Edification Nor do's our Church impose them like the Church of Rome as necessary and as parts of Religion but as merely indifferent and changeable things As for our Penances 't is needless to shew that they are not cruel like those of Rome 3. The Church of Rome subjects her Members by several of her Doctrines to enslaving passions For instance Purgatory subjects them to fear and auricular confession to shame and the dependence of the efficacy of the Sacraments upon the Priest's intention exposes them to great anxiety But our Church rejects the Doctrines of Purgatory and the dependence of the efficacy of the Sacraments upon the Priest's intention and do's not oblige her Members to Confess their sins to Men but when for the relief of their Consciences or making satisfaction c. it is their duty so to do 4. The Church of Rome maintains Licentious Principles and Practices which our Adversaries cannot charge upon the Church of England Secondly In all those Doctrines and Practices in which the Church of Rome is justly charg'd with plainly contradicting the Scripture For instance our Church rejects and utterly abhors the Popish Doctrines and Practices of Image-worship invocation of Saints Transubstantiation Pardons Indulgences Sacrifice of the Mass denying the Bible to the Vulgar Prayers and Sacraments in an unknown Tongue robbing the Laity of the Cup in the Lord's Supper prohibiting Marriage to Priests Merit Superogation making simple Fornication a mere venial sin damning all that are not of her Communion c. Nor is there any Church that more severely condemns all instances of unrighteousness and immorality than the Church of England do's Thirdly In their public Prayers and Offices To shew this in all particulars wou'd be a tedious task therefore I shall instance only in the office of Infant-Baptism by which the Reader may judge of the rest Before they go into the Church after many preparatory prescriptions the Priest being drest in a Surplice and purple Robe calls the Infant saying what askest thou c. the Godfather answers Faith P. What shalt thou get by Faith G. Eternal Life P. If thou therefore c. Then the Priest blows three gentle puffs upon the Infant 's face and saies Go out of him O unclean Spirit c. Then Crossing the Infant 's Forehead and Breast he saith Receive the sign of the Cross c. Then he praies that God wou'd alwaies c. And after a long Prayer the Priest laying his Hand on the Infant 's Head comes the idle and profane Form of the Benediction of Salt viz. I conjure thee O creature of Salt in the Name c. with many Crossings Then he puts a little Salt into the Infant 's mouth saying Take thou the Salt of Wisdom and adds most impiously be it thy Propitiation unto Eternal Life After the Pax tecum he praies that this Infant c. Then the Devil is conjur'd again and most wofully be-call'd Then the Priest Crosses the Infant 's Forehead saying And this sign c. Then he puts his Hand on the Infant 's Head and puts up a very good Prayer Then he puts part of his Robe upon the Infant and brings him within the Church saying Enter thou c. Then follow the Apostles Creed and the Paternoster Then the Devil is conjur'd again and the Priest takes spittle out of his mouth and therewith touches the Infant 's Ears and Nostrils saying c. Then he conjures the Devil again saying Be packing O Devil c. Then he asks the Infant whether he renounces the Devil c. Then dipping his Thumb in Holy Oyl and anointing the Infant with it in his Breast and betwixt his shoulders he saies I anoint thee c. Then he puts off his Purple Robe and puts on another of White colour and having ask'd four more questions and receiv'd the answers he pours water thrice upon the Child's Head as he recites over it our Saviour's Form of Baptism Then dipping his Thumb in the Chrism or Holy Ointment he anoints the Infant upon the Crown of his Head in the figure of a Cross and praies O God Omnipotent c. Afterwards he takes a white linnen cloth and putting it on the Child's Head saies Take the white garment c. Lastly he puts into the Child's or his God-Father's Hand a lighted Candle saying Receive the burning Lamp c. Besides those things which are in the Common Ritual there are divers others added in the Pastorale which I shall not mention And now if any Man will read our Office of Baptism he will acknowledge that no two things can be more unlike than these two Offices are Our Litany indeed has been Condemn'd by Dissenters as savouring of Popish Superstition but nothing is more false if a Man compares it with the Popish one the greater part of which consists in invocations of Saints and Angels But the Brevity I am confin'd to in this Discourse will not permit me to abide any longer upon this Argument Fourthly In the Books they receive for Canonical For the Church of Rome takes all the Apocryphal Books into the Canon but the Church of England takes only those which the Primitive Church and all Protestants acknowledge 'T is true she reads some part of the Apocryphal Books for instruction of manners but she do's not establish any Doctrine by them Fifthly and Lastly in the Authority on which they found their whole Religion The Church of Rome founds the Authority of the Scriptures upon her own infallibility and the Authority of many of her own Doctrines on unwritten traditions and the Decrees of her Councils which she will have to be no less inspir'd than the Prophets and Apostles but the Church of England builds her whole Religion upon Scripture which is her rule of Faith and Practice She Reverences ancient general Councils but do's not think them infallible And as for that Authority which our Church claims in Controversies of Faith by requiring subscription to 39 Articles 't is plain that she means no more Authority than to oblige her Members to outward submission when her decisions do not contradict any essentials of Faith or Manners but not an authority to oblige Men to believe them infallibly true and this is necessary for the Peace of any Church 'T is true she thinks it convenient that none should receive Orders be admitted to Benefices c. but such as do believe them not all as Articles of our Faith but many as inferiour truths and she requires Subscription as a Test of this belief but the Church of Rome requires all Persons under pain of damnation to believe all her false and wicked Doctrines as much as the most undoubted Articles of Faith as may be seen in the Creed of Pius the fourth As to the Motives which our Church proposes for our belief of the Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures they are such as are found in the Scriptures themselves viz. the excellency of them and the Miracles which confirm them
circumstances and may be different according to those circumstances That thing may tend to Order Decency and Edification in one Country or Age which in another may tend to the contrary Thus being cover'd in the Church and the Custom of Love-Feasts c. were once thought decent but afterwards the opinions of Men alter'd So that Order Decency and Edification being changeable things as circumstances vary only general rules can be prescrib'd but the particulars must be left to Authority to determine 2. Our Saviour and his Apostles did use indifferent things which were not prescrib'd in Divine Worship Thus he join'd in the Synagogal Worship John 18.20 c. tho' if the place it self were at all prescrib'd the manner of that Service was not so much as hinted at Thus he us'd the Cup of Charity in the Passover tho' it was not instituted Luke 22.16 The Feast of Dedication was an human institution yet he vouchsaf'd to be present at it Nay he comply'd with the Jews in the very posture of the Passover which they chang'd to Sitting tho' God had prescrib'd Standing The Apostles also observ'd the hours of Prayer which were of human institution Acts 3.1 Now if Christ and his Apostles did thus under the Jewish Law which was so exact in prescribing outward Ceremonies certainly we may do the same under the Gospel I may add that the Primitive Christians not only comply'd with the Jews in such Rites as were not forbidden but also had some ritual observations taken up by themselves Thus they (a) 1 Tim. 5.10 Ambros De Sacram. lib. 3. cap. 1. wash'd the Disciples feet in imitation of Christ and (b) Tertull De Orat. cap. 14. us'd Love-Feasts till they thought it convenient to lay them aside From whence it appears that prescription is not necessary to make a Rite lawful 't is enough if it be not forbidden If it be said that these usages of the Christian Church were civil observances and us'd as well out of God's worship as in it and therefore what there needed no institution for might be lawfully us'd without it I answer 1. That this justifies most of our usages for a white Garment was us'd in civil cases as a sign of Royalty and Dignity c. 2. A civil observance when us'd in Religious worship either remains civil when so apply'd or is religious when so apply'd If it be civil then kneeling in God's worship is not religious because 't is a posture us'd in civil matters If it be religious then a rite that is not prescrib'd may be us'd in worship to a religious end 3. 'T is evident that (c) Buxtorf Exere Hist Sâ—c Caen. neither the washing of feet nor the holy Kiss were us'd as civil rites and that the latter is call'd by the Fathers the Seal of Prayer and the Seal of Reconciliation 4. If a rite's being civil makes it lawful in Divine worship then any civil rite may be us'd in worship and consequently all the ridiculous practices of the Church of Rome wou'd be warrantable 5. If a rite's being civil makes it lawful in worship then how can our Adversaries say that nothing is to be us'd in worship but what is prescrib'd by GOD except the Natural circumstances of action For there are many civil Rites which are not natural circumstances of action Feasting and Salutation are civil usages but Divine worship can be perform'd without them And if these and the like were antiently us'd in worship then we have the same liberty to introduce such customs 3. If things indifferent tho' not prescrib'd may not be lawfully us'd in God's worship then we cannot lawfully join with any Church in the World For all Churches do in some instances or other take the liberty of using what the Scripture has no where requir'd Thus the (d) Vid. August Epist 118 119. Basil De Sp. S. cap. 27. Ambros De Sacram. lib. 2. cap. 7. lib. 3. cap. 1. antients observ'd the Feasts of the Passion Resurrection c. Stood in their devotions on the Lord's Day c. These things they all agree'd in and thought it unlawful to act against an universal practice Besides some Churches had peculiar customs within the bounds of their own Communion The Church of Rome fasted on Saturdays others indifferently on any Day That of Milan wash'd the feet of persons to be Baptiz'd but that of Rome did not Thus in our daies some receive the Lord's Supper kneeling others standing c. So that if we must have an Institution for every thing done in the worship of God and if we must join in nothing which has it not then we cannot be members of any Church in the World Nor indeed can I learn how a Christian can with a good conscience perform any part of God's worship if this principle be admitted for true For habits and gestures are not determin'd in Scripture and God's worship cannot be perform'd without them and if they are unlawful for not being commanded then a man must sin every time he Praies or receives the Sacrament Nay those that condemn the use of such things as are not commanded do in their practice confute their opinion For where I pray are they commanded to sprinkle the Children that are Baptiz'd or to receive the Lord's Supper sitting or to use conceiv'd Prayers or to touch and kiss the Book in Swearing Or to enter into a particular Church-covenant Nay where do they find that the Scripture saith that there is nothing lawful in divine worship but what is prescrib'd or that what is not commanded is forbidden Where are we told that God will be angry with us for doing that which he has not forbidden Our brethren themselves will allow that the time and place of God's worship may be prescrib'd by Authority and why then may not necessary circumstances such as gestures and habits be thus determin'd tho' they be not commanded Certainly the command of a lawful power does not make that unlawful which was not forbidden and by consequence was lawful before They say indeed that Nadab and Abihu sinn'd because they offer'd strange fire before the Lord which he commanded them not c. Lev. 10.1 c. and therefore there must be a command to make any thing lawful in divine worship But to this I answer that the phrase not commanded is constantly apply'd to such things as are absolutely forbidden The fire also is call'd strange which phrase when apply'd to matters of worship signifies as much as forbidden Thus strange incense Exod. 30.9 24. is such as was forbidden because it was not rightly made strange vanities is but another word for strange Gods Jer. 8.19 and thus the fire of these Men was strange that is forbidden fire For there was scarce any thing belonging to the Altar of which more is said than of the fire burning upon it Lev. 9.24 6.12 16.12 'T was lighted from Heaven and was to be always burning When atonement was to be
whom they know may sometimes mistake their Passion for their Zeal and reake their Anger or their Faction in their Prayers or let drop an Errour before they are aware or express themselves so as an honest mind may not be able to join So that in joining with an Extempore Prayer a Man must judge what is said before he can consent to it and if he meet with a rub the Minister goes on in the mean time and the Man is left behind at a loss and perhaps confounded before he can join again and no sooner perhaps is he well fixt but he is troubled again with the same inconveniency all which is easily prevented by the use of Forms 4. Forms do not divert the affections of the People from the Matter of Prayer as Extempore Prayers do which disturb Devotion whenever the Minister hesitates or blunders or expresses himself improperly for then some will be pitying others contemning others carping c. And if he perform well some will admire his Phrase Judgment Readiness c. all which things do call off their minds from the Matter 5. The Decency and solemnity of public Worship which things are highly advantageous to the Devotion of the people are better secur'd by Forms than by Extempore Prayers where they depend wholly upon the Minister For if he happens to be a Man of a bad memory or apt to blunder or be dull c. then the Devotion of the Congregation may be turn'd into scorn and laughter and of this I have seen too many sad experiments But suppose him to be an able and Pious person yet he may be liable to indispositions of body dulness inadvertency c. with outward cares and accidents and if he be he must many times Pray confusedly or with broken indecent expressions and omit a great deal of the matter Sometimes he will be at a loss and be forced to use fulsome repetitions and how is it possible almost but that a great deal of flat and empty nonsence undigested conceptions and unadvis'd expressions shou'd escape from his lips before he is aware And this if he has a grain of modesty must put him into greater confusion and so amaze him that he will be hardly able to recover himself Now is it not a hard case that the Devotions of Five hundred or a thousand Persons must be disturb'd by one Man's disorders For they must either Pray after him or not Pray at all But all these evils are prevented by set public Forms 6. Those that join in a Form may be better secur'd of the reality and sincerity of their own Devotion For they knowing before-hand the expressions of the Form are not so much surpriz'd with the Phrases and therefore if they find themselves affected may more safely conclude 't is the Matter and not the words that moves them Whereas a Man that is tickled with the words of an Extempore Prayer may fancy himself to be very devout when he has nothing of true Devotion in him I might add more but I think these things are enough to convince an unprejudiced person that Forms of Prayer are so far from hindring that they very much help Devotion But if any Man shall still object that he finds by experience that Forms do actually deaden his Devotions because his affections are flat and heavy when he uses them but he is almost transported when he hears a Man Pray Extempore I beseech him to consider whether his experience be not founded in prejudice and whether his prejudice ought to prescribe to the whole Church 'T is certain other Men find by experience that joining with a Form do's help their Devotion so that here is experience against experience Now since two contrary experiences cannot proceed from the nature of the thing therefore one must proceed from the temper of the Man Now I have prov'd and many Men find by experience that Forms do help Devotion and therefore if he do's not find the same the fault must be in himself and I doubt not but if he will consider the matter impartially he will soon be of the same opinion For we have Scripture and Reason on our side but he is led by his passions which may be charm'd and flatter'd and will betray him into strong delusions 'T is plain 't is not the matter of the Extempore Prayer that affects him for that is the same as in a Form and if he be taken with the chiming of words 't is but a sensitive delight and he must not make a Division in the Church only to gratifie his fancy Besides I desire him strictly to examine his Conscience whether he has not often been as dull at a conceiv'd Prayer as at the public Forms If so then the person is to be blam'd and not the Form and he is guilty of a double iniquity who divides the Church without sufficient cause and charges his own formality upon a good and wholesome constitution 2. They pretend that Praying in a Form of Words do's stint and limit the Spirit of Prayer But before I answer this Objection it will be necessary to explain 1. What it is that the Scripture attributes to the Spirit in Prayer 2. What is meant by stinting or limiting the Spirit in Prayer First Then what is it that the Scripture attributes to the Spirit in Prayer I answer There are some things attributed to him which were Extraordinary and Temporary and others that were Ordinary fixt and standing The Extraordinary and Temporary were the immediate Inspiration of the matter of Prayer and an ability to express it in known or unknown Languages We read in the Old Testament of Prayers and Praises which for the matter of them were immediately inspir'd Thus Pray'd Hannah who as the Targum paraphrases it Pray'd by the Spirit of Prophesy that is by immediate Inspiration For Praying and Praising by immediate Inspiration are frequently call'd Prophesying 1 Sam. 10.5 Numb 11.25 1 Chron. 25.1 Luc. 1.67 for the matter of all those Prayers and Praises together with those in the Book of Psalms and sundry others recorded in Scripture was immediately dictated by the Holy Ghost But after the descent of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost wherein the gift of Tongues was communicated 't is certain that not only the matter but the very Language of their Prayers was immediately Inspir'd This gift was peculiar to the Primitive Ages of Christianity because the design of it was not only to enable the first planters of the Gospel to perform their office in the Languages of the several Nations they were sent to but also to be a sign from God as other Miracles were for the confirmation of the Gospel Tongues were for a sign to them that believe not 1 Cor. 14.22 and therefore since all Miracles were Extraordinary and after a time to cease certainly this Miraculous gift of Prayer was so too However because many Dissenters think it not an extraordinary but a Standing Gift which the Spirit will communicate to
and as to the truth of the Matters of fact she places it not in the testimony of any particular Church but in the Vniversal Tradition of Jews and Pagans as well as of all Christians II. I am to shew that a Church's symbolizing or agreeing in some things with the Church of Rome is no warrant for separation from the Church so agreeing The Dissenters tell us that those things which are indifferent in their own nature do cease to be indifferent and become sinful if they have been us'd by the Church of Rome For say they we read Lev. 18.2 After the doings of the Land of Egypt wherein ye dwell shall ye not do and after the doings of the Land of Canaan whither I bring you shall ye not do neither shall ye walk in their Ordinances Now not to insist on the vast difference of our circumstances from those of the Israelites I answer that it is an absurd thing to imagin that the Israelites were so bound up by God as to be obliged to be unlike those People in all their actions The things forbidden from verse 5 th to 24 th are not Indifferent but Incestuous Copulations and acts of uncleaness and God do's expresly enough restrain that general Prohibition to those particulars in saying v. 24 th Defile not your selves in any part of these things for in all these the Nations are defil'd which I cast out before you And they were therefore forbidden under the notion of things done after the doings of the Egyptians and the Canaanites because they were the doings of those People whom they were exceedingly prone to imitate even in their greatest immoralities If it be said that in other places God forbids the Israelites to imitate the Heathens in things of an indifferent nature I answer 1. That supposing this were so it do's not from thence follow that God intended to forbid such imitations in this place the contrary being so manifest as we have seen But 2. That God has any where prohibited the Israelites to symbolize with Heathens in things of a mere indifferent and innocent nature I mean that he has made it unlawful for them to observe any such Customs of the Heathens merely upon the account of their being like them is a very great mistake Which will appear by considering those places which are produced for it One is Deut. 14.2 You shall not cut your selves nor make any baldness between your Eyes for the dead Now as to the former of these prohibited things who sees not that 't is unnatural and therefore not indifferent And as to the latter viz. the disfiguring of themselves by cutting off their Eye-brows this was not merely indifferent neither it being a Custom at Funerals misbecoming the People of God and which wou'd make them look as if they sorrow'd for the Dead as Men without Hope Another place is Lev. 19.19 Thou shalt not let thy Cattel gender with a diverse Kind thou shalt not sow thy Ground with mingled Seed nor shall a garment of linnen and woollen come upon thee But I answer that tho' these things are indeed indifferent in their own nature yet they are forbidden not because the Heathens us'd them but because they were mystical instructions in moral duties If it be objected also that God forbad the Jews Hos 2.16 17. to call him by the Name of Baali which was a very good Name and signify'd only My Lord because that word was abus'd in being the name of the Idol Baal I answer that God did not forbid the Name Baali because an Idol was call'd by that Name for he is call'd Baal in other places of the Hebrew Bible and also Jah which the Heathens us'd for an Idol but because the word Baali signifies an unkind husband or Lord such as Baal was to his worshippers whereas God Promises he wou'd be call'd Ishi that is a tenderly-loving husband for he design'd to be kind to his People Israel I shall add that Baalim in the next verse signifies Idols which God there Promises to destroy But suppose that God forbad the Jews to call him Baal for the future yet it might be because of their vehement inclination to the worship of Baal lest by using it they shou'd be tempted to worship him again whereas our Ceremonies were us'd by the ancient Fathers without any Superstition or Idolatry and we are not in danger of returning to Popery by retaining them Well but they say it appears from Scripture-precepts and examples that it is unlawful to symbolize with the Church of Rome in things that have been notoriously abus'd in Idolatrous and grosly Superstitious Services To this I answer First that it is not sinful to use those things which have been abus'd to Idolatry as I shall prove by these following Arguments 1. No abuse of any Gesture tho' it be in the most manifest Idolatry doth render that Gesture simply evil and for ever after unlawful to be us'd in the Worship of God upon that account For the abuse of a thing supposes the lawful use of it and if any thing otherwise lawful becomes sinful by an abuse of it then it 's plain that it is not in it's own nature sinful but by accident and with respect to somewhat else This is clear from Scripture for if Rites and Ceremonies after they have been abus'd by Idolaters become absolutely evil and unlawful to be us'd at all then the Jews sinn'd in offering Sacrifice erecting Altars burning Incense to the God of Heaven bowing down themselves before him wearing a Linnen Garment in the time of Divine Worship and observing other Things and Rites which the Heathens observ'd in the worship of their false gods If the Dissenters say they except all such Rites as were commanded or approv'd of by God I reply that such an exception avails nothing For if the abuse of a thing to Idolatry makes it absolutely sinful and unlawful to be us'd at all then it 's impossible to destroy that Relation and what has been once abus'd must ever remain so that is an infinite Power can't undo what has been done and clear it from ever having been abus'd And therefore I conclude from the Command and Approbation of God that a bare conformity with Idolaters in using those Rites in the Worship of the true God which they practise in the worship of Idols is not simply sinful or formal Idolatry For if it be God had obliged the Children of Israel by his express Command to commit sin and to do what he strictly and severely prohibited in other places In truth such a Position wou'd plainly make God the Author of sin 2. This principle intrenches upon Christian liberty if St. Paul himself may judge who tells us 1 Cor. 10.25 c. that to the pure all things are pure and affirms it lawful to eat of such things as had been offer'd up in Sacrifice to Idols and to eat whatsoever was sold in the Shambles And what reason is there why a Gesture
Jews were commanded to destroy Idols and the appurtenances of them Deut. 7.25 26. Is 20.22 because they were so prodigiously inclin'd to Idolatry yet surely the Dissenters will not say we must destroy all things that have been abus'd to superstitious uses for then we must destroy our Bells and Fonts and Churches Therefore as Mr. Calvin upon the Second Commandment saies We do not in the least scruple whether we may lawfully use those Temples Fonts and other Materials which have been heretofore abus'd to Idolatrous and Superstitious uses I acknowledge indeed that we ought to remove such things as seem to nourish Idolatry upon supposition that we our selves in opposing too evidently things in their own nature indifferent be not too superstitious It is equally superstitious to condemn things indifferent as unholy and to command them as if they were holy As for the example of Hezekiah's breaking in pieces the Brazen Serpent because the Children of Israel burnt Incense to it 2 Kings 18.4 it will not prove that whatsoever has been notoriously defil'd in Idolatrous or grosly Superstitious Services ought to be abolish'd and much less that the not abolishing some such things is a good ground for separation from the Church that neglects so to do For 1. The Brazen Serpent was not only defil'd but an Idol it self and that at the very time when it was destroy'd Nay it was worshipp'd by the generality of the People to those daies the Children of Israel did burn Incense unto it and there was little hope of their being reclaim'd while the Idol stood and moreover the use of it was ceas'd for which it was first erected Now without doubt Governours ought to take away those indifferent things which have been abus'd when the People are inclin'd to abuse them again at least if such abuse cannot probably be prevented by any other means but then I deny that our Rites have been or are any temptation to Idolatry or to the embracing of Popery Had Hezekiah suffer'd the Brazen Serpent still to stand no doubt private Persons who have no Authority to make public Reformations might lawfully have made use of it to put them in mind of and affect them with the wonderful mercy of God express'd by it to their Forefathers notwithstanding that many had formerly made an Idol of it and did so at that very time And much more might they have lawfully continu'd in the Communion of the Church so long as there was no constraint laid upon them to join with them in their Idolatry nor do we read of any that separated from the Church while the Brazen Serpent was permitted to stand as wofully abus'd as it was by the generality 2. If Example were a good way of Arguing we find by Hezekiah's practice in other things he did not think it an indispensable Duty to abolish every thing that had been made use of to Idolatry if it did not prove an immediate snare at that time For as to the Temples which Solomon had erected for no other end but the Worship of false Gods 1 Kings 11.7 Hezekiah did not make it his business to destroy them as being in his time forlorn and neglected things of which no bad use was then made Altho' indeed King Josiah afterwards probably upon the increase of Idolatry and renew'd use of those places found it expedient to lay them wholly waste 2 Kings 23.13 Let not any says (d) De Vitand Superstitione Calvin think me so austere or bound up as to forbid a Christian without any exception to accommodate himself to the Papists in any Ceremony or Observance for it is not my purpose to condemn any thing but what is clearly evil and openly vicious III. I proceed now in the last place to shew that the Agreement between the Churches of England and Rome is in no wise such as will make Communion with the Church of England unlawful This I shall evince in the chief particulars which our Dissenters take offence at First Then Episcopacy is so far from being an unlawful symbolizing with the Church of Rome that it is an Apostolical Institution and shall we allow the Pope so much power as to make that unlawful by his use which the Apostles and their Disciples have recommended to us by theirs Nay (e) Bez. Episcop du Moul. Past off Calv. Inst lib. 4. cap. 4. Sect. 2. Epist ad Reg. Pol. Beza P. du Moulin and Calvin grant that this was the Goverment of all Churches in the World from the Apostles times for about 1500 years together Nor do I know how the Dissenters will defend the Observation of the Lord's Day while they contend that Episcopacy cannot be concluded from the uninterrupted tradition of the Church from the Apostles times or how those that separate upon the account of Episcopacy can defend the lawfulness of Communicating with any Christian Church for about 1500 years together I shall add no more upon this point only I refer my Reader to Chillingworth's Institution of Episcopacy and Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness of separation p. 244 c. Secondly Our symbolizing with the Church of Rome in having set Forms of Prayer is so far from being culpable that 't is highly commendable For herein we symbolize with the Primitive Church nor is any thing more expedient for the public Service of God as I have already shewn in the Third Chapter Now if the Papists nay if the Heathens us'd set Forms because it was the fittest way for the Service of God must we be forbidden to use them Because they did well are we therefore to do worse Thirdly Our Liturgy in particular do's not so much symbolize with the Roman Service as to cause a separation For tho' some Collects are taken out of the mass-Mass-Book yet that is not enough to make them unlawful For then the Lord's Prayer the Psalms and a great part of the Scripture besides and the Creeds also must never be us'd I know it has been said that the Scriptures being of necessary use must be retain'd by us tho' the Church of Rome retains them but that there is not the same Reason for Forms which are not necessary and that in those we ought to go as far from that Church as we can But what reason is there for this For the danger that may happen to us in coming too near them lies in things wherein they do ill and not in things wherein they do well No Man can shew a good reason why those Passages in the Common-Prayer-Book which are to be found in the Mass-Book but which were us'd also by the Church before Romanism had corrupted it are not as much to be valu'd because they were once us'd by good Christians as to be run down because they have been since us'd by Superstitious and Idolatrous Men. If any Man wou'd set himself to expose the Mass-Book he wou'd I suppose lay hold upon nothing but the Corruptions that are in it and things that are obnoxious to just