THE TVVO STEPS OF A Nonconformist Minister Made by him in Order to the obtaining his liberty of Preaching in Publick Together with an APPENDIX about coming to Church in respect to the People Published for a Testimony in his Generation by a Lover of Sincerity and Peace 1 Tim. 5.21 Doing nothing by Partiality LONDON Printed for Thomas Parkhurst at the Three Crowns and Bible at the lower end of Cheapside near Mercers-Chappel 1684. The First Step BEING My Paper to the Bishop My Lord THE Design of this Paper is Union between the Moderate Bishop and Sober Nonconformist and there is but one Rule must be laid down in order thereunto supposing both sensible that an endeavour after Concord as Brethren in the same Reformed Religion is an undeniable Duty and that a wilful neglect of it cannot be answered to God by either Party whosoever of them shall be found in default The Rule is this that the Nonconformist be ready to do in the sincerity of his Conscience what he can and that out of the like Conscience to God the Bishop then does bear with him in what he cannot at least so far I hope as the Law and the Government or his Duty thereunto according to his own private Judgment of discretion will give way The Nonconformist is to consider well the importance of such Texts as require Subjection to the Higher Powers and he is out of Conscience to the Fifth Commandment to comply with their Injunctions to the uttermost that may give satisfaction so far as he can without sin The Bishop is to consider the import of such Texts as tell us what a dangerous thing it is to give occasion to the doubtful to do anything against their Consciences and he is out of Conscience to the Sixth Commandment for fear of destroying him for whom Christ died to take heed as he would of his life to put a man upon any more than he is convinced he can safely do When the Nonconformist now does what he can the Law of God will bear him out in that which he forbears and if he suffers he hath peace in his Soul If the Bishop likewise shall receive a man upon this account as one that cannot require more of him lest he wound his weak Conscience and so sins against Christ I doubt not but the Law of Charity and Mercy that is the Law which is Gods will justifie him also as to whatsoever he falls short in the fulfilling the Law of Man It is true if the Bishop dispenseth and the Nonconformist exceeds the penalty may be sued if there be any and any body be so affected It is Law I suppose in Foro Civili and we must never Resist but it is no Law in Foro Dei or Conscientiae for the Authority of those greater Laws of Nature and Religion does supersede the Execution so that there is no guilt as to God's sight I mean contracted in the omission God says Thou shalt not do any thing which will destroy thy Brother or wound his Conscience The Law says Thou shalt put him to do thus and not dispense with him Whom shall the good Bishop chuse to obey the Law of his God or the Statutes of the Realm Having therefore thus proposed the Rule I will proceed to Practice There are two things My Lord necessary for me by the Act for Uniformity to obtain a liberty of the Pulpit The one is I must read before the Bishop the 39 Articles and assent to them and you must give me a License when I have got this I may be sent to Gaol if I subscribe not the Declaration in the said Act and that is the 2d thing then I must do likewise If I do this also your Lordship must give me a Certificate and that with my License will serve so that I count then no man can and no friend will put a bar to my Preaching where I am peaceably desired Indeed there is the Declaration of Assent and consent required farther of such as have any preferment in the Church but if I seek nothing but Liberty to Preach this cannot be imposed because I have no Place to make it in according to the Act and I must therefore in all points else be dealt with no otherwise than a perfect Conformist Now for my doing these two things supposing my self willing to do both so far as I can and your Lordship willing to condescend to me in what I cannot I do apprehend that in reading the Articles I may take leave as I go along to make my explication of any Article and if my sense be such as is agreeable to your Lordships Judgment or at least what you judg fit to be allowed you may pass me as to the Articles and if you will then afford me the like liberty of Explication in Subscribing the Declaration also I have no more to do but to set down my explications of the one and the other and leave both to your Lordships candour and conscience to receive me or reject me as it shall please God and your Lordship I begin with the Articles The Thirty nine Articles of the Church I receive as Articles for Concord according to the Title and not as Articles of Faith and I suppose my self therefore not tyed up to the Authentick sense of the Imposer as I think we are in Laws but to be allowed the liberty of a Doctoral Interpretation That is whereas in a Convocation every Doctor there or Member thereof is supposed or granted in passing such Articles or Canons to abound in his own sense so long as he can but reconcile the words to it Let a man make any rational construction of an Article which is agreeable either to the precise words for that he may well think to be the mind of some or other of the Doctors or to the sense which he believes to be the meaning of the major part though varying from the words for that above any when it can is to be embrac'd it is sufficient I count in point of Conscience for his Assent to the same Neither do I by an Assent to a thing according to my present Judgment shut up my understanding from receiving and owning any farther or other Truth whereof I shall be convinced hereafter This liberty being foreprized I do declare my unfeigned Assent to the said Articles with these Explications or Cautions As Christ died for us and was buried so also ' is it to be believed that he went down into Hell Art 3. I assent to the words they are Scripture and my Creed but I am uncertain of the meaning Christ did truly rise again from death and took again his body with flesh bones and all things appertaining to the perfection of mans Nature wherewith he ascended into Heaven and there sitteth until he return to judge all men at the last day Art 4. That Christ arose and ascended with his proper flesh and bones it is certain yet whether upon his entring into
the heavenly glory as Enoch and Elias this flesh and bones of his were not transformed into a spiritual body I do question seeing the Apostle tells us expresly That flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of Heaven We may refer this flesh and bones therefore to his Rising and Ascension but leave it in dubio in regard to his Sitting in Heaven In the name of the Holy Scripture we do understand those Canonical Books of the Old and new Testament of whose AuthorÃty was never any doubt in the Church Art 6. By Church I understand the whole Catholick Church or this Church of England for it is evident that there hath been doubt made of some Books in our Canon by Antient Particular Churches and Fathers The Three Creeds Nice Creed Athanasius's Creed and that which is commonly called the Apostles Creed ought thorowly to be received and believed for they may be proved by most certain Warrants of Holy Scripture Art 8. The word thorowly I understand only in regard to the Articles of those Creeds not in regard to the Proem and Conclusion of the Athanasian Quicunque vult which is inconsistent I hold with the Goodness of God and Natural Religion The condition of man after the Fall of Adam is such that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and good works to Faith and calling upon God Wherefore we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God without the Grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will and working with us when we have that good will Art 10. By the words no power and cannot I understand a Moral power and impotency which lyes in such a disposition as that a man never will without the special grace of God but not so as if we had no power at all that is Physical or as if the terms of the Covenant of Grace were Impossible to any We are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith and not for our own works or deservings Wherefore that we are justified by Faith only is a most wholsom Doctrine and very full of comfort as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification Art 11. By the words Faith only I understand what Paul means by Faith without works that is Faith in opposition to works that would make the reward to be of debt and not of grace or to works of the Law works which the Law requires to Justification which none have and if any be justified at all it must be therefore without them not in opposition to Repentance and Evangelical Obedience and though it be for Christ's sake or his merits and not ours that he accounts us righteous yet is our Faith Repentance and sincere Obedience the condition upon which he does it or rather the Righteousness it self which upon the account of Christ's deserving he accepts unto life everlasting Works done before the grace of Christ and the inspiration of his Spirit are not pleasant to God forasmuch as they spring not of Faith in Jesus Christ neither do they make men meet to receive grace or as the School-Authors say deserve grace of congruity yea rather for that they are not done as God hath willed and commanded them to be done we doubt not but they have the nature of sin Art 13. When good works done before grace are said to have the nature of sin I understand that thô such works are good quoad operis substantiam yet they are evil quoad modum quo ordinantur ad vitam aeternam and consequently when they are said not to be pleasant unto God I understand not acceptable unto Salvation I judg that the doing what we can through the strength of free will and common grace is not to be discouraged and to be held in some good sense preparatory to saving Conversion yet because there is no full promise made thereunto as the condition of obtaining that grace which is special it is truly said that such works do not make us meet for receiving or do not of congruity deserve the same Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God whereby before the foundations of the world were laid he hath constantly decreed by his Counsel secret to us to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind and to bring them by Christ to everlasting Salvation as Vessels made to honour After we have received the Holy Ghost we may depart from grace given and fall into sin and by the grace of God we may arise again and amend our lives Art 16 17. I apprehend the Church here does follow St. Austin in the Points of Election and Perseverance and when it is said that after we have received the Holy Ghost we may depart from grace given it must be understood so as that the Elect for all that shall never finally fall away but shall infallibly recover and be saved They are to be had accursed that presume to say that every man shall be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that Law and the light of nature For holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the name of Jesus Christ whereby men must be saved Art 18. I observe the Church hath but one Anathema in all her Articles and that seems to be denounced here against all those who do or shall hold that any persons can be saved that are not Christians as if the Death of Christ or benefits thereof and the knowledge of him were commensurate through the world But God forbid I am out of doubt that God hath a Government over all mankind which is Moral in order to Life and Salvation and that the instrument of that Government must be the Law of Grace the Law of Innocency becoming in the state of Lapsed Nature uncapable of that end which being at first promulgated to Adam after his Fall and to Noah must belong to all their Posterity insomuch as every one whosoever he be that lives up in sincerity to this Law according to that administration of it he is under shall be saved For my Assent then to this Article I do desire the word by may be especially noted I could not assent to this Article if it were in the Law or Sect he professeth but being by I hold plainly that if a Heathen or any Person that never heard the Gospel repents of his sin and trusts to a good God and lives up to the Law or Covenant of Grace according to the first Edition of it I say if any such indeed do Rom. 2.26 Act. 10.35 and thereby comes to be saved it is by the Christian Religion which he implicitely holds in the substance with us and not by the Law Sect that he professeth that he is saved And this Salvation of his is in
and through the Name and Mediation of Jesus Christ no less than ours is who procured that Law for them and all the World as well as for Abraham and the Jews under the Old and for us under the New Testament The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies and authority in controversies of Faith Art 20. The Church I think hath Power to Decree Rites or Ceremonies that is some Rites not any whatsoever provided she uses due caution not placing matter of Worship or Necessity much less Merit or Justification in them nor scandalizing her Members thereby and not imposing them when they need not as conditions of her Communion Yet if she does so and the Imposition be unlawful if those Rites or Ceremonies be not sinful in themselves we cannot I apprehend refuse our submission for all that so long as the Supream Power confirms the same Again the Church hath authority in controversies of Faith not to make any new Articles thereof for that were Antichristian but upon mature debate to judge what points are de fide or necessary according to the Scripture to be received and what not Only this authority when she hath done is Ministerial or Declarative not Constitutive of duty as Christ's the Lawgiver's is and as Princes or the Supream Magistrates in his Sphear is so also The Clergy in their Convocation is to order and settle them having first obtained leave under our broad Seal so to do and we approving their said Ordinances says the King in his Declaration before these Articles Whosoever through his private judgment willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant to the Word of God and be ordained and approved by common authority ought to be rebuked openly that others may fear to do the like as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church and hurteth the authority of the Magistrate and woundeth the consciences of the weak brethren Art 34. I assent to this Article as parallel with the last mentioned and I gain-say not but the open breakers of the Churches Traditions or Ceremonies may be reproved for the sake of others Yet in regard that some of these Traditions or Ceremonies may be repugnant to the Word of God in the judgment of some men which are not to others I apprehend both that the reasons of such ought to be heard and that we cannot condemn any for acting so among others as to have always a care never to do any thing against Conscience for Company The second Book of Homilies the several titles whereof we have joyned under this Article doth contain a godly and wholsome Doctrine and necessary for these times as doth the former book of Homilies which were set forth in the time of Edward the sixth and therefore we judge them to be read in Churches by the Ministers diligently and distinctly that they may be understanded of the people Art 35. I receive this Article on an implicite faith and I desire that may serve because I have not read over the Homilies and cannot assent any otherwise therefore till I have The book of Consecration of Archbishops and Bishops and ordering of Priests and Deacons lately set forth in the time of Edward the sixth and confirmed at the same time by authority of Parliament doth contain all things necessary to such Consecration and Ordering neither hath it any thing that of it self is superstitious and ungodly Art 36. I understand by Superstition and Ungodliness two perticular Species of that which is sinful I dare not say that there is nothing at all in the whole Book of Consecration and Orders here mentioned that is sinful The Article does not say so but that there is not any thing in it that of it self is Superstitious or Ungodly that is sinful upon the account of either of these particular species of sin And to this I think I may assent at least after I have added this caution that these Articles were agreed upon in the year 1562. and new published by King James and that this book therefore must be understood of the old book in his time and not of the book as it is of late altered with the new Preface put to it wherein there is one thing especially which I pass here nameless too too hard for my Approbation Having thus given my Explication with what I premised before it it is fit I make yet some little farther apology for this liberty There is a threefold Interpretation according to Suarez in his excellent Book De Legibus An Authentick Usual and Doctoral I think he calls it Doctrinal interpretation I have explained two of the terms in the beginning and the third needs no explanation and I need not it These Articles of the Church I suppose to be subscribed generally with this presumption that we may use a Doctoral Interpretation but the question indeed may be whether a man can strictly in point of Conscience give his assent or subscribe to any Article unless he believe it to be true in the Authentick sense or meaning of the Imposers I must confess I have had such an impression on my mind that unless I believe an Article in that sense which I take to be the sense of the majority of the Convocation that passed the Articles I could not choose but scruple the declaring my assent to it for fear of a Lye and yet do I find that an Usher and Hammond the Arminians and Calvinists do subscribe the same Articles without making any scruple about their diversity of interpretation I find also that in the Council of Trent the Doctors differ'd in most points yet as soon as they were but contrived into such words as might salve the contrary opinions they passed them as unanimous in the Council writing after one against another and citing the Council for them on both sides There is this difference therefore seems reasonable to be made between a Law and a Doctrinal Thesis for establishing consent in the matter of Religion That when the one must be taken still in the Authentick the other is to be construed in a Doctoral interpretation I have intimated it before I must now give my reason which is also said but not applied It is because the authority of a Law-giver is Magisterial or Imperative that constitutes duty and his will is uncontroulable but the Pastors authority or Convent of Bishops and Presbyters for agreement in points of Doctrine is Ministerial and Declarative only I may use the same terms I hope I have before and nauseate no body obliging not nisi sententia non errante or no farther than they be agreeable to Gods Word and while every one does judge of that there must be a diversity of interpretation it being not equal that so many Articles should be subscribed by all but upon that supposition I never could be satisfied therefore with that coming off which is proposed by some great