to confess tho' De Synedr l. 1. Cap. 14.560 being an Erastian in his Judgment he was loth to allow the Word in this Text to signifie a College of Presbyters lest he should be forc'd to allow them the Power of Excommunication 4. To put this Sense upon the Word Presbyter in this Text and to make it to signify the Office is such an Inversion and Disturbance of the natural Order of the Word as is never to be allow'd but in case of plain Necessity lest we make the Sacred Scriptures a Nose of Wax of which Mr. Thorndike was too wise to be Guilty 5. And yet if you will needs take Presbytery here for the Office of a Presbyter which Calvin doth not do but rather for the Solemn Act by which the Office is conferr'd see how little it will be to your Advantage Doth it not then clearly follow that 't is by vertue of the Office it self and not by any Degree that some have obtain'd in it above others that Men are to be Ordain'd into the Ministry So that in whomsoever the Office of a Presbyter is found there is this Power of Ordaining others Have you not then ingenuously or inadvertently granted to our Ministers all that they demand in this Matter and prov'd it for 'em too from Calvin whom you pretend to alledge against ' em To what a pass now have you brought your Episcopal Ordination Are these the only Men that have Power to Ordain a Presbyter Or have they any Power or Authority at all to do it but as they are themselves Presbyters What is a Bishop but a Presbyter set in a higher Degree for Clerical Order and Government sake but as to Office the same with the Presbyter And therefore it is that the Titles are so promiscuously and indifferently us'd in the Holy Scriptures Nor did the Apostles themselves Ordain as Apostles but as Presbyters which is the Title they own in their Epistles and claim as their Honour And that it is the Presbyter not the Bishop i. e. consider'd only as such that must Ordain is put beyond Controversy by a rul'd Case that a Bishop or Prelate Ordain'd per saltum i. e. who never had the Ordination of a Presbyter himself but only of a Bishop can neither Consecrate nor administer the Sacrament of the Lord's Body nor Ordain a Presbyter Tho' for the necessary Ends of Clerical Order and Government the Bishop be set in a superiour Degree of Superintendency and consequently his Presence and authoritative Concurrence be necessary with a select Number of his best qualify'd Presbyters to confer Orders and to see the Laws of Christ duly executed in his Church yet where this Power is abus'd than which nothing in the World is apter nor hath been more abus'd where the Churches are impos'd upon and Presbyters tyrannically ravish'd of their just Rights and Priviledges and causelesly cast out of Episcopal Communion the Presbyter is nevertheless a Presbyter as to all the Parts and Purposes of his Office He may be robb'd of his Pulpit but not of his Office robb'd of his Maintenance but not of his Right to it robb'd of his Liberty but not of his Relation to Christ nor to his Church In the Holy Scriptures we find that Presbyters as such are vested with the Power of Rule and Government in the House of God 1 Tim. 5.17 Act. 20.17 28. But of the Investiture of Prelates or their Ordination by Imposition of Hands as of an Office distinct and different from that of the Presbyter we read not one Word in all the New Testament By what Law of Christ then doth he claim a despotical Power over his Presbyters any other than as the Head and Moderator of their common Council and in whose Name and with whose Concurrence for Order and Government sake all the necessary Canons and By Laws that conduce to the Peace Profit and Edification of the Churches committed to their Care ought to be issued and established Will you tell us they are the Apostle's Successors in Power and Authority So are Our Presbyters too 1 Pet. 5.1 2 3. both in Faith and Doctrin and all Things that are Common and Essential to the Office Prelacy is not of the Office per se but only per Accidens and which when duly exercis'd honourably conduces to the bene Esse of the Church but is not constitutive of its Esse We have hear'd indeed of no Bishop no King and ever thought it extravagant enough but never heard of no Bishop no Church till now Again you would have us to believe that Presbytery being a Name of Dignity is sometimes attributed to Ecclesiastical Officers of the highest Rank as St. Peter and St. John call themselves Presbyters and therefore it must needs here signify a Company of Bishops To this we Reply 1. That the Word Presbytery was never so taken for a Company of Bishops only of which there was but one in one Church which is the limited Sense either in the Times of the Apostles or of the first Centuries of the Church perhaps not till Chrysostome's Time but alway for the Collegium Presbyterorum and before we can believe that it is to be otherwise taken in this Text you must prove it 2. If the Word must be taken in your Sense for a Company of Bishops then either there is no particular Church tho' Diocesan that hath any Presbytery of its own or there must be more Bishops than One in every such Church or else you must say that your one Bishop is a Company of Bishops 3. What can you infer in this Case from Peter's and John's assuming the Title of Presbyter but that in all the common Acts of Ecclesiastical Government and Discipline they acted as Presbyters and not as Apostles And what then have you gotten by this Argument But you urge again That Timothy was a Bishop and had Jurisdiction over Presbyters therefore Presbyters could not Ordain him to his Office for they could not communicate a Power which they never receiv'd To this we Answer 1. That Timothy was an Evangelist 2 Tim. 4.5 which if it signify'd any more than a Preacher of the Gospel which was the Work of every Presbyter then it must signify something more than an Ordinary Bishop to which he had no particular Ordination but the Apostles Election of him as his Companion and his Mission to some particular Services in the Churches of Paul's planting So that the Presbytery Ordain'd him only as a Presbyter not as an Evangelist nor as a Bishop about which we have no Form Rule or Precedent in the Scripture 2. Whereas you say They could not communicate a Power which they never receiv'd We Answer That in this Case there was no need of it they Ordain'd him as a Presbyter and what other Titles he afterward arriv'd to were but Accidental But this Reason of yours seems to be bottom'd on a great Mistake viz. That the Ordainers communicate the ministerial Power to the Persons
have all the same External Form or manner of Operation in the Service of the Body Order is to be preserv'd in the Church but how shall we agree what and whose Order it shall be Let us ask you soberly Is there no true Church in the World but yours If there be may not every one of these Churches which differ from you and from one another as much as we magnify their own Order as a Law to all the Rest as you now do And then tell us whether it be Order or Confusion that these Positions lead to or whether this be not the way to set all the Christian World by the Ears Here you complain that Men are generally averse from enduring any thing of Subjection to which we may add and altogether as prone to Domineering and Imposing Now the Obedience which is prescrib'd in the Texts of Scripture which you have cited you say is to be paid by the Faithful to those that are over them in the Lord But by the whole tenour of your Discourse you plainly insinuate that the Wisdom which is in effect the same with the Will of those that have obtain'd the Government of the Church must be the Rule to all their Inferiours And by their being over them in the Lord you give us to understand nothing else but their Power de facto in the Church where they sit in Moses's Chair as the Representatives of Christ in Government so that they must be obey'd without asking any Question for Conscience sake But for our parts we understand not how we can be secur'd against the danger of Church-Tyranny and Superstition if those Words of the Apostle 1 Thes 5.12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Lord do not import the Bounds of our Obedience as well as the general Matter of it and Motive to it Church-Rulers may be forward to Labour and to Admonish too but if it be not in the Lord and according to the Lord woe be to them that are guided and influenc'd by ' em But let the Apostle's Exhortation be taken in the true intent and meaning of it and we will be as forward to obey as you There 's nothing in the World that we covet more than to see such Bishops and Pastors in the Church of England as the Apostle exhorts us to obey in the Lord that is without any personal Reflection such as require nothing of us but what the Lord requires that the World might see how much we would disdain to be out-done by any but Flatterers and Sycophants in our Love and Obedience to ' em What you say of the Oneness of Church-Government and of the People that are under it we agree to if you will but stand to your own Distinctions That what you say of both is to be understood of them so far as they agree to Christ's Institution And if Christ be not divided neither are they They are not divided I mean so far as they act according to his Will and the Rules of their Order If by these Rules you mean the Sacred Rules which Christ hath given them and not the Arbritary Rules which they give us We mean so too That the faithful People under their lawful Pastors we hope you mean Lawful by the Law of Christ and not only by the Law of Man make up one Body This you say is evident from their Duty and from their Rights From their Duty you plead 1. They are oblig'd to Honour and Obey their Spiritual Rulers Ay Sir In the Lord and according to the Lord. 2. It is their Duty to joyn together in publick Acts of Worship with that Company of Christians which they sind Established and in some Cases tho' only tollerated yea tho' Persecuted under a lawful Pastor where they reside This we acknowledge is their Duty where they may do it without Sin From their Rights which are the same every where you Argue That this Vnion is founded on a Divine Institution and the Baptismal Covenant in which they are all alike engag'd and not on a formal positive League amongst themselves No Sir nor on any thing that is merely Humane or of an Indifferent much less a doubtful Nature wherein the Substance or Essentials of Christianity do not consist What you object against the Independent Congregational way or any others of the same Practice and Persuasion in this Point we take not our selves to be concern'd in unless you mistake us all for such who have not that Dependance on and Communion with you which you are Quarrelling with us for Having been at great Labour to prove what none of Us nor perhaps any one else that is call'd Christian ever deny'd viz. That the universal Church is One Body you make your Application of this profound Doctrin by way of Encouragement to your selves and draw a most delightful Contemplation from it That it is now the same Body that it was from the beginning The same indeed is every true Church of Christ as it was from the beginning that is in all things that are absolutely necessary to Salvation but we would gladly understand where that pure Church is now to be found which hath not at all deviated or degenerated from what the Church of Christ was in the beginning 'T is true every true Church of Christ now in the World is deriv'd by Succession from Christ and his Apostles but dares the Church of England say that it is now the very same in all it's Circumstantials and external Modes and Forms of Worship Discipline and Ceremonies with those of the Apostles own Planting Where do you read your apostolical Rules or Precedents for any of those Things which you so zealously Practise and so arbitrarily impose on us as the Terms of our Communion with you and which are the only Matters in debate between us Yet you would have the World believe that without our full Conformity to these Things and our Communion with you in 'em we cannot be one Body with the Vniversal Church nor in Communion with the Apostles Nor is this all but that consequently we are out of Communion with the Father and the Son and so are in a state of Infidelity and Damnation Have we not herein a special Instance and Evidence of your Catholick Charity just like theirs of the Church of Rome who call those only Christians that are of their own Communion Let us be ever so Orthodox in all the Articles of the Christian Faith ever so right as to the Object of our Religious Worship or Reverent and Devout in the Acts of it ever so Sober Just and Righteous in our Conversation or ever so wiling to walk in Communion with you as far as we may do it without Sinning against God and our own Souls Yet for want of Conformity to you in all those unnecessary Things which you would impose on us we must be cut off from Christ and left to Perish with the Heathen World But if we will tamely put our Necks under your
of the Creation doth do them as long as that wherein the vital Substance of Religion consists is preserv'd You having prov'd that a causeless Separation from the Church is highly Schismatical wherein we do not oppose you in the Theorie but in the Application of your Doctrin in which you all along beg the Question you tell us That for Separatists to set up opposite Churches and Officers is a degree of Sin much worse than Separation it self And we will say as you do when once you have prov'd the Separation to be Causeless But till then we hope your Christian Charity will allow us to provide for our own Souls that we may not be as Sheep without a Shepherd when we are either unjustly cast out by you or most justly separated from you And if you will not allow us this we will bless God and thank our more merciful Governours that do allow us without your Leave so to do Lastly You proceed to a yet higher Degree of Schism viz. When they that are engag'd in it constitute Officers without Authority or take to themselves Pastors that have no lawful Mission or real Ordination This is another of your orthodox Hypotheses which it is a thousand Pities that it should be dishonour'd by a Miss-application Sir We are as little for Uncommissionated Preachers and Self-intruders into the ministerial Office as You. Tho' bare Mission without Ministerial Qualification make but an Idol-Shepherd and wherein the Church of England is more deeply concern'd than perhaps you are willing to own yet Qualification without a rightly deriv'd Comission makes but a Thief or a Robber So that herein You and We agree in Thesi But when on this Head you apply to Us and to our Ministers that tragical Story of Korah and his Complices we cannot take it so kindly of you tho' you are not the first Man that in great Wrath hath thrown this heavy Stone at our Heads however we have not been hitherto hurt by it The History of the Case we need not repeat the Principles by which they were acted notwithstanding their popular Pretensions were Seditious and sacrilegiously Rebellious and the Judgment of God on them and their Followers as Just as it was Dreadful But before your Charity had apply'd this dismal Story and Guilt to Us and to our Teachers you ought to have drawn a true Parallel of the Case and have pro'd that our Ministers have no more Call nor Right to the Gospel-Ministry than Korah and his Company had to the Priesthood and that God hath set as strict Bounds about your English Episcopacy as it is now Established exclusively of all others as he then had done about Moses and the Aaronical Priesthood And till this be done there is no Man of sober Thought but must suspend his Judgment on us Out of this Preamble you lead us to your third Section where you tell us You are now come to our Case for indeed we think you have hitherto been far enough from it here then we hope for a fair Trial may we but be determin'd by what is written in that Book out of which both You and We must shortly be judged And in Order to our Conviction you are pleas'd to mind us how nearly it concerns us to enquire I. Whether we have not contracted the guilt of Schism in our Separation from the Church of England II. Whether we have not increased this Guilt by setting up opposite Churches and Officers or joyning with them III. Whether our Pastors have any just Title to the Ministry Sir Had we not to the best of our Power and Skill with the greatest Diligence and Sincerity enquir'd into all these Things long before this Day we had acted very precipitantly and dangerously but yet such an Admonition as this however design'd shall never be out of Season with us But seeing you offer your Interrogatories not in the form of an Enquiry but of an Indictment we are ready to answer to each Article in our just Defence 1. The first Article of our Indictments runs thus That we have contracted the Guilt of Schism by our Separation from the Church of England that is to wave all Disputes about the Ambiguity of the Word what you are pleas'd to call the Church of England Tho' we have varied your Form of Speech we have done you no wrong it being a known Rule in Rhetorick that a Negative Interrogation is but a more vehement Affirmation And to convict us of the Schism you charge us with you plead thus Was your Communion with it lately Lawful and have any new Terms been added to make it cease to be so Or was Conformity then a Duty and is it now become a Sin This you take to be a Dead Blow which must needs convince us and make us cry Guilty or stop our Mouths for ever But be not too Consident before you have heard our Defence 1. By way of Concession you shall have all that you here suppose that you may see we are not froward 1. That we once thought our Communion with your Church of England Lawful we grant for had we not been so perswaded we had been self-condemn'd by our own Practice Yet whatever our private Thoughts were once of it that was not it that could make the thing to be in it self either Lawful or Unlawful our private Judgment being only a Rule to our selves And if we were therein mistaken thro' our Weakness or any Prejudices of our Education we hope you will allow us the Liberty of rectifying our Judgments upon better Information of which if you think us uncapable what do all your Arguings with us signify But 2. We will grant you yet a little more that we are still of the same Opinion that it is Lawful to Communicate with the Church of England i. e. that it is not absolutely and in it self Sinful so to do But then we hope that if your Charity will not your Logick must grant us that what is to be consider'd but as simply Lawful is Matter of Liberty and not of Necessity We say Liberty granted us by the Nature of the Thing without any Relation to what the Government hath pleas'd so much to your regret to grant us But where we are thus at Liberty to Censure us for using it is Inhumanity 3. If this be not yet enough to please you we will grant a little more we once thought the Conformity you contend for i. e. our Lay-Conformity to be our Duty nor have we repented of these our Thoughts to this Day nor acted any thing that is inconsistent with them We hope the Ingenuity of your cultivated Reason will allow at least in Thesi that what is a Duty at one Time and under some Circumstances is not always so at another Time and under other Circumstances This you must grant or you know with what a Crowd of senseless Absurdities you will be pester'd and of which you will not be able to rid your self Now having
second sort of Teachers who claim a Title to the Ministry as being Ordain'd by Presbyters And indeed when you shall have prov'd this way of Ordination to be Schismatical you will have done something in the Service of your Cause wherein if Saying were Proving and Confidence were good Evidence doubtless you would not fail But this being the main Hinge on which the whole Controversy turns it will be necessary to spend a little more Time with you here And first you make your Trip at our Ministers Heels by striking at the Stone on which they stand but you will find it is a Rock against which you may dash your own Feet but which will not move for all the Kicks you can make at it The main Scripture which with all your might you heave at is that of 1 Tim. 4.14 Neglect not the Gift that is in thee which is given unto thee by Prophecy with the laying on of the Hands of the Presbytery Against the generally approved Sense of this Scripture you are pleas'd to Quote us Calvin himself whom you mistakingly call the Father of our Discipline and would have us to believe that he could find no such Matter in this Text and that he thought Presbytery here signifies but the Office of a Presbyter and so read to us the Sense of the Text thus That Timothy should not neglect but be careful to exercise that Presbyterial Office or Power which was committed to him by laying on of Hands Now by the way lest you should hereafter forget pray take notice that you have now granted that it was to the Office of a Presbyter that Timothy was now ordain'd not to that of a Bishop or an Evangelist But as for what you refer us to out of Calvin's Institutions We find that he was there offering some Observations which he had gather'd out of the Scriptures of the New Testament concerning the Ordination of such as are to serve in the Office of the Ministry and tells us that it is certain the whole Multitude of the People were not to impose Hands on their Ministers in their Ordination but only such as were themselves Pastors in Office to whom alone the ordaining Power belongs tho' he leaves it uncertain whether the Hands of many were always laid on in every solemn Act of Ordination but produces Scripture Instances that it was so done in the Ordination of Deacons Act. 6.6 and in the Ordination of Paul and Barnabas Act. 13.3 But that Paul here minds Timothy that he had ordain'd him with his own Hands tho' not exclusively of all others or with his own Hand only but rather that he was the principal Person and the only Apostle concerned in that Ordination and therefore Admonishes him to stir up the Gift that was in him by the Imposition of his Hands And afterward gives us his private Opinion that when the Apostle mentions to Timothy in his other Epistle the Hands of the Presbytery that he is not there minding him so much of the manner of his Ordination by the College of Presbyters of whom Paul was one and the chief in that Action but rather that he should mind lpsam Ordinationem his Ordination it self and the great and glorious Ends of it q. d. Fac ut Gratia quam per manuum impositionem recepisti quum te Presbyterum Crearem non sit irrita That so the Grace which he had receiv'd when he ordain'd him a Minister of the Gospel or a Presbyter might not prove in vain And now how far Calvin is like to serve your Purpose or to disserve ours we leave to any competent impartial Judge And yet if you think your Notion of Calvin's Sense be the right we must tell you you are a Dissenter from the generality of the most Learned of your own Church Mr. Herbert Thorndike will tell you If we take not our Marks amiss we shall sind Argument enough at least at the beginning for the concurrence of Presbyters with the Bishop in making of Presbyters and other inferior Orders In the first Place those general Passages of the Fathers Wherein is witnessed that the Presbytery was a Bench assistent to the Bishop without Advice whereof nothing of Moment was done must needs be drawn into Consequence to argue that it had effect in a particular of this weight Then the Ordination of Timothy by Imposition of Hands of the Presbytery will prove no less Indeed says he 't is well known that the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Ecclesiastical Writers signifies divers times the Office and Rank of Presbyters which Signification divers here embrace expounding Imposition of Hands of the Presbytery to mean that by which the Rank of Presbyter was conferr'd But the Apostles Words running as they do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 oblige a Man to ask when he is come as far as the Imposition of Hands of whom or whose Hands they were he speaketh of which the next Words satisfy Had it been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Sense might better have been diverted but running as it doth with the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with Imposition of the Hands it remaineth that it be specified in the next Words whose Hands were imposed Thus this Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Gospel Luk. 22.66 and in Ignatius's Epistles signifieth the College of Presbyters which hath the Nature and Respect of a Person in Law and therefore is read in the singular for the whole Bench which being assembled and set is call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in both Places and in Cornelius of Rome his Epistle to St. Cyprian where he saith Placuit contrahere Presbyterium Now Sir here 's your Mr. Thorndike against what you would impose on our Calvins But besides this we Answer 1. If the Word Presbytery is here to be understood of the Office then will it follow as we have before noted that Timothy's Office was the Office of a Presbyter What then is become of Timothy's Episcopacy which you so learnedly plead for in your Discourse of Church-Government Or When and by Whom was it that he was created Bishop 2. Camerarius tells us that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which imports the Office of a Presbyter So that here 's a foul mistake of the Presbytery for the Presbyterate the Persons for the Office 3. Ignatius who liv'd very near the Times of the Apostles and therefore may well be presum'd to have understood the Meaning and Use of this Word tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ignat. Epist ad Trall What is the Presbytery other than the Sacred Company who are the Bishops Counsellors and Assessours This Sense Clemens Alexandrinus and some others of the Primitive Fathers give of it nor was it ever taken in any other Sense by the Fathers till Origen nor in any Place of the New Testament doth it signify any other than the Company of Presbyters as Luk. 22.66 Act. 22.5 And this Mr. Selden himself is fore'd
one's Liberty for any thing we have yet heard of and this being a Matter of natural Decency as he there argues at Ver. 14.15 we take it for our Duty to observe as one of our Ministers in an Essay on that Subject hath not long ago taught us But the Inference you drew from this had need of a little better proof Viz. That if the Church hath Power to lay aside such Rites for you confess they are Alterable tho' yours be like the Laws of the Medes and Persians so it hath Power also to appoint others of the like Nature and is oblig'd to do so upon Emergent Occcasions as the Prudence i. e. as the good Pleasure of your Bishops may direct But for our parts we cannot think that your Consequence is good Viz. That because the Church hath Power to Purge it self of some unnecessary and offensive Vanities therefore it hath Power to Introduce others much less that it is oblig'd so to do For we cannot believe that because Hezekiah had Power to take down the Brazen Serpent and to cast it away as a Nehushtan which had been a Symbol of God's own Appointment and of so long standing that therefore he had Power or was under any Obligation to erect another Gambol of his own Invention to stand in the Room of it 1. Then we will say with you It is certain that the publick Worship of God ought to be Celebrated with such Ceremonies as are suitable to the Dignity and Solemnity of the Work and agreeable to the general Directions of the Holy Scripture and you might have added to the Purity and Simplicity of the Gospel and which are Necessary to the right Performance of the Work 2. That Ceremonies us'd in Divine Worship ought to be Significant of some Spiritual Grace or Expressive of some Christian Duty is certain because else they are but Herb John Useless and Impertinent which would but Affront the Deity we pretend to Worship And so indeed we find that all the Ceremonies of Christ's Institutions were Symbolical and Expressive but to argue that because Christ did institute symbolical Ceremonies in his Church therefore you may do so too is what you may not expect our Assent to till you have prov'd your Power in and over the Church to be equal to that of Christ or shew us the Patent he hath given you to justifie your so doing The little Instances which you produce of Smiting the Breast Lifting up the Hands in Prayer Kneeling on the same Occasion and the putting on some new Garment at the time of Baptism have been indeed things taken up into common Use as naturally Expressive of some inward Devotion or Affection of the Heart or of outward Decency and almost common to all Mankind and when you shall have discover'd and prov'd any Divine Institution of them we will acknowledge our Sin if at any time we disuse them on such Occasions but to Argue from the Antiquity of their Use to the Churches imposing Power is as Orthodox and Valid in England as it is in Rome or Spain or any other Church true or false in the whole World 3. That the H. Scripture directs us in general to do all things Decently and in Order we do as zealously own as you But then why should not that of the H. Scripture from which we take our Rules of Gospel worship determine to us what is Decent and Orderly Or if by the Old Testament you would justifie your Ephod and Organs and Festivals and Ceremonious Consecrations or any thing else that the Christian hath borrowed from the Jewish Church why do you pick and chuse and follow your Rule at halves Are not the Harp and the Trumpet and the Viol and Cymbol the Holy Oil and all the rest of the Priestly Robes and Utensils of the Divine Service which you have left out altogether as Decent and as Significant as what you have taken from thence or have been borrowed from any others and which have as much to shew of a Divine Institution 4. Your next Paragraph looks more like Banter than Argument for you tell us in Effect that we ought to satisfie our selves with an implicit Faith of the Lawfulness of the Ceremonies impos'd on us and of their Consormity to the End for which they are appointed because it is not Necessary that every one that uses them should know the Reasonableness of their Institution so that we ought to make no Question of the Lawfulness of what you require of us even in the High and Important Concern of God's Worship and our own Salvation how Unreasonable soever it appears to us and are we not like to be edefi'd much by what we don't understand Is this one Article of your Faith too That Ignorance is the Mother of Devotion Must we put out our own Eyes and make no Question for Conscience sake either of the Lawfulness or Reasonableness of what you require of us but follow the Conduct of your Customs believing as the Church believes Is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Reasonable Service that God now requires of the Gospel-worshipper And is this some of your Protestant Doctrine But to satisfie our Consciences herein you Instance in the customary Way of taking an Oath by kissing the Book which you say may safely be done by such as know nothing of the Original of that Ceremony nor are satisfi'd of the Fitness of it what nor of the Lawfulness of it nor whether the Common-Prayer be in the Book or no If Custom will serve for a Rule in Civil Matters must it be so in the highest and most sacred Acts of our Religion too 5. And this now brings you home to your main Topick Custom from which you profess to take the Significancy of your Ceremonies and the Measures of Decency as that which gives Rules both for Words and Actions and Habits and Gestures 'T is true Custom hath a great stroak to conciliate a Decency and Significancy to these things and may serve very much to excuse the Use of them in Civil Conversation and to offer any thing to the holy God in Worship which Civil Custom hath made Undecent or Ridiculous is horribly Prophane But will you hence argue that what Custom hath made Decent in Civil Conversation is therefore so in Religious Worship and fit to be impos'd as a Condition of Christian Communion Or that what Religious Custom hath made Decent and Significant in the Opinion of the Superstitious and Idolaters is therefore lawful to be us'd and impos'd by you Tho' the Apostle pleaded from the Custome of the Churches for what he call'd on the Corinthians for 1 Cor. 11.16 yet this was but one of his Arguments and which if you observe he urges only negatively he doth not plead for it because it was a Custom but pleads against their contrary Practice because they had no such Custom And pray which of those Ceremonies which you contend for and make the indispensible Condition of Communion