and there may be Schisms where there is no separation of Churches 1 Cor. 3. 1. 2d Before ye had as with confidence ye do asserted a Schism betwixt you and us it had been requisite that ye had proved that there was once an union in these things in which we divide seeing all division presupposeth a prior union if then we were never joyned in one how can there be a division now I apprehend it will puzzle you to prove that the Presbyterians in the North ever joyned with the Establish't Church in these things in which we now differ to wit Church-Government Liturgy and Ceremonies therefore if you would succesfully attack Dissenters you must not use the same Topicks for all some you must prove Schismaticks tho they never joyned others you must convince that there is a National Church before you will be able to perswade them that they have divided it To your first Question Is there any of these things which are necessary to the salvation of a Christian wanting in the Communion of our Church Do we not profess and teach the true Christian Faith in all its Fundamental Articles Answer 1st Tho you may be so inured to officiate by Delegates as to think we should serve the Cure for you we do not find our selves obliged to prove what you affirm seeing the rule hath hitherto universally obtained affirmanti incumbit probatio It lies upon you to shew that your Church teacheth all the Fundamental Articles of the Christian Faith and not on us who are not bound to give the reason of the Faith that is in you Christ and his Apostles proved their Doctrines and left them not to be disproved by Jews and Pagans until they had first proved them 2. But in reverence to the antiquity of the question which is old Roman Catholick I shall give it a Protestant's answer which cannot be excepted against for Non-conformity being the learned Chillingsworth's in his Book The Religion of a Protestant the safe way to Salvation in answer to a Papist who maintained the contrary The Papist had put this Question Page 4. Parag. 14 15. If the Roman Church did not fall into any Error that was damnable how can it be damnable to live in her Communion and if her Errors were not damnable nor did exclude Salvation how can they be excused from Schism who forsake her Communion c. To this Chillingworth answers Page 16. All that we forsake in you is the belief profession and practice of your Errors Hereupon you cast us out of your Communion and with a strange contradictious and ridiculous confidence complain that we forsake it as if a man should thrust his friend out of doors and then be offended at his departure but for us not to forsake the belief of your Errors having discovered them to be Errors was impossible and therefore to do so could not be damnable believing them to be Errors not to forsake the profession and practice of them had been damnable hypocrisie so that either you must free your Church from requiring the belief of any Error whatsoever or whether you will or not you must free us from Schism for Schism there cannot be unless we were obliged to continue in it Man cannot be obliged by man but to what he was formerly or virtually obliged by God God the eternal Truth neither can nor will oblige us to believe any the most innocent falshood to be a divine truth that is to err nor to prosess a known Error which is to lye so that if ye require the belief of any Error among the conditions of your Communion our obligation to Communicate with you ceaseth and so the imputation of Schism to us vanisheth to nothing but lies heavy on you for making our separation necessary by requiring unnecessary and unlawful conditions of your Communion Hereafter I therefore intreat you demand not how came we to forsake your Communion without Schism seeing ye err'd not damnably but how could we so do seeing ye err'd not at all Which if either ye do prove or we cannot disprove we will turn to your Communion or subscribe our selves Schismaticks In the mean time let us continue as we are Yet notwithstanding of all your Errors we do not renounce your Communion totally and absolutely but only leave Communicating with you in the practice and profession of your Errors the trial whereof will be to propose some form of worshipping God taken wholly out of the Scriptures and herein if we refuse to joyn with you then and not till then let us be condemned as Schismaticks so he whom the late Arch-Bishop Tillotson thought it an honour to be his Scholar To the next Question Is there any thing required by us from them that Communicate with us that is a Sin We answer affirmatively there be things required which to us are so To the third Question Are there any of our Constitutions contrary to God's Law We answer to us it appears there be To the 4th Hath God any where forbid us to use the sign of the Cross after Baptism a Ring in the Celebration of Marriage a Surplice in divine Service the posture of kneeling at the Reception of the Lord's Supper or any of those Rites and Ceremonies which are appointed to be used among us Answer Things are either forbidden expresly or by just and necessary consequence though then they be not expresly by name forbidden they be by good consequence for whatever is not commanded by GOD and is required by men as a part or means of the worship of God is forbidden by God 1st Then whatever part or means of divine worship is not commanded is forbidden is evident from that reason given Lev. 10. 1. Why God destroyed Nadab and Abihu for offering strange fire which is this for I commanded them not The reason of God's rejecting what was offered Isa 1. 12. is given Who hath required these things at your hands the cause of God's Judgments on false Prophets Jer. 14. 14 15. is I sent them not neither have I commanded them Fear or Worship of God taught by the commandments of men is not only vain Matth. 15. 9. but brings plagues on them who abuse their wisdom that way Isa 29. 14. And we are lately taught this to be the doctrine of the Establish't Church by the Bishop of Derry in his Vanity of Humane Inventions page 3. 1st saith he It belongs to God only to give rules how he will be worshipped which is a truth naturally implanted in the minds of men and universally acknowledged at all times 2. The holy Scriptures contain the revelation of God's will concerning his own Worship 3. It concerns us to keep as close as we can to the directions which God hath been pleased to afford us without adding to omitting or altering any thing that he hath therein laid down for since God hath vouchsafed us a certain and perfect direction for his Worship in the holy Scripture it is to be supposed
prepared by the Council of Ireland in my Lord Sydneys Government and approved by the K. Q. and council of England and Re-transmitted to be Enacted by the Parliament here in 1692. But if the Reason of his dissatisfaction with them be only their denying one of the Doctrinal Articles durst he be so Impartial he hath no less cause to look upon many of his Brethren Fathers and Sons of the Church as intolerable as the Anabaptists for they are too truly suspected to have no sincere veneration for several of the Articles And Bishop Bramhall hath taught us concerning the 39 Articles that the Church doth not define any of these Questions as necessary to be believed either necessitate praecepti or medii nor doth look upon them as Essentials of Saving Faith or Legacies of Christ or his Apostles but as pious Opinions fitted for the preservation of Vnity Stillingst Ratif p. 54 55. neither doth she oblige any man to believe them but not to contradict them Whence we may see what great esteem the great Prelates of the Church have for the 39 Articles Seeing then by such the Incarnation Death and Resurrection of Christ be not Essentials of Saving Faith but only pious Opinions why should Anabaptists be look'd on as intolerable for denying Infant Baptism when the Doctrin of Biptism is only a pious Opinion We notice this not in defence of Anabaptists but to lay open the D's gross partiality who knowing how little regard many Sons of the Church have for these Articles yet tacitly justifies them when he condemns others for the same or less faults But for this let him read Bishop Taylor 's Liberty of Prophecying p. m. 227. The V. asserted that the Bill pleaded for by the Dissenters would multiply no other Sects than those mention'd in it and tolerated by it which the D. tells hath little shew of Reason to recommend it and that because such a Toleration may occasion the Rise and Increase of many others not pleaded for To confirm which he instanceth Holland where in few years the Anabaptists spawned 50 Sects all under the same name A. The Reason giv'n to disprove the V's Assertion hath as little substance of Reason to recommend it as the V. had shew for what if Toleration to some Protestant Dissenters shou'd occasion the Rise of other Sects must it be therefore unreasonable to tolerate them By this way of arguing we might prove the Reformation from Popery yea Christianity it self Intolerable because they occasion'd the Rise of many Sects and most bloody Persecutions tho they were not the proper causes of these Evils even so the tolerating two or three can never be the cause of multiplying more if no other be tolerated save those two or three Further the Instance of Holland is disingenuously offered for he knows the Toleration there granted is nothing like what 's here desired seeing there are comprehended all sorts Jews Papists c. And therefore all multiply where they are equally tolerated but here only three are pretended But again his Inference with its Reason are neither fairly not prudently produced his Inference is That persons in Authority should deny an unlimited and irrestricted Indulgence to Presbyterians and Independents his Reason is lest the general and legal Allowance granted should be productive of many Sects which tho different from each other should disire to be called by their names to take away their reproach and that they might enjoy the benefit of the publick Toleration A. This Inference unjustly insinuate that on unlimited Toleration is desired when as in matters of Religion we are satisfy'd to be limited by the Law of God In matters Civil by the Law of the Land The imprudence of his Reason is that it militats as much against a legal Establishment as a legal Toleration and more for Experience reacheth us that many desire the Ruler's favour and to be called by the name of the Established Church and shrowd themselves under her cover both to take away their reproach and also to share of the Honour Rise and plentiful provision allow'd the Sons of the Church The D. being dissatisfy'd with the V's weakness or unwillingness to apprehend the mischievous consequences of this legal Toleration notwithstanding all he had said complains of him that he had propounded several Questions to little purpose among which he instanceth one viz. Whether the Popish Interest will be ever the stronger because there are more Protestants to oppose it and because their mutual forbearance will more unite their endeavors against the common Enemy so this the D. answereth 1st That tho the Popish interest will be sensibly weak and by the increase of Proteâ—ants of the same Communion yet it will be considerably strengthned by the multiplicity of Sects which Legal Indulgence generally promotes 2d That Dissenters on the grant of Legal indulgence will grow far more insolent and tumultucus than they were before as hath been observed in a Neighbour Kingdom A. To his first 't is plain that the increase of Protestants tho' not of the same Communion doth not considerably strengthen but weaken the Popish Interest for hath not the Increase of Protestants in Germany France Britain and Ireland since 1691 particularly in the North tho' of different Communion considerably weaked the Popish Interest Much more would the greater increase of the number of Protestants here in Ireland weaken them in their Civil and consequently in the defence and maintenance of their Religious Interests were they encouraged by a legal Indulgence And 't is too well known to be with modesty denied that the Popish Interest here hath been and yet is weakened by other hands than those of the Established Church only for he and all may know how formidable Vlster appeared to Tyrconnel and his Party in Winter 1688 and how undauntedly it resisted and foiled King James's Army and Reinforced Duke Sconberg's And he and every Man of sence knows the far greater Number there are Dissenters for the truth whereof we vouch Bp. King for 30000 in his Diocess and leaves him in his next to publish their Numbers in his own and Neighbouring Diocesses But bless't be God we are not divided in defending the British and Protestant Interest against a Popish Irish Interrest And I hope as the many Parties of different Religions and Interest now confederate against France do considerably weaken that King while they unite all in one to make him just and peaceable so will we the Protestants of Ireland against our common Enemy for the Union of many Parties Syncretizing against a common Foe is not that which strengthens the Adversary but when these several Parties divide in heart and hand by mutual conflict that impedes their joining for the common good which is the native Fruit of one prevailing Party's persecuting the rest And this the Papists labour to effectuat whose drudgery he and his Brethren do with all their might while they daily labour to keep us off and at under with
that by these Intruders are chiefly means Episcopal Ministers thrust out by the Rabble who had repossess'd their own Churches A. This Act was made against allIntruders without exception Presbyterian or others and we suppose thought Rational by all reasonable men for the English Law justifies not a forcible Entry even tho' a Person hath a right And I doubt not but the Church of Engl. would condemn it in her own case for I question if the D. could defend the late Bishop of Down and Connor with the Arch-Deacon who looked on themselves unjustly deprived of Bishopprick and Livings by the late Regal visitation should they re-enter and possess themselves of what they have lost without owning Church or State But we say that those who were rabbled out neither have nor dare intrude into those Churches from which they were rabbled and challengeth him to instance one who hath so done But the truth of the matter is this some of those who were rabbled out in the West and South went to the North and there by the connivance of the Inheritors and some of the Parishioners did intrude into vacant Parishes some also had been deposed by the Church for Immoralities others who were put out of their Benefices by the Counsel for refusing to swear Allegiance to K. William and supported by the Jacobite party did enter into Churches in contempt of both Civil and Ecclesiastical Government Against these this Act was made so that none are counted Intruders meenly for repossessing the Church out of which they were turned by the Rabble seeing that by the Proclamation Aug. 6. 1689. all who had been Rabbled since the Settlement of the Government were restored to their Churches By this the D. as he thinks having proved the Parliament of Scotland guilty of great Severity for making an Act against Intruders concludes undoubtedly the reason of the V's not publishing that Act of Parliament July 16. 1695. not to be what is alledged but his fear of setting matters in a true light and exposing too plainly his gross and willful misrepresentations of the present State of that Kingdom A. We leave it to the Parliament of Ireland whether they will thank him for inveighing against the Parliament of Scotland thus at random when both have the same head and in all these Invectives his Sacred Majesty is reflected on But how ridiculous is it to reason thus The Vindicator durst not publish the Act of July 16. 1695. lest he should have exposed the severity of the Parliament against Intruders when there is nothing in that Act against Intrusion but it is as himself tells us by an Act July 5. 1695. what needs the V. fear the publishing that Act which all allow to be an Act of Câ—emency we are satisfied the V. had not seen that against which he so much Inveighs Nor needed he fear the publishing that other Act which was in Print yea so far were Dissenters from any sear from that Act that they industriously spread it amongst Members of Parliament here as a good precedent of Moderation The D. having discharg'd his spleen upon the Parliament of Scotland returns upon the Church Government saying by way of mock I must indeed acknowledge that we cannot boast of our coming up to or equal in the example which the present Presbyterian Government in Scotland has set us For first our moderation to Dissenters has not exprest it self in raising of the Rabble against them much less in returning them publick and solemn thanks for the greatness of their Zeal in so doing A. His first instance of this Churches negative moderation to Dissenters contains an unreasonable calumny thrown upon the Presbyterian Government of the Ch. of Scotl. for during the Rabble's Reign there was no legal Government in Church or State And therefore the Church is not chargeable with things done before it was re-established or had power That the Church gave the Rabble publick and solemn Thanks for their Rabbling is false but the truth was this the Prelates of Scotland with the Jacobitish Party headed by the Viscount Dundee having conspired against the Convention of States then assembled at Edenburg to settle the Crown of that Kingdom upon K William and Queen Mary had secretly conveyed 200 and upwards of armed men into the Town in order to scatter the Convention and so defeat the Nations Settlement Hereupon the Gentlemen and Commons of the West being then in Arms came with all expedition to Edinburgh whereupon the Viscount of Dundee with his party immediately fled and entred into an open Rebellion which ended with his Life at Killycrankie These Gentlemen who protected the Convention of Estates till they had established the Government are by him and his Episcopal Brethren in Scotland called the Rabble These indeed received the publick thanks of the Convention of Estates instead of their pay and so went all home peaceably But at this time there could be no Establish't Church seeing there was no Establish't Civil Government 2. That he and his have not raised the Rabble against Dissenters in Ireland we owe not to him or his but to the Rabble if any such be who if once up might possibly turn their rage upon others Yet he and some of his have not failed to incense the Magistrate against Dissenters who have thereupon imploy'd arm'd force against them For notwithstanding all that the Dissenting Ministers had suffered in the North for their Loyalty to Ch. 2. being all banished by Oliver for refusing the Oath called the Tender which many Episcopal Clergy-men easily swallow'd yet upon his Restauration the Prelates stirr'd him up contrary to his inclination to imprison all Dissenting Ministers and so persecute the People for Non-conformity which was accordingly done This the Living Generation can abundantly Testify A Second Evidence of the Churches Moderation to Dissenters he offers is That the Church of England Parliament in this Kingdom has not declared that Non-Conformist Ministers in exercising any part of their Ministerial Function have offer'd a high contempt of the Law as tending to perpetuate Schism and of dangerous consequence A. Seeing as he saith The Church of England Parliament hath not declared Non-Conformist Ministers contemners of the Law in exercising any part of their Ministry How cometh it to pass that the Church of England Clergy daily declare them guilty of offering high contempt to the Law As being Schismaticks that the exercise of their Ministry is of dangerous consequence We have cause to thank the Church of England Parliament for their Justice and Moderation but neither of us have reason to thank the Clergy for declaring the contrary And tho we may be satisfied with this Confession that there is no Act of Parliament against us vet we have cause to fear he will retract else he hath labour'd in vain in this Pamphlet The third Instance given of the Churches Moderation to us is They have not made an Act of Parliament against ut making Non-Conforming Ministers Intruders altho
legally Establish'd Church-Government then it is in the Church of England to require Subscription to their 39 Articles Assent and Consent to her Liturgy and Ceremonies and Canonical Obedience to her Bishops For an Epilogue to his History of Scots Affairs since the Revolution he gives a mock Commendation as he is pleas'd to call it the ingenuous temper of the General Assembly in their Act for a solemn National Fast Nov. 12. 1690. wherein they gave a particular Confession of the Sins of the Nation To which he saith Amen wishing they may be as sincere in repenting as they have been ingenious in Confession A. To have our Prayers and Fasts turned to reproach is but what befel our betters Psal 69. 10. and therefore we may the easier bear it but doth not the Church of England dayly confess we have erred and strayed from thy ways we have done these things which we ought not to have 〈…〉 to require his Charity to the Church of 〈◊〉 〈…〉 wish him ingealous and 〈◊〉 in his The D. having made his progress through Scotland in his return home to Ireland gives us a taste of his skill in persuading while he would have us believe that the gently Penal Laws are not as the V. insinuates a severe lash design'd as Instruments of an Unreasonable Correction but as the necessary means of keeping such Children as are of a froward and ungovernable temper within the bounds of a due Subjection and therefore it ought not to be esteemed an unkind severity but a prudent tenderness in a Parent to deny them such indulgences as in all propability will be abused to the diveâ—â—ing him of his Parental Authority and to the incouraging of them to a total withdrawing of their Filial Duty and Obedience for the future A. This D. seems to be or at least wou'd have Dissenters be like the Wives of Mascovy who are jealous of their Husbands affection unless they correct them severely But he must beat us out of reason and sense both e're he persuade us to this and had he but tasted as much of these gentle Penal Laws as some have lately done for refusing the Oath of a Church-Warden he wou'd change his Note If to be Excommunicated thrown into Prison till a Man and his Family be utterly ruin'd be gentle correction how dares he exclaim against the severity of Scotland where there is not one such Penal Law nor one instance of a Lay-man's being fin'd and imprisoned for meer Non-conformity much less for refusing to be Lay-Elders And we suppose he cannot give instance of any Church in the World who Excommunicate Fine and Imprison Men for refusing to be Officers in the Church especially these whom they condemn as Schismaticks And to thrust Men into Places of Trust in the Church out of Malice That many more Episcopal Children have discover'd their froward and ungovernable temper since the happy Revolution then of Dissenters is sensibly felt by the Government and therefore the reflection on us hath as little Truth as Charity Nor is it rational to suppose us such enemies to our own case and peace as to endeavour to divest these of Authority by whose powerful Clemency we are protected from the claws of some of the angry Clergy As to the second thing desired by Dissenters viz. That there be no such Clauses annexed to the Bill of Indulgence as might disenable them from serving their King and Country he observes to be the same Argument the Papists made use of in the late Reign for taking off the Penal Laws and Test and that the design of Dissenters is the same with that of the Papists viz. not only to capacitate themselves for all Employments of Honour Trust and Profit but also to exclude others of a different persuasion from having a share in any unless perhaps in mean and unprofitable ones A. The Observation tho his own is not observable either for it's Wit or Honesty for if Dissenters ought not to use the Argument because Papists have us'd it then the Church ought far less to Cross in Baptism and kneel at the Sacrament seeing the Papists have gresly abused them But it 's well known that Dissenters did refuse to joyn with the Papists in taking off the penal Laws and Test tho they thereby might have had their own Fetters knockt off yet they rather chus'd to continue in chains then to suffer such ravenous Creatures to run loose And we remember what fair promises were then made to Dissenters for this piece of generosity but the world knows how religiously these promises have been kept And he may see that where Presbyterians have more then we desire they have not ingross'd to themselves all places of Honour and Trust as now in Scotland where such imployments are enjoy'd by Persons declared Episcopal in Judgment And its ridiculous to tell that Dissenters won'd inhanfe all imployments to those of their own perswasion and exclude others seeing all of them are not of one persuasion and so cannot inhance all to their own Party But unless the Magistrates to whom the grant of such Offices belongs shou'd turn Dissenters it 's unreasonable to fear that Dissenters shou'd be able to make such a Monopoly While he tells us That it 's not reasonable that they shou'd pull down any part of their Church to furnish Dissenters with Materials to build and strenthen theirs We must say that we knew not before now that Penal Laws against Dissenters were any part or parcel of the Church of England which if they be as is said it will be no demonstration of that Churches Antiquity at least for that part of it which must commence with the Act of Uniformity Surely the Primitive Church had no such Pillars to support it for 300 years and more and yet the Gates of Hell were not able to prevail against it Bp. Taylor liberty of prophesying p. 18. will better inform him That imposing on Mens understandings being Masters of their Consciences and Lording it over their Faith came in with the rotinue and train of Antichrist The increase of Interest and abatement of Christian Simplicity when the Churches Fortune grew better and her Sons grew worse and some of her Fathers worst of all And cites Tertullian saying Sâ—d nec Religionis est cogere religionem quae suscipi debet sponte non vi To this he adds That all wise Princes till they were overboâ—n with Faction or sollicited by peevish Persons gave To eration to different Sects whose opinions did not disturb the Publick Interest Heretical Persons who are impatient of an Adversary were the first who intreated the Emperors to persecute the Catholicks but till 400 years after Christ no Catholick Persons or very few did provoke the secular Arm or implore its aid against Hereticks The D. having given his judgment with more passion than truth against Dissenters particularly these in the North to make it appear reasonable as he saith he attempts to prove it by matter of fact