews say Thou mayest not enquire or ask concerning the way of the service of an Idol how it is although thou serve it not for this thing occasions to turn after it and to do as they do Maimon Tract of Idol Cap. 2. Sect. 2. Not only the Worship of false Godds but false or Idolatrous Worship of the true God is here forbidden and all imitation of Idolaters is condemned 2 Kings 17. 15. Jer. 10. 2. Psal 106. 35. 2dly That this Animadverter supposeth That the Introduction of the Inventions of Men into the Worship of God is not Idolatry That such Ceremonies are not Idolatrous which we cannot yeild him it being the making an Image to our selves contrary to the second Commandment Nor am I singular in this opinion August de Consens Evang. Lib. 2. Cap. 18. Vasq de Adorat Lib. 2. Disput 1. Cap. 3. Dr. Bils against Apolog. p. 4. p. 344. assert That all Will-Worship is flat Idolatry And Mr. T. will yeeld That what is Praeter mandatum beside the Commandment is Will-worship 3dly That a departure from one or more of the Institutions of God to the embracement of the Customs of the Nations is in Scripture called a forsaking of God 2 Kings 17. 15 Deut. 28. 20 with 15. Isa 1. 4. which cannot be interpreted of their casting off the whole Worship of God which they did not for they continued to sacrifice to him to tread his Courts and made many Prayers they observed the New-Moons Sabbaths c. vers 11 12 13 so that totally they had not rejected him and his service but turning aside to the Inventions of men and mixing them with the Worship of God he saith They had forsaken him which that the present Ministers and Church of England have done we have evinced in Chap.
over his Churches doth consist the taking away rejection of which is to take away and reject the visible Scepter of his Kingdom So that betwixt these two there is no compare He adds 2dly That they are part of Gods instituted Worship needs better proof Answ 1. This is but Mr. T. his opinion he hath not manifested the weakness of the proof exhibited 2. He acknowledgeth some of the Institutions mentioned to be the Appointments of Christ We say 2dly What if it should appear that as small as these things seem to be they are the grounds of the late Controversies of God pleaded with fire and sword in most of the European Kingdoms This may perhaps a little stay sober persons from so rash a Conclusion That these are small matters To which our Animadverter saith This is not demonstrated Answ I am upon some accounts unwilling to review things he cannot be ignorant of the truth of the suggestion What was the ground of the first contest in Scotland was it not the imposition of the Liturgy What begat the bad blood in England was it not the Prelates Pride imposition of their Inventions upon the Saints What the Covenant was against this Animadverter hath not yet forgot But enough of this I add 3dly As small matters as these have been severely punished by the Lord as 2 Chr. 26. 16. Num. 16. 1 Chr. 15. 13. with Num. 4. 11 15. 1 Sam. 8. 7. which we more at large speak to in S. T. Mr. T. Replies 'T is not demonstrated that in the rejection of these Institutions that the Minsters sin as Uzziah c. Answ But that herein they do so and that at an higher rate is evident 1. Uzziah c. sinn'd but against one Institution of the Lord these against many 2. They sinn'd under the Law against the carnal administrations thereof these under the Gospel 3. They sinn'd of ignorance and weakness as may charitably be deemed at least some of them which 't is to be fear'd cannot be said of many of the present Ministers who have preached printed sworn against what they now own and practise We add 4. As small matters as these when once commanded by the Lord are of that force as not only to deface the well-being but to overturn the true being of the Worship of God We instance in the case of Sacrifices which being appointed to be offered at a certain place if offered elsewhere which was but a failure in a circumstance of place they were a stink in the Nostrils of God and not accounted by him as any Worship performed to him Doth Mr. T. deny these things to be so Not at all He only tells us That the Ministers of England in their opposing the Institutions mentioned overturn the true Worship of God is not demonstrated Which how much it is to the purpose others will judge The judicious Reader knows we were not upon the proof of any such thing the utmost of our intendment being only to demonstrate that the particular Institutions remarked were not such small matters as some made them since as small matters viz. a circumstance of place commanded neglected have been of that force as to overturn the true being of the Worship of God which we are apt to think abundantly demonstrated and desire Mr. T. to leave dictating and manifest by Argument and Reason our mistake Though we did not yet may we righteously argue non-subjection to circumstances of Worship injoyned is of that force as to overturn the true being of the Worship of God sacrificing any where but at the place appointed was so Therefore the non-subjection of the present Ministers of England to the forementioned Institutions should we assert them to be only Circumstances of Worship determined doth so Their Ministry is no Ministry of Christ their Excommunication no Institution of Christ because not according to divine appointment We say further in S. T. As for what is added that good men differ among themselves in this matter it s of no more weight than what went before 1. 'T is not at all to the business in hand 2. 'T is possible good men may for a while do that which really enwraps in the bowels of it a denial of the Offices of Christ The Animadverter adjoyns 1. That good men may do that which by consequence may be a denial of Christs Office is granted it being no more than that they may erre or sin Answ 1. We say more Good men may under the power of Temptation plainly directly with cursing and banning themselves deny Christ Peter did so Mat. 26. 74. some say that he cursâ— Christ yet a good man 'T is true this is no more than that they may eâ—re or sin the greatest miscarriage any of the Children of the Lord ever were or can be guilty of Davids Murder and Adultery the Corinthians Incest was no more He adds 2dly If the Ministers of England are in the account of God good men we should not have censured them so deeply as walking disorderly symbolizing with Antichrist nor have disswaded men from hearing them or joyning with them in Gods Worship Answ 1. Good men in the main may be guilty of great miscarriages may be told of censured for them and that publickly if they are publick and notorious 2. When Mr. T. proves that I have said any thing of them that is false and untrue or that by mentioning these I have made any breach upon any rule of Christ I do assure him in the word of a Christian to make a publick acknowledgment and recantation thereof till then I have so little cause of being afraid or ashamed that I have boldnâ—ss and confidence through the grace of God in the Testimony I bear though unworthy against their enormities and cause of rejoycing in Christ whatever I may suffer 3dly That good men that in the account of God may be so ought not to be separated from when under the guilt of scandalous offences this Animadverter cannot prove many Scriptures have already in this Treatise been produced for the confirmation of the contrary We add in S. T. 3. That good men differ is an Argument of their ignorance and darkness which though in some cases it excuses a tanto yet not a toto it may alter the degree never the nature of the sin To this our Animadverter replies There may be darkness in this Author Answ 1. And this Author saith so to 't is what he is daily bemoaning before the Lord. But 2dly In the matters he is treating of he knows and is perswaded by the Lord Jesus that the truth is with him and he dares not call Light Darkness for fear of man or advantage in the world 3dly He conceives these words might have been spared inasmuch as they are greatly impertinent whether Darkness be with them or me If we sin though our sin be not a sin of that magnitude as if it had been committed against Light yet 't is a sin still and so to be censured
c. that never entred into the heart of Christ the judicious Reader will easily from what we have already offered discern the impertinency of Ezra 6. 7. and 7. 13. Dan. 3. 29. and 6. 26. to the present design 'T is true as he saith Christianity alters not civil Relations or Estates 1 Cor. 7. 24. And 't is as true that if in the time of my infidelity I have been the servant of men that are my Political Masters with respect to Worship though I am whilst I continue their servant to perform faithful service to them with respect to things Civil yet am I not to own them or subject to them as my Lords Governours with respect to the Service of God therein one only being my Lord and Master viz. Christ 2. I say not that all the Kings of Israel were Types of Christ but that the Kings of Israel were so i. e. some of them nor do I restrain the word Israel to the ten Tribes but to the twelve headed by David Solomon a pair of eminent Types of the Messiah That Christ and the Apostles yeelded subjection to Civil Powers with respect to things sacred of which this Animadverter must speak or he speaks impertinently is a gross mistake unworthy so learned a person We say in S. T. 3dly That the Kings of Israel were Heads of the Church is false God was its alone Head and King Hence their Historian saith Their Government was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And when they would needs choose a King God said They rejected him to whom even as to their Political Head a Shekel was paid yearly as a Tribute called the Shekel of the Sanctuary True indeed as they were a Political Body they had visible Political Governours but that these had any Headship over them to make any Laws introduce Constitutions of their own framing in matter relating to Worship will never be proved To which Mr. T. replies 1. That the Church of Israel was different from the Kingdom of Israel is one of the proper opinions of those who would establish from that example an Ecclesiastical Independent Government in the Church distinct from the Civil Government of the State Answ 1. 'T is no matter whose opinion 't is if Truth it ought to be imbraced 2. That there is a real and formal distinction betwixt the two Societies Church and Common-wealth is at large proved by several As Mr. Gillespy in his Aarons Rod Blossoming b. 1. c. 3. The Assembly in their Jus Divinum Hear their Reasons p. 88 89. 1st The Society of the Church is only Christ's and not the Civil Magistrates it s his House and he hath no Vicar under him as is abundantly proved by Mr. Rutherford in his Divine Right of Church-Government Chap. 27. Q. 23. Pag. 595 to 647. 2dly The Officers Ecclesiastical are Christ's Officers not the Magistrates 1 Cor. 4. 1. Ephes 4. 8 10 11. 1 Cor. 12. 28. 3dly These Officers are elected and ordained by the Church without Commission from the Civil Magistrate by virtue of Christs Ordinance and in his Name Acts 6. 3 4. with 14. 23. 1 Tim. 4. 14. with Acts 13. 1 2 3 4. 4thly The Church meets not as Civil Judicatories for Civil Acts of Government but as Spiritual Assembles for such as are spiritual viz. Preaching 5thly Should not these two Societies be acknowledged to be really and essentially distinct from one another several gross absâ—rdities would follow As 1. Then there can be no Common-wealth where there is not a Church but this is contrary to all experience Heathens have Common-wealths yet no Church 2. Then there may be Church-Officers elected where there is no Church seeing there are Magistrates where there is no Church 3. Then those Magistrates where there is no Church are no Magistrates And if so then the Church is the formal constituting Cause of Magistrates 4. Then the Common-wealth as the Common-wealth is the Church and the Church as the Church is the Common-wealth 5. Then all that are Members of the Common-wealth are because so Members of the Church 6. Then the Common-wealth being formally the same with the Church is as Common-wealth the Mystical Body of Christ 7. Then the Officers of the Church are the Officers of the Common-wealth the power of the Keys gives them right to the Civil Sword and consequently the Ministers of the Gospel as such are Justices of the peace All which how absurd let the world judge He adds 2dly That Solomon and other Kings did exercise power over Ecclesiastical persons is evident because he deposed Abiathar Answ 1. Who denies it How this proves the power of the Kings of Israel as Heads of the Church to innovate in Worship which is the thing to be proved I know not Hic labor hoc opus est And Mr. T. hath more wit than seriously to attempt it 2. Solomon deposed Abiathar not as High Pontifee or Head of the Church for male administration in Church-affairs but as King of Israel for treason against the Common-wealth in the business of Adonijah Ergo Solomon was the Head of the Church of Israel risum teneatis amici Of 2 Chr. 29. 30 and 30. 2. which he produceth to prove That the Kings of Israel had power in Ecclesiastical things we have already spoken What follows in this 14th Sect. is not worthy our spotting paper with the repetition of 1. He grants That God was the alone Head and King of the Church of Israel with respect to power Legislative to assign what Faith Worship Judicatories and what other things were necessary for that Congregation all which solely appertained to him which is all we need contend for The Kings of Israel had not any Legislative power with respect to these he grants from the power of these Kings then it cannot be argued that any have power now to innovate in matters of Faith and Worship they are not Heads of the Church invested with authority to introduce Constitutions of their own framing in matters relating to Worship as such nor had the Kings of Israel any such Authority Jam sumus ergo pares nec ab uno dissidet alter 2. What he talks of Kingly Government we are not at all concerned in All that we assert in S. T. is that Josephus saith Their Government was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Theocracie that when they choose a King they rejected God 1 Kings 8. 17. which when he attempts the confutation of we may attend him 3. That a Shekel was yearly paid to the Lord Ex. 30. 13. which continued to the destruction of Jerusalem Josep l. 7. c. 28. of the Jewish Wars he grants that it was paid to him as their Political Head he denies Now though this be not of any moment as to our present concern therein yet the truth thereof is easily demonstrated 1. It was paid to the Lord in token of their thankfulness for his delivering them from the Egyptian yoke which he did as their Political Head 2. None were
the God that made the Heaven and the Earth Mr. T. replies 1. To worship the Creatures terminatively is most gross-Idolatry the Israelites Exod. 32. and many Heathen Idolaters did not do so 2. 'T is not true that few or none worship the Creature terminatively for the most of the Idolaters of old worshipped the Host of Heaven and at this day the Devil himself is worshipped in the East and West Indies Answ 1. That most of the Idolaters of old worshipped the Host of Heaven is granted that they worshipped these or any other Idols terminatively our Dictator attempts not the proof of What is said of Baal 1 Kings 16. 31. or Molech Psal 106. 37 38. who is also call'd Moloch Amos 5. 26. and Milcom 1 Kings 11. 33. and Malcham Zeph. 1. 5. i. e. the Sun proves not that they so worshipped the Sun in commemoration of which these Images were erected 'T is true Psal 106. 37 38. 't is said They sacrificed to Devils but that therefore they worshipped the Devil as the utmost terminus cannot be conceived 'T is call'd Devil-worship because it was not from God but of the invention and instigation of the Devil as all the false worship in the World is Of their worshipping Molech or Milcham 't is expresly said that they worshipped the Lord too when they worshipped him Zeph. 1. 5. Heb. to the Lord and in Malcam as the Papists say they direct their worship to God only in or through their Images which fully answers what can be pleaded from Acts 7. 41 42 43. 2. The most learned of the Heathens do affirm That their Images were dedicated to the true God whom in them they worshipped reputing the Images themselves but Stooks and Stones and that in them they worshipped but one God Seneca saith By Jupiter standing in the Capitol with Lightning in his hand they understand the Preserver and Governor of all things the Maker of all the World Qu. natur l. 2. c. 45. Who it was that sang 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mr. T. is not ignorant See Arnobius l. 6. contra Gent. We premise 2dly That there is a somewhat more refiâ—ed Idolatry and to this Head we refer 1. The ascription of a God-head to any creature as to Herod Acts 12. 22. 2. The ascription of the properties of the God-head to any Creature 3. The worshipping God in any other way than what he hath prescribed which is the Idolatry forbidden in the second Commandment 4. The Oblation of Worship and Service to God that hath been offered up to Idols for which there is no prescription in the Scriptures 'T is this second sort of Idolatry we say the present Ministers of England are guilty of Mr. T. answers 1. The definition of Idolatry by Dr. Rainold â—ath hitherto been received by all Protestants that he knows of that it is exhibiting Divine Worship to a Creature proved from Rom. 1. 15. Answ 1. That this is Idolatry I grant that nothing else is so will not be proved Protestants affirm otherwise as Calvin Perkins Ames Paraeus Though 2. the very truth is when we submit to a Worship of humane devising we exhibit Divine Worship to a Creature viz. the deviser imposer thereof we worship him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 besides the Creator as Hilarius Beza expound the Phrase Rom. 1. 25. And Paraeus Explicat cate p. 3. Q. 9. p. 528. saith What is required in the second Commandment Answ That we express not God by any Figure and that we worship him not in any other way or manner than he hath in his Word commanded us to worship him 1 Sam. 15. 23. Deut. 12. 30. Mat. 15. 9. Idolatry is contrary to this Commandment which is a false and superstitious worship of the Deity of which there are two chief kinds one more gross ☜ as when a false Deity is worshipped this is forbidden in the first Commandment another more refined when the true God is pretended to be worshipped but there is a mistake in the kind of Worship i. e. when Worship is pretended to be performed to God in some work which he hath not required this is condemned in this second Commandment p. 529. Those who sin against the second Commandment sin also against the first because they who worship God otherwise than he will be worshipped they feign to themselves another God and indeed worship not God but the figment of their own brain To feign another Worship of God is to feign another will of God and by consequence another God Mr. Perkins Vol. 1. p. 659. saith When God is worshipped otherwise and by other means than he hath revealed in his Word that is Idolatry Idolatrous Worships are all they which are appointed without the Command of God Mel. Tom. 2. p. 107. We shall onely add what we find mentioned by the Learned Peter Martyr in his Comment on the first of Sam. ch 7. p. 40. Men are wont sometimes to feign to themselves Commentitious gods as Jupiter Neptune Mercury Sometimes to worship the one and true God but with a Worship that is forbidden or strange i. e. not commanded as if any one should slay his Son or do what King Ahaz did who constituted a Damascene Altar in the Temple of God To do thus is nothing else than to worship an Idol For men do hereby feign a God who will so be worshipped who is in truth no God Therefore August Quest 29. in lib. Jos in which place the same thing is proposed to the people by Joshua that is here by Samuel He that feigns to himself God to be other than he is doth carry in his heart another God Wherefore not only Jupiter and the vain Deities but also those Idols and Phantasms are altogether to be cast out of our mind This will be done if we constitute to our selves God to be such as he is described to us to be in the Holy Scriptures Tertul. in lib. de idololat saith Not only the Cross and made Worship of Images is Idolatrous for the Antients of old had Temples †The Romans for above 170. years worshipped the Godds without Images say Vario Plutarch without Images who were nevertheless Idolaters It matters not whether thou make to thy self a God of Plaiscering or Marble or of a Trunk of a Tree I add saith P. Martyr or of thy own Phantasm an Idol is so call'd of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a Form an Idol therefore is a little Form Samuel therefore exhorts chap. 7. 3. that they cast away commentitious Godds and vain Worship and evil Opinions of God out of their minds What this Animadverter mentions out of Tertullian in his Book of Idolatry c. 15. makes for us If Idolatry be when any thing that is not God is extolled beyond the measure of humane honour then when the Prescribers of Divine Service are so extolled as they are when the Service prescribed by them is subjected to it being the peculiar honour
things we are to pray for for at that time they were not bound to the use of so many words and syllables as are Tertullian Cyprian Cornelius a Lapide Musculus c. But 3dly should it be granted that Christ enjoyned the use of that form of Prayer as a form this will not prove that stinted forms of Prayer are lawful and as such may lawfully be imposed and used which can have no other basis then this 't is as lawful for Civil or Ecclesiastical Rulers to devise and impose forms of Prayer upon the Churches as for Christ a most absurd and blasphemous assertion As touching what he adds 2. Christ justifies the Childrens crying of Hosanna uses himself the forms which David used before in the Psalms c. We answer That in all this he doth but beat the Air and speaks not one word to the purpose We find no footsteps of any enjoyned Liturgie or stinted forths of Prayer imposed either in the old Testament or the New though we find the same words used sometimes by them yet that they might never use any other in their publick devotions which is the condition of stinted enjoyned forms the known case of the Ministers of Engl. with respect to their Church-Service we find not which is also a full answer to what he cites out of Cyprian touching their use of the Lord's Prayers and other Forms if they used any they were not bound to use them and no other When he proves this consequence the Saints of old used the same words in prayer sometimes and Christ used words before used by them Therefore a set and stinted Liturgy was in use amongst them and such an one as our Common-Prayer-Book-Worship I will be his Convert He knows the contrary His answers to Justin Martyr and Tertullian are impertinent and not worth the reciting The words of the former are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Atheists we are not seeing we worship the Maker of the World And in all our Oblations we praise him according to our abilities in the way of prayer and thanksgiving And afterwards tells us that the President of the Assembly poureth our prayers according to his ability and continues long in this work Tertullian tells us The Christians looking towards Heaven not on their Common-Prayer-Book with their hands spread abroad prayed without a Moniter because from their hearts expressions wholly exclusive of inconsistant with the formes of prayer contended for The sayings of Socrates in his Eccl. Hist l. 5. c. 21. who lived about the year 430. tells us That among all the Christians in that Age scarce two were to be found that used the same words in prayer He passeth over in silence as he doth the account I give of the use of them not till about the year 600. and the imposition by Charles the Great of Gregories Liturgy as is thought and the support thereof by threats and punishments ever since These things hâ— knows to be true and yet they are such as the Dragon he labours to support cannot possibly stand before Sect. 3. Common-Prayer-Book-Worship not of the appointment of Christ because an obstruction of some positive Duty charged by Christ upon the Saints Mr. T. his Exceptions refuted Of resting on the Sabbath Day Whether Sacrificing was an obstruction of that Duty Mat. 5. 12. explained Following Christ no obstruction of positive Duties to Parents Of the gift and grace of Prayer Rom. 8. 26. opened 'T is the duty of Saints to improve Gifts received Common-Prayer-Book-Worship contrary to Scripture 'T is not necessary to the edification of the Saints The Judgment of the Reformed Churches A Second Argument advanced in S. T. to prove that Common-Prayer-Book-Worship is not of the appointment of Christ is thus formed That Worship which is an obstruction of any positive Duty charged by Christ to be performed by the Saints is not a Worship that is of his appointment But this is undeniably true of the Common-Prayer-Book-Worship Therefore Christ hath given Officers to his Church Ephes 4. 11. to them he hath given gifts every way suiting the imployment he calls them forth unto the improvement whereof he expects and charges upon them 2 Tim. 1. 6. 1 Cor. 12. 7. Ephes 4. 11. Prov. 17. 16. Luke 19. 20. To think after all this that any Worship should be of the institution of Christ that shuts ouâ— as unnecessary the exercise of the gifts given is absurd and injurious to Christ To which Mr. T. answers Sect. 5. 1. The major is not in all cases true resting on the Sabbath Day was a positive Duty yet sacrificing which was an obstruction of that Duty called prophaning the Sabbath Mat. 12. 5. was Worship of Gods appointment following Christ preaching of the Gospel were Worship of Christs appointment yet they were obstructions to positive duties to be done to Parents Answ 1. Resting from our own works on the Sabbath Day was a positive Duty not from the works of Religion and the Worship of God as was Sacrificing 'T is true Christ saith Mat. 12. 5. That the Priests in the Temple prophaned the Sabbath but this is spoken in respect of the vulgar Opinion that thought the Sabbath violated if any necesâ—â—ry work were done therein not that indeed the Sabbath day was broken by them So Dr. Willet on Exod. 20. 9. and our Annotaâ—ors upon the place expound it 2. That following Christ is an obstruction of any posstive duty we owe to Parents Mr. T. will prove Quum durae quercus sudabunt roscida mella i. e. never 'T is true Christ sometimes calls us to leave Father and Mother for his Name and Gospel-sake but then our abiding with them is no longer any positive duty enjoyned us by him but the contraty so that the major Proposition abides firm To the minor viz. That the Common-Prayer-Book-Worship is an obstruction of a positive duty viz. the exercise of the gift of Prayer which is excluded hereby He answers 1. 'T is supposed that the Common-Prayer-Book-Worship is a different sort of Worship from such as is used by those who exercise the gift of Prayer Answ And so it is the one being of the Earth earthy carnal devilish the other from Heaven as good he may say the Ark and Dagon are the same as that the Common-Prayer-Book-Worship and the Worship of Jesus Christ is so When he proves the absurdities mentioned are the proper issue of this assertion we shall think our selves concern'd to take notice of them but till then we reject them as the spurious off-spring of his own begetting He adds 2dly The Author intimates that ability to conceâ—ve compose and utter in variety of Expressions Petitions to God is the gift of Prayer and the exercise of it is the exercise of that gift Answ I do so indeed That there are some that have ability so to do Mr. T. will not cannot deny nor that this ability may be where there is not true Grace what will Mr. T. call this Ability to
the Faith and Unity of the Gospel is not of the institution of Christ but that those modes and forms that are made an essential part of Worship which the Common-Prayer-Book forms are though using Notes in the Pulpit are not which are therefore impertinently and ineptly produced by our Animadverter not being necessary to the forementioned ends are not of the institution of Christ because in all Gospel-Institutions those ends were aimed at by him by which the Judicious Reader will easily perceive how little we are concern'd with his Argument That the Common-Prayer-Book-Service is as a polluted accursed abominable thing to the Reformed Churches is from hence evident that they will not touch nor meddle with it no more than with any thing that is most notoriously so Their expressions touching Popish Rites and Ceremonies of which not a few are retained in our Common Prayer-Book manifest as much Calvin cals them Filthy Dunghils Conrad Schlusselburg l. 13. p. 593. saith That the Adiaphorism of Rites Popish retained is the very Image of the Beast whose Mark Character and Name those Adiaphorous Rites are The third Angel who preacheth against the Image of the Beast and the receiving his Mark representeth the Preachers that withstand the rayl of Antichrist left behind in the Church of God The German Divines Thes de Adiaph Theol. Sax. p. 193. tell us That the retention of Popish Ceremonies under pretence that they be Adiaphora is a countermand to that precept Go out of her my People seeing hereby men do even return yea enter into Antichrist And Bucâ—r expresly avers That all things that are of the Romane Antichrist are abominated in Censur cap. 3. p. 460. What this Animadverter speaks further in this Section will receive a speedy dispatch Calvin speaks of the Prayers and Rites not their Imposition when he speaks favourably of them in Epist 87. which he abhorrd Maresius his Assertion amounts onely to a justification of forms of Prayer not our English forms much less their imposition So that notwithstanding what Mr. T. is able to say to the contrary The Common-Prayer-Book-Worship is not of the appointment of Christ and therefore those that Worship him in the way thereof worship him in a way that is not of his appointment Sect. 4. An Objection answered Nothing in the Instituted Worship of Christ that is a Circumstance thereof as such Of praying in a Form The unlawfulness thereof evinced Mr. T. his Arguments to the contrary answered Praying in the Spirit what it is What is meant by quenching the Spirit 1 Thes 5. 19. Forms of prayer imposed are necessary parts of Worship The Opinion of the Papists and present Ministers touching this matter THere is one stone of offence that lying in the way of our former discourse we endeavour in S. T. to remove 'T is this Object That the Liturgie or Common-Prayer-Book-Worship is no essential part of Worship but meerly circumstantial Praying 't is true is part of Worship but praying in this or that form is not so but meerly a circumstance thereof and therefore though it be true that the present Ministers of England worship God after the way of the Common-Prayer-Book yet it follows not that they worship him after away that is not of his appointment To this we answer That many things are supposed as the Basis upon which the weight of this Objection is laid which we cannot grant as 1. That there are some things in the instituted Worship of Christ that are meerly circumstances thereof as such which we deny Circumstances in the Worship of Christ attending Religious Actions as Actions we grant but Circumstances of Worship as such will never be proved To infer that because time and place with sundry things of the like nature are Circumstances in Worship therefore there are Circumstances of Worship as such is frivolous these things being the attendment of Religious Actions common to any civil actions of the like nature to be performed by the Sons of Men no action to be managed by a community can be orderly performed by them without such an assignment of time and place publick prayer being so to be managed as a Religious Action hath the circumstances before mentioned attending it and so it would were it a meer civil action to be performed by a community though it related not at all to the Worship of God To which Mr. T. Sect. 8. 1. 'T is not true that the Objection supposeth that some things in the Instituted Worship of Christ are but meer circumstances thereof as such Answ The naked meaning of the Author of S. T. in that expression is this That whereas the Liturgical forms of prayer are by their imposition made parts of the Instituted Worship of Christ the Objection supposeth that they are but meer circumstances thereof as such This was so obvious to any ordinary understanding that I cannot but fear our Animadverter did wilfully mistake our meaning whilst he makes it to be this that that particularity of action that is instituted by Christ is a meer Arbitrary circumstance which no Christian in his wits will affirm 2dly He tells us The distinction of circumstances in the Worship of Christ attending Religious Actions as actions and circumstances of Worship as such is an unnecessary nicety and intimates as if we were agreed in the thing Answ 1. If it be a nicety 't is such a one as cuts the throâ—t of his cause nothing is then to be subjected to or used in the Worship of God or Christ as a circumstance thereof there are no circumstantial accidental parts of Worship for which he hath hitherto pleaded nothing to be practised relating to it as such of an indifferent nature The whole of it being either commanded by Christ and so to be indisputably subjected to or else not of his Institution and so to be rejected how great a part of his tottering Fabrick he hath by this one concession shaken about his ears the Judicious Reader is able to discern We add in S. T. the Objection supposeth 2ly That it is lawful for Saints to tie themselves to a written stinted form of words in prayer This we say is not yet proved nor like to be That it is not needful that we enter into the debate thereof till it be proved that to pray in the form of the Common-Prayer-Book or imposed devised Liturgies is so We only briefly offer a few things that evince the unlawfulness of Saints tying themselves to a written stinted form of words in prayer Because 1st 't is a quenching of the Spirit in prayer 2dly A rendring useless the donation of the Spirit as a Spirit of Prayer unto the Children of God 3dly Directly opposite unto the many positive Precepts of Christ before instanc'd in of stirring up the gifts given to us of God 4dly If it be lawful for Saints to pray in a form 't is lawful 〈◊〉 because they have not the Spirit or that having the Spirit he is not a sufficient help to them
for it 'T is added in S. T. 2dly Let both parties be weighed in an upright ballance such as you judge to be offended with you for not hearing and such as are offended thereat I am bold to say the last mentioned for number holiness spirituality and tenderness do far surmount the former Mr. T. his Answer herento 1st is A composure of passionate expressions and reflections upon the Brethren of the Congregational way even the prime Leaders of them of stories of the piety of Hildersham Ball Bradshaw Gataker of the rottenness and stinkingness of puffing up my own party and disparaging dissenters Answ 1. But what needs all this wrath I own my self of no party love all that love Christ disparage not such as dissent from me have a reverend esteem of many of them only say That such as attend not on the present Ministers for number holiness spirituality and tenderness surmount those that do which I should not say but that this is generally known to be true The generality of their hearers being a debauch't formal covetous generation of men but few very few serious enlightned souls to be found in their Assemblies they worship else-where 2. That which he saith That by the Authors Rule if we would know our duty we must leave studying of the Scriptures and study men is false and scandalous I am fully of Tertullian's mind Non ex personis fides aestimanda sed ex fide persona and crave leave to tell him that had he studied men less and the Scriptures more we should have met with fewer Antiscriptural Notions than we do in his Theodulia I conceive the Rule mentioned by the Author of S. T. is bottom'd upon Scripture 1st Let it be remembred that the matter of our debate is touching what is at the least conceived to be the Christians Liberty not Duty 2dly That the case as proposed is of scandal by the use of my Liberty whether it be this way or that The eating the Idolothyte is my liberty I may do it or not do it without sin If I do it not my Heathen Neighbour will be offended and say I am proud and unsociable If I do it my Christian Brother will be scandalized What shall I do Offend not thy weak Brother saith Paul He bears the Image of Christ the other doth not But what if some Brethren be offended at my going others at my forbearing What shall I do now Why truly I know no better way to determine the doubt by a parity of Reason than by the Answer before given Consider who they are that will be offended that exceed in number For certainly if it be not my duty to offend one Saint because a Saint then when the case is brought to that pass that I must necessarily offend some Saints my duty lâ—es in doing that whereby I shall offend the smallest number of Saints which Mr. T. may confute at his leisure We add 3dly Let also the grounds of the offence on both sides bâ— weighed the one are offended at you that you build not up in practice in a day of trouble and cause thereby the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme and triumph what in a day of liberty you did in your preaching and practice pull down and destroy The other because of your disobedience to what they are satisfied and you your selves once were God is calling you to viz. to have nothing to do with separate from this generation of men To which Mr. T. 1st These words are Aenigmatical and require an Oedipus to unriddle them Answ 1. It may be Sir you your self stood so in your own light that you could not see to unriddle them 2. It may be you were not willing to have them unridled 3. If they need an Oedipus you your self shall be the man Sir you were he that in your Fermentum Pharisaeorum call'd the People from attending upon the Ministers of England as Preachers of Superstition though for the generality of them in some things much better then than now 't is an offence and just ground of offence to your Brethren to see you in this day of their distress to plead for what in the dawnings of Liberty you preached down You are the man that with hands lift up to Heaven swore to extirpate the Hierarchy with its Appurtenances Traditions who rejoyced and were glad at the prosperity of those who carried on that work resisting unto blood You are he who sate at White Hall as a Commissioner for the approbation of Ministers and rejection of such as were scandalous gloried in Print that the then Protector had so good an opinion of you as to constitute you one of that number and 't was one part of scandal to use the Service-Book Now after all this for you to write a Book for the defence of this very Hierarcy and Worship your Brethren think it a just ground of Scandal and at their refusing to hear you have and such as you at least no real ground at all since 't is no more than what they practised in dayes past and that without your offence by your leave or at least connivance as the People you particularly walk't with at Lempster did Hereby you have given occasion to Saints to mourn wicked prophane persons to rejoy So that the grounds of offence on your side are not in the least considerable in comparison of theirs What follows is a heap of impertinencies that I am not concerned in 1. I count not any the enemies of the Lord but such as are evidently such a generation of Swearers Drunkards Adulterers and Adulteresses these the turnings about of Professors cause to blaspheme thereat they rejoyce 2. He is mistaken whilst he thinks the Author of S. T. was for violent practices in dayes of Liberty who more or less was not concerned with those publick transactions nor ever was the prosecutor of one person in any kind who by the then Law might be obnoxious to ejection out of their places of spiritual or temporal promotion or otherwise 3. Of some of the things he mentions he himself was once guilty particularly of setting up private Brethren to preach which I account not his fault but wish he had had a little more respect to his own repute if regard to the wayes of truth and peace had not been prevalent upon him than to condemn others for practising the very things he himself hath been found in the practice of That we gather Churches out of Churches that particular Churches of Christ have not the power of government within themselves he should have proved before he had given liberty to his Pen to wander at this wild rate That eminent Independent as he calls him who would not have the Lords Prayer used in a prescript form of words is of age to answer for himself that he hath given any one just cause of offence by that assertion Mr. T. may evince by disproving what he hath written thereabout in his Vindiciae Evangelicae pag.
truth of the assertion we fully manifest in S. T. nor doth Mr. T. deny but that the hearing the present Ministers doth pour out contempt upon the Institutions mentioned he denies them to be the Institutions of Christ Sect. 5. tells us That 't is a gross error which is oft in the mouthes of the Seperatists that they may not hear with the world nor pray with the world whence it hath come to pass that some have left off praying in their Families unless Members of their Church Answ The first and second we have proved beyond what Mr. T. hath as yet been able to reply to 2dly The last I hope is not true God forbid that any that pretend to Christianity much more such as are so in truth should so far degegenerate into the Spirit of Heathenism as not to call upon God in their Families or cease to do their uttermost to convert their Children and Servants to the Lord and instruct them in his fear 3. That this is the consequence of the principle of Seperation or that 't is in it self a gross Error that 't is unlawful for me to hear with the world or pray with the world i. e. joyn with them in their Worship he may prove when he is able What follows hath either already been replied to or will be in its proper place so that we need not attend it here The second thing in the Minor Proposition incumbent upon us to prove we say in S. T. is 2dly That hereby poor souls are hardned in a false way of Worship what can be thought less supposing the worship in the Parish-Assemblies of England to be so as hath been proved when they shall see Professors that were wont to pray and preach together to prosess and protest against Common-Prayer-Book Worship and Priests to cry up or at least approve of as Mr. T. 't is thoâ—ght did Laws made for their ejection if guilty of no other crime than conformity to the Worship they now conform to and practise now flock to their Assemblies and hear their Priests What can they imagine less than that these persons thus acting in a direct contrariety to their former judgment and practice do now see they were mistaken and are begining at least to return unto those pathes from whence they departed and that these wayes in which they and their forefathers have walked are the good Old Way in which rest is to be found To which Mr. T. Answers nothing but what hath already been considered noâ— any thing that deserves our stay The 3d Particular asserted in the Minor Proposition it s said in S. T. is That hereby poor souls are hardned in their rebellion and blasphemy against God his Spirit and Tabernacle and them that dwell therein This is not to be questioned we every day hear stout words spoken against the Lord because of the practice of some in this thing what say the wicked less thanthat Religion is but a fancy that the professors thereof are but a generation of Hypocrites that will turn to any thing to save themselves that the Spirit by which they are acted is but a Spirit of Phanaticism and delusion Yea how do they bless themselves that they are not nor ever were of the number of such Professors and that because they see these for fear of Persecution desert their former principles strike in with their Assembly and Ministers To which Mr. T. adjoyns 1st Papists have thus insulteâ— over Protestants upon the return of any seeming zealous Protestant into the Romane Church yet the Answerer knows how to reply to such that mens instability shews their own weakness not the thing in which they have been zealous to have been good or bad Answ Very right and we know how to reply to the insulting of the Conformists upon the account of the return of any seeming zealous Professors to them but still we say that their return to them gives them too just occasion of insulting The contrary to which Mr. T. should have proved of which he speaks not one word He adds 2dly This Author doth not do well to call the Obloquies against his party speaking against Religion blaspheming God the Spirit Tabernacle and them that dwell therein Answ Sir the party I am through grace of are not mine but Christs the followers of the Lamb in opposition to the wicked profane world of no other party do I own my self to be 2. The Obloquies Blasphemies mentioned being such as are vented against the Institutions of Christ as we have proved them to be and such as conform to them by the Beast and his party may well be called Blaspheming God his Temple Tabernacle and them that dwell therein They are so called by the Spirit Rev. 13. 5 6. He adds 3dly It were very sad should we be afraid to do a thing because of Clamours Answ True if the thing done be our duty which if he supposeth in the present case he begs the question or continue in that which we cannot justifie because men will be hardened in their own way Answ Very right but if a man depart from that way which he once owned to be the way of God which he justifies in the Scriptures to be such and in so doing hardens persons to cleave to a way of Superstition Formality to their utter undoing and gives them just occasion to open their mouthes against the Institutions of Christ reviling blaspheming them and those that walk in them this is not justifiable nor will it be found matter of joy to us at the end of our dayes that we have administred such occasions to them It remaineth then that inasmuch as the hearing the present Ministers pours out contempt upon the wayes and Institutions of Christ hardens persons in a false way of Worship Rebellion and Blasphemy against God it s utterly unlawful for Saints to be found in the pâ—â—ctise thereof Sect. 2. A 10th Argument proving the unlawfulness of hearing the present Ministers 'T is not lawful to go to the places of false Worship All Monuments of Idolatry to be abolished proved The judgment of the learned Mede Cotton Ainsworth Robbinson 2 Cor. 6. 17. 1 John 5. 21. Jude 23. 1 Sam. 2. 17. 1 Cor. 11. 20. 14. 26. explained THE 10th Argument against hearing the present Ministers is in S. T. thus formed God calls his People out of and strictly chargeth them not to go ro the place of False Worship Hos 4. 5. Amos 4. 4. Therefore 't is unlawful for the Saints to attend upon the present Ministers of England The Reason of the Consequence is because we cannot go to hear them without we go to the Places and Assemblies of false Worship as the common-prayer-book-Common-Prayer-Book-Worship hath been proved to be To which Mr. T. replies Sect. 7. 1st This Argument is bottom'd upon this Opinion That all Monuments of Idolatry all Temples Altars Chappels dedicated by the Heathens or Antichristians to their false Worship ought by lawful Authority to be rased and