something essential to a Church But if the Church have all things essential to it it is a true Church and not to be separated from When the V. Annotations on the Apologet. Nar. p. 17. Church of Rome is called a true Church it 's understood in a Metaphysical or Natural Sence as a Thief is a true Man and the Devil himself though the Father of Lies is a true Spirit But withal she is a false Church as Mr. Brinsly saith from Bishop Hall an Heretical Arraignment of Schism p. 26. Apostatical Antichristian Synagogue And so to separate from her is a Duty But when the Church of England is said to be a true Church or the Parochial Churches true Churches it 's in a moral Sence as they are sound Churches which may safely be communicated with Thus doth Dr. Bryan make the Dwelling with God Serm. 6. p. 289 291. Opposition The Church of Rome is a part of the universal visible Church of Christians so far as they profess Christianity and acknowledg Christ their Head but it is the visible Society of Traiterous Vsurpers so far as they profess the Pope to be their Head c. From this Church therefore which is Spiritual Babylon God's People are bound to separate c. but not from Churches which have made Separation from Rome as the reformed Protestant Churches in France and these of Great Britain have done in whose Congregations is found Truth of Doctrine a lawful Ministry and a People professing the true Religion submitting to and joyning together in the true Worship of God Such a Separation would as has been said unchurch it This would be to deny Christ holds Communion with it or to deny Communion with a Church with which Christ holds Communion contrary to a Principle that is I think universally maintained The Error of these Men saith Mr. Brightman * * * On Rev. c. 3. V. Jenkin on Jude v. 19. Allen Vindiciae Pietatis second part p. 123. Vindication of Presbyterian Government p. 130. Cotton on John p. 156. i◠full of Evil who do in such a manner make a Departure from this Church by total Separation as if Christ were quite banished from hence and that there could be no hope of Salvation to those that abide there Let these Men consider that Christ is here feasting with his Members will they be ashamed to sit at Meat there where Christ is not ashamed to sit Further this would be a notorious Schism so the old Non-conformists conclude * * * Grave Consut p. 57. Cawdrey's Independency further proved p. 136. Because we have a true Church consisting of a lawful Ministry and a faithful People therefore they cannot separate themselves from us but they must needs incur the most shameful and odious Reproach of manifest Schism for what is that saith another †††Brinsly's Arraigment p. 15 24 44. but a total Separation from a true Church This lastly would not diminish but much increase the Fault of the Separation As another saith | | | Baily's Disswasive c. 6. p. 104. For it is a greater Sin to depart from a Church which I profess to be true and whose Ministry I acknowledg to be saving than from a Church which I conceive to be false and whose Ministers I take to have no Calling from God nor any Blessing from his Hand This therefore is their avow'd Principle That total Separation from the Church is unlawful And this the old Non-conformists did generally hold and maintain against the Brownists * * * Ames 's Puritanismus Angl. V. Parker on the Cross part 2. c. 91. § 21. Bax. Defence p. 55. and the Dissenting Brethren did declare on their part †††Apologet. Nar. p. 6. We have always professed and that in those times when the Churches of England were the most either actually over-spread with Defilements or in the greatest Danger thereof c. that we both did and would hold Communion with them as the Churches of Christ And amongst the present Non-conformists several have writ for Communion with the Church against those that separate from it and have in Print declared it to be their Duty and Practice So Mr. Baxter | | | Sacril desert p. 75. I constantly joyn i◠my Parish-Church in Liturgy and Sacrament It 's said of Mr. Joseph Allen * * * The Life of Mr. J. Allen p. 111. That he as frequently attended on the Publick Worship as his Opportunities and Strength permitted †††The Doctrine of Schism p. 64. Of Mr. Brinsley that he ordinarily attended on the Publick Worship Dr. Collins saith as much of himself | | | Reasonable Account c. Mr. Lye in his Farewell Sermon doth advise his People to attend the Publick Worship of God to hear the best they could and not to separate but to do as the old Puritans did thirty Years before Mr. Cradacot in his Farewel Sermon professeth That if that Pulpit was his dying Bed he would earnestly perswade them to have a care of total Separation from the Publick Worship of God Mr. Hickman freely declares I profess Bonasus vapulans p. 113. where-ever I come I make it my Business to reconcile People to the Publick Assemblies my Conscience would fly in my Face if I should do otherwise And Mr. Corbet as he did hold Communion with the Church of England so saith * * * Account of the Principles of the Non-conformists p. 26. That the Presbyterians generally frequent the Worship of God in the Publick †††Discourse of the Religion c. p. 33. V. Mr. Read's Case p. 15. Assemblies It 's evident then that it is their Principle and we may charitably believe it is their Practice in Conformity to it * * * Non-conformists Plea for Lay-Communion p. 1. Thus Mr. Corbet declares for himself I own Parish-Churches having a competent Minister and a number of credible Professors of Christianity for true Churches and the Worship therein performed as well in Common-Prayer as in the Preaching of the Word to be in the main sound and good for the Substance or Matter thereof And I may not disown the same in my Practice by a total neglect thereof for my Judgment and Practice ought to be concordant And if these two Judgment and Practice be not concordant it would be impossible to convince Men that they are in earnest or that they do believe themselves while they declare against Separation and yet do not keep it up Those good Men therefore were aware of this who met a little after the Plague and Fire to consider saith Mr. Baxter Non-conformists Plea fo◠Peace § 17◠p 240. whether our actual Forbearance to joyn with the Parish-Churches in the Sacrament and much more if it was total might not tend to deceive Men and make them believe that we were for Separation from them and took their Communion to be
Disobedience but methinks it is a little absurd to say that those continue Members of the Church who separate from it Schism and Separation from the Church is just what Treason and Rebellion is in the State and such persons by your own confession cease to be sound Members You add Nay possibly that there should be several Religious Assemblies living by different Customs and Rules and yet continuing Members of the National Church is not more inconsistent than that particular places should have their particular Customs and By-Laws differing from the Common Law of the Land without making a distinct Government Ans Whatever variety and difference in the Rules of Worship in several Congregations is consistent with one Communion may be granted when the prudence of Governours sees it fit and expedient But Mr. Humphry's project which I perceive you are nibling at of making a National Church by an Act of Parliament which should declare Presbyterians Independants c. to be Parts of the National Church is certainly the cunningest way of curing Schism that ever was thought on but you may find that expedient for Union at large considered in the Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Still And thus Sir I proceed to your Third Letter and here you run nothing but Dregs and Lees and I hope you will not think it any neglect of you if I do not answer you Paragraph by Paragraph as I have done your first Letter there being little new in this but only a Repetition of your old Queries and though you know Repetitions are very convenient to lengthen a Sermon there is no need of such Arts to lengthen this Answer which is too long already Your first Charge upon me is that I only amuse People with Equivocal Words and Terms that I play Letters 3. p. 16. with the words Church and Schism which had been no fault had I played the right way with them that is had I ridiculed them as you do who think them words only fit to be played with who have found out a Church without any Government which is only an Intreague p. 12. between Clergy-men on all sides who will not allow causeless Separation from a Sound part of the Catholick p. 17. Church to be Schism but place Schism wholly in want of Charity and make it nothing else but some Divisions and Contentions between the Members of the same Church who still live in Communion with one another a true Independent Notion to justifie causeless Separations Divisions in the Church are certainly very Sinful and a degree of Schism as unnatural as if the Members of the same Body should fight with each other while they are United to the same Body but to divide from the same Body is the perfection of Schism unless a quarrel be a Rent and Schism but Separation be none You desire me to define what I mean by a Church when considered as Catholick and Universal and when taken in a more restrained sense But this I think I have done already if you had eyes to see it and you may find it done more largely in the Defence of Dr. Still But would not any Man who had ever seen this discourse which you undertake to confute wonder to hear you ask me whether a Man has a right to be of a particular p. 18. Church as he is a Christian when the whole design of that Tract is to prove that every Christian by being so is a Member of the Catholick Church and has a right to Communicate with all sound parts of the Catholick Church and bound to Communicate with that part of it in which he lives In the next place you attempt to prove that the Influences and Operations of the Holy Spirit are not confined to the Visible but Invisible Church but not p. 19. to examine your proof of it which is nothing to the purpose you may consider that the Visible and Invisible Church on Earth are not two but one Church not that every Member of the Visible Church is a Member also of the Invisible that is every profest Christian is not a true Believer but whoever is not a Member of the Visible Church and does not live in Communion with it when it may be had is not that we know of a Member of the Invisible Church We have no way to prove that any Man is a Member of the Invisible who is not a Member of the Visible Church and what we do not and cannot know does not concern us secret things belong to God and with him it becomes us to leave them But this also you may find more largely discourst in the Vindication of the Defence You urge the case of Pope Victor who as you say in a Council or full representative of that Church excommunicated p. 21. the poor Asians upon the Paschal Controversy And that each Church was far enough from owning each others Members for their own What should the poor Lay-Christians do in this divided State could they not Communicate with both or either without danger of Schism themselves Ans It is an easie matter to put hard Cases almost about any thing and if a particular hard Case which either may possibly happen or has sometimes happened is sufficient to overthrow a standing and general Rule and to confute the most plain and convincing Evidence for it there is nothing in Religion can be firm and stable In the very same manner Men Dispute against the Being of a God and a Providence against the necessity of Baptism and the Lords Supper against the Apostolical Power and Ministry and all Church-Government against the necessity of Believing many fundamental Articles of our Faith because many otherwise very good Men from the Power and Prejudice of Education or through weakness of understanding may be guilty of some damnable Heresies But must there be no standing Laws or Rules because there may happen some hard and difficult Cases Does not humane Power make Provision against such Cases by Courts of Chancery or the Prerogative of the Prince and yet maintain the Authority and Sacredness of Laws And will we not allow God himself a Power of Dispensing with Laws in hard Cases without destroying the Authority of his Laws Is not Church-Communion a necessary Duty because it may so happen that sometimes I cannot Communicate with any Church Is not Schism a very grievous and damning sin because it may happen that Men may be unavoidably innocently and without a Schismatical mind engaged in a Schism I have evidently proved the necessity of Church-Unity and Communion and the evil and danger of Schism and if you can answer the Scripture-Evidence produced in this Cause I will carefully consider it but it is no confutation of a plain Law to urge hard Cases against it which will overthrow all Laws that ever were made If you imagine or can produce any real Case wherein it is almost impossible for the Persons concerned to know that they are guilty
nor suspend Communion with the Asian Churches unless they will justifie this Schismatical Excommunication The Jurisdiction of a particular Bishop is confined within the Bounds of his own Church and every Christian is Subject to the Authority of the Church where he is and therefore though the Roman Christians at Rome cannot receive the Excommunicated Asians to their Communion without the Authority of their Bishop yet when they are in Asia where the Bishop of Rome has no Authority over them they may and ought to joyn themselves to the Communion of the Asian Churches during their abode among them if the Asians would receive them without Commendatory Letters from their Bishop which they could not have in such a case as this Thus Sir I have considered the Case you put about Pope Victors Excommunicating the Asian Churches which is not a real but a feigned Case for there was no actual Schism upon it as I perceive some body had told you there was And yet supposing it had been so I have shewn you how the Roman and Asian Churches might have maintained Communion with each other and that the case of private Christians was not so desperate as you represent it Your following exceptions concerning National Communion and National Churches and the possibility Letters 3. p. 22. that there should be several Sound and Orthodox parts of the Church at the same place have been sufficiently considered already and you twit me so often with my repetitions that though I find you want very frequent repetitions to make you understand the plainest sence yet I will for my Readers sake and my own correct that fault Your attempt to prove Congregational Churches p. 24. from 1 Cor. 14. 23. has been so often answered by the Presbyterian as well as Episcopal Divines that to save my self the labour of transcribing I shall refer you to them and particularly to the Defence of Dr. Still Vnr of Separ p. 392. c. where you may find this matter largely debated in answer to Dr. Owen's Original of Churches You say it is evident that one of these Separate Churches must needs be cut off from Christs Body I readily grant it for Christ has but one Body which p. 26. is one Communion and therefore two Churches which are not in Communion with each other cannot both belong to the same Body or the one Catholick Church but the Church which is the Schismatick according to the Language of the Primitive times is out of the Catholick Church extra Ecclesiam foris as is discourst at large in the Vindication of the Defence In the next place you endeavour to make me contradict my self in talking of occasional Communion and occasional Membership and different Relations when else where I assert That the Communion of the Church does not make us Members of any particular Church But pray Sir where do I assert this I am sure I assert the quite contrary that Church-Communion consists in Church-Membership I say indeed That Church-Communion Primarily and Principally refers to the Vniversal Church not Resol of Cases p. 13 14. to any particular Church or Society of Christians That a Member is a Member of the whole Body not meerly of any part of it That Baptism which is the Sacrament of our admission into the Covenant of God and the Communion of the Church does not make us Members of any particular Church as such but of the Vniversal Church And I do as plainly assert that every true Catholick Christian is a Member of the Vniversal Church and as such is a Member of every particular Church which is a sound part of the Vniversal Church That no Man can properly be said to Communicate with any Church whatever Acts of Communion he may perform in it who does not Communicate with it as a Member and that therefore to talk of Occasional Communion in the sense of our Dissenters is as absurd as to talk of an Occasional Membership these are the very Principles on which I dispute against those absurd Distinctions of p. 30. constant and occasional Communion which I confess to be absurd and a Contradiction to all the Principles of Catholick Communion and therefore you are concerned to answer this absurdity not I. I have charged this absurdity upon our Occasional Communicants and let any man take it off that can But are you not Sir admirably qualified to Answer Books without so much as understanding the general scope and design of the Book you Answer without knowing what makes for you or against you As for your next Question How does it appear that it is necessary to Communion with the Catholick Church that we must perform the constant Acts of Communion in that part of the Catholick Church where we constantly live You ought instead of asking this Question to have shown that what proofs I have alleadged for this are not conclusive or do not sufficiently prove the thing but your Question insinuates that I have said nothing at all about it or at least that you do not know that I have though it be the Principal Design of that discourse and then I am a very careless writer or you a very careless Reader But the Answer to it in short is this That every Christian is bound to live in Communion with the Catholick Church no Man lives in Communion with the Church who does not perform the External visible Acts of Communion when he may do it without sin The whole Catholick Church being but one Communion whoever Communicates with any sound part of it Communicates with the whole no Man can ordinarily Communicate in a Church in which he does not ordinarily live and therefore if he be bound at all to the External and visible Acts of Communion he must perform them in the Church wherein he lives and in so doing if it be a true Catholick Church he lives in Communion with the whole Catholick Church But you attempt to prove That you are not bound to Communicate so much as sometimes with a sound part of Ibidâ— the Catholick Church because you live where there is such an one And this you prove from Mr. Chillingworth's Authority who says that if you speaking to the Papists require the belief of any Error among the conditions of your Communion our Obligation to Communion with you ceaseth Now is not this an admirable proof that we are not bound to Communicate with a sound part of the Church where we live because we are not bound to Communicate with an erroneous Church which imposes the belief of her Errours as Terms of Communion Is not this a wonderful sound Church And are not you a very subtil Arguer You produce another passage of Mr. Chillingworth by which I cannot tell what you intend to prove unless it be that there is no need there should be any External or Visible Church-Society so Men do but Profess the Faith of Christ which seems to be the sence of your foregoing Paragraph But
things injoined We must Separate at this time from all the Reformed Churches in the World for there is none of these which does not require the use of such things as we should judge cause enough to depart from them Nay when we have once Separated from the Church of England upon this account we must then Separate from one another and every man must be a Church by himself for it is impossible that any Society whether meerly Humane or Christian should subsist without the orderly determination of some Indifferent things And sure we can never hope to maintain our Separation upon such a Principle as would not only part us from all the Churches that are or ever were and tear Christendom into ten thousand pieces but scarce leaves us so much as the Notion of a Church and makes Christian Communion absolutely impracticable Let us not give those of Rome the pleasure of seeing that Church which has always opposed them with the greatest Vigor and been the constant mark of their Envy quite Ruined or extreamly Weakned by a pernicious Mistake that would Divide and Divide us again and again and never make any end of Dividing Let us shew at least that well are we inclined unto Peace by coming as far as we can and if there should be any thing that we may possibly suspect to be Unlawful let not this hinder us from joining in those other holy Offices in which we have not any pretence of a Doubt Let not our groundless Scrupling at a Ceremony or two fright us from the whole Worship of God against which we have not any Exceptions And for those that esteem our Communion in all particulars utterly Unlawful which I suppose are but very few and I know they have but very slight Arguments for the severe Judgment they pass upon us if they will meet let them do it in the most private manner that they can without any vain Ostentation of their Numbers which cannot be any Satisfaction to their Consciences but may make their Adherents over forward and bold and tend to the creating of Jealousies in the Government And while they are upon these terms they cannot reasonably expect any Connivance They might sooner hope for it from his Majesties wonted and often experienced Clemency when they shall make it appear that their Dissent is modest and humble and such as has no other but a Religious Design in it Than when they assume a high degree of Confidence and think to extort Indulgencies by Clamors and Discontents and resolve to Assemble openly in Opposition to a Royal Command as if it were a piece of Christian Fortitude to outbrave Authority These are but ill Methods of courting the Favour of a Prince But I hope for the future we shall all upon all Occasions behave our selves as becomes good Subjects and sober Christians and make no Disturbances neither on a Civil nor Ecclesiastical account Let it Pity us at last to see the Ghastly Wounds that are still renewed by the continuance of our Divisions Let us have some Compassion on a Bleeding Church that is ready to Faint and in eminent Danger of being made a prey to her Enemies by the unnatural Heats and Animosities of those that should Support and Defend her Why should we leave her thus Desolate and Forlorn when her present Exigencies require our most Cordial Assistance If the condition of her Communion were such as God's Laws did not allow we might forsake her that had forsaken him But since this cannot be Objected against her since she exacts no Forbidden thing of us Let us strengthen her Hands by our unanimous Agreement and since we do not Condemn her Doctrine let us not Despise her Worship since the Substantials of Religion are the same let not the Circumstances of external Order and Discipline be any longer an Occasion of Difference amongst us And so shall we bring Glory to God a happy Peace to a Divided Church a considerable Security to the Protestant Religion and probably Defeat the subtle Practices of Rome which now stands gaping after All and hopes by our Distractions to repair the losses she has suffered by the Reformation May the Wisdom of Heaven make all Wicked Purposes unsuccessful and the blessed Spirit of Love heal all our Breaches and prosper the Charitable Endeavours of those that follow after PEACE Amen FINIS A RESOLUTION Of some CASES OF CONSCIENCE Which respect Church-Communion VIZ. I. Whether to Communicate with some Church especially in such a divided State of the Church be a necessary Duty Incumbent on all Christians II. Whether Constant Communion be a necessary Duty where Occasional Communion is Lawful III. Whether it be Lawful to Communicate with two Churches which are in a State of Separation from each other The Second Edition LONDON Printed by Henry Hills Jun. for Fincham Gardiner at the White Horse in Ludgate-street 1683. A RESOLUTION Of some CASES of CONSCIENCE Which respect Church-Communion IN order to state such cases as particularly relate to Church-Communion with all possible clearness it will be necessary to premise a brief explication of some words which must be used in questions of this nature but are not so commonly understood As 1. What is meant by a Church and a Christian Church 2. What Church Communion is 3. What is meant by Fix't Communion and by Occasional Communion First What is meant by a Church Now the plainest description I can give of a Church is this That the Church is a Body or Society of Men separated from the rest of the World and Vnited to God and to themselves by a Divine Covenant I shall briefly explain this description to fit it to the meanest understanding 1. Then a Church is a Body or Society of Men for I speak only of the Church in this World and therefore shall not enter into that dispute in what sense Angels belong to the Church And when I call the Church a Body or Society of Men I oppose a Body to single Individuals or particular Men and to a confused Multitude without any order or Union among themselves For tho the Church consists of particular Men and when their Numbers are encreased of great Multitudes yet the Church consists of such particular Men not considered in a private and separate capacity but as United into a regular Society which is called a Body in allusion to the natural Body in which all the parts and members are United in an exact Order Eph. 4. 16. 1 Cor. 12. 15 16 c. For God is not the Author of Confusion but of Peace as in all the Churches of the Saints And if the meanest Societies cannot subsist without Order wherein their strength and beauty and usefulness consist much less the Church of God which is a Society Instituted for the most spiritual and Supernatural Ends. And therefore we find that God ordained a most exact Order and Government in the Jewish Church which for the greater strength and Unity he formed into a
and of every sound part of it then our Communion with the Church is as fixt as our relation and membership is and I think no Man who understands himself will talk of an occasional member If no Man can perform any Act of Communion with a Church of which he is no member since all Acts of Communion have a necessary relation to a state of Communion and that which is an Act of Communion in a member is no Act of Communion when performed by him who is no member as I have already proved then it is as plain a contradiction to talk of an occasional Act of Communion as of occasional membership and there can be no place for occasional Communion with a Church of which we are no members unless we will say that a Man who is not in Communion may exercise Acts of Communion with the Church If all the Acts of Christian Communion which respect Christian Worship such as Prayer receiving the Lords Supper c. tho performed in a particular Church be not Acts meerly of a particular Church-Communion but of Catholick Communion with the whole Christian Church and every sound part of it then every true Catholick Christian is not only in a fixt state of Communion with the Catholick Church but lives in as constant an exercise of Christian Communion with all Sound and Orthodox Churches as he does with that Church in which he lives for every Act of Worship which is an Act of Communion with that particular Church in which it is performed if that Church be in Catholick Communion is an Act of Communion with the whole Catholick Church and therefore the very exercise of Christian Communion is equally fixt and constant or equally occasional with the whole Catholick Church There is a sense indeed wherein we may be said to be members of one particular Church considered as distinct from all other particular Churches but that principally consists in Government and Discipline every Christian is a member of the whole Christian Church and in Communion with it but he is under the immediate Instruction and Government of his own Bishop and Presbyters and is bound to Personal Communion with them and this constitutes a particular Church in which all Acts of Worship and all Acts of Discipline and Government are under the direction and conduct of a particular Bishop And when Neighbour Bishops unite into one Body and agree upon some common Rules of Government and the Administration of Religious Offices this makes them a Patriarchal or National Church and thus by submitting to the Government and Discipline of such particular or united Bishops we become members of a Diocesan or National Church considered as distinct from other Diocesan or National Churches But this does not confine our Church-membership and Communion to such a particular Church tho it strictly oblige us to conform to the Worship and Discipline and Government of that Church wherein we live while it imposes nothing on us inconsistent with the Principles of Catholick Communion But tho particular Christians are more peculiarly obliged to observe the Rites and Usages and to submit to the Government and Discipline of the Church wherein they live and to maintain Personal Communion with it and upon this account may in a peculiar manner be called the members of that Church yet every Act of Communion performed in this particular Church is an Act of Catholick Communion and an exercise of Christian Communion with the whole Church and every sound part of it Baptism makes us members of the whole Church and gives us a right to Communion with every sound part of it every Act of Christian Communion in a particular Church is a vertual Communion with the whole Church with all particular Churches which live in Communion with each other and notwithstanding my relation to a particular Church by my constant Abode and Habitation in it when ever I travel into any other Church I Communicate with them as a member so that wherever I Communicate whether in that Church in which I usually live or in any other particular Church where I am accidentally present my Communion is of the same Nature that is I Communicate as a member of the Church and it is Impossible I should Communicate otherwise for I have no right to Communion but as a member and nothing I can do can be an Act of Communion if I be not and do not own my self to be a member And yet this is the occasion of this mistake about Fixt and Occasional Communion that according to the Laws of our Church which are founded on great and wise reasons and indeed according to the Laws of Catholick Communion every Christian is bound to Communicate with that part of the Church wherein he lives now Men may have Houses in different Parishes or distinct Diocesses or may Travel into other parts of the Country and Communicate with the Churches which they find in those places where they are or they may sometimes go to Prayers or hear a Sermon or receive the Lords Supper at another Parish-Church now our ordinary Communion with those Churches where our constant Abode is may be called constant Communion and our Communion with those Churches which we accidentally visit and Communicate with may be called occasional Communion and all this without Schism because we still Communicate either with the same National Church or which is often the case of Travellers with some other sound part of the Catholick Church of which we are also members and so still keep in the same Communion and Communicate with no Churches but those of which we own our selves members as being all in the same Communion as being either sincere members of the National or Catholick Church From hence our Dissenters Conclude that their Communion with an Independent or Presbyterian Church of which they profess themselves fixt members is as constant with their occasional Communion with the Church of England when to serve some present turn they hear the Prayers and receive the Sacraments with us as our fixt Communion with our Parish-Churches is with our occasional Communion with other Parish-Churches which no Body accounts Schism tho when it is too frequent and causeless it is a great disorder But the difference between these two is vastly great for in the First case we only Communicate with such Churches which are all in Communion with each other and therefore he who is a member of one is a member of them all and Communicates with them wherever he is as a member But he who is a fixt member of a Presbyterian or Independent Church cannot Communicate so much as occasionally with the Church of England as a member because he is a member not only of another particular but of a separate Church and it is impossible for any Man who is one with himself to be a member of two separate Churches and whatever Acts of Worship we joyn in with other Churches of which we are no members they are not
may 1 Cor. 14. 5. 12. receive Edifying That ye may excel to the Edifying Eph. 4. 12. of the Church For the Edifying of the Body of Christ And it is very observable wherein the Apostle places the Edification of the Body of Christ viz. in Unity and Love Till we all come in the Vnity of the Faith and of the 13. knowledge of the Son of God to a perfect Man unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ Till we are united by one Faith into one Body and perfect Man And speaking the truth in love may grow up in him into 15 16. all things which is the head Even Christ from whom the whole Body fitly joyned together and compacted by that which every joynt supplieth according to the Effectual working in the measure of every part maketh increase of the Body unto the Edifying it self in love This is an admirable description of the Unity of the Church in which all the parts are closely united and compacted together as Stones and Timber are to make one House and thus they grow into one Body and increase in mutual Love and Charity which is the very Building and Edification of the Church which is Edifyed and Built up in love as the Apostle adds 1 Cor. 8. 1. that knowledge puffeth up but charity Edifieth this Builds up the Church of Christ and that not such a common Charity as we have for all Mankind but such a love and Sympathy as is peculiar to the Members of the same Body and which none but Members can have for each other and now methinks I need not prove that Schism and Separation is not for the Edification of the Church to Separate for Edification is to Pull down in stead of Building up But these Men do not seem to have any great regard to the Edification of the Church but only to their own particular Edification and we must grant that Edification is sometimes applied to particular Christians in Scripture according to St. Pauls Exhortation Comfort your selves together and Edifie one another 1 Thes 5. 11. even as also ye do And this Edifying one another without question signifies our promoting each others growth and progress in all Christian Graces and vertues and so the Building and Edification of the Church signifies the growth and improvement of the Church in all Spiritual Wisdom and knowledge and Christian graces the Edification of the Church consists in the Edification of particular Christians but then this is called Edification or Building because this growth and improvement is in the Unity and Communion of the Church and makes them one Spiritual House and Temple Thus the Church is called the Temple of God and every particular Christian is Gods Temple wherein the Holy Spirit dwells and yet God has but one Temple and the Holy Spirit dwells only in the Church of Christ but particular Christians are Gods Temple and the Holy Spirit dwells in them as living Members of the Christian Church and thus by the same reason the Church is Edified and Built up as it grows into a Spiritual House and Holy Temple by a firm and close Union and Communion of all its parts and every Christian is Edified as he grows up in all Christian Graces and Vertues in the Unity of the Church And therefore whatever extraordinary means of Edification Men may fancy to themselves in a Separation the Apostle knew no Edification but in the Communion of the Church and indeed if our growth and increase in all Grace and Vertue be more owing to the internal assistances of the Divine Spirit than to the external Administrations as St. Paul tells us I have planted and Apollos watered but God gave the 1 Cor. 3. 6 7. increase So then neither is he that planteth any thing nor he that watereth but God that gave the increase And the Divine Spirit confines his influences and operations to the Unity of the Church as the same Apostle tells us that there is but one Body and Eph. 4. 4. one Spirit which plainly signifies that the operations of this one Spirit are appropriated to this one Body as the Soul is to the Body iâ— Animates then it does not seem a very likely way for Edification to cut our selves off from the Unity of Christs Body 3. The Third and Last Case still remains which Case 3 will be resolved in a few words according to the Principles now laid down which is this Whether it be Lawful to Communicate with two distinct and Separate Churches For this is thought of late days not only a very Innocent and Lawful thing but the true Catholick-Spirit and Catholick-Communion to Communicate with Churches of all Communions unless perhaps they may except the Papists and Quakers It is thought a Schismatical Principle to refuse to Communicate with those Churches which withdraw Communion from us And thus some who Communicate ordinarily with the Church of England make no Scruple to Communicate in Prayers and Sacraments with Presbyterian and Independent Churches and Presbyterians can Communicate with the Church of England and with Independents whom formerly they charged with down-right Schism and some think it very indifferent whom they Communicate with and therefore take their turns in all But this is as contrary to all the Principles of Church-Communion as any thing can possibly be To be in Communion with the Church is to be a Member of it and to be a Member of two Separate and Opposite Churches is to be as contrary to our selves as those Separate Churches are to each other Christ hath but one Church and one Body and therefore where there are two Churches divided from each other by Separate Communions there is a Schism and Rent in the Body and whoever Communicates with both these Churches on one side or other Communicates in a Schism That the Presbyterian and Independent Churches have made an Actual Separation from the Church of England I have evidently proved already and therefore if the Communion of the Church of England be Lawful as those who can and ordinarily do Communicate with the Church of England must be presumed to acknowledge then they are Schismaticks and to Communicate with them is to partake in their Schism Now if Schism be an Innocent thing and the true Catholick Spirit I have no more to say but that the whole Christian Church ever since the Apostles times has been in a very great mistake but if Schism be a very great Sin and that which will Damn us as soon as Adultery and Murder then it must needs be a dangerous thing to Communicate with Schismaticks The Sum of all in short is this Besides these Men who justifie their Separation from the Church of England by charging Her with requiring Sinful terms of Communion which is the only thing that can justifie their Separation if it could be proved there are others who Separate lightly and wantonly for want of a due sense of the Nature of
out of England without interrupting our Communion with the Church of England for the Communion is one and the same in all Christian Churches which are in Communion with each other though they may observe different Rites and Modes of Worship And this I suppose is a Sufficient answer to that other untoward consequence that if the Members of the Church of England may occasionally Communicate with the French Church then Constant Communion is not always a Duty where occasional Communion is lawful I suppose because we are not bound to a constant actual or presential Communion with the French Church though we may occasionally Communicate with it But certainly Sir Had you ever considered what I discourst about constant and occasional Communion you would not have made such an Objection as this For this is a Modern distinction which has no sence at the bottom as I plainly shewed But however by constant Communion our Dissenters understand the performing the Acts of Communion always or ordinarily in the same Church and by occasional Communion performing the Acts of Communion sometimes or as occasion serves in another Church now with respect to this Notion of constant or occasional Communion as it signifies the constant and ordinary or the Occasional Acts of Communion must that question be understood whether Constant Communion he a Duty where Occasional Communion is Lawful the meaning of which question is this whether when other reasons and circumstances determine my Personal Communion Ordinarily to one Church it be not my Duty to Communicate ordinarily with that Church if I can lawfully Communicate sometimes with it and there being no other reason to justifie non-Communion with any Church with which I am bound for other reasons Ordinarily to Communicate but onely Sinful Terms of Communion and there being no Colour for such a Pretence where occasional Communion is acknowledged Lawful for Sinful Terms of Communion make occasional as well as constant Acts of Communion Sinful I hence conclude that it is a necessary Duty to Communicate constantly or ordinarily with that Church in which I live if it be Lawful to Communicate occasionally or sometimes with it But if any Man will be so perverse as to understand this Question as you now do not of the Communion of a Church which for other reasons we are bound to Communicate Ordinarily with but of any Church with which I may Lawfully Communicate as occasion serves it makes it an absurd and senseless Proposition to say that constant Communion by that meaning presential and personal Communion is always a Duty where occasional Communion is lawful For at this rate if occasional Communion with the Protestant Churches of France Geneva Holland Germany be Lawful it becomes a necessary Duty for me to Communicate always personally and presentionally with all these Churches at the same time which no man can do who can be present but in one place at a time But yet thus far the Proposition holds universally true that whatever Church I can occasionally Communicate with without Sin I am also bound to Communicate constantly with whenever such reasons as are necessarie to determine my Communion to a particular Church make it my Dutie to do so And no man in his Wits ever understood this Question in any other sense But this you think cannot be my meaning For accorcording to me no Man is obliged to be a Member of one Sound Church more than another provided the distance is not so great but that he may Communicate with both It is wonderful to me Sir how you should come to fasten so many absurd Propositions upon me and I would desire of you for the future if you have no regard to your own Reputation yet upon Principles of Common Honesty not to write so hastily but to take some time to understand a Book before you undertake to confute it Where do I say that no man is Obliged to be a Member of one Sound Church more than of another I assert indeed that no Baptized Christian is a Member of any particular Church considered meerly as particular but is a Member of the universal Church and of all sound Orthodox Churches as parts of the Universal Church This puts him into a State of Communion with the whole Church without which he cannot be properly said to perform any Act of Church-Communion though he should join in all the Acts and Offices of Christian worship But is there no difference between being a Member of the Universal Church and of all particular Churches which are Parts and Members of the Universal Church and not to be Obliged to be a Member of one Sound Church more than of another The first supposes that every Christian whatever particular Church he actually Communicates in is a Member of the whole Christian Church and of all particular Sound Churches the second supposes the quite contrary that Christians are so Members of one Church as they are not of another that constant Communion in a particular Church confines their Church-Membership to that particular Church in which they Communicate So that the question is not what Church I must be a Member of for every Christian is a Member of the whole Church not meerly of this or that particular Church but what particular Church I must Communicate in now our Obligation to Communicate in a certain particular Church results from the place wherein we live The Church in which we were Born and Baptized and have our Ordinary abode and Residence the Church which is incorporated into the State of which we are Natural Subjects if it be a true and sound Christian Church Challenges our Communion and Obedience Now in the same place there never can be any Competition between two Churches because there must be but one Church in the same place and therefore there can be no dispute in what Church we must constantly Communicate which must be the Church in which we live But is there not a French and a Dutch as well as an English Church in London and since distance of place does not hinder may we not choose which of these we will ordinarily Communicate with I answer no we have onely the Church of England in England The French Church is in France and the Dutch Church is in Holland though there is a French and Dutch Congregation allowed in London These Congregations belong to their own Original Churches and are under their Government and Censures but there is no Church-Power and Authority in England but only of the Church of England and therefore though we may occasionally Communicate with the French Congregation our Obligation to constant Communion is with the Church of England which alone has Authority and Jurisdiction in England to require our Communion and Obedience one particular Church is distinguisht from another not by a distinct and separate Communion which is Schismatical but by distinct Power and Jurisdiction and that Church within whose Jurisdiction we live can onely Challenge our Communion and I suppose
of Schism or to discover on which side the Schism lies or to avoid it without renouncing all Communion with the Church which course soever they take I leave all such Cases to God who knows when it is fit to dispence with his own Laws and will take care of my own Duty according to Scripture-Rules and not hope to justifie the ordinary breach of known Laws by some extraordinary Cases And yet the Case which you propose is not so unanswerable a difficulty as you imagine Several Councils in Palestine in Rome in Pontus and other places Euseb b. 5. cap. 23. Determine the Celebration of Easter on the day of the Resurrection not on the Fourteenth Day of the Month which was the Jewish Passover which dispute you call a Mistake in Arithmetick but for what reason I know not the Bishops of Asia at the same time decree the observation of Easter on the Fourteenth Day whatever Day of the week it fell on according to the Ancient Observation of the Asian Churches Pope Victor upon this writes to several Bishops very bitterly against them and was very desirous to have them Excommunicated and did as much as in him lay denounce the Sentence against them cap. 24. But this was ill resented by other Bishops in Communion with him and particularly Ireneus wrote a Letter to him about it and earnestly disswades him from it and did prevent it from taking effect if we will believe Eusebius So far is it from being true as you assert that Pope Victor in a Council Excommunicated the poor Asians what he did was only his own Act which was displeasing to other Bishops and which he was forc't to undo So that here was a great deal of Heat and Warmth and tendency towards a Schism but no Schism followed upon it among the Catholick Churches But suppose Pope Victor had Excommunicated the Asian Churches and this Excommunication had taken effect this could not make the Asian Churches Schismaticks for there is a great deal of difference between being cast out of the Communion of a Church and forsaking the Communion of a Church The first is matter of censure the second is our own choice the First is an Ecclesiastical Punishment the Second when it is causeless is Schism So that had the Church of Rome Excommunicated the Asian Churches unless the Asian Churches upon this had made a Separation from the Church of Rome this Excommunication could not make them Schismaticks and therefore any one might safely Communicate with them without partaking in a Schism Nor was it a just reason for the Asian Churches to have renounced the Communion of the Church of Rome though they had been Excommunicated by Victor for this had been to do as ill a thing as Victor had done for no other reason but because Pope Victor had set them an example And therefore we find Saint Cyprian of another temper when he and the African Bishops were threatned in the same manner by Pope Stephen upon occasion of that warm Dispute about rebaptizing Hereticks At that very time in his Epistle to Jubaianus he declares his resolution not to break Communion with any Church or Bishops upon that account and therefore not with Pope Stephen himself notwithstanding his rash and furious Censures And concludes that Patience and Forbearance was the best Remedy in such Cases and therefore upon this occasion he says he wrote his Book de bono Patientiae Well but if the Asiatick Churches were not Schismaticks yet Pope Victor had been a Schismatick had he Excommunicated the Churches of Asia or withdrawn Communion from them And this had made the case of the Roman Christians very hard for they must either have suspended Communion with both these divided Churches and lived without the comfort and advantages of Christian Communion or they must have rejected the Communion of their own Bishop and Churches or have rejected the Communion of the Churches of Asia or have maintained Communion with them both that is with two Separate Churches which according to my Principles is to Communicate in a Schism If they Communicate with their own Schismatical Bishop this is to Communicate in a Schism by Communicating with a Schismatick if they Renounce his Communion when he imposes no new unlawful Terms of Communion upon them this is to Separate from a Sound and Orthodox Church for the sake of a Schismatical Bishop If they Communicate with the Churches of Asia this is to break Communion with their own Bishop who has Excommunicated them if they separate from the Churches of Asia for no other reason but because they are unjustly Excommunicated this is to Separate for an unjust cause which is a Schism if they communicate with both they Communicate with two Separate Churches and therefore must be Schismaticks on one side or other If you can find any more difficulties in this matter you may And yet after all this I do believe the Christians of Rome might have Communicated both with the Roman and Asian Churches without Schism and this I believe upon these Principles which I shall briefly explain and confirm 1. That the Personal miscarriage of the Bishop in the exercise of Ecclesiastical Censures cannot involve his whole Church in the guilt of Schism though it may make him a Schismatick and certainly since Bishops are but Men and Subject to the like passions and infirmities that other men are it would be a very hard case if his personal Schism should be imputed to the whole Church Though the Bishop have the chief Authority in the Church yet it is hard to say that every abuse of his Authority is the Act of the whole Church and therefore the Church may not be Schismatical when the Bishop is and it is possible to Communicate with a Church whose Bishop is a Schismatick without Communicating in the Schism And therefore though Victor had Schismatically Excommunicated the Asian Churches the Christians of Rome at that time might have Communicated with the Church of Rome without partaking in Victors Schism For tho a particular Church-Society consists in that Relation which is between the Bishop and his Clergy and People yet it is possible that the Bishop in the exercise of his Authority may violate the Fundamental Laws of Communion on which the Christians of such a Church unite into one Body and Society and when he does so it being an abuse of his Episcopal Authority it is his personal fault which cannot affect the whole Church The case is very plain where there is an Established constitution in a Church as it is in the Church of England which obliges the Bishops as well as People For should any English Bishop require any thing of his Clergy or People which is contrary to the Establish't Laws and Canons of the Church or should exercise any Authority in Censures and Excommunications which is not allowed him by those Canons this can in no sense be called the Act of the Church nor is any one bound
before Luther 2. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is meant by it and what Tradition is to be received and what Tradition is to be rejected 3. The difference of the Case between the Separation of Protestants from the Church of Rome and the Separation of Dissenters from the Church of England 4. The Protestant Resolution of Faith c. THE CASE OF Lay-Communion WITH THE CHURCH of ENGLAND CONSIDERED And the Lawfulness of it shew'd from the Testimony of above an hundred eminent Non-conformists of several Perswasions Published for the satisfaction of the Scrupulous and to prevent the Sufferings which such needlesly expose themselves to The Second Edition corrected by the Author LONDON Printed for Richard Chiswell at the Rose and Crown in St. Paul's Church-Yard M. DC LXXXIV TO THE DISSENTERS FROM THE Church of England Dear Brethren YOU being at this time called upon by Authority to join in Communion with the Church and the Laws ordered to be put in Execution against such as refuse it It 's both your Duty and Interest to enquire into the grounds upon which you deny Obedience to the Laws Communion with the Church of God and thereby expose our Religion to danger and your selves to suffering In which unless the Cause be good the Call clear and Mr. Mede 's Farewel Serm. on 1 Cor. 1. 3. the End right it cannot bring Peace to your selves or be acceptable to God Not bring Peace to your selves For we cannot suffer joyfully the Mr. Read 's Case p. 4. spoiling of our Goods the confinement of our Persons the ruin of our Families unless Conscience be able truly to say I would have done any thing but sin against God that I might have avoided those Sufferings from Men. Not be acceptable to God to whom all are accountable Continuat of Morn Exer. Ser. 4. p. 92. for what Portion he hath intrusted them with of the things of this Life and are not to throw away without sufficient reason and who has made it our Duty to do what we can without Sin in Obedience to that Authority which he hath set over us as you are told by some Read Ibid. in the same condition with your selves To assist Persons in this Enquiry I have observed that of late several of the Church of England have undertaken the most material Points that you do question and have handled them with that Candor and Calmness which becomes their Profession and the gravity of the Arguments and which may the better invite those that are willing to be satisfied to peruse and consider them But because Truth and Reason do too often suffer by the Prejudices we have against particular Persons to remove as much as may be that Obstruction I have in this Treatise shewed that these Authors are not alone but have the concurrent Testimony of the most eminent Non-conformists for them who do generally grant that there is nothing required in the Parochial Communion of the Church of England that can be a sufficient reason for Separation from it The sence of many of these I have here collected and for one hundred I could easily have produced two if the Cause were to go by the Poll So that if Reason or Authority will prevail I hope that yet your Satisfaction and Recovery to the Communion of the Church is not to be despaired of Which God of his infinite Mercy grant for your own and the Churches sake Amen THE CONTENTS THE difference betwixt Ministerial and Lay-Communion Pag. 1 The Dissenters grant the Church of England to be a True Church p. 4 That they are not totally to separate from it p. 12 That they are to comply with it as far as lawfully they can p. 16 That Defects in Worship if not Essential are no just reason for Separation p. 23 That the expectation of better Edification is no sufficient reason to with-hold Communion p. 39 The badness of Ministers will not justify Separation p. 48 The neglect or want of Discipline no sufficient reason to separate p. 59 The Opinion which the Non-conformists have of the several Practices of the Church of England which its Lay-Members are concerned in p. 64 That Forms of Prayer are lawful and do not stint the Spirit ibid. That publick prescribed Forms may lawfully be joined with p. 66 That the Liturgy or Common-Prayer is for its Matter sound and good and for its Form tolerable if not useful p. 69 That Kneeling at the Sacrament is not idolatrous nor unlawful and no sufficient reason to separate from that Ordinance p. 71 72 That standing up at the Creed and Gospel is lawful p. 73 The Conclusion ibid. THE NON-CONFORMISTS PLEA FOR Lay-Communion With the CHURCH of ENGLAND THE Christian World is divided into two Ranks Ecclesiastical and Civil usually known by the Names of Clergy and Laity Ministers and People The Clergy besides the things essentially belonging to their Office are by the Laws of all well-ordered Churches in the World strictly obliged by Declarations or Subscriptions or both to own and maintain the Doctrine Discipline and Constitution of the Church into which they are admitted Thus in the Church of England they do subscribe to the Truth of the Doctrine more especially contained in the thirty nine Articles and declare that they will use the Forms and Rites contained in the Liturgy and promise to submit to the Government in its Orders The design of all which is to preserve the Peace of the Church and the Unity of Christians which doth much depend upon that of its Officers and Teachers But the Laity are under no such Obligations there being no Declarations or Subscriptions required of them nor any thing more than to attend upon and joyn with the Worship practised and allowed in the Church Thus it is in the Church of England as it is acknowledged by Mr. Baxter to whom when it Defence of the Cure part 2. pag. 29. was objected that many Errors in Doctrine and Life were imposed as Conditions of Communion he replies What is imposed on you as a Condition to your Communion in the Doctrine and Prayers of the Parish-Churches but your actual Communion it self In discoursing therefore about the Lawfulness of Communion with a Church the Difference betwixt these two must be carefully observed lest the things required only of one Order of Men should be thought to belong to all It 's observed by one That the Original of all Our Mischiefs A Book licensed by Mr. Cranford sprung from Mens confounding the terms of Ministerial Conformity with those of Lay-Communion with the Parochial Assemblies there being much more required of the Ministers than of the People Private Persons having much less to say for themselves in absenting from the publick Worship of God tho performed by the Liturgy than the Pastor hath for not taking Oaths c. Certainly if this Difference were but observ'd and the Case of Lay-Communion truly stated and understood the People would not be far more
thing and somewhat favoured by Scripture and by Experience has been found to be of such Convenience Advantage and Security to Religion that Mr. Baxter hath more than once said †††Mr. Baxter's Plea for Peace Epist Serm. on Gal. 6. 10. p. 24. Defence p. 21. par 1. p. 36. I doubt not but he that will preserve Religion here in its due Advantages must endeavour to preserve the Soundness Concord and Honour of the Parish-Churches And Mr. Corbet saith | | | Mr. Corbet's Account of the Principles c. of several Non-Conformists p. 26. That the nullifying and treading down the Parish-Churches is a Popish Design But whatever Opinion others may have of that Form yet all of one sort and another agree that the Churches so called are or may be true Churches This was the general Opinion of the old Non-Conformists Thus saith a late * * * Troughton's Apol. p. 103. Writer who though he is unwilling to grant that they did own the National Church to be a true Church yet doth admit as he needs must at least that they did own the several Parishes or Congregations in England to be true Churches both in respect of their Constitution and also in respect of their Doctrine and Worship and that there were in them no such intolerable Corruptions as that all Christians should fly from them And even those that were in other respects opposite enough to the Church did so declare It was saith Mr. Baxter the Parish Churches that had the Liturgy Defence of his Cure part 2. p. 178. V. Letter of Ministers of Old England to New p. 49. which Mr. H. Jacob the Father of the Congregational Party wrote for Communion with against Fr. Johnson and in respect to which he called them Separatists against whom he wrote The same I may say of Mr. Bradshaw Dr. Ames and other Non-conformists whom the Congregational Brethren think were favourable to their way And if you will hearken to the abovesaid Apologist he saith again and again That the general Sence Apol. c. 4. p. â—17 of the present Non-conformists both Ministers and People is that the Parishes of England generally are true Churches both as to the Matter of them the People being Christians and as to the form their Ministers being true Ministers such as for their Doctrine and Manners deserve not to be degraded But lest he should be thought to incline to one side I shall produce the Testimony of such as are of the Congregational Way As for those of New-England Mr. Baxter doth say That Defence of his Cure part 2 p. 177. their own Expressions signify that they take the English Parishes that have godly Ministers for true Churches though faulty Mr. Cotton professeth that Robinson's denial of Way cleared p. 8. the Parishional Churches to be true Churches was never received into any Hearts amongst them and otherwhere saith We dare not deny to bless the Womb that bare us His Letter p. 3. printed 1641. and the Papes that gave us suck The five Dissâ—nting Brethren do declare * * * Apologet. Narr V. Hooker's Survey Pref. and part 1. p. 47. We have this sincere Profession to make before God and the World that all the Conscience of the Defilements in the Church of England c. did never work in us any other Thought much less Opinion but that Multitudes of the Assemblies and Parochial Congregations thereof were the true Churches and Body of Christ To come nearer Dr. T. Goodwin On the Ephes p. 477 488 489. doth condemn it as an Error in those who hold particular Churches those you call Parish-Churches to be no true Churches of Christ and their Ministers to be no true Ministers and upon that Ground forbear all Church-Communion with them in hearing or in any other Ordinance c. and saith I acquitted my self before from this and my Brethren in the Ministry But the Church of England is not only thus acknowledged a true Church but hath been also looked upon as the most valuable in the World whether we consider the Church it self or those that minister in it The Church it self of which the Authors of the grave and modest Confutation thus write All the known Pag. 6. Churches in the World acknowledg our Church for their Sister and give unto us the Right-hand of Fellowship c. Dr. Goodwin saith If we should not acknowledg these Ibid. Churches so stated i. e. parish-Parish-Churches to be the true Churches of Christ and their Ministers true Ministers and their Order such and hold Communion with them too in the Sence spoken of we must acknowledg no Church in all the Reformed Churches c. for they are all as full of Mixtures as ours And Mr. J. Goodwin saith Sion College visited that there was more of the Truth and Power of Religion in England under the late Prelatical Government than in all the Reformed Churches in the World besides If we would have a Character of the Ministry of the Church of England as it was then Mr. Bradshaw Unreasonableness of the Separat p. 97. gives it Our Churches are not inferiour for number of able Men yea and painful Ministers to any of the Reformed Churches of Christ in foreign Parts c. And certainly the Number of such is much advanced since his time But I cannot say more of this Subject than I find in a Page or two of an Author I must frequently Mr. Baxter's Cure of Church Divisions Dir. 56. p. 263. use to which I refer the Reader Before I proceed I shall only make this Inference from what hath been said That if the Church of England be a true Church the Churches true Churches the Ministry a true Ministry the Doctrine sound and Orthodox the Worship in the main good and allowable and the Defects such as render not the Ordinances unacceptable to God and ineffectual to us I think there is much said towards the proving Communion with that Church lawful and to justify those that do joyn in it Which brings to the second General which is to consider II. What Opinion the sober and eminent Non-conformists Sect. II. have of Communion with the Church of England And they generally hold 1. That they are not totally to separate from it this follows from the former and must be own'd by all them that hold she is a true Church for to own it to be such and yet to separate totally from it would be to own and disown it at the same time So say the Members of the Assembly of Divines Thus to Papers for Accommodation p. 47. depart from true Churches is not to hold Communion with them as such but rather by departing to declare them not to be such And saith Mr. Baxter Nothing will Reasons for the Christian Relig. p. 464. warrant us to separate from a Church as no Church which yet is the case in total Separation but the want of
touch viz. the unclean and abominable Practices that were us'd by the Heathens in the Worship of their Gods It 's call'd by the Apostle in another place the unfruitful Eph. 4. 11 works of darkness and again thus describ'd by him it 's a shame to speak of those things that are done of them in secret These they were not to touch to have no fellowship with them in but rather to reprove them that is in judgment to condemn them by words to reprove them in conversation to avoid them But now because Christians are not to communicate with Heathens in their filthy mysteries nor to partake with any sort of wicked Men in any Action that 's Immoral does it therefore follow that they must not do their duty because sometimes it cannot be done but in their company Must they abstain from the Publick Worship of God and their Lord's Table to which they are commanded because Evil Men who till they repent have nothing to do there rudely intrude themselves May they not joyn with bad Men in some cases where it cannot be well avoided in doing a good Action because they must in no case and on no account joyn with them in doing a sinful one Because they have omitted their Duty must I neglect mine Because they sin in coming unpreparedly must I sin in not coming at all Will their sin be any plea or excuse for mine If I Communicate with them will their unworthiness be laid at my door If I separate because of that shall they answer for my contempt as well as for their own prophanation of it No surely every Man shall bear his own burden The soul that sinneth it shall dye The Ezek. 18. 20. second is that Text Obj. 2. In the Revelation Come out of her my people that ye be not partakers of her sins and that ye receive 18. c. 4. not of her plagues Answ This place is most certainly to be understood of Idolaters and according to most Interpreters of the Roman Idolatrous Polity and is a command to all Christians to forsake the Communion of that Church lest they endanger their own salvation by Communicating with her in Masses and other Idolatrous Worship And if this be the true sense of the words it abundantly justifies our Separation from the Roman Church But affords not the least plea for Dissenters to separate from ours unless any of them are so hardy as to say that there is none or but little difference betwixt the Church of Rome and the Church of England But blessed be God we have a Church reform'd from all her Superstitions that retains nothing of hers but what she retains of the Gospel and the Primitive Church Here 's no drowning Religion in shadow and formality nor burying her under a load of ritual and ceremonial Rubbish nor dressing up Religion in a flanting pomp to set her off or a gaudy garb to recommend her much less in such fantastical Rites such antick Vestments and Gesticulations that may justly render her ridiculous and contemptible but her Ceremonies are few and decent countenanc'd by Primitive Antiquity and very much becoming the gravity and sobriety of Religion Here are no Half-Communions no more Sacraments thrust upon us than our Lord himself instituted and yet those left whole and entire for our use and comfort that he did no Prayers in an unknown Tongue which the votary neither minds nor understands no praying to Saints or Angels no adoring Images Pictures and Reliques no worshipping the Creature besides or more than the Creator which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they do who in all their publick Offices of Devotion for one Prayer to God have order'd ten to be made to the blessed Virgin Here 's no Doctrine obtruded on our Faith that 's contrary to reason nay to sense to all our senses no Practices allowed that are forbidden by God no Pardons to be bought no Indulgences to be purchas'd no expunging any one Commandment out of the Decalogue or contriving arts and devices to make void the rest but as her Devotions are pure and spiritual having God and him only for their object so her Doctrine is found and orthodox having Christ for its Corner-stone and the Prophets and Apostles for its Foundation A Church that needs no counterfeit Legends no incredible Miracles no ridiculous Fables to promote her veneration whose security lies not in the Peoples ignorance but in their inlightned understandings that can defend it self without the help of spurious Authors or corrupting the words and sense of Authentick ones a Church that dares to be understood and is sure the more she 's lookt into the more to be embrac'd and admir'd And I would to God 't was as easie a matter to clear every one of her Members from Vice as it is her Constitution from Corruption But let those that stand take heed lest they fall and be sure to sweep their own door clean who are so apt to throw dirt in the faces of their Fellow-Christians St. Paul's advice is that every Man should examine himself and I am much mistaken if spiritual pride a rash and censorious judging of our Bretheren be not as great a crime as some of those that are lookt upon to be of so polluting and infectious a nature in other Men I need not say how directly oposite this Pharisaical humour is to that humility meekness and self-denial that the Gospel of our Saviour injoyns how unsuitable to the temper of all good Men who are more apt to suspect and accuse themselves than others who the more holy they are the more sensible of their own imperfections How contrary to the example of our blessed Lord who balkt not at any time the society of Publicans and sinners who when he knew what was in Man and who it was that should betray him yet admitted Judas into the number of his Disciples and familiarly converst with him And yet how fully it answers to the Spirit and Genius of those ancient Schismaticks the Novatians and the Donatists Might I stay to run the parallel both those Schisms and this amongst us would be found to begin on the same Principles slackness of Discipline in the Church and corruption in Manners To be carried on by the same pretences zeal for purity and fear of pollution to spring from the same bitter fountain pride and arrogance But I speak not this to excuse our selves or to recriminate them My hearty Prayer to God is that all Isarel may be saved that they who dissent from us would now at last lay aside all passion and prejudice all groundless scruples and pretences and come in and joyn their forces with our Church against the common Adversary And that we who profess our selves Members of the Church of England would be extreamly careful for the honour of our Religion for the preservation of our Church for the recovery of our straying Bretheren for whose sakes in some cases we are bound to lay down our lives
in the point and by which we may be able to Judg what is Decent Edifying and Orderly as well as we are by what is Decent c. to Determine what is fit to be used in Religious Worship And this we may be help'd in by considering 1. That some things make so Eminently for or are so Notoriously opposite to these Rules that Common Reason will be able forthwith to Judge of them and to declare for or against them So when the Love-feasts and the Lords Supper were appointed for the testifying and increase of mutual Charity if one took his Supper before another it was to make it rather a private 1 Cor. 11 20 21. Meal than a Religious Feast and so was a Notorious Breach of Order and Christian Fellowship So a Tumultuous speaking of many together is less for Edification and hath more of Confusion than the Orderly speaking of one by one And Service in an Unknown Tongue doth less conduce to Edification than when it it is in a Language Vulgarly known and Understood 1 Cor. 14. 16. 17 26 27. this is a case that Reason as well as the Apostle doth Determine to our Hands and which Mankind would with one consent soon agree to were it not for a certain Church in the Wotld that carries those of its Communion against sense Reason and Nature for its own advantage 2. But there are other things which are not so Clear and Evident and so the case needs further consideration For the clearing of which we may observe 1. That we are not so much to Judge of Decency Order and Edification asunder as together these having a mutual Relation to and dependance upon each other So it s well observed by St. Chrysostom That Chrys in 1 Cor. Ch. 14. 40. 1 Cor. 14. 26. nothing doth so much Edify as Order Peace and Love And the Apostle when he had reproved the Disorders of their Service in the Church of Corinth concludes it Let all things be done to Edifying The not observing of this is the occasion of very great Mistakes in this matter For Persons when they would Judge of Edification consider presently what they conceive doth most improve them in Knowledge or any particular Grace and having no further consideration for the sake of this throw down the Bounds of Publick Order and bring all into Confusion and for Edifying as they apprehend themselves do Disturb if not Destroy the Church of God and render the means used in it ineffectual to themselves and others Thus again they Judge of what is Decent and Indecent and conclude that there is no Indecency in Sitting suppose at the Sacrament or the Prayers but they mistake in such a conception whilst what is against publick Order and Practice is for that reason Indecent were there no other reason to make it so So that if we would Judge aright of either of these we must Judge of them together and as Order alone is not enough to make a thing Decent which is in it self Indecent so Decency or particular Edification is not enough to recommend that which is not to be Introduced or Obtained without the Disturbance and Overthrow of publick Order and Peace 2. When the case is not apparent we should rather Judge by what is contrary than by what is agreeable to those Rules We know better what things are not than what they are And if Christians should never agree to any thing in the External Administration of Divine Worship till they agree in the notion of Decency Order and Edification or till they can prove that the things used or required to be used in a Church do exactly agree to the Notion and Definition of it Worship must never be Administred or the greater part of Christians must Exclude themselves from it And yet this must be done before it can be positively said unless in things very manifest that this is Decent or that is Orderly c. These things as I have said are variable and depend upon Circumstances and so Persons must needs be Wonderfully Confounded if they come to Niceties and insist upon them And therefore as we better know what is Indecent than Decent Disorderly than Orderly against than for Edification so it s better to take the course abovesaid in Judging about it As for instance if we would enquire into the Decency of the Posture to be used in the Lord's Supper or the Edification that may arise from it some will say its best to receive it in the Posture frequently used in the Devotions of the ancient Church of Standing or Incurvation others would choose Sitting as the dissenting Parties amongst us and some Forreign Churches others be for the Posture of Kneeling used in ours and many more and all with some shew of Reason In these different cases it may not perhaps be so easy for a Person Educated in a different way from what is practised and Prescribed to Judg of the Decency or Edification but if he find it not Indecent or Destructive of Piety and of the ends for which the Ordinance was Instituted he is therewith to satisfy himself St. Austin puts alike case and gives the like answer Some Churches Fast on the Saturday Epist 118. because Christ's Body was then in the Grave and he in a State of Humiliation Others do Eat on the Saturday both because that Day God Rested from his Work and Christ Rested in the Grave And how in such a case to Determine our selves both in Opinion and Practice that Father thus directs If saith he what is joyned be not against Faith or good Manners it is to be accounted Indifferent And I may add if it be not Indecent Disorderly and Destructive of Piety its lawful 3. If the case be not apparent and we cannot easily find out how the things used and injoyned in a Church are Decent c. we are to consider that we are in or Obliged to be of a Church and that these things do respect such a Society and therefore are to be Cautious how we Condemn this or that for Indecent Confused and Inexpedient when we see Christians agreeing in the Practice of them and such whom for other things we cannot Condemn When we find if we argue against it they argue for it and produce Experience against Experience and Reason against Reason and that we have a whole Church against our particular conceptions of things of this Nature we should be apt to think the Fault may be in our selves and that it s for want of Understanding and Insight for want of Use and Tryal and by Reason of some Prejudices or Professions that we thus differ in our Judgment from them We see what little things do Determin Men ordinarily in these matters how addicted some are to their own Ways and Customs and forward to Like or Condemn according to their Education which doth form their conceptions and fix their inclinations how Prone again others are to Novelty and Innovation So St.
Table because he is indeed in such a state and disposition of mind as renders him habitually qualified for the performance of that Duty But this as I said is not the Question before us we here suppose the Man either through want of Means of Instruction or through strong Prejudices from Education or the like to be incapable at present of this Satisfaction and to be in great perplexity on both sides and that which we are to enquire into is to which side of the doubtful Case he must determine himself Shall he receive the Sacrament doubting as he doth or shall he forbear it doubting as he doth Now I say a man hath no other way of coming to a Resolution of this Question but by applying the Rules I before laid down to his present Case which may be done in this manner Since the Man we speak of doubteth that he sins whether he come to the Sacrament or forbear the First thing to be considered is on which side he doubts least or which side appears to him most likely and probable to be free from the danger of sinning For if all other things in the Case be equal the Ballance is to be turned on that side according to our first Proposition Now if our present Question be put upon this Issue I am confident the Man whose Case I am representing will think it more reasonable to repair to the Sacrament even in that evil posture he takes himself to be than customarily to abstain from it Because by thus doing he doth certainly follow the more probable and the less doubtful or dangerous side of the Question For it is evident he cannot pretend to be half so certain of this Particular viz. That he is unprepared for the Sacrament which is the reason of his abstaining as he is certain in the General that it is his Duty to frequent it If indeed the Man was a person of ill Life and Manners Or if he had been lately guilty of any Notorious Wilful Sin and came to the Lords Table with that sin upon his Conscience unrepented of Then I will grant he had some reason to believe that he was as much in danger of sinning by receiving unworthily as by withdrawing himself from Gods Ordinance But the Case here is not so The Man is really an honest well-meaning Christian nor hath he done any thing of late which can give him any suspicion of his having forfeited that Title Only through his Mistake about the Notion of preparation for the Sacrament he apprehends he is not qualified as he ought to be though yet if most others were to be Judges of his Condition they would say he was Why certainly in this Case it must be evident to the Man that he runs a greater danger of transgressing the Law of God by absenting himself from the Communion especially if he do it customarily than if he should come to it with all his Fears and Doubts about him For as I said his Fears and Doubts of his own unworthiness cannot possibly be so well grounded as his Fears and Doubts that he sins against God by habitually denying his attendance on that great Christian Service For those are founded on the express Laws of the Gospel The others are founded onely on uncertain conjectural Surmises about his own condition That is to say he is certain that he is bound to take frequent opportunities of paying his homage to Jesus Christ in the Sacrament but he cannot pretend to have such assurance in his Case that he is unqualified for paying that homage But Secondly Let us suppose the Doubt is equal on both sides That is to say that the Man hath as much reason to believe that he is an unworthy Receiver if he receives at all as he hath reason to believe that it is a Sin in him if he do not receive Which yet can hardly be supposed in our Case but let us suppose it nay if you please let us suppose the Man doth certainly sin whether he recives or forbears Here then this comes to be considered which of these two Sins is the least To Receive unworthily yet out of a Sense of Duty or not to receive at all For on which side soever this last sin happens to be to that side the Man is to determine himself according to our second Rule It being eternally reasonable That of two Evils we should chuse the least when we cannot avoid both Now putting the Case before us upon this Issue there needs no more to be done for the resolving it than only to ask this general Question Which is the greater sin of these two for a Man to omit a known Duty and so to break a known Law of God for Conscience sake Or to yield Obedience to that Law for Conscience sake when yet it so happens that a Man cannot do that without breaking another Law of God in the manner of his Performance of that Duty For my part I should think that the Man who doth this last though he cannot be said to be Innocent yet is he guilty in a far less degree than the Man that practiseth the former and a great deal more is to be said in his justification Let us suppose two Men both of them conscious to themselves that as things stand with them they are not in a fit condition so much as to say their Prayers or to perform any other act of Religious Worship as they ought to do now one of these Men doth upon this account forbear all Prayers both Publick and Private neither using his Closet nor frequenting the Church The other hath such a Sense of what both Natural Religion and Christianity do oblige him to in this matter that he dares not forbear his usual Offices either in Publick or Private though yet he believes he sinfully performs them If the Question now be put which of these two is the better Man or the least Offender I dare say that all men will give their Judgment in favour of the latter though yet no Wise man will think that this Person is to be excused for living at such a rate that he cannot say his Prayers without Sin This Judgment I say men would pass in this Case and there is a great deal of Reason for it For certainly no indisposition that a man hath contracted of what nature soever will take off from his Obligation to obey the Laws of God If a man cannot do his Duty so well as he ought he must at least do it as well as he can And therefore let his Circumstances be what they will he must needs be less Criminal in performing a known Duty in the best manner that his Condition will allow him though with many and deserved Reflections upon his own Vnworthiness than in wholly omitting or disusing that Duty Because a neglect in the manner of performing a Duty is a less fault than to neglect the Substance of it Let this now that I have said be applyed to our
Authority for it is not so absurd as may by some be imagined for the Common People to take upon trust from their lawful Teachers what they are not competent Judges of themselves But the difficulty here is how shall a private Christian govern himself when the very Guides and Ministers of Religion determine differently concerning these matters in question amongst us Some warranting and allowing them others as much disapproving and condemning them by what Rule shall he choose his Guide To which I briefly reply 1. As for those who scruple at Conformity and are tolerably able to judge for themselves let not such relye barely upon the Authority either of the one or the other All we desire of them is that they would equally hear both sides that they would think that the Ministers of the Church of England have some Sense and Conscience too as well as other Men and are able to say somewhat for what they do themselves or require of others that laying aside all Prejudices Favour to or admiration of Mens Persons they would weigh and consider the Arguments that may be propounded to them being diffident of their own Apprehensions and indifferent to either part of the Question that they would think it no shame to change their Mind when they see good reason for it Could we thus prevail with the People diligently to examine the Merits of the cause our Church would every day gain more Ground amongst all wise Men for we care not how much Knowledge and Understanding our People have so they be but humble and modest with it nor do we desire Men to become our Proselytes any further than we give them good Scripture and Reason for it 2. But as for those who are not so capable of examining or judging for themselves as few of the common People who separate from us really are they not being able to give any tolerable account of their dissent from us only in general Words declaiming against Popery Superstition Antichristian and Unscriptural Ceremonies Humane Traditions c. such had better trust to and depend on those Ministers of known Sufficiency for their Office who are regularly and by the Laws of the Land set over them than any other Guides or Teachers that they can choose for themselves This to be sure is the safer course which in doubtful cases is always to be taken I speak now of these present Controversies about Forms and Ceremonies so hotly agitated amongst us which are above the Sphere of common People out of their profession not of such things as concern the Salvation of all men which are plain and evident to the meanest Capacities When therefore in such cases about which we cannot easily satisfie our selves we follow the Advice of the publickly authorized Guides and Preachers of Religion if they chance to mislead us we have something to say or apologize for our selves Our Error is more excusable and pardonable as being occasion'd by those to whose Judgment by God's Command we did owe a great Respect and Submission But when we choose Instructors and Counsellors to our selves according to our own Fancy and liking and they teach us contrary to the Doctrine of our lawful Ministers if then we prove to be in the wrong and are betray'd into Sin we may thank our own Wantonness for it and are more severely accomptable for such Mistakes Thus let a Man that is troubled with any threatning disease apply himself rather to the Licensed Physicians or Chyrurgions of approved Skill and Honesty and if he chance to miscarry under them yet he hath this contentment that he used the best and wisest means for his Health and Recovery But if he leaves them all and will hearken only to Quacks and Empiricks tho they advise him quite contrary to what the others prescribed if under their hands he grows worse and worse he must then charge his own perverse Folly or idle Humour as the cause of his Ruine 4. In order to the curing of our Scruples we should thoroughly understand and consider what is the true Notion of lawful and how it differs from what is necessary and from what is sinful That is necessary or our Duty which God hath expresly commanded that is sinful which God hath forbid that is lawful which God hath not by any Law obliging us either commanded or forbid for Where there is no Law saith the Apostle there is no Transgression Rom. 4. 15. There can be no Transgression but either omitting what the Law commands or doing what the Law forbids For instance If any Man can shew where kneeling at the Sacrament is forbid in Scripture where fitting is required where praying by a Form is forbid and extemporary Prayers are enjoyned then indeed the Dispute would soon be at an end but if neither the one nor the other can be found as most certainly they cannot then kneeling at the Sacrament and reading Prayers out of a Book must be reckon'd amongst things lawful And then there is no need of scrupling them because they may be done without Sin nay where they are required by our Superiours it is our Duty to submit to them because it is our Duty to obey them in all lawful things This way of arguing is very plain and convincing and cannot be evaded but by giving another Notion of Lawful And therefore it is commonly said that nothing is lawful especially in the Worship of God which God himself hath not prescribed and appointed or that hath been abused to evil Purposes And on these two Mistakes are chiefly grounded Mens Scruples about indifferent Rites and Ceremonies in God's Worship 1. That only is said to be lawful in God's Worship which he himself hath prescribed and appointed so that this is thought Exception sufficient against the Forms and Usages of our Church that though they are not forbid yet they are no where commanded in Scripture Who hath required these things at your hands Now here I only ask Where our Saviour or his Apostles have forbid us doing any thing in God's Worship which is not by himself commanded or where in the New Testament we are told that God will be angry with us for doing any thing which he hath no where forbid either by general or particular Laws For unless this can be shewn there can be no colour for this Pretence and we are sufficiently sure that no such Place can be produced out of the Bible It is acknowledged by all that the Holy Scriptures as to all that is necessary to be believed or done in order to Salvation as to all the essential and substantial Parts of Divine Worship is a plain and perfect Rule but it is as certain that the outward Circumstances of Time Place Habit and Gesture are not determined in the New Testament as they were in many cases by Moses's Law and yet God cannot be at least visibly and publickly worshipped without them If therefore these be not determined in Scripture and it is unlawful to
have taken due care to inform others rightly of the matter and warn them of the danger till I have endeavoured to rectifie their judgments concerning the innocency of my action and intention and given them notice of the evil that might possibly by my action happen to them If I dig a pit or lay a block in the way whereby others not knowing any thing of it are hurt and wounded here I stand chargeable with it and am guilty in causing them to fall but if they are plainly and often told of it and being forewarned yet will run into the danger they are then only to thank themselves and it is purely their own fault Now if it be thus in cases that are liable to suspicion and misinterpretation it holds much more in our Ceremonies and the orders of our Church where the offence that is taken at them ariseth not so much from the nature of the injunctions as from mens gross Ignorance misconceit or perverseness Thus men are no longer weak in Scripture sense than they are inculpably Ignorant or which is all one the Plea of weakness is gone after that sufficient instruction hath been given or offered to them and other allowances made according to mens different capacities of understanding This shall suffice for the first thing propounded to shew what is the true notion of a weak Brother 2 I proceed to give you an account what it is to offend such an one Because I write for the use of the Common people only I shall not trouble them with the several significations of the Greek word which is Translated Scandal or offence nor distinctly consider the several places of Scripture where it is used only so far as plainly to shew First that people are generally mistaken in the sense they have of it Secondly What it is truly to offend or give offence 1. That people are generally mistaken about the sense of offending or giving offence For by it they commonly understand displeasing or grieving another and making him angry with them and so consequently they think themselves in Conscience bound to forbear all those things which godly persons do not like or approve of or is contrary to their fancy and judgment It is notorious that most of the ordinary sort of Dissenters who assign this as the reason of their not conforming to the Established Laws of the Church because by doing so they shall offend their Brethren mean nothing else by it but that they shall fall into disgrace with incur the displeasure and provoke the anger of those with whom they have held Communion for a long time in religious exercises They good men will be mightily troubled and vexed to see or hear such a sad thing and this is taken by many amongst them for an heinous crime even the same which St. Paul calls Scandalizing a weak Brother to do any thing which may chance to put any of their Godly Brethren out of humour The occasion of this false apprehension is in all likelyhood the Ambiguity of our English word offend which is used in the Translation of our Bibles In our Language it signifies to displease or to do something which another dislikes but the Greek word which is so rendered signifies to lay a stumbling block in the way of another which causes him to fall or to ensnare and deceive him into something that is evil as I shall shew more largely presently We must not therefore interpret the places of Scripture where offend or offence are found by the common importance of the words amongst us but by the undoubted signification of the Original word which all learned men agree to have quite another sense It must not be concealed that there is one place in the famous fourteenth chapter of the Romans that seems to favour this popular conceit v. 15. If thy Brother be grieved with thy meat now walkest thou not charitably and it is the only one I know of that sounds this way but surely it is more reasonable that this one verse should be interpreted by all the other places of Scripture about this matter than all the rest explained agreeably to this single verse Nay it sufficiently appears that by grieving our Brother is not meant displeasing him or making him sorry or sad but wounding or hurting him and so it is used to denote that which causes grief or sorrow For in the very next words it follows destroy not him with thy meat for whom Christ died and what is here expressed by grieving is v. 13. called putting a stumbling-block or an occasion to fall and v. 21. it is good neither to eat Flesh nor drink Wine nor any thing whereby thy Brother stumbleth or is offended or is made weak all which signifie the same with being grieved To be offended or grieved is not to be troubled at what another hath done out of pity and concern for his Soul but to receive hurt our selves from it being by it drawn or deceived into some sin and our own fall occasioned by what our Brother hath done is that which creates the grief and trouble But because this mistake doth so generally prevail amongst many as I hope well disposed people who think that they must not do any thing at which good men are displeased or grieved I shall offer these few things to their consideration 1. That thus to censure and condemn the actions and to be displeased and angry with the persons of those that differ from them or refuse any longer to joyn with them in their Separate Congregations is a great instance of peevishness and uncharitableness and is that very sin which St. Paul often warns his weak believers against viz. that they should not rashly judge those who knew their duty and understood their Christian liberty better than themselves This seems to be the same with that Argument the Papists use to perswade men into or to keep them in their Communion as the safest way to Heaven since they so confidently damn all Men whom tho never so unjustly they thrust out of their Church Because some of our Dissenting Brethren are so froward and unmerciful in their censures and so fond of their own way as to brand all that return to the Church with the infamous names of Apostates Time-servers Men that have made Shipwrack of Faith and a good Conscience and have forsaken Christ for fear of Persecution and the like therefore all those who are convinced of the lawfulness of Conformity yet ought still to continue with them in their Separation lest they provoke and irritate their anger and displeasure against them and thus any company of men that shall joyn together and resolve to quarrel with all that do not as they do or that shall leave their society must oblige all for ever to remain with them for fear of giving them offence If what I do is not evil in it self it cannot become such because another Man is causelesly angry with me for doing of it Let
is apt to breed scruples and perplexities in well meaning but less knowing members of it and by degrees produces a distast or dislike of our Worship and plainly hinders the efficacy of the ordinances of Christ as administred in our Church whilest it creates prejudices in people against them as impure and corrupt and why there should not be a due regard had to those many who are Offended at our Dissenters Conventicle Worship as well as of those who are said to be Scandalized by our Church service I cannot at all guess I shall only say here that irreverent sitting at the receiving the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Mens unmannerly wearing their Hats in time of Divine Worship and oftentimes putting them off but half way at their Prayers their indecent postures and antick gestures at their devotions the extravagancies and follies not to say worse some of them are guilty of in their extemporary effusions the strange uncouth Metaphors and Phrases they use in their Preaching in a word the slovenly performance of Divine Worship amongst the Dissenters is much more Scandalous then all the Ceremonies of our Church can ever be 4. Consider the Scandal that is hereby given to Magistrates and our Superiours by bringing their Laws and Authority into contempt concerning which the forenamed Mr. Jeans in his first Edition of his Discourse about Abstinence from all Appearance of Evil hath these words If saith he it were better to be thrown into the bottom of the Sea with a Millstone about ones Neck than to offend a little one a poor and illiterate Artizan what expression shall we then find answerable to the heinousness of a Scandal given to a Pious Magistrate to a Religious Prince to a Parliament and Convocation to an whole Church and Commonwealth 5. By this Separation from the Church great Scandal is given to the Papists not that they are displeased at it they are not indeed offended in that sense but this serves wonderfully to harden them in their false and Idolatrous Worship it increaseth their confidence that their Church is the only true Church of Christ because amongst them only is found Peace and Unity and this is a mighty temptation to many wavering Christians to turn Papists insomuch that Mr. Baxter hath told us that Thousands have been drawn to Popery or confirmed in it by this Argument already and he saith of himself that he is persuaded that all the Arguments else in Bellarmin and all other Books that ever were written have not done so much to make Papists in England as the multitude of Sects among our selves This indeed is a great Scandal to our Protestant Religion and is that which the Papists are on all occasions so forward to object against us and hit us in the teeth with and by our hearty uniting with the Church of England we may certainly wrest out of their hands the most dangerous weapon they use against the Reformation 6. This tends to the Scandal of Religion in general It prejudiceth men against it as an uncertain thing a matter of endless dispute and debate it makes some Men utterly reject it as consisting mostly in little trifles and niceties about which they observe the greatest noise and contention to be made or as destructive of the Publick Peace of Societies when they see what dangerous feuds and quarrels commence from our Religious Differences and all the disorder and confusion that they have caused here in England shall by some be charged upon Christianity it self Thus our causeless Separations and Divisions open a wide door to Atheisme and all kind of Prophaneness and Irreligion After this manner it was of old and always will be where there are Parties in Religion and one contends that their Separation is lawful and the other that it is unlawful the Common people soon become doubtful and ready to forsake all Religion I might add here that such Separations necessarily occasion breach of Charity they beget implacable enmities and animosities Hence cometh strife emulation envying one Party continually endeavouring to overtop the other watching for one anothers halting rejoycing in one anothers sins and misfortunes constant undermining one another to the disturbance of the Publick Government and endangering the Civil Peace of all which and much more than I can now mention the present distracted condition of our Nation is so great and undenyable an evidence that there need no more words to shew the mischiefs that attend such Divisions and now let any one judge whether the Peace and Unity of the Church the maintaining of Charity amongst Brethren the keeping out Popery and Atheism the preservation of the Authority of the Magistrate and quiet of the Society we are Members of the honour and credit of our Religion Lastly Whether giving Offence to all both Conformists and Nonconformists those only excepted of our own particular Sect and Division nay Scandalizing them also in the true and proper sense of Scandal be not of far greater and more weighty consideration than the fear of displeasing or grieving some few weak dissatisfied Brethren Wo to those by whom Offences come But these things I have very lightly touched because they have been the subject of many Sermons and discourses lately published To sum up all I have said Since they who dissent from the Church of England are not such weak persons as St. Paul all along describes and provides for since we cannot by our Conformity really Scandalize or Offend them in that sense in which the Scriptures use those words since tho we did give Offence to them by our Conformity yet that would not excuse us from doing our Duty and by refusing to Conform we should do both them and others greater hurt and mischief I think I may safely conclude that there cannot lie any obligation upon any private Christian as the case now stands amongst us to absent himself from his Parish-Church or to forbear the use of the Forms of Prayer or Ceremonies by Law appointed for fear of Offending his weak Brethren I end all with one word of Advice First to those who are not convinced of the lawfulness of Conformity Secondly to those who are satisfied that it is lawful 1. To those who are not convinced of the lawfulness of Conformity and therefore urge so hard that they ought not to be Offended by us I would beseech them that they would take some care and make some Conscience to avoid giving any needless Offence to those of the Church of England and this cannot but be thought a reasonable request since they require all others to be so tender of them They ought not therefore to meet in such numbers nor at the same time at which we assemble to Worship God in our publick Churches Let them not affront our Service and Common-Prayers nor revile our Bishops and Ministers nor put on their Hats when at any time they chance to be present at our Service in our Churches nor talk nor read in Books nor make sour
we be said to give offence to others in either of these sences by conforming to the Institutions and Rites of the Church of England 1. Not in the first sence for that can onely be in one or both of these two cases either first by doing that which is essentially and in its own nature evil and a sin Or secondly by doing that which is directly a temptation and a snare to induce another to do that which is a sin Now if it can be shewn that complying with the Rites and Service of the Church of England is giving offence in either of these sences then I here profess I will my self immediately turn their Proselyte and renounce Conformity and protest against it for ever 1. It hath scarce ever yet been so much as intimated that the Church of England requires any thing as a condition of Communion with her that is essentially evil None of our adversaries that I know of have yet dared to charge her Doctrine with falshood or her Discipline with any thing that is in it self evil And when any shall adventure to do it I doubt not but he will find enough to enter the lists with him Even our bitterest Enemies of the Romish Communion have dared to charge us no further in either of these but onely that we are defective in both and reject many things which the Church of Christ as they pretend hath believed and practised in the ancient and primitive ages of it They would rather chuse to call us Schismaticks than Hereticks or to prove us Hereticks not because we believe or teach any things for necessary Doctrines which are false but rather because we do not teach or believe all things that are Christian and true Neither do they charge our Liturgy and Service or Form of Worship with any thing that is materially evil no nor redundant but onely deficient in many Usages and Rites which they pretend to be Apostolical And if our own Brethren must be more spightful and bitter against us than our worst Adversaries let them look to it that even they become not their accusers at the great day But yet thanks be to God they have not adventured to do this and will be unsuccessful enough when they do it and therefore themselves free us from giving any offence in our Conformity in this sence of giving offence i. e. doing any thing which is formally a Sin our selves and thereby inducing others into the same evil by joyning with us 2. Neither secondly do I see any one sin that Conformity is directly introductive of or a temptation unto and I will believe it will puzzle the most curious and inquisitive to find out any such I have so much charity for my dear Mother the Church and so much duty I thank God yet left in me as to dare to justifie her from this imputation I am sure she intends no sin in what she doth nor knowns of any evil that her Communion will betray any man into All that she designs in her Doctrine is to teach the truth as it is in Jesus and to keep close to that Symbol of Faith which was once delivered unto the Saints And what she intends and aims at in her Liturgie and Discipline is by the one to keep men from innovating and corrupting that Faith or debauching it in their manners and deteining it in unrighteousness And by the other to direct them to worship God in such a way as is suitable to his own nature and to the Principles of such a holy Religion and thereby conciliate that grace that may enable them to live so as the Worship of such a God and the Belief of such a Religion require and oblige them to do I must confess in one thing the Church of England may be an occasion of a great deal of sin in the world but it is such as will as little advantage our Brethren to have it granted as it will be any disparagement or disadvantage to be caused by it I mean in being an occasion of all that in and guilt that all those bring upon themselves that rail and cry out so much upon it that separate and divide from it and studiously maintain and keep up an unreasonable and downright Schism against it But certainly all men will see that this is an offence onely taken and not given and ought no more to be objected against the Church than Murther and Adultery Theft and Robbery ought to be charged upon the Laws of God that declare the same to be sin Were there no such thing as the Constitution of a Church these men would not be guilty of Schism and unjust Separation from it But so if there were no Law there would be no transgression and Adulterers may as well accuse the Law for their sin in one case as Schismaticks can accuse the Constitution of the Church in the other They are both in this case equally culpable i. e. indeed not at all In a word and to conclude this Period if Piety and becoming expressions of Devotion in the publick Worship of God If Gravity Decency and Order in the Offices of Religion And if engaging men to a due respect and regard to the rules of the Gospel be sins or evils to be eschewed and dreaded by men then I will grant that Conformity to the Church of England may possibly give offence in this sence of giving of it but if not I do not see any reason to apprehend or fear any danger at all of it By these considerations it will appear we are free from giving offence by our Conformity to the Rules of our Church in this first sence of Scandal and giving Offence 2. I proceed therefore now to enquire if we cannot clear our selves sufficiently from it in the second notion of these things also And this I think will best and most plainly be determined by considering what can be thought just cause of sorrow and grief to a good man or a reasonable discouragement or hinderance to him in his way of Duty I mean still cause of these given to him by another Now these I think I may reduce pretty safely to these three Heads 1. Some dishonour offered to God and his Religion 2. The Wickedness and Profaneness of men 3. The making the way of Religion and Duty more cumbersome and difficult than otherwise it would be These are great and just causes of offence and grief to a good man It cannot but greatly afflict a good man to behold his God whom he adores and honours and loves above all things affronted and dishonoured his Laws violated his Authority contemned and trampled upon by daring and foolish men Rivers of waters saith the holy Psalmist run down mine eyes because men keep not thy law Psal 119. 136. And it cannot but be cause of the like sorrow to such a man to see other men for whom he hath a great and concerning charity and whom he loves as his own soul to live in sin
will suggest enough to him Neither God nor Religion can be so much concerned in the one as in the other nor can the Souls of men or the peace of the World be so much endangered by private offences as by those against the publick Church Mens guilts are higher and more injurious to themselves and the effects are more dangerous and mischievous to others which is another good consideration to sway men in this case For a wise man will weigh the probable effects of what he doth and where an honest and uninstructed man is uncertain whether he may do or forbear such things and after his enquiry remains scrupulous and unresolved it is a good means to determine himself by to consider as well as he can what the effects and consequences of what he is going to do or forbear in all likelihood will be and that which he sees attended with a train of the worse and more mischievous consequences disargues it self and pronounceth its own condemnation And by these effects he may make as true a difference as if the plain essence and nature of the things were naked unto his view 3. Offending the Church of God is offending those to whom we owe more duty than we do unto any private party whatsoever I confess charity and respect and all the possible ininstances of it we owe to every private person with whom we converse and to whom we are any way related and God hath made all this matter of plain duty But it is a great deal more than this that we owe those that are over us in the Lord and his whole Church even as much more as we owe of deference and Duty of Obedience and Submission to a Father and a Governour and those that God and Nature hath set above us above that common Charity and Duty that we are to owe to one that is in all respects our equal The Laws of all Nations consider us under greater obligations to our Parents and to our Country than to any single persons whatsoever and make injuring of a Father or our Prince more heinous than doing the same to a common person upon the same level with us And I am sure the Laws of God and Religion too considering us as Members of the Church and calling the Governours of it our Fathers in Christ let us know what great duty we owe to them and of how much greater guilt it must needs be to offend them than our Fellow-christian or any Party in which we can be engaged There is a complication of sins and guilt in the one when there is but the breach of common charity in the other I deny not but men may joyn themselves to such a Party and make another man their Guide and commit themselves to the Conduct of him and thereby oblige themselves to more duty than they owe to others But this is duty of their own choice and the failure in it a sin of their own causing and doth no more supercede their original and primer obligations which God and Nature had layd on them than the being faithful to a company of Banditi will excuse disloyalty to our Prince and Country or than giving a gift to the Corban among the Jews would atone undutifulness to a wanting Parent However men may divide themselves from the Church of which Providence and Religion have made them Members and enter themselves into separate Factions yet they must remember that they owe duty to it still that no voluntary and second Compacts of their own can dissolve their primitive Obligations or their care to continue faithful to the one expiate their regardless offending of the other for they do owe more duty to the one than to the other what they pretend to owe to one is contracted by themselves but what they owe to the other is bound on them by the sacred and strong ties of Religion and Providence And this is another good Argument to determine a scrupulous person in this matter If he be in doubt which he had best to offend the Church of Christ or his own private Party and know not by what considerations to determine his resolution let him in Gods name consider to which he owes most what the Laws of God make his duty to the one more than to the other and then if he be honest and single-eyed he will soon be able to resolve his scruple and know what choice he ought to make 4. Offending the Church of God is truly a grievous Scandal and an Offence in the true Gospel-notion of it but the offending particular persons may possibly not be so That which I mean is this the Church of God we may be sure will not take offence but upon just reason but other men may call that an offence to them which really is not If we do that which grieves and injureth the whole Church then we do properly offend and are guilty of Scandal in the true notion of it But if we onely offend some private persons of our own party they may call that an offence which is not so For every grieving and offending of another in that sense of the word is not a formal Scandal as I hinted before and hath been since this made clear by a better Pen. And to apply this to our present matter in debate this is really so in our Case of Conformity the refusal of it and separating our selves from the Communion of the Church is truly that giving of offence which the Gospel condemns it is laying a snare in the way of men intrapping them into that damnable sin of Schism it is an obstructing the effect of Religion and a direct hinderance of that Concord and Love that Unanimity and Peace that it so strictly calls for among Christians and designes to render the World happy by But you may challenge any dissenting person to shew how angring some private persons and a single party of Schismaticks can be a Scandal to them or to name any one sin that it is temptation to them to commit and to instance that prejudice or disservice that it doth to Christian Religion It is possible I must confess that grief and anger at such a persons Conformity may irritate and provoke men to some things that are evil But then I say that this is the fault of them that are angry and not his with whom they are causelesly offended it may be taking an offence on their parts but not giving it by him For if we must call every thing an offence that any man doth pervert into an occasion of evil there will scarce any no not the best actions of men escape that denomination This methinks is a very material consideration and ought always to sway with men in this Case and if men could not determine themselves in it by other Reasons yet they might by this They should consider which is most likely to judge truest what is Scandal and what is not and when both sides say they are offended
there is no doubt but they may be composed with the same advantage of expression and pronounced with the same affection as the Prayers of our own extempore composure and if they are so they will have the same advantage of the musick of speech to excite the Devotions of the People but as for novelty of method and expression that may indeed entertain their minds and divert them from roving out to other objects but even this entertainment is a roving and excursion of their minds from the acts of Prayer which while they are amused with the novelty of the phrase and method of the Prayer can be no more intent on the devotion of it than while they are busied about secular objects and affairs And indeed that seeming devotion that is raised in the minds of the People by the gingling of the Ministers words about their fancies is generally false and counterfeit for as words do naturally impress the fancy so the fancy doth naturally excite the sensitive affections so that when the affections are excited meerly by the art and musick of the words of Prayer it is not Devotion but Mechanism for there is no doubt but men may be and many times are strangely affected with the words of Prayer when they have not the least spark of true devotion to the matter of it for when they fancy the matter of Prayer and are affected with it meerly for the sake of the words the movement of their affection will cease as soon as the impression is worn out which the words make upon their fancies and if in the mean time they happen to hear any other matter exprest in the same affectionate words they will in all probability be as much affected with it as they are now with the matter of Prayer but if the mind be truly devout and doth affect the matter of Prayer for it self and not for the sake of the words I cannot imagin how new words should any way advantage its devotion unless they were to express new matter Since therefore the matter of publick Prayer neither is nor ought to be new unless it be upon extraordinary publick emergencies what colour of reason can there be assign'd why the devotion of the hearers should be more affected with it in new words than in old supposing it be express'd and pronounc'd with the same propriety and affection in both And thus I have shewn that those advantages of publick Devotion which are pretended to be peculiar to conceiv'd Prayers are for the most part imaginary and that so far forth as they are real they are more peculiar to Forms of Prayer I proceed to the third and last enquiry viz. 3. Whether there are not sundry advantages of publick Devotion peculiar to Forms of Prayer which conceived Prayers cannot pretend to That there are I do affirm and will indeavour to prove by these following Instances 1. One great advantage that is peculiar to publick Forms of Prayer is That the People may address themselves to them with greater preparation for if they please they may peruse the words before-hand and consider the sense and matter of them and indeavour to affect their minds with it as for instance when I know before-hand what words my sins will be confest in when I am to joyn in the publick Devotions I can consider before-hand the sense and meaning of them and prepare such affections as are sutable to them as suppose the confession be that of our Church's Liturgy wherein we begin with Almighty and most merciful Father I can consider the meaning of these words before I come to Church and from the consideration of God's almighty and most merciful nature excite my affections to an awful dread of his power and an ingenuous sense of his mercy by which when I come to joyn with these words in the publick confession I shall be duely affected with the sense of them and my soul will be ready melted into all that filial sorrow and humiliation for my sin which the consideration that I have offended by it an Almighty and most merciful Father suggests and so if I consider and apply before-hand all the rest of the confession I shall thereby tune and set my affections to the sense and matter of each particular phrase and expression in it which 't will be impossible for me to do when I am to joyn with an extempore Prayer because I cannot know before-hand what the phrases and expressions of it will be besides which upon the words of publick Forms there may be written excellent Paraphrases and Meditations such as is that of the Companion to the Temple by reading of which the Devotions of the People may be very much excited and improved which is such an advantage as the words of extempore Prayer will not admit of 2. Another advantage peculiar to publick Forms is That in joining with them the People may pray with more understanding than they can well be supposed to do in conceiv'd and extempore Prayer wherein generally the Minister is forc'd to make use of such words and expressions as come first to hand having not leisure enough to pick and choose his words without making long and undecent pauses and interruptions so that sometimes he is fain to use a hard word which perhaps not half the People understand because an easier doth not come to his mind and sometimes to intangle his expressions with long Parentheses sometimes to darken his matter with far fetch'd Metaphors or to express it by halfs in broken Sentences and sometimes to run out his Periods to an inordinate length by which the sense of them is very much clouded and obscur'd these and such like inconveniences all the World knows do very commonly attend extempore Effusions and let a mans fancy and tongue be never so fluent and voluble he can never be so secure of expressing himself intelligibly to the People when he prayers extempore as he might be if he took time enough before-hand to choose his words and form his expressions so that the People may be much more secure of understanding what they pray for when they joyn with a Form than when they joyn with an extempore Prayer for to be sure in composing publick Forms more care will be taken of the phrase that the words may fit the matter and express it intelligibly to the People than there can be in extempore Prayer which admits of no long consideration no alteration upon second thoughts no after-scanning or revisal as Forms of Prayer do but it must pass as it happens whether it be intelligible or no by reason of which those who occupy the room of the unlearned are many times forc'd to break off praying for want of understanding what the words and expressions of the Prayer mean for whether the Prayer be spoken in an unknown Tongue or in words that are unintelligible to the People it is all one to them for still their understanding is unfruitful and so long their devotion must
that since themselves were desired by them to undertake for this Child they as such Sureties are particularly concerned to mind the Parents of their Duty and if need be to rebuke them sharply for neglecting it since they did in effect and to all purpose of Obligation undertake for the performance of it when the Sureties undertook for the Child Moreover when the Child is grown to years of Knowledge and come abroad into the World he is liable to the Charitable Admonitions of his Sureties as well as of his Parents in case he does amiss and their Reproofs are more likely to take place than those of most other Persons Now though all Christians as Members of one Body are to take care of and to watch over one another yet some are more Particularly Obliged and have greater Advantages to do those Works of Spiritual Charity than others And I appeal to all considering Men if Sureties at Baptism may not with great Authority and with likelyhood of good effect Reprove both those Negligent Parents and Vnruly Children for whom they have undertaken to the Church The Parents for not minding to Educate their Children in the knowledge and keeping of the Baptismal Vow or the Children for not hearkening to good Admonition And in this Age when the Duty of Christian Reproof is so generally omitted it were well if the defect were this way a little supplied But it is by no means desireable that the opportunity thereof and the obligation thereunto should be taken away I know some will be apt to say that this is but rarely Practised But that is no sufficient Answer to what I have said For when we use to judge of the goodness of a Rule or Custom by the good that comes of observing it we must look where 't is kept though it be kept but by few and not where 't is broken And if the Dissenters have nothing to say against the use of Sureties but that the end of this Appointment is seldom regarded themselves may help to remove this Objection by returning to the Church and encreasing the number of those that do pursue the End of it And thus doing they shall have the benefit of this Order of the Church and the Church the benefit of their good Examples As for the use of the Interrogatories put to the Sureties and their Answers they are a Solemn Declaration of what Baptism doth oblige all Baptiz'd Persons to and that Infants do stand ingaged to perform the Vow of Baptism when they shall come to years of knowledge This is the known meaning of the Contract nor did I ever hear of any that otherwise understood it and therefore I see not why it should be said to be liable to misunderstanding After all there is one General Objection yet remaining which still prevails with some Persons and that is That some of our Prayers are to be found in the Mass-Book and the Breviary and the Offices of the Church of Rome This Objection hath made a great noise but I appeal to Understanding Men if there be any sense in it No Man will say that 't is enough to make any Prayer or Form of Devotion or Instruction unlawful to be used that the same is to be found in the Mass-Book c. For then the Lords Prayer the Psalms and a great part of the Scriptures besides and the Creeds must never be used by us And therefore whether any part of the Roman Service is to be used by us or not must be judged of by some other Rule that is by the Word of God So that 't is a vain Exception against any part of our Liturgie to say it was taken out of the Mass-Book unless it could be shewn withal that it is some part of the Romish Superstition I know it has been said that the Scriptures being of necessary use are to be retained by us though the Church of Rome retains them but that there is not the same Reason for Forms which are not necessary but in those we ought to go as far from that Church as ever 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 not in which they do well And as for the Papists themselves we do not in the least countenance them wherein they are wrong by agreeing with them wherein they are right And as for the Things themselves they are not the worse for being used by them We should allow the Papists a greater Power to do mischief than they have if their using of some good things should render all use of them hurtful to us The Case in short is this When our Reformers were intent upon the Reformation of the Liturgie they designed to Purge it of all those corrupt Additions which the usurpt Authority of the Church of Rome had long since brought into it and to retain nothing but what was agreeable to the Holy Scriptures and to the Practice of the purer Ages of the Church And in this they did like Wise Men because thus it would be evident to all the World that they Reformed upon just necessary Reasons and not meerly out of a desire of Change and Innovation since they Purged the Forms of Divine Service from nothing but Innovations and Corruptions and an unprofitable croud of Ceremonies 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 used also by the Church before Romanism had Corrupted it are not as much to be Valued because they were once used by good Christians as to be run down because they have been since used by Superstitious and Idolatrous Men. But to conclude this Matter If any Man would set himself to expose the Mass-Book he would I suppose lay hold upon nothing but the Corruptions that are in it and things that are obnoxious to just reproof not on things that are justifiable and may easily be defended And the reason of this is plain because the Mass-Book is to blame for those parts of it only but not for these Now for such Passages as the Mass-Book it self is not to be blamed for neither is our Liturgie to be blamed if we will speak justly of things and without Prejudice and Passion I have now considered all those Exceptions against the Solemn Service of God by our Liturgie which the Dissenters are thought to insist most upon Not but that some other Exceptions have been made by the Ministers of that persuasion But this I hope was without design to prejudice the People against our Communion but rather to gain some alterations which in their Judgment would have been advantageous to the Book of Common-Prayer and given it a greater perfection whether they were right in this or not I will not now dispute being very desirous as I pray God we may all be to avoid Controversies in this Matter as much as may be Nay
declares against in these Words Article 22 d. The Romish Doctrine of Purgatory is a vain thing fondly invented and grounded on no Warranty of Scripture but rather Repugnant to the Word of God As to that of Auricular Confession nothing like it is taught or practised in our Church Her Members are obliged onely to Confess their Sins to God except when 't is necessary to Confess them to Men for the relieving of their Consciences and their obtaining the Prayers of others or in order to the righting of those they have wronged when due satisfaction can't otherwise be made or in order to their giving Glory to God when they are justly accused and their guilt proved in which cases and such like 't is without dispute our duty to confess to Men. Nor have we any such Doctrine in our Church as that of the Dependence of the Efficacy of the Sacraments on the Priests intention but the contrary is sufficiently declared Article 26th viz. that The Efficacy of Christs Ordinance is not taken away by the Wickedness of those that Minister 3. The Church of Rome subjects her Members by not a few of her Doctrines and Practices to Vile Affections and Vices of all sorts As might be largely shewed See Libertas Evangelica Chap. 17. and will be in part under the next Head of discourse But our Church neither maintains any Licentious Principle nor gives Countenance to any such Practice our Adversaries themselves being Judges Secondly The Church of England is at the greatest distance from that of Rome in all those Doctrines and Practices in which she is justly charged with plainly contradicting the Holy Scripture For instance not to repeat any of those ranked under the foregoing head several of which may also fall under this Her Doctrines of Image-Worship of Invocation of Saints with her gross practising upon them of Transubstantiation of Pardons and Indulgencies of the Sacrifice of the Mass wherein Christ is pretended to be still offered up afresh for the quick and dead Her keeping the Holy Scriptures from the Vulgar and making it so hainous a crime to read the Bible because by this means her foul Errours will be in such danger of being discovered and the People of not continuing implicite believers Her injoyning the saying of Prayers and the Administration of the Sacraments in an unknown Tongue Her Robbing the Laity of the Cup in the Lords Supper Her prohibiting Marriage to Priests Her Doctrines of Merit and works of Supererogation Her making simple Fornication a mere Venial sin Her damning all that are not of her Communion Her most devilish cruelties towards those whom she is pleased to pronounce Hereticks Her darling Sons Doctrines of Equivocation and Mental Reservations of the Popes power of dispensing with the most Solemn Oaths and of absolving Subjects from their Allegiance to their Lawful Princes with many others not now to be reckoned up But the Church of England Abominates these and the like Principles and Practices As to the instances of Image-Worship Invocation of Saints and Pardons and Indulgences what our Church declareth concerning Purgatory she adds concerning these things too Article 22 d. viz. That the Romish Doctrine concerning Pardons Worship and Adoration as well of Images as of Relicks as also Invocation of Saints is a fond thing vainly invented and grounded on no Warranty of Scripture but rather Repugnant to the Word of God And as there is no such Practice as Worshipping of Images in our Church so all are destroyed which Popery had Erected among us Nor have we in our Church any Co-Mediators with Jesus Christ we Worship only one God by one only Mediator the Man Christ Jesus And the now-mentioned Practices our Church doth not only declare to be Repugnant to the Holy Scriptures but to be likewise most grosly Idolatrous viz. in the Homilies As to the Doctrine of Transubstantiation our Church declareth her sense thereof Article 28th in these Words Transubstantiation or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine in the Supper of the Lord cannot be proved by Holy Writ but it is repugnant to the plain terms of Scripture overthroweth the Nature of a Sacrament and hath given occasion to many Superstitions The Body of Christ is given taken and eaten in the Lords Supper only after an Heavenly and Spiritual manner and the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is Faith The Sacrament of the Lords Supper was not by Christs Ordinance reserved carried about lifted up or Worshipped As to the Sacrifice of the Mass see what our Church saith of it Article 31st viz. That the offering of Christ once made is that perfect Redemption Propitiation and Satisfaction for all the Sins of the whole World both Original and Actual and there is none other Satisfaction for sins but that alone Wherefore the Sacrifices of Masses in the which it was commonly said that the Priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead to have Remission of pain or guilt were Blasphemous Fables and dangerous deceits As to the Church of Romes locking up the Scriptures and prohibiting the reading of them Our Church hath not only more than once caused them to be Translated into our Mother-Tongue but also as I need not shew gives as free Liberty to the reading of the Bible as of any other Book nor is any duty in our Church esteemed more necessary than that of Reading the Scriptures and Hearing them read As to Praying and Administring the Sacraments in an unknown Tongue as this is contrary to the Practice of the Church of England so is it to her Declaration also Article 24th viz. That it is a thing plainly Repugnant to the Word of God and the Custom of the Primitive Church to have publick Prayers in the Church or to Administer Sacraments in a Tongue not understanded of the People As to Robbing the Laity of the Cup in the Lords Supper in Our Church they may not receive the Bread if they refuse the Cup. And Article 30. tells us That the Cup of the Lord is not to be denied to the Laity for both the parts of the Lords Sacrament by Christs Ordinance and Commandment ought to be Administred to all Christians alike As to prohibiting Marriage to Priests this is declared against Article 32. Bishops Priests and Deacons are not Commanded by Gods Law either to vow the Estate of single Life or to abstain from Marriage therefore it is Lawful for them as for all other Christian Men to Marry at their own discretion as they shall judge the same to serve better to godliness As to the Popish Doctrine of Merit Our Church declares against this Article 11. 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 viz. such a Faith as purifies the Heart and works by Love is a most wholsome Doctrine and very
Subscription that is required to the 39 Articles it is very Consistent with Our Churches giving all Men Liberty to Judge for themselves and not Exercising Authority as the Romish Church doth over our Faith for she requires no Man to believe those Articles but at worst only thinks it Convenient that none should receive Orders or be admitted to Benefices c. but such as do believe them not all as Articles of our Faith but many as inferiour truths and requires Subscription to them as a Test whereby to Judge who doth so believe them But the Church of Rome requires all under Pain of Damnation to believe all her long Bed-roul of Doctrines which have only the Stamp of her Authority and to believe them too as Articles of Faith or to believe them with the same Divine Faith that we do the indisputable Doctrines of our Saviour and his Apostles For a proof hereof the Reader may consult the Bull of Pope Pius the Fourth which is to be found at the End of the Council of Trent Herein it is Ordained that Profession of Faith shall be made and sworn by all Dignitaries Prebendaries and such as have Benefices with Cure Military Officers c. in the Form following IN. Do believe with a firm Faith and do profess all and every thing contained in the Confession of Faith which is used by the Holy Roman Church viz. I believe in one God the Father Almighty and so to the end of the Nicene Creed I most firmly admit and embrace the Apostolical and Ecclesiastical Traditions and the other Observances and Constitutions of the said Church Also the Holy Scriptures according to the Sense which our Holy Mother the Church hath held and doth hold c. I profess also that there are truly and properly Seven Sacraments of the New Law instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord and necessary to the Salvation of Mankind although all are not necessary to every individual Person c. I also admit and receive the Received and approved Rites of the Catholick Church in the Solemn Administration of all the foresaid Sacraments of which I have given the Reader a taste I Embrace and Receive all and every thing which hath been declared and defined concerning Original Sin and Justification in the Holy Synod of Trent I likewise profess that in the Mass a True Proper and Propitiatory Sacrifice is Offered to God for the quick and dead And that the Body and Blood of Christ is truly really and substantially in the most Holy Eucharist c. I also Confess that whole and intire Christ and the true Sacrament is received under one of the kinds only I constantly hold that there is a Purgatory and that the Souls there detained are relieved by the Prayers of the Faithful And in like manner that the Saints Reigning with Christ are to be Worshipped and Invoked c. And that their Relicks are to be Worshipped I most firmly assert that the Images of Christ and of the Mother of God always a Virgin and of the other Saints are to be had and kept and that due Honour and Worship is to be given to them I Affirm also that the power of Indulgences is left by Christ in his Church and that the use of them is very Salutiferous to Christian People I acknowledge the Holy Catholick and Apostolick Roman Church the Mother and Mistress of all Churches and I Profess and Swear Obedience to the Bishop of Rome the Successor of St. Peter Prince of the Apostles and the Vicar of Jesus Christ Also all the other things delivered decreed and declared by the Holy Canons and Oecumenical Councils and especially by the Holy Synod of Trent I undoubtedly receive and profess As also all things contrary to these and all Heresies Condemned Rejected and Anathematized by the Church I in like manner Condemns Reject and Anathematize This true Catholick Faith viz. all this Stuff of their own together with the Articles of the Creed without which no Man can be Saved which at this present I truly profess and sincerely hold I will God Assisting me most constantly Retain and Confess intire and inviolate and as much as in me lies will take Care that it be held taught and declared by those that are under me or the Care of whom shall be committed to me I the same N. do Profess Vow and Swear So help me God and the Holy Gospels of God Who when he Reads this can forbear pronouncing the Reformation of the Church of England a most Glorious Reformation 2. As to the Motives our Church proposeth for our belief of the Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures viz. that that Doctrine is of Divine Revelation they are no other than such as are found in the Scriptures themselves viz. the Excellency thereof which consists in its being wholly adapted to the reforming of mens Lives and renewing their Natures after the Image of God and the Miracles by which it is confirmed And as to the Evidence of the truth of the matters of Fact viz. that there were such Persons as the Scriptures declare to have revealed Gods will to the World such as Moses our Saviour Christ and his Apostles and that these Persons delivered such Doctrine and Confirmed it by such Miracles and that the Books of Scripture were written by those whose Names they bear I say as to the Evidence of the truth of these matters of Fact our Church placeth it not in her own Testimony or in the Testimony of any Particular Church and much less that of Rome but in the Testimony of the whole Catholick Church down to us from the time of the Apostles and of Vniversal Tradition taking in that of Strangers and Enemies as well as Friends of Jews and Pagans as well as Christians Secondly We proceed to shew that a Churches Symbolizing or agreeing in some things with the Church of Rome is no Warrant for Separation from the Church so agreeing Agreement with the Church of Rome in things either in their own nature good or made so by a Divine Precept none of our Dissenting Brethren could ever imagine not to be an indispensable duty Agreement with her in what is in its own nature Evil or made so by a Divine Prohibition none of us are so forsaken of all Modesty as to deny it to be an inexcusable sin The Question therefore is whether to agree with this Apostate Church in some things of an indifferent nature be a Sin and therefore a just ground for Separation from the Church so agreeing But by the way if we should suppose that a Churches agreeing with the Church of Rome in some indifferent things is sinful I cannot think that any of the more Sober Sort of Dissenters and I despair of success in arguing with any but such will thence infer that Separation from the Church so agreeing is otherwise warrantable than upon the account of those things being imposed as necessary terms of Communion But I am so far from taking it for granted
appointment it was first Erected But there was no necessity for this upon supposition that it had ceased to be abused for any considerable time and there were no appearance of an inclination in the People to abuse it again And no doubt all things of an indifferent Nature that have formerly been abused to Idolatry or Superstition ought to be taken away by the Governours whensoever they find their People again inclined so to abuse them at least if such abuse cannot probably be prevented by other means Sixthly But had Hezekiah suffered the Brazen Serpent still to stand no doubt private Persons who have no authority to make publick Reformations might Lawfully have made use of it to put them in mind of and affect them with the wonderful mercy of God expressed by it to their Fore-Fathers notwithstanding that many had not only formerly but did at that very nick of time make an Idol of it And much more might they have Lawfully continued in the Communion of the Church so long as there was no constraint laid upon them to joyn with them in their Idolatry As we do not read of any that Separated from the Church while the Brazen Serpent was permitted to stand as wofully abused as it was by the generality I will also conclude this Head with the sense of Mr. Calvin concerning Rites used and consequently superstitiously abused by the Papists expressed in these Words Let not any think me so austere or bound up Calv. de vitandâ Superstitione c. 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 Vitious To which may be added many other such like sayings of this Learned Person And thus much shall suffice to be discoursed upon our second general Head viz. That a Church's Symbolizing in some things with the Church of Rome is no Warrant for Separation from the Church so Symbolizing We now proceed in the Third and last place to shew That the Agreement which is between the Church of England and the Church of Rome is in no wise such as will make Communion with the Church of England unlawful We have shewed what a vastly wide Distance and Disagreement there is between the Church of England and that of Rome And we have sufficiently though with the greatest brevity made it apparent that a Church's Symbolizing or agreeing in some things with the Church of Rome and those such too as she hath abused in Idolatrous and grosly Superstitious Services is no just ground for Separation from the Church so agreeing And we have answered the Chief of those Arguments which have been brought for the Confirmation of the contrary Doctrine And now from what hath been discoursed it may with the greatest ease be prov'd that those things wherein our own Church particularly agreeth with the Romish Church do none of them speak such an Agreement therewith as will justifie Separation from our Church's Communion Now the particulars wherein our Church Symbolizeth with that of Rome which our Dissenters take offence at and make a pretence for Separation though all Dissenters are not offended at all of them and much less so offended as to make them all a pretence for Separation are principally these following First The Government of our Church by Bishops Secondly Our Churches prescribing a Liturgy or Set-Forms of Prayer and Administration of Sacraments and other Publick Offices Thirdly A Liturgy so contrived as that of our Church is Fourthly Certain Rites of our Church Particularly the Surplice the Cross in Baptism the Gesture of Kneeling at the Communion the Ring in Marriage and the Observation of certain Holy-days And to all these I shall speak very succinctly the limits I am confined to not permitting me to enlarge much upon any of them But I must first premise concerning them all in the general these following things First That I take it for granted that they are all indifferent in their own nature That there is nothing of Viciousness or Immorality in any of them to make them unlawful I know no body so unreasonable as not to grant this Secondly That there is no Express positive Law of God against any of these things I do not know of any such Law objected against any one of them And therefore if all or any of them are unlawful they must be made so either by Consequences drawn from Divine Laws or certain Circumstances attending them Thirdly That I am concerned in this Discourse to vindicate them from being unlawful upon the account onely of this one Circumstance viz. Our Symbolizing with the Church of Rome in them Now then First As to the Government of our Church by Bishops This is so far from being an Vnlawful Symbolizing with the Church of Rome that we have most clear Evidence of its being a Symbolizing with her in an Apostolical Institution And what Eminent Divines of the Presbyterial Party have acknowledg'd and is too evident to be denied or doubted by any who are not wholly ignorant of Church-History is sufficient I should think to satisfie unprejudiced persons concerning the truth of this And that is that this was the Government of all Churches in the World from the Apostles times for about 1500 years together Beza in his Treatise of a Threefold kind of Episcopacy Divine Humane and Satanical asserts concerning the second which is that which we call Apostolical that of this kind is to be understood whatsoever we read concerning the Authority of Bishops in Ignatius and other more Antient Writers And the famous Peter Du Moulin in his Book of the Pastoral Office written in defence of the Presbyterial Government acknowledgeth that presently after the Apostles times or even in their time as Ecclesiastical story witnesseth it was ordained that in every City one of the Presbytery should be called a Bishop who should have preheminence over his Collegues to avoid Confusion which oft times ariseth out of Equality And truly saith he this Form of Government all Churches every where received Mr. Calvin saith in his Institution of Christian Religion Quibus docendi munus injunctum erat c. Those to whom was committed the Office of Teaching they called them all Presbyters These Elected out of their number in L. 4. cap. 4. §. 2. each City one to whom in a special manner they gave the Title of Bishop lest Strife and Contention as it commonly happeneth should arise out of Equality And in his Epistle to Arch-bishop Cranmer he thus accosts him Illustrissime Domine Ornatissime Praesul c. Most Illustrious Sir and most Honourable Prelate and by me heartily Reverenced And tells him that if he might be serviceable to the Church of England he would not think much of passing over ten Seas for that purpose Again in his Epistle to the King of Poland he thus speaks of Patriarchs and Arch-bishops The Ancient Church did
them should in tract of time creep upon us we should certainly be much the better Christians for the observation of our Holy-days Mr. Calvin saith In Festis non recipiendis cuperem vos esse Constantiores c. I could wish In Epist ad Monsbel-gardenses p. 81 82. that you would be more constant in your not receiving Festivals but so as not to contend and make a stir about all but about those onely which nothing at all tend to Edification and which have a manifest appearance of Superstition c. And he instanceth in those Days which Popery dedicates to the Celebrating of the immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary and of her Assumption on which Holy-days nothing he saith can be said in the Pulpit by a servant of God besides exposing the folly of those who have invented them And in another Epistle Caeterùm cùm Festi dies hîc In Epist ad Hallerum abrogati c. Moreover whereas some of your Country are much offended at the Abrogation of Holy-days among us and 't is likely that much odious talk is spread about it And I make account that I am made the Author of this whole matter and that by the Ignorant as well as Malicious I can solemnly testifie of my self that this was done without my knowledge o desire c. Before I ever came into the City there was no Holy-day at all observed besides the Lords day those which are Celebrated by you were taken away by that same Law of the People which banisht me and Farel And 't was rather Tumultuously extorted by the violence of Wicked Men than decreed legally Vpon my return I obtained this temper or mean that Christmass-day should be observed after your manner but upon the other days extraordinary supplications should be made the Shops being kept shut in the Morning but after Dinner every one should go about his own Business And no doubt the Governours of our Church would be abundantly satisfied with such an observation of most of our Holy-days as Mr. Calvin ordered at Geneva would the People be generally so far conformable And thus I have I hope sufficiently shewed that our Church's Symbolizing in this Rite too with the Church of Rome no otherwise than she doth can be no colour for Separation It may be objected that notwithstanding our having several times cited Mr. Calvin for the unlawfulness of Separation from the Church of England on the account of her Symbolizing as she doth with the Church of Rome yet he calleth her Ceremonies tolerabiles ineptiae tolerable fooleries which would make one think that he was not in earnest in calling them tolerable fooling in the Worship of God being no doubt intolerable In Answer hereto let Mr. Calvin account for his joining ineptiae tolerabiles together but the instances he gives of things he so censured were such as the Liturgy was cleared of in the amendment of it under Queen Elizabeth viz. Prayers for the dead that is that they might have a happy Resurrection not such Prayers as supposed Purgatory Chrism at Baptism and Extreme Vnction And besides he saith he was informed by Mr. Knox of several other Popish Ceremonies that were retained viz. the Use of Wax Candles divers Crossings at the Communion c. which Information was not true And now how happy should we think our selves would our Brethren at length be perswaded to cease fearing where no fear is as also to fear what is really very frightful namely the guilt of so great a sin as that of Schism or making and continuing a breach in the Church by Separation without just cause The greatness of which sin none have more aggravated than Mr. Calvin and several of our old Non-conformists who have also zealously born their Testimony against Separation from the Church of England and accordingly did themselves hold Communion there with generally viz. all the Presbyterian Party to their dying day though they could not Conform as Ministers And there is another very formidable Evil too which I wish more of our Bretheren had a greater sense of viz. the advantage that our Common Enemy is too like to make of our Sad Divisions and being crumbled into so many Sects and Parties and hath already made in order to their final accomplishing their designs upon us The truth on 't is they themselves have had the main hand in those Divisions they so upbraid us with of which we have abundant Evidence having most industriously followed that advice of the famous Jesuit Campanella viz. There is no such effectual Jam verò ad enervandos Anglos nihil tam conducit quà m dissensio discordia inter illos excitata perpetuóque nutrita Quod citò occasiones meliores suppeditabit Camp de Mon. Hisp p. 304. Amstel way to weaken the English as to stir up strife and discord among them and still to feed it This will quickly put into our hands very fair advantages and opportunities Their main spight is at the Church of England as being well aware that it hath ever since the Reformation been their most formidable Enemy and the most impregnable Bulwark in all Christendom against the mighty Power and Policy of their Church of Rome What a madness therefore is it in hearty Protestants to joyn with those People in laying this Church as low as ever they are able And by contending with our Church about innocent if not commendable things upon the account of her Symbolizing in them with the Church of Rome eminently to endanger the opening such a breach as shall let in all her Heresies Superstitions and Idolatries among us Which God in his infinite Mercy prevent by causing us to live more answerably to the happy Means and Opportunities we now enjoy by quenching our as unreasonable as unchristian fierce Feuds and Animosities and by making our Church like Jerusalem of old a City compact together and at Vnity within it self Amen ERRATA PAge 4. line 9. read unction p. 8. l. 14. r. the Mass p. 10. l. 8. r. Homilies especially p. 15. l. 1. r. others p. 32. l. 21. r. dispensation FINIS A DEFENCE OF THE RESOLUTION OF THIS CASE VIZ. Whether the Church of England's Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it Unlawfull to hold Communion with the Church of England In Answer to a Book Intituled A Modest Examination OF THAT RESOLUTION LONDON Printed by J. H. for B. Aylmer at the Three Pigeons against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill 1684. A DEFENCE OF THE Resolution c. SIR I who know the Author of the Book which hath given you this trouble better than any man do conclude that you are not more a stranger to him than he is to you from the Epithets you so frequently bestow upon him throughout your Papers except you do it which I would not be so uncharitable as to think by way of Irony In your First Paragraph you express a Liking of the Complexion of his Book
probable and no demonstrative reasons that all the Books contained in the Canon and no other are the Word of God but in conjunction with the Testimony and Authority of the Ancient Catholick Church amount to a Demonstration So though the Texts which I have cited are of themselves but probable Arguments for the requisite necessity of Infant-Baptism yet in concurrence with such a Comment upon them as the Practice of the next Age unto the Apostles and all Ages since from one Generation to another they amount to such a demonstration as is called in Logick Demonstratio ducens ad absurdum and are a violent Presumption that Children ought to be Baptized I might run on the Parallel as to the other Instances of Episcopal Government the admitting of Women to the Communion and the Observation of the Lord's day and therefore let the Adversaries of Infant Baptism consider well with themselves Wheâ—her rejecting of it after a Concurrence of such Texts and such a Tradition to establish it they do not teach others especially Atheists pure Deists and Sabbatizers to which I may add Scepticks Socinians and Quakers a way to deny all the rest Thus much I have said concerning the requisite necessity of Infant-Baptism to shew that it is not lawful to separate from a Church for appointing of Infants to be Baptized when there are such cogent reasons arising from the concurrence of Scripture and Antiquity to presume that Infant-Baptism was an Apostolical Tradition and an Institution of Christ And I have designedly called it a requisite to distinguish it from an absolute necessity lest the Reader should think I were of St. Augustin's Opinion who thought Baptism indispensibly necessary to the Salvation of Infants so that a Child dying unbaptized through the carelesness or Superstition of the Parents or through their mistaken Belief of the unlawfulness of Infant-Baptism were * * * Potest proinde rectè dici parvulos sine Baptismo de corpore exeuntes in damnatione omnium mitissima futuros Multum autem fallit fallitur qui eos in damnatione praedicat non futuros dicente Apostolo Judicium ex uno delicto August de peccat merit remiss contra Pelag. l. 1. c. 16. Vid. contra Julianum Pelag. l. 5. c. 8. infallibly damned No I intended no such severe Conclusion because we ought not to tye God to the same means to which he hath tied us but only to shew that the Baptism of young Children is antecedently necessary and †††Articles of Religion Artic. 27. in any wise to be retained in the Church as being most agreeable with the Holy Scripture the Apostolical Practice and the Institution of Christ And to set this way of arguing more home upon the Consciences of those who Dissent from the Church upon the account of Infant-Baptism I appeal unto them Whether Scripture and Antiquity standing against Infant-Baptism in the same posture of evidence that they now stand for it it would not be unjustifiable for any sort of Men to separate from the Church for not Baptizing Infants as they do now for Baptizing of them Let us suppose for Example That the Disciples of Christ instead of rebuking those that brought little Children unto him had brought them to him themselves and he had been much displeased at them for it and said I suffer not little Children to come unto me for the Kingdom of God is not of such Let us put the case That two Evangelists had recorded this supposed Story and accordingly we had been assured by the Writers of the two next Ages to the Apostles that then there was no Baptizing of Infants and that the Apostles Baptized them not and that there never was any Church in after Ages which did practise Infant-Baptism Upon this Supposition I appeal unto them Whether it would not be highly unreasonable to separate from all the Churches in the World for not allowing of Infant-Baptism against the Concurrence of such a Text to the contrary and the sence and practise of the Catholick Church The case which I suppose one way is the real case the other only with this difference that the supposed case would have but the benefit of one Text whereas the real hath the benefit of many in Conjunction with Tradition and therefore seeing there are so many Texts and such a cloud of Witnesses for Infant-Baptism Why should it not be looked upon as one of the common Notions of Christianity like the Parallel Doctrines above-mentioned though it be not commanded especially when as I have shewed there was no need of commanding of it in express Words I know the Dissenters of all sorts and especially those for whose sake I am now writing are bred up in great prejudice and sinister Suspicions against Tradition declaiming against it as very uncertain and against the use of it as very derogatory to the sufficiency of the Word of God But as to the first part of their Objection against the certainty of Tradition I desire them to take notice that there is a certain as well as an uncertain an undoubted as well as a pretended Tradition as there are true certain and undoubted as well as pretended and uncertain Scriptures and that there are sure ways whereby ingenious and inquisitive Men may satisfie themselves which is one and which is the other The way then to find out true and undoubted Tradition as * * * Advers Haeres c. 3. Vincentius Lirinensis teacheth is to try it by these three Tests Universality Antiquity and Consent First By Universality If all the Churches wheresoever dispersed or how different soever in their Languages and Customs do believe or practice such a Doctrine Secondly Antiquity If what all the Churches all the World over doth so believe or practice was no innovation but Believed and Practiced in the Ages next to the Apostles when such Fathers governed the Churches or such Famous Men lived in them as knew the Apostles and conversed with them or lived near unto those or with those Apostolical Men who so knew them or conversed with them or lived near unto them Thirdly Consent If it appear that such a Doctrine was the consentient belief or practice of all the Fathers in those Ages or of all except a very few who had no proportion to the rest To which I will add First That this Tradition must be written and not Oral And Secondly That it must be proved in every Age from Books that were written in it and whose Authors whether under their own or under borrowed Names had no interest to write so And therefore though the Testimonies for Infant-Baptism in the Constitutions going under the name of * * * L. 6. c. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptize your Infants educate them in the Discipline and Admonition of God for saith our Lord Suffer little Children to come unto me and forbid them not Clemens Romanus and the Book of Ecclesiastical Hierarchy bearing the name of
a a a C. 7. Where arguing for Infant-Baptism he saith Of this we say the same things which our Divine Ministers of Holy things instructed by Divine Tradition brought down to us Dionysius the Areopagite are of no authority as to the first Century when St. Clement and St. Denis lived yet they are most excellent authorities for the third and fourth Century when they were written because they had no interest to write for Infant-Baptism The like I may say of the Testimony which the b b b Quaest respons 56. Where he saith That there is this difference betwixt Baptized and unbaptized Infants that Baptized Infants enjoy the good things of Baptism which those that are not Baptized do not enjoy and that they enâ—â—â— them by the Faith of those who offer them to Baptism Ancient and Judicious Author of the Answers to the Orthodox concerning some Questions gives of Infant-Baptism it is of no authority as for the second Century when Justin Martyr whose name it bears flourished but being a disinteressed writer it is of excellent authority for the third when it was written So much for the Test whereby to try certain and undoubted from uncertain and doubted Tradition and happy had it been for the Church of God if all Writers at the beginning of the Reformation had made this distinction and not written so as many of them have done against all Tradition without any discrimination whereas Tradition as I have here stated it is not only an harmless thing but in many cases very useful and necessary for the Church It was by Tradition in this sence that the Catholicks or Orthodox defended themselves in the fourth Century against the Arians and the Church of Africk against the Donatists and the Protestants defend themselves as to the Scripture-Canon and many other things against the Innovations of the Papists And therefore in answer to the Second part of their Objection against Tradition as detracting from the Sufficiency of the Scriptures I must remind them that the Scriptures whose sufficiency we admire as well as they cannot be proved to be the Word of God without Tradition and that though they are sufficient where they are understood to determine any Controversie yet to the right understanding and interpretation of them in many points Tradition is as requisite as the * * * Lex currit cum praxi practice of the Courts is to understand the Books of the Law This is so true that the Anabaptists themselves cannot defend the Baptizing of such grown Persons as were born and bred in the Church merely from the Scriptures in which the very Institution of Baptism hath a special regard unto Proselytes who from Judaism or Gâ—ntilism would come over unto the Christian Faith Accordingly they cannot produce one Precept or Example for Baptizing of such as were born of Christian Parents in all the New Testament but all the Baptized Persons we read of in it were Jews or Gentiles and therefore they cannot defend themselves against the Quakers who for this and other Reasons have quite laid aside Baptism without the Tradition and Practice of the Church Quest IV. Whether it be a Duty incumbent upon Christian Parents to bring their Children unto Baptism To state this Question aright I must proceed in the same order that I did upon the last First In arguing from the bare lawfulness and allowableness of Infant-Baptism And Secondly From the necessity thereof As to the lawfulness of it I have already shewn upon the last Question That there is no necessity of having a Command or Example for to justifie the practice of Infant-Initiation but it is sufficient that it is not forbidden to make it lawful and allowable under the Gospel Nay I have shewed upon the Second Question that of the two there is more reason that Christians should have had an express command to leave off or lay down the practice of Infant-Initiation because it was commanded by God in Infant-Circumcision and approved by him in Infant-Baptism which the Jewish Church added to Infant-Circumcision under the Legal State Commands are usually given for the beginning of the practice of something which was never in practice before but to justifie the continuation of an anciently instituted or anciently received practice it is sufficient that the Power which instituted or approved it do not countermand or forbid it and this as I have shewn being the case of Infants-Initiation the Initiation of them by Baptism under the Gospel must at least be lawful and allowable and if it be so then Parents and Pro-parents are bound in Conscience to bring them unto Baptism in Obedience unto the Orders of the Church For the Church is a Society of a People in Covenant with God and in this Society as in all others there are Superiors and in Inferiors some that must Order and some that must observe Orders some that must Command and some that must Obey and therefore if the Catholick Church or any Member of it commands her Children to observe any lawful thing they are bound by the Common-Laws of all Government and by the Precepts in the Gospel which regard Ecclesiastical Order and Discipline to observe her Commands Obey them saith the * * * Heb. 13. 17. Apostle who have the Rule over you and submit your selves unto them for they watch for your Souls Accordingly we read that St. †††Act. 16. 4. Paul as he went through the Grecian Cities delivered the Christians the Decrees which the Apostles had made at Jerusalem to keep but I think I need not spend more time in the Proof of a thing which all Dissenters will grant me for though they differ from us as to the Subject of pure Ecclesiastical Power yet they all agree that there is such a Power and that all lawful Commands proceeding from it ought to be Obey'd Wherefore if Infants are not uncapable of Baptismal Initiation as is proved under the first Question nor excluded from it by Christ as is proved under the Second but on the contrary there are very good Reasons to presume that Christ at least allowed them the benefit and honour of Baptism as well as grown Persons then the Ordinance of any Church to Baptize them must needs lay an Obligation of Obedience upon the Consciences of Parents and Pro-parents who live within the Pale of it because the matter of that Ordinance is a thing not forbidden but at least allowed by Jesus Christ But because People when the are once satisfied with the lawfulness are wont especially in Church-matters to enquire into the expediency of their Superiors Commands and to obey them with most Chearfulness and Satisfaction when they know they have good reasons for what they ordain therefore least any one whom perhaps I may have convinced of the bare lawfulness of Infant-Baptism should doubt of the expediency of it and upon that account be less ready to comply I will here proceed to justifie the practice of
of the Jews were admitted as effectually into the Covenant and had it as really sealed unto them and were as strongly tyed to perform the Conditions of it when they came to years of understanding as if they had been Circumcised then and at their Circumcision had personally and expresly indented with God Wherefore the same answer which will serve to justifie Infant-Circumcision will justifie Infant-Baptism which succeeds in the place of it and it is this That God of his goodness towards Infant 's was pleased to seal the Covenant of Grace unto Infants upon an implicite and imputative sort of Stipulation which at years of understanding they were bound to own by openly professing the Jewish Religion or if they then renounced it thereupon they became Strangers to the Covenant which in such cases was as void as if it had never been made An implicit Stipulation was sufficient for the Children of Believers though an open Profession and Stipulation was required of Grown Proselytes which shews that Circumcision was an institution of Latitude and that personal and express Restipulation was not a general pre-requisite condition to Circumcision but only to some Persons to be Circumcised In like manner Baptism being an institution of Latitude ordained for Persons under as well as at the years of discretion perssonal and express Stipulation is only required of the former and therefore St. Peter in the Text above cited likely had respect not to all Baptism or Baptism in general but only to the Baptism of Adult Proselytes whom the Minister used to * * * Hence Tertullian de Baptismo calls Baptism Sponsionem Salutis And in St. Cyprian we often read of the interrogation in Baptism interrogate at the time of Baptism much after the same manner as we interrogate Adult Proselytes now Wherefore this Objection like the rest which the Anabaptists make runs upon this presumption that Baptism is a strict institution and that personal and express answering or Restipulation is a pre-requisite condition to all Baptism whereas it is only a personal qualification required of Majors or Adult Persons when they come to be Baptized But as for Children Baptism may be administred unto them upon an implicite and imputative sort of Restipulation as Circumcision was to the Jewish and Baptism now is to agonizing Christian Infants or else it may be administred unto them as Baptism formerly was among the Jews to the Infants and Minors of Proselytes upon a vicarious Restipulation by their Sponsors which seems to have been translated together with the use of Baptism from the Jewish Church It is certain that * * * De Baptismo cap. 18. quid enim necesse est Sponsores etiam periculo ingeri Tertullian makes mention of Sponsors or Sureties for Children at Baptism and very probable that the Apostles made Parents and Major domos stipulate in the name of their †††Praefecturae igitur juridicae quae Baptismo praeerat profitebatur Proselytus ipse Majorennis Masculus qui annum decimum tertium foemina quae duodecim superaverat legem Mosaicam se servaturum Minorum vero nomine idem ipsum profitebatur praefectura ipsa uti in Christianismo susceptores minorennium seu parvulorum saltem si nec parentes adessent qui idem praestare possent Selden de Synedriis Lib. 1. c. 3. And what is here said of the CONSISTORT among the Jews concerning the Baptism of Infants and Minors St. Augustine saith of the Church among Christians accommodat illis mater Ecclesia aliorum pedes ut veniant aliorum cor ut credant aliorum linguam ut fateantur Minors when they Baptized them as the Jews were wont to do and upon this Supposition St. Peter in the Text above cited might also probably allude to all Baptism because Grown Proselytes to the Christan Religion did answer for their Children as well as for themselves at Baptism according to the Custom of the Jewish Church Nay there is little reason to doubt but that the Jewish being the Pattern of the Christian Baptism the Apostles and their Assistants who were Jews or Hellenists did observe this Custom of Vicarious Stipulation at the Baptism of Infants and Minors as well as all the other Particulars in which they resemble one another as the Picture doth the Face whose Picture it is As for Example the Jewish Baptism was administred to Women as well as Men and so is the Christian Secondly It was never reiterated nor repeated no more is the Christian Thirdly It was called Regeneration and a New Birth and Baptized Persons were said to be born again and Regenerated which also holds in Christian Baptism Fourthly Baptized Proselytes among the Jews were bound to leave their nearest Relations if it were necessary and adhere to the Church and so are Baptized Christian Proselytes bound to do the same Fifthly The Infants of Proselytes were Baptized among the Jews as well as the Proselytes themselves and so have I proved that Infants have been always Baptized among the Christians And therefore in the last place since the Jewish Church Baptized Infants upon Vicarious Stipulation why should not we think it sufficient for their entrance into the Covenant and that the Apostles did so too These things and whatsoever else is written in this little Tract I hope will be fairly and candidly confidered by the Dissenters among us upon the account of Infant-Baptism I say the truth in Christ I lye not my Conscience also bearing me Witness in the Holy Ghost who is the Searcher of Hearts that I have great heaviness and almost continual sorrow in my heart for them and that to reconcile them to the Church I could wish in the Apostles Sence that I my self were an Anathema from Christ And because it is a Disease too common among Dissenters and more especially among those with whom I have been a dealing to have minds full of Prejudice Prepossession and sinister Suspitions against what we Speak or Preach or Write I have here subjoined a Letter of that Famous Martyr of Jesus Christ Mr. John Philpot concerning Infant-Baptism which I seriously recommend to their Impartial and diligent perusal hoping that the same Arguments which may perhaps have less effect upon them as they come from me may be better received and make deeper impression upon their Souls as they come from him who like the Primitive Martyrs was Blessed with Heavenly Visions and chearfully suffered for his Redeemer who had suffered for him and thanked God when the time was come that he was to seal the truth of the Protestant Religion with his Blood A Letter of Mr. PHILPOT to a Friend of his Prisoner the same time in Newgate Wherein is debated and discussed the matter or question of Infants to be Baptized THE God of all Light and Understanding lighten Book of Martyrs 3 Vol. p. 606. Col. 2. London 1641. your Heart with all true Knowledge of his Word and make you perfect to the day of our
bloud and cheerfully underwent all the hardships that Primitive Christians signalized their Profession with rather than they would intermix with Rome in any usage of Worship or Article of Faith that had the least savour of Idolatry Superstition or false Religion at all in it And yet these Holy and Wise Men when they had the Power and Opportunity of Reforming wholly in their Hands being equally jealous of Enthusiasm as they were of Superstition would not give themselves up to those fantastick Antipathies as to abolish this or that Ceremony meerly because it had been in use amongst the Papists if some other very substantial Reason did not put in its claim against it And verily had they not Governed themselves in these temperate and unbyast methods of Reformation they would not so easily have justified themselves to their Adversaries or the World or have made it so evident as by their wise management they did that what was done by them was from the mere urgencies of Conscience and Reason and not the wantonness of Change and Innovation So that where any mean honestly as I doubt not but many of those do that Dissent from us in this particular circumstance of the Cross in Baptism they ought to have their Reason very well awake that the meer charge of Popery upon any disputed point may not so prejudice them in their enquiries into things as to leave no Room for debate and mature Consideration Secondly The other head of Objection against the sign of the Cross in Baptism is that it seems the introducing of a new Sacrament which having not the warranty of our Lord and Master Christ Jesus must needs be a very offensive invasion of his Rights whose Royal Prerogative alone it is to institute what Sacraments he pleaseth in his Church This Objection seems to point at a twofold argument The one with respect in Common to all those Circumstances in Worship which for Decency and Order are appointed by the Governours of the Church but not antecedently prescrib'd and enjoyn'd in the word of God For to do this our Dissenting Brethren have generally affirm'd it a bold and unwarrantable intrusion upon our Lord and Master who was faithful to him that appointed him as also Moses was faithful in all his House that is in prescribing to the Jews all their modes and usages in Worship from which they were not to vary or deviate to add or diminish in any one Circumstance This I shall take no further notice of than as it may necessarily intermix it self with the question particularly in hand about the Cross in Baptism partly because I would keep as strictly as may be to this distinct Case and especially because this Case of doing nothing in or about the Worship of God but what is expresly prescrib'd and appointed by him in his word hath been another's province so that I shall only say the Customs of the Jewish Church it self which our Brethren would make their main instance in this matter do make directly against it They did unquestionably take up some usages wherein Moses had given no antecedent directions which yet it is evident were not unlawful upon that account because our Blessed Lord did not only not blame or accuse them of Encroachment or Superstition but himself practis'd comply'd with them this amongst many other things hath been clear'd up in the instance of their Synagogue Worship and upon another occasion may be further insisted on by and by Besides it is plain this was no Rule amongst the primitive Christians in the first ages of the Gospel not to add the inexpediency and unfitness of this Rule to the very Oeconomy and Dispensation of Christianity which was to diffuse it self amongst all Nations and all kinds of People who did so infinitely differ from one another both in their Customs and in the Significations of those Customs too that it must have been a vast and bulky digest of Laws indeed that must have suited all Countries were every Circumstance and Punctilio in divine Worship to have been antecedently prescrib'd All this hath been with so much clearness made out by several Hands that I am apt to think at this time of the day our Brethren do not expect or stand in need of further Conviction in this point and seem in some measure agreed that this Position of theirs will not hold water It is the other part of the Objection therefore that will fall more directly under our consideration at this present and that is that our using the sign of the Cross in Baptism doth seem to run into the nature of a new Sacrament And this is that they mean when they tell us it is an outward Visible sign of an inward invisible Grace whereby a Person is dedicated to the Profession of and Subjection to the Redeemer That it is a dedicating means to consecrate us to God that it signifies our covenanting engagement and is as a Badg and Symbol of the Christian Religion that it represents Christ dying on the Cross and signifies our being listed under Christ that it is an addition to Baptism that it adds another Sacrament to Baptism And that it is used as an engaging Sign in our first and solemn covenanting with Christ and the duties whereunto we are really oblig'd by Baptism are more expresly affixt to that aery Sign than to the Holy Sacrament With many other Expressions of this kind which we may find interspers'd in the several writings of the Nonconformists where they take occasion to dispute this Ceremony This of the Crosses having at least the semblance of a Sacrament is indeed the only Objection the Presbyterian Brethren insist upon in their exceptions against some passages in the present Liturgy As to this therefore first I must needs say I have sometimes wonder'd that the word Sacrament it self hath been so well agreed upon amongst us The Fathers have us'd it so much at large in their writings that it would sometimes be difficult to understand what they mean by it and our Brethren upon the same reasons by which several other exceptions have been made might have disallow'd and rejected it as a word by no means Scriptural but Pagan and Heathenish However since by a long reception of the word into the Church it seems agreed on all sides what the Sense and Acceptation of it should be my business will be to shew 1. What we are agreed in as to the Notion of a Sacrament and then 2. to make it plain that as our Church never did design or intend by the use of the cross in Baptism to make an new Sacrament of it so in the nature of the thing it hath not any semblance of a Sacrament according to the Notion of a Sacrament that both sides are agreed in First As to our being agreed in the Notion of a Sacrament I must presume our Church in her publick catechism hath given that definition of it which no reformed Church but approves and allows of That is
betoken our being made new Creatures and entred into a new State or Condition of Life which still they seem to aim more expresly at in their general care to give the Child some Scripture Name or some name that should signify some excellent vertue or Grace some Religious duty owing to God or some memorable benefit receiv'd from him Here we have an outward Visible sign and this too sometimes of an inward Spiritual Grace and yet this no more accounted a new Sacrament or a Sacrament within that of Baptism than we do our Sign of the Cross and indeed there seems just as much reason for the one as for the other and no more 2. Those Arguments which some of our Dissenting Brethren have us'd in Plea for the posture of sitting at the Lords Supper do shew that besides what they urge from the posture wherein our Saviour himself celebrated it they apprehend some Significancy in the gesture that renders it more accommodate to that ordinance than any other for some of them plead for the posture of sitting as being most properly a Table-gesture and doth best of all express our fellowship with Christ and the honour and priviledg of Communion with him as Co-heirs Now in this matter let us consider our Lord hath no where expresly Commanded us to perform this Sacrament in a sitting posture much less hath he told us that he ordain'd this gesture in token of our fellowship with him so that we see this gesture of sitting by the Tenor of their Argument made an outward Visible sign of an inward and Spiritual Grace and this not from any antecedent express institution of Christ which notwithstanding this posture of sitting is not accounted by those that frame the Argument any new or additional Sacrament to that of the Lords Supper 3. Lastly Those of the Congregational way have a formal Covenant which they insist upon that whoever will be admitted into any of their Churches must engage themselves in this is of that importance amongst them that they call it the Constitutive Form of a Church that which makes any particular Person Member of a Church Apol. for Church-coven Yea and as another expresses it that wherein the Vnion of such a Church doth consist We will suppose then this Covenant administer'd in some form or other and the Person admitted by this Covenant into an Independant Church declaring his consent by some Action or other such as holding up his Hand or the like Let me ask them What must they of that Church think of this Rite or Ceremony of holding up the hand will they not look upon it as a token of his consent to be a Church-Member Here then is an outward Visible sign of What of no less according to their apprehension of things than a perfect new State and Condition of Life that is of being embody'd in Christ's Church engag'd to all the Duties and enstated in all the priviledges of it Will they say that this way of admission either the form of words wherein their Covenant is administred or the Ceremony of holding up the hand by which this Covenant is taken and assented to was originally ordain'd by Christ or do they themselves esteem this of the nature of a Sacrament or did the Presbyterian-Brethren in all their Arguments against this way charge them with introducing a new Sacrament So that from all instances imaginable both of the Jewish and Christian Church and that both Primitive and later Reformations even from the particular practices of our Dissenting Brethren it is very Evident how unreasonable a thing it is that though we sign the baptiz'd person with the Sign of the Cross in token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed to confess the Faith Christ of Crucifi d c. We should be accus'd as introducing a new Sacrament or adding the Sacrament of the Cross to that of Baptism But then they tell us secondly we seem to own it our selves when in an entire Representative of our Church such as we suppose a Convocation to be it is actually determin'd that by the Sign of the Cross the Person Baptiz'd is dedicated to the service of him that dy'd upon the Cross and what can be more immediate saith one of our Brethren than in the present dedicating act to use the sign and express the dedicating Signification It is confest that the 30th Canon doth say the Cross is an honourable badg whereby the Infant is dedicated c. And the stress of the Objection in this part of it lieth in the word dedicated that is because the Sacrament of Baptism is it self a Seal of Admission into Covenant and Dedication to God and the Christian Religion therefore by using a Symbolical Ceremony of humane institution whereby we profess the Person Baptiz'd dedicated to the service of him that dy'd upon the Cross we have made a new Sacrament and added to that of Baptism to dedicate him in our own invented way as Christ hath in that which he hath instituted 1. To this I answer that surely the word dedication is of a much larger Signification than that it should be confin'd meerly to the Interpretation that our Brethren would put upon it The meaning of dedication properly is the appropriating of any thing or Person to any peculiar service such as a Church or Temple for the Worship of God any Person to the profession the true Religion to the Ministry or to any kind of attendance at the Holy Altars This is the strictest sense of dedication but then in a larger sense we may suppose it apply'd to any strict or conscientious discharge of all the Duties and answering all the ends of the first dedication Thus suppose a Man ordain'd to the Ministry whereby he is properly dedicated to the work and service of the Gospel he may by some solemn act of his own dedicate himself to a zealous and faithful discharge of that Office and this after some time that he may have apprehended himself hitherto not so diligent in the trust that had been committed to him This cannot be call'd in any sense a new ordination but it may with reason and sense enough be stil'd a dedicating of a Man's self more particularly to the service of God in the discharge of that Ministry he was ordain'd to And therefore 2. In this sense the Convocation ought in all justice to be understood when they in explaining the intention of the Cross tell us it is an honourable badg whereby the Infant is dedicated to the service of him that dy'd upon the Cross c. And yet I must needs say it seems hard measure upon the Church of England that if those in a Convocation should not have apply'd the word dedication to what might be most strictly the sense of it that this should be so severely expounded that no other declarations of their meaning and intention must be accepted of than what meerly the strict and critical sense of that word will bear Surely
there are many expressions in the Fathers that may seem more distant from that sense we are willing to take them in and we should be very loth to yield them up as the Authors or Defenders of some dangerous Opinions in the Church of Rome because some phrases of theirs in the rigour of them may be prest to a kind of meaning that may seem to favour them There is a necessary allowance to be given to some schemes of Speech and meaning of words or else we should be in a perpetual wrangle and dispute about them However there doth not need even this sort of Charity for this word dedicated upon which such weight of Argument hath been lay'd For as in all Authors it hath been variously used so is it properly enough apply'd in this Canon for the design for which it was used and the declaration is plain and intelligible enough to the candid and unprejudic'd mind The word dedication as they use it may properly enough signifie a Confirmation of our first dedication to God in Baptism and a declaration of what the Church thinks of the Person Baptiz'd what she doth expect from him and what Obligations he lieth under by his Baptism And as a medium of this declaration the sign of the Cross is made being as expressive as so many words what the Infant by his Baptism was design'd to the Apostle himself having comprehended the whole of Christianity under that term and denomination of the Cross Now that our Church did design this declarative dedication by the use of this sign and none other is very evident in that though the word dedicated is used in the explication of their sense in that Canon yet do they there refer to the words used in the Book of Common Prayer By comparing therefore the Canon and the Office for Baptism together the Canon directing to the Office and the Rubrick belonging to the Office directing to the Canon we may observe what stress is to be lai'd upon the word Dedicated that is how far they were from desâ—gning the same sort of immediate dedication that is made by Baptism and yet how by the Cross we may properly enough be said to be dedicated too As to the Sacrament of Baptism we are all agreed that by that we are dedicated to the Service of Christ and the Profession of his Gospel Now the Church of England both in the Rubrick and Canon do affirm and own that the Baptism is complete and the Child made a Member of Christ's Church before the Sign of the Cross is made use of or if upon occasion it should not be made use of at all It is expresly said We receive this Child into the Congregation of Christ's Flock and upon that do sign it with the Cross So that the Child is declar'd within the Congregation of Christ's Flock before the Sign of the Cross be apply'd to it Beside that in the Office for private Baptism where the Sign of the Cross is to be omitted we are directed not to doubt but that the Child so Baptiz'd is lawfully and sufficiently Baptiz'd the Canon confirming it that the Infant Baptiz'd is by vertue of Baptism before it be sign'd with the sign of the Cross receiv'd into the Congregation of Christ's Flock as a perfect Member thereof and not by any power ascribed unto the sign of the Cross If therefore we be dedicated in Baptism and the Baptism acknowledg'd complete and perfect before or without the use of this Sign the Church cannot be suppos'd ordaining so needless a repetition as this would be to dedicate in Baptism then to dedicate by the Cross again but that which they express by dedicated by the Cross must be something very distinct from that dedication which is in Baptism that is the one is a sign of dedication the other is the dedication it self as distinct the one from the other as the Sign of Admission is from Admission it self and a signification of a priviledg is from an Instituted means of Grace It seems a thing decent and seasonable enough that when it hath pleas'd God to receive a person into his favour and given him the Seal of it that the Church should give him the right hand of fellowship solemnly declaring and testifying he is receiv'd into her Communion by giving him the Badg of our Common Religion So that this is plainly no other than a Declaration the Church makes of what the Person Baptiz'd is admitted to what engagement he lies under when capable of making a visible Profession It expresseth what hath been done in Baptism which is indeed not a sign of Dedication but Dedication it self as I have already said as also the Cross is not dedication itself but a sign of it Which Declaration is therefore made in the name of the Church in the plural number We Receive this Child into the Congregation of Christs Flock and do sign him with the sign of the Cross c. Whereas in Baptism the Minister as the immediate agent of Christ by whom he is Authoriz'd and Commissionated in the singular number as in his Name pronounceth it I Baptize thee in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost As to what is urg'd above that nothing can be more immediate than in the present dedicating act to use the sign and express the dedicating signification they must know it might have been more immediate either to have plac'd this Sign before Baptism or to have appointed some such form of words in applying it as the Church of Rome doth or if it had been pretended to be of divine Institution and necessary to make the Sacrament of Baptism compleat and perfect And thus I presume I have run through the main debate betwixt us and our dissenting brethren as to this Case Wherein I hope I have neither misrepresented their objections nor let pass any material strength in them nor in replying to them used any one provoking or offensive word Would they but read and weigh this and the other Discourses of this kind with the same calmness of temper and study of mutual agreement wherewith I dare say they have been written I cannot think there would abide upon their Spirits so vehement a desire for the removal of these things but it might rather issue in a peaceable and happy closure in the use of what hath been made appear was so innocently taken up and might with so much advantage under the encouragement of serious and good Men be still retained I do not indeed think any of our Church so fond of this Ceremony particularly but that if the laying it aside might turn to as great Edification in the Church as the serious use of it might be emprov'd to our Governours would easily enough condescend to such an overture Instances of this have been given in our Age and our Presbyterian-Brethren in their Address to the Bishops do own that divers Reverend Bishops and Doctors in a Paper in Print Except
Pap. of the Presbyt p. 31. before these unhappy Wars began yielded to the laying aside of the Cross and making many material alterations c. They have not those apprehensions of these things that they are unalterable and obligatory upon all Christians as such or that the laying them aside for the bringing about some greater good would be offensive to God I would to God our Brethren at least would but meet us thus far as to throw off those Superstitious prejudices they may have conceiv'd against them and think that as the laying them aside would not be displeasing to God so the use of them cannot be so neither Forgive the expression of Superstitious prejudices For I must suppose we put too high a value upon indifferent rites when we think that either the use or rejection of them will recommend us to God unless there be other accidents of obedience or disobedience to Authority that will alter the Case Otherwise the Imagination we may have of pleasing or displeasing God in any of these things must look like what the Greeks express Superstition by I mean a causeless dread of God It is a passage 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Calvin that it is equally Superstitious to condemn things indifferent as unholy and to command them as if they were holy It is infinitely In 2 Praecept a nobler Conquest over our selves a proper regaining that Christian liberty to which we are redeemed and would be of far happier consequence to the Church of God to possess our selves with such notions of God and of indifferent things as to believe we cannot recommend our selves to him in the least measure by scrupling what he hath interpos'd no Command to make them either Obligatory or Unlawful FINIS A Catalogue of the several Cases c. 1. A Persuasive to Communion with the Church of England 2. A Resolution of some Cases of Conscience which respect Church-Communion 3. The case of Indifferent things used in the Worship of God proposed and Stated by considering these Questions c. 4. A Discourse about Edification 5. The Resolution of this Case of Conscience Whether the Church of England's Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it unlawfull to hold Communion with the Church of England 6. A Letter to Anonymus in Answer to his three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about Church-Communion 7. Certain Cases of Conscience resolved concerning the Lawfulness of joyning with Forms of Prayer in Publick Worship In two Parts 8. The Case of mixt Communion Whether it be Lawfull to Separate from a Church upon the account of promiscuous Congregations and mixt Communions 9. An Answer to the Dissenters Objections against the Common Prayers and some other parts of Divine Service prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England 10. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament stated and resolved c. The first Part. 11. Certain Cases of Conscience c. The second Part. 12. A Discourse of Profiting by Sermons and of going to hear where men think they can profit most 13. A serious Exhortation with some important Advices relating to the late Cases about Conformity recommended to the present Dissenters from the Church of England 14. An Argument for Union taken from the true interest of those Dissenters in England who profess and call themselves Protestants 15. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament Stated and Resolved The second Part. 16. The Case of â—ay-Communion with the Church of England considered 17. A Persuasive to frequent Communion c. 18. A Defence of the Resolution of this Case viz. Whether the Church of England 's Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it unlawfull to hold Communion with the Church of England In Answer to a Book intituled A Modest Examination of that Resolution 19. The Case of compelling Men to the Holy Sacrament 1. A Discourse about the charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion before Luther 2. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is meant by it and what Tradition is to be received and what Tradition is to be rejected 3. The difference of the Case between the Separation of Protestants from the Church of Rome and the Separation of Dissenters from the Church of England 4. The Protestant Resolution of Faith c. 5. A Discourse concerning a Guide in matters of Faith c. 6. A Discourse concerning Invocation of Saints 7. A Discourse concerning the Unity of the Catholick Church maintained in the Church of England A PERSUASIVE TO Frequent Communion IN THE HOLY SACRAMENT OF THE Lords Supper LONDON Printed by M. Flesher for Brabazon Aylmer at the Three Pigeons against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill and William Rogers at the Sun against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleetstreet 1684. A PERSUASIVE TO FREQUENT COMMUNION MY design in this Argument is from the Consideration of the Nature of this Sacrament of the Lord's Supper and of the perpetual Use of it to the end of the World to awaken Men to a sense of their Duty and the great Obligation which lies upon them to the more frequent receiving of it And there is the greater need to make men sensible of their Duty in this particular because in this last Age by the unwary Discourses of some concerning the Nature of this Sacrament and the danger of receiving it unworthily such doubts and fears have been raised in the minds of Men as utterly to deter many and in a great measure to discourage almost the generality of Christians from the use of it to the great prejudice and danger of Mens Souls and the visible abatement of Piety by the gross neglect of so excellent a means of our growth and improvement in it and to the mighty scandal of our Religion by the general disuse and contempt of so plain and solemn an Institution of our blessed Lord and Saviour Therefore I shall take occasion as briefly and clearly as I can to treat of these four Points First Of the Perpetuity of this Institution this the Apostle signifies when he saith that by eating this 1 Cor. 11. 26. Bread and drinking this Cup we do shew the Lord's Death till he come Secondly Of the Obligation that lies upon all Christians to a frequent observance of this Institution this is signified in that Expression of the Apostle As often as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup which Expression considered and compared together with the practice of the Primitive Church does imply an Obligation upon Christians to the frequent receiving of this Sacrament Thirdly I shall endeavour to satisfie the Objections and Scruples which have been raised in the Minds of Men and particularly of many devout and sincere Christians to their great discouragement from their receiving this Sacrament at least so frequently as they ought which Objections are chiefly grounded upon what the Apostle says Wherefore whosoever
and the Churches succeeding excluded it out of their Congregations and gave it no Entertainment for the space of 1200 years That Kneeling to receive the Sacrament was not used at the Institution of the Lords Supper nor after in any Age of the Church before the time of Honorius the Third about the year 1220. So also another great Champion for sitting writes Didoclavius maintaineth saith he that which none of our opposites Gillesp Disp against Eng. Pop. Cer. p. 191. Altar Damascen 784. lib. 1. c. 1. are able to infringe viz. That no Testimony can be produced which may evince that ever Kneeling was used before the time of Honorius the Third He further observes from the History of the Waldenses That bowing of the Knees before the Host was then onely enjoyned when the opinion of Transubstantiation got place By the Practice of the Church in the first and purest Ages I conceive they mean thus much That from the Age wherein the holy Apostles lived down to that wherein Transubstantiation was set on foot or that wherein Honorius the Third enjoyned the Adoration of the Host Kneeling in the act of Receiving the Lords Supper was never heard of nor used or as one Author expresly asserts it till the year 1220. Howsoever for sureness sake and in order to the clearing of this matter under our present Consideration I think it will be requisite to fix the time wherein Transubstantiation was first broacht as well as when it was establisht or imposed as an Article of Faith and so too wherein the Adoration of the Host was enjoyned whereby the just bounds and limits will be known beyond which we are not to pass to fetch in Evidence and consequently all extravagancy will be prevented on our part and all cavilling if possible on theirs As for the Time then which we enquire after I think we may safely relie on the judgment of a very Learned Prelate of our own which he delivers after this manner The word Transubstantiation Histori Transub Papal Josian Ep. Dunelm Edit 1675. p. 53 54. is so far from being found in the sacred Scriptures or the Writings of the ancient Fathers that the great Patrons of it do themselves acknowledge it was not so much as heard of before the twelfth Century Nay that the Thing it self without the Word that the Doctrine without the Expression cannot be proved from Scripture is ingenuously acknowledged by the most Learned Schoolmen who endeavour by other Arguments Scotus Durandus Biel Cameracen Cajetan c. therefore to defend it and allow it to be brought in by the Authority of the Pope and not received in the Church of Rome till 1200 years after Christ The first Authors who mention this new-coyn'd word Transubstantiation are Petrus Blesensis who lived under Pope Alexander the Third about the year 1159 and Stephanus Eduensis a Bishop whose Age and Writings are very doubtful The Pope who first establisht this An. Dom. 1215. An. Dom. 1217 or thereabouts monstrous Doctrine by his own Arbitrary power as an Article of Faith was Innocent the Third And his Successor Honorius was the man who decreed Adoration to the Host The first Council which took notice and approved of the Papal Decree for Transubstantiation was that assembled at Constance which condemned A D. 1415. Wiclif for an Heretick because among other truths he had asserted this That the substance of the Bread and Wine remains materially in the Sacrament of the Altar and that in the same Sacrament no accidents of Bread an t Wine remain without a Substance and for this Opinion they ordered his Body to be taken out of his Grave and burnt to ashes Thus things stood till the year 1551. when the Council of Trent publisht it to the world for an infallible Truth and imposed the belief of it upon all under the pain of an Anathema As for the Doctrine of Consubstantiation and the Corporal presence of Christ at with and in the Sacrament it was started long before that of Transubstantiation and was much disputed among learned men He who first broacht it in the East was John Damascen in the days of Gregory the Third And about About the year 740. an hundred years afterwards it was set a-foot in the West by the means of Paschasius Radbertus a Monk of Corbie and one Amalarius a Who wrote de Ecclesias Officiis de ord Antiphon c. contemporary with Amalarius Fortunatus Ar. bp of Triers who wrote de Sac. Baptis ad Carol. M. Deacon of Metz. The former taught that Christ was Consubstantiated or rather enclosed in the Bread and Corporally united to it in the Sacrament for as yet there was no thoughts of the Transubstantiation of Bread The latter gives Amalar. de Ecclesi Offic. lib. 3. c. 24. vid. lib. 3. c. 35. it as part of his Belief That the simple nature of the Bread and Wine mixed is turned into a reasonable nature viz. of the Body and Bloud of Christ Moreover he in another place confesseth that it was past his skill to determine what became of his Body after it was eaten When the Body of Christ is taken with a good intention it is not for me to dispute saith he whether it Amalar. Epist ad Guitardum MS in Biblioth Coll. S. Benedic Cantabri Cod. 55. cited by A. Bp. Vsher Ans Jesuits Chall p. 75. Rabanus Maurus John Erigena Wala Strabo Ratramus or Bertramus be invisibly taken up into Heaven or kept in our Body until the day of our burial or exhaled into the Air or whether it go out of the Body with the Bloud or be sent out by the mouth c. For this and another Foolery of the three parts or kinds of Christs Body he was censured by a Synod held at Cressy wherein it was declared by the Bishops of France That the Bread and Wine are spiritually made the Body of Christ which being a meat of the Mind and not of the Belly is not corrupted but remaineth unto everlasting life From whence we may learn as also from the Writings of several Learned men of that Age who opposed these Dotages of the Corporal presence that the Western Church had not then adulterated the Doctrine of the Sacrament but followed the pure and sound sence of the Ancient Fathers and condemned these Whimseys and gross conceits of the carnal or Oral eating of Christ in the Sacrament Nay in the year 1079. when Hildebrand called Gregory the 7th came to the Papal Chair the Bishops and Doctors were divided in their Opinions concerning the Corporal Presence some maintaining Berengarius his opinion who denied it and some following that of Paschasius as appears from the Acts of that Council writ by those of the Popes Faction which was called on purpose to condemn Berengarius Moreover it 's recorded that Hildebrand himself doubted whether what we receive at the Lords Table be indeed the Body of Christ by a substantial conversion For three
months space was granted to Berengarius to consider in and a Fast appointed to the Cardinals That God would shew by some sign from Heaven who was in the right the Pope or Berengarius It seems the Doctrine of the Popes Bâ—nno Card. in vita Hild. Epis Dunelm Hist Trans p. 135. Infallibility was not known to that Age and that of the Corporal presence much doubted But however thus much we may conclude upon That from the dark and mysterious Writings of those men Paschasius and Amalarius did that monstrous Errour of Transubstantiation spring which afterwards came to be established as an Article of Faith in the Church of Rome As to the time then wherein we are to contain this Discourse it shall be the first 700 years after Christ and to Authors onely that liv'd within that compass I will appeal for evidence in the matter under dispute and surely our Dissenting Brethren will allow that they lived in the first and purest Ages because they were dead before the Doctrines either of Consubstantiation or Transubstantiation were hatcht much less received or establisht in the World If I would take all the advantage that our Adversaries give us I need not confine my self within so narrow a compass For they challenge us to produce one instance for Kneeling before the days of Honorius the Third who lived 1220 or thereabouts and confidently affirm Kneeling was never heard of nor used for 1200 years after Christ I hope therefore they will not complain of foul dealing or that I strain the point since I give away 500 years wherein the pure ancient Catholick Faith touching the Holy Sacrament began to decline and was by various arts and tricks at last foully corrupted Which piece of liberality I need not have exercised but that I design purely to convince not to contend Let us therefore bring this matter under examination and see what the practice of the Church was within the compass of 700 years after Christ or which is all one in the first and purest Ages And what I shall produce out of Antiquity may be conveniently placed under these two general Heads according to the method proposed in the beginning of this Discourse 1 That notwithstanding several Nonconformists well esteemed of for Learning have in their Writings boldly asserted Kneeling to be contrary to all Antiquity it is highly probable the Primitive Christians did Kneel in the act of Receiving as the Custom is in the Church of England 2 It 's certain they used an Adoring posture As to the first I hope I shall be able to make it good by this following Account which I shall give with all possible plainness and sincerity And I declare beforehand to all the World that I will offer nothing for satisfaction to others which I do not think in my Conscience to be true and that I would not use a Fallacy to serve the Cause though I were sure it could never be detected by any of our Separating Brethren In the first place for the first Century or 100 years wherein our Lord and his Apostles lived the Scripture hath left us in the dark and under great uncertainty what the particular Gesture was which they used at the Institution and Celebration of the Holy Sacrament which I think I have sufficiently evinced in my Answers Part 1. p. 17. to the first and second Query In the next place I desire those who urge a common Table-gesture and particularly Sitting which was a usual posture at Meals among those Eastern Nations as well as among us now to observe that Sitting was esteemed a very irreverend Posture to be used in the Worship and Service of God by the Primitive Church of which I shall give a few instances The ancient Loadicean Which met under Pope Sylvester 1. between the Neocaesarian Synod and the first general Council of Nice that is between the years 314 and 325 as some learned men think or Anno Dom. 365. after the first general Nicaene Council as others Synod finding great inconveniencies to arise from the Love-Feasts which were kept at the same time with the Lords Supper prohibited absolutely the said Feasts and the lying upon Couches in the Church as their manner was of Solemnizing those Feasts The words of the Canon are these The Feasts of Charity ought Can. 28. not to be kept in the Lords House or in the Church neither may ye eat or make Couches in the House of God This was afterward forbidden by the Council of Carthage and the Decrees of both these Provincial or National Councils were ratified by the 6th Trullan Council and that under the pain of Excommunication Can. 74. upon which in some time the Custom dwindled to nothing Now the Reasons which induced these holy Bishops and ancient Fathers to prohibit these Feasts of Charity and the use of a discumbing posture upon Beds or Couches in the House of God which was too an ordinary Table-gesture according to the custome of those times were in all probability taken from the Disorder and Irreverence the Animosities and Excess that accompanied these Feasts and which both poor and rich were guilty of They did not distinguish between their spiritual and corporal Food between the Lords Supper and an ordinary Meal they did not discern the Lords Body as St. Paul speaks and I am apt to think that the same abuses which had crept in so early into the Church of Corinth and which St. Paul took notice of and reproved continued and spread till the Church by her Censures and Decrees opposed the growing evil and rooted up the causes of such mischievous effects To these Canons of Councils if we adde the Testimony of particular Bishops who lived in those first Ages and who speak not their own private sence and Opinions but Customes and Usages of the Church in their time we shall plainly discern that Sitting was accounted an irreverent posture in the Worship of God while they were engaged in Prayer or Praise or receiving the Holy Sacrament Justin Martyr who lived in the second Century which immediately Flor. Ann. D. 155. succeeded that of the Apostles seems to hint that the people sate at the Sermon and while the Lessons were reading when he informs us concerning the Christian Assemblies in his Apol. 2. time and the place where he lived After the reading of the Lessons and the exhortatory Sermon of the Bishop we rise up saith he all together and send up our Prayers He doth not indeed signifie what the particular Gesture was which they used at their Prayers but it 's clear enough they did not Sit and they might Kneel for any thing he saith to the contrary For it 's customary among us to sit at the Sermon and during the reading of the Lessons and after they are ended we may be truly said to rise up all together and send up our Prayers But if any one should hence infer that we stood and not kneeled he would conclude
Subjects more lov'd commanding equally Bowels and Affections and Duty and Honour Masters and Servants Husbands and Wives and all Relations are kept in their just Bounds and Priviledges With other Churches we make good Works necessary to Salvation but think our selves more modest and secure in taking away Arrogance and Merit and advancing the Grace of Christ With other Men we cry up Faith but not an hungry and a starved one but what is fruitful of good Works and so have all that others contend for with greater modesty and security 3. How fitly this Church is constituted to excite true Devotion When we make our Addresses unto God we ought to have worthy and reverend Conceptions of his Nature a true sense and plain knowledge of the Duty and of the Wants and Necessities for which we pray to be suppli'd All which our Church to help our Devotion plainly sets down describing God by all his Attributes of just wise and laying forth the Vices and Infirmities of Humane Nature and that none else but God can cure our needs When her Sons are to pray the matter of her Petitions are not nice and controverted trivial or words of a Party but plain and substantial wherein all agree Her Words in Prayer are neither rustick nor gay the whole Composure neither too tedious nor too short decently order'd to help our Memories and wandring Thoughts Responsals and short Collects in Publick Devotion are so far from being her fault that they are her beauty and prudence There are few Cases and Conditions of Humane Life whether of a Civil or Spiritual Nature which have not their proper Prayers and particular Petitions for them at least as is proper for publick Devotions When we return our Thanks we have proper Offices to enflame our Passions to quicken our Resentment to excite our Love and to confirm our future Obedience the best instance of gratitude When we Commemorate the Passion of Christ we have a Service fit to move our Affections to assist our Faith to enlarge our Charity to shew forth and exhibit Christ and all his bloudy Sufferings every way to qualifie us to discharge that great Duty She hath indeed nothing to kindle an Enthusiastick heat nor any thing that savours of Raptures and Extasies which commonly flow from temper or fraud but that which makes us manly devout our Judgment still guiding our Affections When we enter first into Religion and go out of the World we have two proper Offices Baptism and Burial full of Devotion to attend those purposes So that if any doth not pray and give thanks communicate and live like a Christian 't is not because the Services to promote these are too plain and hungry beggarly and mean but their own mind is not fitly qualifi'd before they use them bring but an honest mind to these parts of Devotion a true sense of God sober and good purposes and affections well disposed that which is plain will prove Seraphical improve our Judgment heighten our Passions and make the Church a Quire of Angels Without which good disposition our Devotion is but Constitution or melancholy Peevishness Sullenness or Devotion to a Party a Sacrifice that God will not acccept 4. Her Order and Discipline Such are the Capacities and Manners of Men not to be taught onely by naked Vertue a natural Judgment or an immediate Teaching of God but by Ministry and Discipline decent Ceremonies and Constitutions and other external Methods these are the outward Pales and Guards the Supplies and Helps for the Weakness of Humane Nature Our Church hath fitted and ordered these so well as neither to want or to abound not to make Religion too gay nor leave her slovingly neither rude nor phantastick but is cloth'd in Dresses proper to a manly Religion not to please or gratifie our senses so as to fix there but to serve the reason and judgment of our Mind There are none of our Ceremonies which good Men and wise Men have not judged decent and serviceable to the great ends of Religion and none of them but derive themselves from a very ancient Family being us'd in most Ages and most of the Churches of God and have decency antiquity and usefulness to plead for them to help our Memories to excite our Affections to render our Services orderly and comely Were we indeed all Soul and such Seraphical Saints and grown Men as we make our selves we might then plead against such external helps but when we have Natures of weakness and passion these outward helps may be call'd very convenient if not generally necessary and as our Nature is mixt of Soul and Body so must always our Devotion be here and such God expects and is pleas'd with Our Church is neither defective in Power and Discipline had she her just dues and others would do well to joyn with her in her wishes that they might be restor'd which would turn all into Confusion nor yet tyrannical want of Authority breeding as many if not more Miseries than Tyranny or too much Power both of them severe Curses of a Nation But her Government like her Clime is so well temper'd together that the Members of this Christian Society may not be dissolute or rude with her nor her Rulers insolent being constituted in the Church with their different Names and Titles not for lustre and greatness and Secular purposes but for suppression of Vice the maintaining of Faith Peace Order and all Virtues the true Edification of Mens Souls And if those Vices are not reprov'd and chastized which fall under her Cognizance 't is not the fault of her Power but because by other ways ill restrain'd unnecessary Divisions from her hindring her Discipline upon Offenders and so they hinder that Edification which thy contend for This Government is not Modern Particular or purely Humane but Apostolical Primitive and Universal to time as well as place till some private Persons for Number Learning or Piety not to be equall'd to the good Men of old who defended it and obey'd it and suffer'd for it out of some mistakes of Humane frailty and passion or born down with the iniquities of the times began to change it and declaim against it though so very fit and proper to promote Christianity in the World This is a general account of that Edification that is to be had in that Church in which we live a more particular one would be too long for this Discourse but thus much must be said that examine all her particular Parts and Offices you will find none of them light or superstitious novel or too numerous ill dispos'd or uncouth improper or burthensome no just cause for any to revolt from her Communion but considering the present circumstances of Christianity and Men the best constituted Church in the World If therefore Edification be going on to Perfection Heb. 6. 1. 2 Pet. 3. 18. Rom. 15. 2. 1 Cor. 14. 3. or growing in Grace if it is doing good to the Souls of
have been lessen'd with the character of dull honest and moral Men fit onely for Catechists and Christians of the lowest Form Tickle but their imaginations with conjectural Discourses about the Situation of Paradise of old or Hell now and you are a sounder Divine than he that onely draws wholsom Conclusions from Adam's prevarication to caution you against sin of the like nature or how to avoid those dismal flames where ever they are And others have been silly and phantastick in admiring those who have pratled about the length of the Sword that guarded Paradise or how the Spirits above pass Eternity away and scorn'd him who in plain methods chalkt them out the way that will lead them to Heaven The ancient Gnosticks because they 1 Tim. 1. 4. made a mixture of the Jewish Fables and Genealogies of their Lilith and Behemoth and fetcht in the Stories of the Gods out of Orpheus and Philistion two great Divines in the Pagan Religion into plain Christianity thought themselves the most knowing Men of the Secrets of God and Heaven and wondred how onely Faith upon Jesus and keeping of the Commands could be knowing of God or Wisdom from above The wranglings of the Schools with their fine distinctions and barbarous terms fitter for Magick than Christianity by their Disciples have been priz'd for great and precious Truths And Enthusiastick Raptures and slights making once the Brain to swim have snatcht the hearers beyond themselves and then thought them the Dictates of the Spirit and the Teachings of God and the more dark and obscure the Doctrine hath been the greater illumination it was esteem'd and call'd a noon-day Thought which was a mid-night Dream Such things as these pass with too many for saving Truths a great part of Mankind being ignorant in their Heads and corrupt in their Practice espous'd to Parties and Interests having Constitutions and Passions fit for these they readily swallow them down The Apostle confirms the truth of this telling 2 Tim. 4. 3. us the time will come when they will not endure sound Doctrine but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves Teachers having itching Ears caus'd by some disease of Vice within which is not to be cured by good Physick but onely scratch'd and gratifi'd and if the Food though wholsom and good be not to their Palate and Fancy they complain of hunger and starving These and many more are the Instances of a weak and sickly nature craving onely nice and curious things for Spiritual Meat and kecking at the sincere Milk of the Word plain and substantial Truths that it may grow thereby To give therefore a liberty to every Man to run from an established Church upon the account of better Edification which is so often and easily mistaken is to direct Men into temptation and a snare and is dangerous and sinful and when once the gap is open where will especially the Vulgar stop May we not add that this pretence of better Edification is very fit to disguise and colour other Vices When Controversies have unhappily risen from an unjust denial of the Ministers Rights and Dues or the accidents of civil conversation they make the Ministry that was spiritual and good before to be call'd dull and mean and better must be sought elsewhere while onely Revenge or Covetousness is at the bottom Wandring Reports or their own lavish Tongue and censorious Temper have call'd some Pastours Covetous or Intemperate or branded them with other Vices and then cry out they cannot Edifie in such a Church and so make one fault help out another and Defamation must excuse their Schism 2. In taking the Opinions of Parties for undoubted Truths essential to salvation When men have once wedded a Party and the Opinions peculiar to it they magnifie and propagate them grow furious for their defence and call them the best part of Religion and if these be not abetted and cry'd up by the Pastours of our Church or they differ from them in explications and distinctions of them the way of salvation is not taught they do not improve their Spiritual condition and therefore is a just cause of their Separation Because the Notion or Explication of Faith and Spirit Church and Grace Justification Regeneration Conversion Adoption and other things of the like nature are generally different in our Church from those of the Separation they therefore cry we destroy the saving Truths of the Gospel and instead of being Edifi'd they find themselves weakned in their Christian Faith Though 't is plain to all impartial judgments that their sense and interpretation of them by natural consequences lessen the Grace of the Gospel and give security to lazy Sinners a strange sort of Edification For though our Charity is not so narrow as to think every man a vicious person who is thus mistaken in his conclusions yet however this alters not the nature of these Opinions and their consequences and who knows how far men of ill Principles do improve them Such is the perverse and angry temper of many about their own Opinions no way necessary to salvation wherein wise men and good men may differ which are not stated by Authority and may not be determin'd till Elias come yet if these be not insisted on and press'd with vehemency the great things of the Gospel are omitted and truths are wanting to their perfection And if once the People are possess'd with Opinions and Notions they grow fierce about them and call them salvation-truths and run head-long into a Sea of disorder and tumult for their defence The Disciples of the fifth Monarchy the Pretenders to the Spirit the Enemies of Childrens Baptism think themselves wrong'd and the Gospel hidden if casually they hear you making Interpretations of the Kingdom of Jesus the Operations of the Spirit and that divine Institution different from their lewd sense And many Questions when determin'd after a great deal of labour and passion and expence of time may improve our Knowledge but not Faith and a good Life the onely Edification The early and best Christians thought themselves mighty Saints and secure of Heaven if they onely knew Jesus and the Resurrection in their full extent and the World being such ill Judges about any other Edification it would be well if they return'd to this good old way and rest satisfi'd there lest they take the Inventions of Men Rhetorick or subtlety secular interest or conjectures for the Pillars of the Temple to support their Faith and so upon the score of Edification break the Peace and Unity of the Church and Obedience to our Governours the great things of Religion 3. In taking sudden heats and warmth for true Edification When melting tones affectionate expressions solemn looks and behaviour passion and vehemency and other Arts have play'd upon the fancy and put their constitutions into different motions some have though themselves so strangely Edifi'd as though it was the impulse and powerful acting of the Divine Spirit which
many times is no more than a bright or a lowring day can do acting upon the Animal Spirits and a Dose of Physick will do the same And if they carry the men no further improve no virtue in them they are nothing else but downright flesh and blood And they are hot and cold high and low very changeable and uncertain according as the humours flow and as is the bodily temper of the men Upon this account some are melted into Tears and others are fired into Rage and Zeal their Spirits like Tinder easily catching the flame and these have happened in the worst of Men serving onely the Designs of Fury and Hypocrisie and can no more be called Edification than the Fire from the Altar that may consume the Temple Zeal Yet such mistakes as these have been too common Anger and Revenge have been called Zeal for God Trade and Interest have been Baptized Christianity Fury and Fumes of the Stomach have been thought the Divine Spirit ridiculous Looks and unmanly Postures have been fanci'd true Acts of Devotion and when they themselves were pleas'd and in the good humour God was reconcil'd and when they were dull and heavy the Spirit was withdrawn and according as these heats and bodily passions were stirr'd so the Ministry was Edifying or unprofitable pale Cheeks and hollow Looks have been Matth. 6. 16. counted signs of Grace and the Diseases of their body pass'd for the Virtue of their mind And when a Doctrine hath been so insinuated as to hit and favour these they were strangely improv'd and had obtain'd a good degree in Religion Many of these may be beginnings or occasions leading unto Religion and may serve some good purposes in men that can manage them well but to cry up these for Edification and going on unto perfection is to betray their People into the power of every Cheat and Impostor who hath the knack to raise these heats which pass for reason and conviction of mind and most commonly are great hindrances to solid and sound reasoning plain discourses the true way to Edification to make firm and lasting impressions upon the mind while the silly and the weak who are most subject to these heats and colds the uncertain motions of their Spirits are fickle and inconstant turning round in all Religions such men being all Sail are more easily tost about with every wind of Doctrine 3. Argument to confirm the Answer is That pretence of better Edification will cause endless Divisions in the Church This Question doth suppose that every man must judge and so great a part of the World being ignorant and vicious partial and prejudic'd false and insincere to themselves and others they may run from Teacher to Teacher from Presbyterian to Independent from Independent to Anabaptist or Quaker and never stop till they come at their Grave to find out better Edification ever learning and never coming to the knowledge of the truth ever seeking and 2 Tim. 3. 7. never satisfi'd till they find the Pattern upon the Mount or the new Jerusalem be come down from above till they meet with such a perfect Church as perhaps will never be here upon earth till her great Master comes The ignorant will easily mistake and who can know the heart and intention of the false and the Hypocrite And the Governour hath nothing to do here to retrench this liberty which as they pretend is either born with them or given them by God At this rate may not every single person be a Church leaving all other Christian Societies fancying that he can better Edifie at home with the workings of his own mind and some pretended infusions of the Spirit that he shall better meet with in his privacies and retirements than in an external and carnal Ministry and Crowd When once they have torn the Unity of the Church in pieces and set up their more Edifying Meetings in comes whole shoals of Vices Envy and Detraction Strife and Emulation Murmurings and Complainings Fierceness and Wrath and a great number of things more prejudicial to the State of the Kingdom the interest of Families the good of Friendship and all civil Conversation a wonderful Edification destroying the very Soul of Christianity The same Principles that divide them from this Church will crumble them into endless Parties and every little Chip may call it self a Building and so destroy all good Government and Discipline so necessary to propagate and preserve Christianity in the World And should I live to see that fatal day when the Government in our Church should be dissolv'd and liberty given to every man upon pretence of better Edification to chuse his Pastour and his Church so many Mischiefs and Confusions would follow from it that if there was any regard to common Christianity or sense of temporal happiness left within their Breast they would too late repent their Schism as once in a great degree many of them did and beg upon their Knees that the Pale of this Government in Church might be set up again and they would receive it with all its pretended load of Impositions This will certainly follow from dividing from the Church to the laughter of Rome and joy of all the Enemies of our Christian Religion All this would be avoided if men were sensible of the hainous nature of Schism which the Apostles and all the ancient Christians have painted forth in such black colours though others think our Divisions in the Church are no more than variety of Companies and Liveries in a City 4. What great discouragement this is to an honest and truly Christian Ministry When a Pastour of our Church shall diligently and faithfully plainly and devoutly unfold the Articles of Faith and lay down Rules for Practice which will certainly bring him to Heaven yet his Flock or Charge one after another upon pretence of greener Pastures greater Knowledge better Elocution Delivery Tone or the like to be had elsewhere shall run from him will it not cool his Zeal check his Labours and affront his Person and Office This may be done to the painful as well as idle to the judicious and learned as well as imprudent and Ignorant Pastour where the People shall have liberty of Separation for the sake of Edification The ill effects of this have turn'd upon their own Ministers and new Government and the most judicious among them have sadly complain'd of it Formerly they Petition'd for a painful and preaching Ministry but this pretence of better Edification gives denial to their own request such Discouragements as these happening severely sometimes to the best of Pastours as well as the worst And they have no cure for this having put a power into the Peoples hands which they cannot recal for neither King Parliament Bishop or Pastour can tell them what is Edification so well as themselves And are the Pastours of the Church to be so treated and trifled with who derive their Offices and Authority from God to Command and
Perswade to Rebuke and Exhort and have the Charge of Souls committed to them for fancies peevishness and humour to be scorn'd and discountenanc'd and have their Ministry rendred useless and the Sheep to govern the Shepherd But what if our Pastour be idle or remiss in his Duty or corrupt in his Faith and teacheth Errour instead of sound Doctrine and we have no means of Edification what must we do must we take in Poyson for Food or not be fed at all To be sure you must not run into Schismatical Separation 't is more tolerable to go to other Congregations of our Communion that may be irregular but 't is not Schismatical but thanks be to God we have a Government which upon a just and modest Complaint will quicken the lazy and negligent correct the Heretical Pastour and restore to you true Edification That this Discourse may prevail upon such who make this Question I desire to recommend these two following things which are very reasonable to their consideration 1. That if they fancy any Defects in our Government they should not hence conclude that they have not sufficient Edification in the Church to save their Souls If upon a nice search and critical enquiry they think they have found some little Flaws and Defects improper Phrases doubtful Senses and some small Omissions in the matter of our Prayers and Discipline yet let them not conclude that these can weigh in the ballance against the black sin of Schism and Separation and all its sad Consequences which is excus'd by nothing else but terms of Communion plainly sinful Have not Divine Services been accepted which were less perfect and came not up to their rule as is plain in Hezekiah's Passover which was not to the Purification of the Sanctuary yet the good King's 2 Chron. 30. 18 19 20. Prayer and the necessity of the time prevail'd with God to heal the People that is to repute them clean and well prepar'd and their Sacrifice and Devotion good Is there no Reverence to be paid to the Pious Authors of our Service and Reformation but to tell them they must divide from them were they now living for they cannot Edifie under that Religion and Government for which they dy'd Is there or will there ever be any Government in the Church so well fram'd and built but some curious Surveyor can spy out some disproportion or ill shape especially if assisted by ill Nature Emulation the Spirit of Pride and Contention which is ever quick-sighted abroad and blind at home the difficulty of knowing what is utmost perfection and absolute purity of Administrations which till attain'd these Men think they are not to rest in any Church should make them judge candidly interpret fairly and comply with every thing that is not sinful to preserve Peace and Love When Men in the English Church are plainly taught to believe well to live well and to dye well and have good and proper Offices to serve these great purposes in order to their Salvation what can they desire more To be better or more sav'd we know not what it means To leave such a Communion upon such an account proceeds from peevishness uncharitableness or some ill Principle and is downright Schism if ever there was Schism in the World Bring but an honest sincere and teachable mind and it will find improvement and advantage in Offices and Administrations fuller of spots and blemishes far than they can pretend to find in the English Church but if the mind be byassed by a Party or corrupted by Designs if its Palate be vitiated the best Food is coarse and insipid to it 2. Let Edification be plac'd in the substantial things of Religion Some revolt from our Church for things wherein the Pastour is solely concern'd and others for things of decency and indifferency but these things do not concern the Case of Edification That a right Faith and an honest Conversation are not taught in our Church is onely a scandal cast upon her to plead for their unjust Separation For after she hath plainly and distinctly taught the Articles of Faith as was prov'd before with the same Spirit and Zeal she commands and presses Justice Humility Mercy and every Virtue that is necessary to a true Christian Life and both under the Penalty of Eternal Damnation these and these alone do truly Edifie the Souls of Men as is plain if we consider that our Prayers and Sacraments our Churches Ceremonies and Discipline and all other parts in Religion are in order to and minister unto Faith their head that works by love and the nearer these approach unto and the greater service they do to this design the greater degree they have in Religion and more value is set upon them This is that Religion which our first Parent was of in his Paradise and innocency Noah and his Posterity in their Precepts and Pious Men in different Countries before the Law of Moses thus serv'd God And the scope and aim of the Jewish Law with its Temple and Utensils its Figures and Ceremonies was to discipline and teach Men thus to be good with allowance to the Nature of that People and the Times they liv'd in And the best and most knowing Pagans thought such a Religion as this would most please God who therefore in some measure did accept it and reward it with greater Discoveries as is plain Acts 8. 27. Acts 10. 4. in Cornelius the Queen of Candaces Treasurer and others who having not the Law were a Law unto themselves In such things as these the Kingdom of our Messias was to consist not in Meat Rom. 14. 17. and Drink but Righteousness and Peace and Joy in the Holy Ghost Such a Religion as this Edifies in so great a degree that 't is the onely Condition and Qualification for the upper World where though other great Parts of Religion shall dye with us Righteousness Gratitude Love of God and glorifi'd Beings and such like Virtues are of an Eternal Nature shall be Ingredients of our Happiness and shall live with us for ever What can be justly requir'd in Religion to improve Mens Souls that is not found in this Is it to recover the Nature of Man now defac'd Righteousness and Goodness proceeding from Faith their root will make us truly good Is it to give us a clearer Knowledge and worthy Conceptions of God such a practical Religion as this best prepares for greater knowledge and in Scripture-sence is knowing of him Is it Religion 1 Joh. 2. 4. to love God the love of God consists in obedience to his Precepts submission to his Will and resignation to his Providence otherwise 't is flattery and fondness Is it the design of Religion to bless Mankind here and edifie them in their different relations such a Religion as this in our Church will do all that and make the World a Paradise once more This will give us the best character to judge by whether we shall be
sav'd or no being the perfection of all other marks and signs of our assurance of Life and Glory When we are so Edifi'd and Religious we are certain that we are justifi'd and adopted accepted and treated like the Sons of God that we are in Christ and have our wedding-Garments on our proper qualifications for the state of Heaven Such an honest Principle as this makes our Prayers to be heard our Devotions to be regarded our Hopes to be strengthened This is the great intention of Christianity the Holy of Holys of our Temple and all Religion Such a Religion as this being so strongly enjoyn'd and zealously taught in our Church no ways disguis'd by a dress of Phrases or corrupted into soft and lushious sences we need not complain for want of the means of Grace and Edification we need not cross the Seas or run into private corners for it 't is nigh us even at our Doors in the establish'd Government of the Church of England Some use to say that brown Bread and the Gospel was very good Fare but now they are grown as nice and delicate about Religion and Edification as about Sawces and Dresses Thanks be to God 't is a knowing Age I wish it was as good The Corruption of it doth not arise for want of Knowledge and Information if it doth the Cure is near let them value that Church and Government that hath all things in it sufficient to Mens Salvation Let them not think so light of Schism and speaking evil of the Rule and Discipline in our Church so fit and necessary to the preservation of Christianity let them not cry up other Pauls and Apollos's any other Teachers making Divisions among us than this Church hath allowed for their Edification which is so far from Spiritual Edification that it calls such Men Carnal For the desire 1 Cor. 3. 4. of any other Nourishment beside such plain Food is Spiritual Pride and Wantonness and they pamper their Fancies while they starve their Judgments Let us therefore stick to such a manly Religion one great part of which is to preserve Obedience Peace and Order and say of our Church that teacheth it as the Disciples of its Author Thou art he and we seek for no other whither shall we go thou hast the Words of Eternal Life She hath all things in her that are necessary for the perfecting of Ephes 4. 12 13. the Saints for the Work of the Ministry for the Edifying of the Body till we all come in the Vnity of the Faith and of the Knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ. That such a Religion as this in our Church is pleasing both to God and Man we have the Testimony of an Apostle He that Rom. 14. 18. in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God and approv'd of Men. FINIS BOOKS Printed for FINCHAM GARDINER A Continuation and Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness of Separation in Answer to Mr. Baxter and Mr. Lob c. Considerations of present use considering the Danger resulting from the change of our Church-Government 1. A Perswasive to Communion with the Church of England 2. A Resolution of some Cases of Conscience which respect Church-Communion 3. The Case of Indifferent things used in the Worship of God proposed and Stated by considering these Questions c. 4. A Discourse about Edification 5. The Resolution of this Case of Conscience Whether the Church of Englands Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it unlawful to hold Communion with the Church of England 6. A Letter to Anonymus in answer to his three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about Church-Communion 7. Certain Cases of Conscience resolved concerning the Lawfulness of joyning with Forms of Prayer in Publick Worship In two Parts 8. The Case of mixt Communion Whether it be Lawful to Separate from a Church upon the account of promiscuous Congregations and mixt Communions 9. An Answer to the Dissenters Objections against the Common Prayers and some other parts of Divine Service prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England 10. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament stated and resolved c. The first Part. 11. Certain Cases of Conscience c. The second Part. 12. A Discourse of Profiting by Sermons and of going to hear where men think they can profit most 13. A serious Exhortation with some important Advices relating to the late Cases about Conformity recommended to the present Dissenters from the Church of England 14. An Argument for Union taken from the true interest of those Dissenters in England who profess and call themselves Protestants 15. The Case of Kneeling c. The Second Part. 16. Some Considerations about the Case of Scandal or giving Offence to Weak Brethren 17. The Case of Infant-Baptism in Five Questions c. 1. A Discourse about the charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion before Luther 2. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is meant by it and what Tradition is to be received and what Tradition is to be rejected 3. The difference of the Case between the Separation of Protestants from the Church of Rome and the Separation of Dissenters from the Church of England 4. The Protestant Resolution of Faith c. A Discourse OF PROFITING BY SERMONS AND Of going to HEAR where men think they can PROFIT most LONDON Printed for T. Basset at the George in Fleet-street B. Tooke at the Ship in St. Pauls Church-yard F. Gardiner at the White-Horse in Ludgate-street 1684. A Discourse Of PROFITING by SERMONS AS there is nothing that all good Men more desire nothing that they more heartily seek and endeavour than a Happy re-union of all those with us who have Rent themselves from us which we should reckon to be one of the highest blessings that God can now bestow upon us so there is little hope of seeing those desires and endeavours satisfied while the smallest Scruples seem a sufficient cause to hinder many People from joyning with us But among all the Reasons that I have heard alledged for leaving our Churches this seems to me to be the weakest and most ungrounded That our Ministers are unedifying Preachers for they cannot profit by their Sermons Which I am informed is so commonly objected and some lay such weight upon it and it carries with it such a shew of Piety it being a very commendable thing to desire to be the better for every Sermon one hears that it is thought to be worth some body's pains to try to remove this unjust Prejudice which too many have entertained against the most instructive and useful Sermons that perhaps are preached any where in the Christian World This may seem too high a commendation but it is the Judgment of more indifferent persons then we are on either side of
Sense of them to the mind of the Hearers Neither of which I am confident can be truly charged upon them For never did men more indeavour orderly discourse and aim at plain unaffected Speech than they do now in the Church of England where good Sense in the most easie and familiar Words is now lookt upon as the principal Commendation of Sermons Some indeed I have heard find fault with our Sermons for not keeping the old method as they call it of Doctrine Reason and Vse which is altogether unjust as well as frivolous For there is no man that baulks that Method when it is natural but rather chuses it because it hath been common and is easie and useful As for example if any man among us were to preach upon this text Corinth XIII 13. And now abideth Faith Hope and Charity these three but the greatest of these is Charity He would without doubt not only observe among other Doctrines the preheminence of Charity but also give the best Reasons he could think of why it ought to be highest in our Esteem and our Affections too because it is the very end of Faith and Hope and because it makes us like unto God which Faith and Hope do not And after such like things he would likewise make that Use of this Doctrine which the Apostle himself doth Immediately in the very next words Verse 1. Chapter XIV pressing every one to follow after the Love of God and of their Neighbour to follow it earnestly and vigorously and never cease their pursuit till they feel their Hearts possessed with it not contenting themselves meerly with believing but being so affected with it that they attain the end of their Faith which ought to work by Love Nay he would wish them to examine and prove their Faith by this whether it be likely to save them or no. For if it leave them short of this Charity it will leave them short of Heaven for it is Charity alone that hath any place there And who would forbear most pathetical intreaties here to be very serious in this search there being so much Pretence to Faith in the World and so little Charity to be found there To one sort of Faith especially which is the apprehension of Christs Merits and application of them to themselves which every Body makes bold withal whilst very few have any thing of that Charity which St. Paul describes in the Chapter before named of that long suffering and kind Charity which envieth not which vaunteth not it self or is not rash is not puffed up doth not behave it self unseemly seeketh not her own is not easily provoked thinketh no Evil but takes things in the best Sense and puts the fairest Construction upon them in one Word makes a Man inoffensive not only towards God but towards Men of all sorts high and low rich and poor that is to the whole Church of God The like I might say of all other Subjects of the same nature which lead him that handles them into this Method But sometime the matter to be treated of is such that there is no other Reason to be given of it but only the divine Revelation upon whose Testimony we receive it as we do that Jesus Christ is the Eternal Son of God begotten of his Father before all Worlds The Vses of which I never heard any Preacher amougst us fail to make both for the begetting Reverence towards him Faith in him and Obedience unto him But what need is there of so many Words about this method of Sermons when the ancient Doctors of Religion it is manifest did not mind it nor any other But spake to the Business before them without observing any constant Rule at all in their Discourses and then it is apparent People profited by Sermons much more than they do now when they are most artificially contrived And it would be an inexcusable Sin in those that should leave our Church did the Ministers of it only open the Sense of the Epistle or the Gospel for the day or any other portion of Holy Scripture as St. Chrysostom was wont to do without making particular Observations or concluding all with distinct Uses as the manner now is but only with a general Application pressing what they thought most material or what the necessities of their People most required By which way of preaching if Men can receive no profit they must lay the Blame somewhere else than upon the Composition of the Sermon or the manner of its Delivery either which is the next thing to be considered 2. Now here two things are found fault withal first That our Preachers are not vehement enough in the Delivery of their Sermons secondly That they read them For the former of these it is not true where the matter in hand is of great concernment and requâ—res more than ordinary earnestness Which ought in reason to be reserved for some certain Occasions and not be spent upon all things alike for then it loses its effect at that time when it would be most seasonably and usefully employed But there is a great mistake in that which men call vehemence which oft-times consists only in the strength of the voice which neither all your Preachers nor all ours are indowed withal And if they were would be but noise without good Sense which will move attentive minds as much as a loud sound affects Mens Ears Add to this that there is a natural heat also in some Mens tempers which makes them speak vehemently with such a warmth as hath the appearance of much Zeal when they are nothing near so deeply affected with what they say as some Men of more sedate and cool tempers are whose Judgment operates more strongly than their Passions And these Men surely may be very serviceable for Illumination of the Mind with such force of Argument as will certainly move the affections vehemently by the help of serious Consideration without which if any affections be raised they are little worth and will not last but vanish as soon as that blast is over which stirred them up And this difference of temper is observable in your Men as well as in ours and therefore this can be no hindrance to Edification among us no more than among you As for reading of Sermons it is not universally used but there are those among us whom God hath blessed with such strength of Memory or readiness of Conception that they need not the help of any Notes at all in the Pulpit And others do not tye themselves to them so as never to look off the Book but only assist their Memory by them sometimes Whereby the Auditory is assured that they hear nothing but what hath been beforehand considered and digested and the Preacher himself also is secured that he shall not forget any thing of Moment which he hath prepared that no Expression slip from him on a sudden which may prove indecent or imprudent As for those whose weakness of Memory
did offend which moved him to set out the sins of those Men in several Respects and Considerations Which it would be too long for me to mention nor is it needful if this that I have discoursed already be laid to Heart And if Men will lay nothing close to their Consciences all that can be said or wrote or preached will do them no good but they will be only hearers or readers not doers of the Word deceiving their own Souls Wherefore laying aside as St. Peter speaks I. II. 1. 2. all malice and all guile or deceit and hypocrisies and envies and all evil speakings as new born babes desire the sincere milk of the Word or that rational sincere milk the pure food of your mind and understanding and not of your fancy that you may grow thereby As certainly you will when you become of the same disposition with little Children void of hatred of guile of wraths of dissimulation and such like evil affections and are of an humble teachable and submissive Spirit For if every one had but such an increase of grace as to hear meekly Gods Word and to receive it with pure affection they could not easily fail to bring forth the fruit of the Spirit So we pray in our Litany And may it please God as it there follows to bring into the way of truth all such as have erred and are deceived for Jesus Christ his sake Amen FINIS AN ARGUMENT FOR UNION Taken from the True Interest OF THOSE DISSENTERS in ENGLAND Who Profess and call themselves PROTESTANTS LONDON Printed for Tho. Basset at the George in Fleet-street Benj. Tooke at the Ship in St. Pauls Church-yard and F. Gardiner at the White-Horse in Ludgate-street 1683. THE CONTENTS DIssentions are dangerous to the Church Page 1. If the Church should be dissettled by such means our Dissenters would not obtain their Ends. p. 2. Their First or Subordinate End is the Establishing of themselves p. 3. The first Branch of it is the Establishing themselves as a National Church which cannot be hop'd for either First by all of them p. 4. Or Secondly by the Prevalent Party amongst them p. 5. This is prov'd First from several Reasons p. 5 6. Secondly from the History of our late Revolutions p. 6. to 10. After which it is shewed That if they could not then gain their point they can much less do it now p. 10 c. The second Branch of their Subordinate End is the settling of themselves by mutual Sufferance p. 12. This is proved still more improbable p. 12 13. Also it is shewed that Parties tolerate each other no longer than one gets Power to suppress the rest with publick safety p. 14. to 18. The Second End of the Dissenters is more Principal and the first part of it is the keeping out of Popery p. 18. That this End cannot be obtained by Dissenting from our Church is shewed From Reason p. 18. to p. 25. From the History of the late Times p. 25 c. From the Judgment and Methods of the Papists themselves p. 28 29. The second part of the more Principal End of the Dissenters is the advancing of Pure Religion p. 30. But there are Reasons to perswade us that upon the Dissettlement of this Church Religion would not be advanced but embased p. 30 34. to 37. And the History of the late Troubles sheweth this to have been so in Fact p. 33 34 38 39. By virtue of the Premisses Dissenters are perswaded to consider seriously the state of things in this time of Prosecution and to hold constant Communion with our Church with which the wisest and best of them hold occasional Communion that the blessed Ends of Truth Holiness and Peace may be obtained p. 40 41 42 43. AN ARGUMENT FOR UNION c. I Take it for granted seeing a Truth so very plain The Introduction needs no formal Proof that the ready way to overthrow a Church is first to divide it It is also too manifest that our Dissentions are Divisions properly so called or Publick Ruptures It is true notwithstanding these Ruptures the Church still lives and in some good measure prospers But how Mortal these Breaches may at last prove through their Continuance and Increase a Man who has but a Competency of Judgment may easily fortel It is therefore the business of every Good Man as far as in him lies to disswade with Prudent Zeal from these Divisions which are in their Nature so uncharitable and so perillous in their Consequence Now one way of moving Men to desist from their Undertakings is the shewing of them with calmness of Temper and plainness of Reasoning that their Ends are not likely to be obtain'd As also that by the Means they use they will bring upon themselves those very Evils which they fear and of the removal of which they have Expectation Wherefore I have chosen an Argument of this Nature in order to the persuading of Dissenters to joyn in the Exercise of Constant Communion with the Church of England And I have here endeavoured to make it evident to them that in attempting to pull down this Establish'd Church they unwarily turn their own force against themselves and prepare Materials for the Tombs of their own Parties This Argument is here offer'd to them in the Spirit of Christian Charity and without any design of exposing or exasperating any person who differs in his Notions from the sense of the Writer For he had rather lie at the Feet of the meanest Man who is overtaken with an errour than spurn insolently against him Now in the managing of this Argument it is necessary The Argument itself It s Partition and Method to shew two things First What those Ends are which are proposed by the Dissenters I mean those which seem with any tolerable colour of Reason fit to be proposed and which are designed by the better and wiser of that number Secondly What Reasons may make it manifest that the Ends which they propose can never be procured by the Dissâ—ttlement of the Church of England These things being shewed there shall follow such a Conclusion as is suitable to the Premisses First For the Ends proposed by the more Prudent The Ends of the Dissenters Dissenters they are of two kinds The First End is Subordinate The Second is Principal Or the End to which the former serveth in the quality of the Means The Subordinate End is the Establishing of themselves And it hath two Branches Either the setling themselves First as a National Church Or Secondly as several distinct Churches giving undisturbed Toleration to one another For I am not willing to believe all of them to be given up to such a degree of Infatuation as to be intent only upon beating down without considering what is fit to be set up That is the way of Tempests and not of Builders The Principal is the further Advancement of the Reformed Religion This also hath two parts 1. The Removal
Sedition Sedition Rebellion and Rebellion the Ruine of Church and State And what wonder if the Laws bear a little hard there where there are the same Appearances and where there seem to be the same Tendencies and Inclinations to the same Dismal State of Things Whoever considers by what Ways the most flourishing Kingdom in the World and the best Church that ever was since the Primitive Times were miserably Harrassed and Destroyed cannot think that those who sit at the Helm should be content to have them Ruined again by the same means especially after the King for several Years together has in vain tryed by all the Methods of Favour and Indulgence to win upon them Thirdly Let those who now complain so much consider How little Favour themselves shewed to others when they were in Power How the Loyal and Episcopal Party were Plundered Sequestred Decimated Dungeoned Starved and often stunk to Death What Oaths and Covenants were Rigorously Imposed upon them what Restraints laid upon their Liberties both Civil and Ecclesiastical though all this while they had Law and Right standing for An Ordinance for putting in Execution the Directory August 11. 1645. them In the Year 1645 an Ordinance of Parliament was published That if any Person hereafter shall at any Time use or cause to be used the Book of Common-prayer in any Church or publick place of Worship or in any private Place or Family within the Kingdom every Person so offending should for the first Offence pay the Sum of Five for the second ten Pounds and for the third should suffer one whole Years Imprisonment without Bail or Mainprize This one would think was very hard but there is something harder yet behind For Cromwel being got into the Throne Published a Delaration 24 November 1655. at that time Equivalent to a Law That no Person who had been sequestred for delinquency or had been in Arms against the Parliament or adhered unto or had abetted or assisted the Forces raised against them should keep in their Houses or Families as Chaplains or Schoolmasters for the Education of their Children any sequestred or ejected Minister Fellow of a Colledge or Schoolmaster nor permit any of their Children to be taught by such upon pain of being proceeded against as was directed and that no Person who had been sequestred or ejected for delinquency or scandal shall hereafter keep any School either publick or private nor preach in any publick place or at any private Meeting of any other Persons then those of his own Family nor Administer Baptism or the Lords Supper or marry any Persons or use the Book of Common-Prayer or the Forms of Prayer therein contained upon Pain that every Person so Offending in any of the Premisses shall be proceeded against as by the said Order is provided and directed There needs no Comment upon these Proceedings they do not only Whisper but speak aloud to the present Generation of Dissenters to tell them how little reason they have to complain X. Lastly We beg of them that before they pull down any further Trouble or Suffering upon themselves they would Consider Whether the Cause they engage in be such as will bear them out with Comfort before God another Day 't is not Suffering or refusing to comply with the External Circumstances of our Religion that can be said to be a Persecution for Righteousness sake it not being the Suffering but the Cause that makes the Martyr Then I suffer as a Christian when the Honour of Christ or something that offers Violence to my Religion and Christianity is concerned in it when I suffer for that which I cannot avoid without disowning my self to be a Christian and making Shipwrack of Faith and a good Conscience But where the Case is not evidently this a Man may draw Miseries upon himself and yet not suffer as a Christian because it may proceed from Humour or Interest or the Conduct of a misinformed Judgment mistaking things for what they are not Men very often place Religion in doing or not doing what is no part of it and then think they may safely Suffer upon that account when there is more it may be of Passion or Prejudice of Fancy or Opinion of Humour or Mistake then of the real Concerns of Piety or Religion I am very sure neither the Ancient Christians would have passed through the Fiery-Tryal every Day nor the Holy Martyrs in Queen Mary's Days have thought themselves obliged to Forfeit their Estates much less their Lives had no more been required of them then there is of us to come to Khurch or to Kneel at the Sacrament but would rather have Blessed God and thankfully owned the Favour of the Governours under which they lived might they have enjoyed both upon the same Terms as we do In Cases that only concern indifferent things and meer Circumstances of Worship stiffly and obstinately to stand out is rather for a Man to be a Martyr to his own Humour and Opinion then to the Cause of Christ Whether this be not the Case of our Dissenting-Brethren they themselves might quickly see would they but lay aside the unreasonableness of their Prejudices and lay no more stress upon things than they Obed. Patience p. 79. ought to bear Let us hear what Mr. Baxter in a late Book says to this matter I am One that have been first in all the Storms that have befallen the Ministry these Twenty Years past to look no farther back and yet my Conscience commandeth me to say as I have oft done that many through mistake I am persuaded now Suffer as Evil-doers for a Cause that is not Good and Justifiable I shall leave with them the Wise and Excellent R. Bernard's Christian Advert Counsels of Peace 1608. Counsel which was given by one in the time of the Elder Puritans Follow true Antiquity and the general Practice of the Church of God in all Ages where they have not Erred from the evident Truth of God If thou Sufferest let it be for known Truth and against known Wickedness for which thou hast Example in Gods Word or of the Holy Martyrs in Church-Story But beware of far-fetched Consequences or for Suffering for new Devices and for things formerly unto all Ages unknown seem they never so Holy and Just unto Man All that now remains is to call upon our Dissenting-Brethren by all the Considerations of Love and Kindness to themselves of Tenderness for the Honour of Religion the Edification of their Brethren and the Peace Security and Welfare of the Church and State wherein they live that they would duely and impartially Weigh and Consider things put a stop to the Separation wherein they are engaged return to and hold Communion with us and keep the Vnity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace Let them bethink themselves what a mighty Evil Schism is and will be so found before God at the last Day and whether any thing can be meet to be put in the Ballance with the Peace and Unity of the Church and those vastly-important Consequences that depend upon it Let us consider a little what a deep Sense the best and most pious Christians that ever were had of it It 's better to Suffer any thing than that the Church of God should be Rent asunder it is every whit as Glorious and in my Opinion a far greater Martyrdom to dye for not Dividing the Church than for refusing to Sacrifice to Idols says Dionysius the good Bishop of Alexandria in his Letter to Novatian Ap. Euseb lib. 6. c. 45. Epist 52. ad Antonian de Vnit Eccles fol. 181 184. c. And St. Cyprian speaks very severe things to this purpose That a Person going from the Church to Schismaticks tho in that Capacity he should dye for Christ yet can he not receive the Crown of Martyrdom And how oft elsewhere doth he tell us That such a one has no part in the Law of God or the Faith of Christ or in Life and Salvation that without this Unity and Charity a Man cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven and that although he should deliver up himself to the Flames or cast his Body to wild Beasts yet this would not be the Crown of his Faith but the Punishment of his Falshood not the Glorious Exit of a Religious Courage but the Issue of Despair such a One may be Kill'd but he cannot be Crown'd He rents the Unity of the Church destroys the Faith disturbs the Peace dissolves Charity and Profanes the Holy Sacrament And were it necessary I could shew that the Ancient Fathers generally say the same thing And can we now be such degenerate Christians if we can be said to be Christians at all as to make nothing at all of Schism and Separation Are not the Glory of God the Peace of the Church and the Good of Souls things as considerable as necessary and indispensable now as they were of old I beseech you Brethren return from whence you are fallen and let us all with one Shoulder set our selves to Support that Church with whose Ruine we are all likely to sink and fall Let us lay aside Envying and Strife Confusion and every Evil Work and let us follow after the things which make for Peace and things wherewith one may Edifie another FINIS
no Man will say that in this sence we live in the French or Dutch Church because there is a French and Dutch Church allowed among us 5. Your next Query is Whether a true Christian though not visibly admitted into Church-Communion where he wants the Means has not a virtual Baptism in the Answer of a good Conscience towards God according to 1. Peter 2. 21. Ans What this concerns me I cannot tell I speak onely of the Necessity of Visible Communion in Visible Members you put a question whether the want of Visible Admission by Baptism when it can't be had may not be supplied with the answer of a good Conscience towards God I hope in some cases it may though I do not hope this from what St. Peter saies who onely speaks of that Answer of a good Conscience which is made at Baptism not of that which is made without it But what God will accept of in this case is not my business to determie unbaptized Persons are no Visible Members of the Church and therefore not capable of Visible Communion and therefore not concerned at all in this dispute 6. Query Why a profest Atheist who has been Baptized and out of Secular Interest continues a Communicant with this Church is more a Member of the Catholick Church than such as are above described Ans Neither Atheists nor Schismaticks are Members of the Catholick Church But this is a vile insinuation against the Governours and Government of our Church as if profest Atheists were admitted to Communion Though possibly there may be some Atheists yet I never met yet with one who would profess himself an Atheist If I should I assure you I would not admit him to Communion and I hope there is no Minister of the Church of England would and I am sure no Man who had any kindness for the Church with which he pretends to hold Communion would ask such a question 7. Query Whether as the Catholick Church is compared to a Body of Men incorporated by one Charter should upon supposition of a possibility of the forfeiture of the Charter to the whole Body by the Miscarriages of any of the Officers does it likewise follow that the Miscarriages of any of the Officers or the Church Representative as I remember Bishop Sanderson calls the Clergy may forfeit the Priviledges given by Christ to his Church or at least may suspend them As suppose a Protestant Clergy taking their Power to be as large as the Church of Rome claim'd should deny the Laity the Sacraments as the Popish did in Venice and here in King Johns time during the Interdicts quid inde operatur Ans Just as much as this Query does the reason of which I cannot easily guess I asserted indeed that as there is but one Covenant on which the Church is founded so there can be but one Church to which this Covenant belongs and therefore those who divide and separate themselves from this one Body of Christ forfeit Resol of Cases p. 8. c. their right to this Covenant which is made onely with the one Body of Christ which I illustrated by the instance of a Charter granted to a particular Corporation which no Man had any interest in who divided himself from that Corporation to which this Charter was granted but what is this to forfeiting a Charter by the Miscarriages of Officers I doubt Sir your Head has been Warmed with Quo Warranto's which so affect your Fancy that you can Dream of nothing else I was almost afraid when your hand was in I should never have seen an end of these Questions and I know no more reason why you so soon left off asking Questions than why you askt any at all for I would undertake to ask five hundred more as pertinent to the business as most of these You have not indeed done yet but have a reserve of particular Queries but general Queries are the most formidable things because it is harder to find what they relate to than how to Answer them You have three sets of Queries relating to three several Propositions besides a parting blow of four Queries relating to my Text. The first Proposition you are pleased to question me about is this That our Saviour made the Apostles and their Successors Governours of his Church with promise to be with them to the end of the World Which I alledged to prove that when the Church is called the Body of Christ it does not signifie a confused multitude of Christians but a regular Society under Order and Government Now Sir is this true or false if it be false then the Church is not a governed Society is not a Body but a confused heap and multitude of Independent Individuals which is somewhat worse than Independent Churches If it be true why do you ask all these Questions unless you have a mind to confute our Saviour and burlesque his Institutions but since I am condemned to answer questions I will briefly consider them 1. Whether our Saviours promise of Divine Assistance did not extend to all the Members of the Church considering every man in his respective station and capacity as well as the Apostles as Church-Governours For which you may compare St. John with St. Matthew Ans No doubt but there are promises which relate to the whole Church and promises which belong to particular Christians as well as promises which relate peculiarly to the Apostles and Governours of the Church in the exercise of their Ministerial Office and Authority but what then Christ is with his Church with his Ministers with particular Christians to the end of the World but in a different manner and to different purposes and yet that promise there is peculiarly made to the Apostles including their Successors also for the Apostles themselves were not to continue here to the end of the World but an Apostolical Ministry was 2. Therefore Query Whether it signifies any thing to say there is no promise to particular Churches provided there be to particular Persons such as are in charity with all Men and are ready to communicate with any Church which requires no more of them than what they conceive to be their duty according to the Divine Covenant Ans It seems to me to be a harder Query what this Query means or how it concerns that Authority which our Saviour has given to his Apostles for the Government of the Church to which this Query relates I asserted indeed that Christ hath made no Covenant with any particular but onely with the Universal Church which includes particulars as Members of it nor has he made any promise to particular Persons but as Members of the Church and in Communion with it when it may be had upon lawful terms Whoever breaks the Communion of the Church without necessary reason tho he may in other things be a very good natur'd man yet he has not true Christian Charity which unites all the Members of the same Body in one Communion
the words are these I believe our Saviour ever since his Ascension hath had in some place or other a Visible true Church on Earth I mean a Company of Men that profest at least so much as was necessary to Salvation and I believe there will be some where or other such a Church to the Worlds end This is his answer to that Popish Question about the perpetuity of the Visible Church whereby it appears that this Company of Men he speaks of are not single and scattered Individuals which are no Visible Church but he means a Formed and Visible Church-Society and his Answer is true though there were never a sound Church in the World For a corrupt Church which retains all the Essentials of Faith and Worship is a true Visible Church and this is the meaning of Mr. Chillingworth's Answer but how this proves that there is no need there should be any Visible Church at all or that Christians are not bound to actual Communion with the sound and Orthodox Church wherein they live is past my understanding At the same rate you defend your self against me in your Preface by the Authority of those two excellent Persons the Dean of Canterbury and the Dean of Saint Pauls Dr. Stillingfleet had asserted That all things necessary to Salvation are plain in Scripture to all that sincerely endeavour to understand them hence S. C. infers That the Governours of our Church have no Authority to teach Truth or to condemn Errours and all the People are become Prophets and all their Articles Answer to several Treatises p. 272. c. Constitutions and Ordinances have been composed and enjoyned by an usurped Authority and if he had added as he might have done with the same reason And all Church-Communion is needless it had been exactly what you aim at in this Citation The Dr. vindicates his Doctrine from such a wild Fanatical inference 1. By shewing the intention of those Principles which was plainly to lay down the Foundations of a Christian Faith living in the Communion of our Church And if this was his design as he says it was certainly he could neither before nor after say any thing which should overthrow the necessity of Church-Communion and then he can say nothing against me nor for you 2. He distinguishes between the necessaries to Salvation and to the Government of the Church that is what is necessary for every Christian considered in p. 275. a private Capacity to know and believe to make him capable of Salvation and what care the Church must take to instruct the ignorant to satisfie the doubting to direct the unskilful and to help the weak and not barely to provide for necessity but safety and not barely the safety of particular persons but of it self which cannot p. 276. be done without prudent Orders setting the bounds of Mens Employments c. i. e. though it is possible for a private Christian who lives alone and has the use of the Bible in a Language which he understands by diligent and honest inquiries to find out so much truth as is absolutely necessary to Salvation yet this does not overthrow the necessity of a setled Ministry and a regular Authority in the Church all this I firmly assent to and yet do as firmly believe the necessity of Church-Communion when it may be had upon Lawful Terms and so does this Reverend Person also and therefore I cannot look upon your alleadging his Authority against me to have any other design than to affront the Dean for his excellent Pains in vindicating the Communion of our Church and shewing people the Evil and Danger of Separation He has sufficiently declared what his Judgment is about Separation and therefore I need not concern my self any farther to prove that he is not my Adversary in this Cause At the same rate you deal with that great Man as you deservedly call him Dr. Tillotson who says I had much rather perswade any one to be a good Man than Preface to be of any Party and denomination of Christians whatsoever for I doubt not but the belief of the Ancient Creed provided we entertain nothing that is destructive of it together with a good life will certainly save a Man and without this no man can have reasonable hopes of Salvation no not in an Infallible Church if there were any such to be found in the World How does this oppose me who assert the necessity of Church-Communion Is the Catholick Church then and the Communion of Saints no part of our Creed and is not Schism destructive to these great Articles of our Faith or is Schism which is the breach of Christian Charity properly so called which is the Love and Charity which the Members of the same Body ought to have for each other and consists in Unity and Communion consistent with a good Life if by that we understand an Universal goodness of which Charity is the most vital and essential part But do you indeed think Sir that the Dean believes a Man may be saved without Communion with any Church when it may be had without Sin when in the very next Paragraph he so earnestly exhorts them to Communion with the Church of England I can easily forgive your usage of me since I find you cannot Read the best Books without perverting them and that you never spare any Mans Reputation to serve your Designes for your Reproaches and your Commendations are but different ways of abuse though I confess I should rather chuse to be reproached by you Your last Consideration is whether it be a good way to convert Schismaticks to prove that Schism is as Letter 3. p. 29. Damning a Sin as Murder or Adultery Truly Sir St. Cyprian and St. Austin and all the Ancient Fathers of the Church thought this a very good way for they insisted very much upon this Argument and if Men will not forsake their Schism though the Salvation of their Souls be endangered by it I am apt to think that no other Arguments will perswade them And if this be true as I verily believe it is and shall believe so till I see the Third Chapter of the Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Still fairly answered I think it the greatest Charity in the World to warn Men of it and if it should prove by their perverseness no Charity to them it is Charity to my own Soul and delivers me from the guilt of their Bloud whether such Doctrine Preach Men into or out of the Church And now for your parting Blow Certainly if our Church required Conformity to its Rites and Ceremonies as necessary to Salvation It could not blame Men for dividing from it Yes certainly upon such a Supposition the Church could and would blame Men for their Separation though it may be they might not deserve to be blamed for no doubt the more necessary the Church judges her Constitutions the more she will blame Dissenters But he who tells us or he