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 LONDON Printed for Dorman Newman at the Kings Arms in the Poultry 1683. TO THE DISSENTERS FROM THE Church of England Dear Brethren YOU being at this time called upon by Authority to joyn 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 a 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 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 spoiling of our Goods the confinement of our Persons the ruine 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 these sufferings from men Not be acceptable to God to whom all are accountable for what portion he hath instrusted 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 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 Pole 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 justifie Separation p. 48 The neglect or want of Discipline no sufficient reason to separate p. 59 The opinion which the Nonconformists have of the several practices of those 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 joyned 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-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 owne 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 a worthy Person to whom when it was objected that many Errours 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 sprung from mens confounding the terms of Ministerial Conformity with those of Lay-Communion with the Parochial Assemblies there being much more required of Ministers than of the People private persons having much less to say for themselves in absenting from the Publick Worship of God though performed by the Liturgy than the Pastor hath for not taking Oaths c. Certainly if this difference was but observed and the Case of Lay-Communion truly stated and understood the people would not be far more averse to Communion with the Parish-Churches than the Non-Conforming Ministers are as one complains and whatsoever they might think of the Conformity of Ministers because of the previous terms required of them they would judge what is required of the people to be lawful as some of them do And as the Ministers by bringing their Case to the Peoples may see Communion then to be lawful and find themselves obliged to maintain it in a private capacity so the People by perceiving their Case not to be that of the Ministers but widely different from it would be induced to hold Communion with the Church
many superstitious Ceremonies the observation whereof were more strictly urged than the Commandments and Ordinances of God the Temple made a Den of Thieves the Discipline and censures shamefully abused the Doctrine was corrupt in many points yet the word tells you Christ whose example it binds you to follow and you profess your selves followers of him in all imitable things made no separation from this Church professed himself a Member of it was by Circumcision incorporated a Member received Baptism in a Congregation of that People was a hearer of their common Service and their Teachers allowing and commanding his Disciples to hear them communicated in the Passover with the People and the Priest no more did his Apostles make separation from this Church after his Ascension till their day had its Period c. By their example it appears that till God hath forsaken a Church no man may forsake it c. So that we may conclude from hence with M r Hildersham Those Assemblies that enjoy the Word and Doctrine of Salvation though they have many corruptions remaining in them are to be acknowledged as true Churches of God and such as none of the faithful may make Separation from We shall need no further proof of this Doctrine than the example of our Saviour himself c. For why should our Saviour use it if it was unlawful or why should it be a Sin in us who have not such Eyes to pierce into the impiety of mans Traditions as he had as M r Bradshaw argues The same measures were observed also by the Apostles after the establishment of the Christian Church This is not to be gainsaid and is therefore granted by one in other things rigid more than enough I do not say that every corruption in a true Church is sufficient ground of Separation from it The unsoundness of many in the Church of Corinth touching the Doctrine of the Resurrection and in Galatia touching the Doctrine of Circumcision and the necessity of keeping the Ceremonial Law were not sufficient ground of Separation from them for the Apostles held Communion with them notwithstanding these corruptions Now by parity of reason it will follow that if Separation was not to be allowed from those corrupted Churches then surely not from such as are not so corrupted as they So M r Cawdrey pleads Corinth had we suppose greater disorders in it than are to be found blessed be God in many of our Congregations why then do they fly and separate from us And if our Saviour and his Apostles did not separate from such Churches much less should we who may without doubt safely follow the advice given by an Author above-quoted When you are at a stand think how Christ would have carried what he would have done in the like case with yours and we may thereby be concluded Thirdly They further argue that Christ doth still hold Communion with defective Churches and not reject the Worship for tolerable corruptions in it and so neither ought we It is supposed by a worthy person that there is no such society of Christians in the World whose Assemblies as to instituted Worship are so rejected by Christ as to have a Bill of Divorce given unto them until they are utterly as it were extirpate by the Providence of God c. For we do judge that where-ever the Name of Jesus Christ is called upon there is Salvation to be obtained however the ways of it may be obstructed unto the most by their own sins and errors And if this may be said of Churches though fundamentally erroneous in Worship then who shall dare as another saith to judge when Christ hath forsaken a People who still profess his Name and keep up his Worship for substance according to his word though they do or are supposed to fail in circumstances or lesser parts of duty Now this granted the other will follow that then we are not to separate from such Churches Thus M r Hildersham concluded of old from the practice of Christ and observes 1. So long as God continueth his word and the Doctrine of Salvation to a People so long it is evident that God dwells among them and hath not forsaken them c. And till God hath forsaken a Church no man may forsake it 2. No Separation may be made from those Assemblies where men may be assured to find and attain Salvation but men may be sure to find and attain Salvation in such Assemblies where the Ministry of his word and the Doctrine of Salvation is contained So M r Vines The Argument saith he of M r Brightman is considerable if God afford his Communion with a Church by his own Ordinances Grace and Spirit it would be unnatural and peevish in a Child to forsake his Mother while his Father owns her for his Wife I might heap up Authorities of this kind but shall content my self with a considerable one from M r Cotton who reasons after this manner The practice of the Brownists is blame-worthy because they separate where Christ keeps fellowship Rev. 1.18 And that he walks with us we argue because he is still pleased to dispense to us the word of life and edifies many Souls thereby and therefore surely Christ hath fellowship with us and shall man be more pure than his Maker where Christ vouchsafes fellowship shall man renounce it Upon this are grounded the wholesome exhortations of many eminent Non-Conformists as that of M r Calamy You must hold Communion with all those Churches with which Christ holds Communion you must separate from the sins of Christians but not from the Ordinances of Christ. Of M r R. Allein Excommunicate not them from you excommunicate not your selves from them with whom Christ holds Communion Judge not that Christ withdraws from all those who are not in every thing of your mind and way Methinks saith a Reverend Person in his Farewel Sermon where a Church as to the main keeps the form of sound words and the substantials of that Worship which is Christs some adjudged defects in order cannot justifie separation I dare not dismember my self from that Church that holds the head I think whilst Doctrine is for the main sound Christ stays with a Church and it is good staying where he stays I would follow him and not lead him or go before the Lamb. To such we find a severe rebuke given very lately by a Reverend Person Proud conceited Christians are not contented to come out and separate from the unbelieving idolatrous World but they will separate also from the true Church of Christ and cast off all Communion with them who hold Communion with him Fourthly They argue that to separate for such defects and corruptions would destroy all Communion If this should be saith M r Bradshaw then no man can present himself with a good Conscience at any publick Worship of God wheresoever because except it should
be stinted and prescribed he can have no assurance but that some errours in matter and form will be committed So M r Ball One man is of opinion that a prescribed Form is better than another another that a prescribed Form is unlawful c. In these cases if the least errour do stain the Prayers to others that they may not lawfully joyn together with whom shall the faithful joyn at all Is not this to fill the Conscience with scruples and the Church with rents Such as these must if they will be true to their own Principles renounce Communion with all the World and be like those that M r Baxter tell us he knows that never Communicate with any Church nor ever publickly hear or pray or Worship God at all because they think all your ways which he directs to M r Bagshaw and other Non-Conformists of Worship to be bad With this there can be no continuance in any Communion so much M r Burroughs doth maintain There would be no continuance in Church-fellowship if this a separation from a Church for corruptions in it were admitted for what Church is so pure and hath all things so comfortable but within a while another Church will be more pure and some things will be more comfortable there Upon the mischievous consequence of this did M r R. Allein ground his last advice to his Parishioners Destroy not saith he all Communion by seeking after a purer Church than in this imperfect estate we shall ever attain According to this principle no Communion at all if not in all where shall we rest In all society something will offend With this lastly there can be no Order Union or Peace in the Church so M r Bains a Person of great experience This seeking the Peace of Sion reproveth such as make a seression or departure from the Church of God our visible Assemblies either upon dislike of some disorders in administration Ecclesiastical or disallowed Forms and manner of procuring things which the Communion of Saints for full complement and perfection requireth This is not in my conceit so much to reform as to deform to massacre the Body and divide the Head c. and will end in the dissolution of all church-Church-Communion if it be followed as is notoriously evident in the case of M r R. Williams of New England that for the sake of greater purity separated so long that he owned no Church nor Ordinances of God in the World and at his motion the people that were in Communion with him dissolved themselves as we have the account from thence This therefore is one of the Doctrines we are to avoid according to the prudent advice in a Book above-cited Doctrines crying up purity to the ruine of unity reject for the Gospel calls for unity as well as purity Fifthly They argue that to separate upon such an account is not at all warranted in Scripture Thus M r Cawdrey It is no duty of Christs imposing no priviledge of his purchasing either to deprive a mans self of his Ordinances for other mens sins or to set up a new Church in opposition to a true Church as no Church rightly constituted for want of some reformation in lighter matters Saith Mr. Blake We read not of Separation in this way for the sake of abuses and corruptions approved nor any presidents to go before us in it we read a heavy brand laid upon it Jude 19. These be they who separate themselves sensual not having the Spirit So the Congregations in New-England declare The faithful in the Church of Corinth wherein were many unworthy persons and practices are never commanded to absent themselves from the Sacrament because of the same therefore the godly in like causes are not presently to separate It should rather have been infer'd are not to separate for so much must be concluded from the premises if any thing at all This is accordingly infer'd by Mr. Noyes For Brethren to separate from Churches and Church-Ordinances which are not fundamentally defective neither in Doctrine or Manners in Heresy or Prophaneness is contrary to the Doctrine and Practice both of Christ and his Apostles Unto whom I shall add the testimony of Mr. Tombs Separation from a Church somewhat erroneous or corrupt in Worship or Conversation c. is utterly dissonant from any of the rules or examples which either of old the Prophets or holy men or Christ and his Apostles have prescribed is for the most part the fault of Pride or bitter Zeal and tends to strife and confusion and every evil work Sixthly They argue that there is no necessity for Separation for the sake of such corruptions because a Person may Communicate in the Worship without partaking in those corruptions It was the opinion of the Presbyterian Brethren at the Savoy-Conference that not only the hearing but the reading a defective Liturgy was lawful to him that by violence is necessitated to offer up that or none And if there was a possibility of thus separating the substance from the circumstantial defects in the Ministerial use of such Worship much more may this be supposed to be done by those that only attend upon it and are not obliged by any act of their own to give an explicite consent to all and every thing used in it 1. This separation of the good from the bad in Divine Worship they grant possible So Mr. Ball If some things humane be mixed with Divine a sound Christian must separate the one from the other and not cast away what is of God as a nullity fruitless unprofitable defiled because somewhat of men is annexed unto them In the Body we can distinguish betwixt the substance and the sickness which cleaveth unto it betwixt the substance of a part or member and some bunch or swelling which is a deformity but destroyeth not the nature of that part or member c. So M r Calamy It s one thing to keep our selves pure from pollution another to gather Churches out of Churches 2. They grant that what is faulty and a sin in Worship is no sin to us when we do not consent to it So M r Corbet My partaking in any Divine Worship which is holy and good for the matter and allowable or passable in the mode for the main doth not involve me in the blame of some sinful defects therein to which I consent not and which I cannot redress So another Reverend Person in his Farewel Sermon While all necessary fundamental Truth is publickly professed and maintained in a Church is taught and held forth in publick Assemblies and the corruptions there though great yet are not such as make the Worship cease to be Gods Worship nor of necessity to be swallowed down if one would communicate in that Worship while any Christian that is watchful over his own heart and carriage as all ought ever to be may partake in the
As for those of New-England Mr. Baxter doth say that 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 the Parishional Churches to be true Churches was never received into any heart amongst them and otherwhere saith we dare not deny to bless the womb that bare us and the paps that gave us suck The five Dissenting Brethren do declare 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 Congregation thereof were the true Churches and Body of Christ. To come nearer Dr. T. Goodwin 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-Church-Communion with them in hearing or in any other Ordinance c. and saith I acquitted myself 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 Churches in the world acknowledge our Church for their sister and give unto us the right hand of fellowship c Dr. Goodwin saith If we should not acknowledge these Churches so stated i. e. Parish-Churches to be the true Churches of Christ and their Ministers true Ministers and their order such and bold Communion with them too in the sence spoken of we must acknowledge no Church in all the Reformed Churches c for they are all as full of mixture as ours And Mr. J. Goodwin saith 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 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 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 found 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 toward the proving Communion with that Church lawful and to justifie those that do join in it which brings to the second general which is to consider 2. What opinion the sober and eminent Non-Conformists 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 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 warrant us to separate from a Church as no Church which yet is the case in total separation but the want of 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 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 M r Brinsly saith from Bishop Hall an Heretical 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 sense as they are found Churches which may safely be communicated with Thus doth D r Bryan make the opposition The Church of Rome is a part of the universal visible Church of Christians so far as they profess Christianity and acknowledge Christ their head but it is the visible society of Traiterous Usurpers 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 lawfull 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 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 errour of these men saith Mr. Brightman is 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 Conformists conclude 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 but a total separation from a true Church This lastly would not diminish but much increase the fault of the separation as another saith For it is a greater sin to depart from a Church which I profess to be true and whose ministry I acknowledge 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
cause of grief that such should have any thing to do in Gods matters which are so weighty and to be dealt withal in high reverence But yet before the objection is admitted it is to be premised 1. That if there be such in the Church it doth not proceed from their Conformity to it For good and pious men of this sort always were and still are in the Church What there were formerly may be read in Mr Baxter who thus delivers himself When I think what learned holy incomparable men abundance of the old Conformists were my heart riseth against the thoughts of separating from them such as M r Bolton M r Whately M r Fenner c. and abundance other such yea such as Bishop Jewel Bishop Grindal Bishop Hall c. yea and the Martyrs too as Cranmer Ridley Hooper himself c. What there are now in the Church he also tells us I believe there are many hundred Godly Ministers in the Parish-Churches of England And of his own knowledge saith I profess to know those of them whom I take to be much better than my self I will say a greater word that I know those of them whom I think as Godly and humble Ministers as most of the Non-Conformists whom I know So saith D r Bryan In some Countries I am sure there are many Sober Godly Orthodox able Preachers yet in possession of the publick places 2. It is to be premised that this argument if of any yet is of no farther force than against the Congregations where such are and so is of none against the Church it self where are good as well as bad nor against Parochial Communion where such are not So M r Baxter argues I doubt not but there are many hundred Parish Ministers who preach holily and live holily though I could wish that they were more And what reason have you to charge any other mens sins on them c. or to think it unlawful to joyn with the good for the sake of the bad this is to condemn the sound for the sake of the infected Having premised this we shall re-assume the case and consider how it is stated and resolved by them 1. It s granted that it is not unlawful to joyn with bad Ministers in some cases where they may have better So M r Rogers As it is far from me to be a Patron of such or to justifie them so yet while we may enjoy the Ministry of better I would not refuse to be partaker of the Prayers which are offered by them 2. It s granted that its lawful and a duty to hear and joyn with such where a better cannot be had that it is lawful so M r Rogers Who can blame him who desireth to pray with better than they be And yet better to joyn with them sometime than to leave the publick Assemblies altogether So M r Baxter No People should chuse and prefer an ungodly Minister before a better but they should rather submit to such than have none when a better by them cannot be had That its a duty so the old Non-Conformists The Scripture teacheth evidently that the People must and ought to joyn with them unworthy Ministers in the Worship of God and in separating from the Ordinance they shall sin against God For the Worship is of God and the Ministry is of God the Person unworthily executing his place is neither set up by some few private Christians nor can by them be removed And warrant to withdraw themselves from the Worship of God because such as ought not are suffered to intermeddle with holy things they have none from God So M r Ball To communicate with Ministers no better than Pharisees in the true Worship of God is to worship God aright to reverence his Ordinances to relye upon his Grace to hearken unto his voice and submit unto his good pleasure This they maintain by several arguments As First Such were always in the Church and Communion must never have been held with the Church if no Communion was to be where such were So the old Non-Conformists argue If the Minister make it unlawful then all Communion in any part of Gods Worship with such Ministers is unlawful and so the Church in all ages of the World the Prophets our Saviour Christ the Apostles and the faithful in the Primitive Churches sinned in holding Communion with such when the Priests were dumb Dogs that could not bark and greedy Dogs that could never have enough when the Prophets prophesied lyes when the Priests bought and sold Doves in the Temple c. when they were such and did such things they were ungodly Ministers but we never find that the Prophets our Saviour and the Apostles did either forbear themselves or warn the faithful not to communicate with such in the Ordinance of Worship So much M r Nye doth grant More cannot be objected against our Ministers that Conform than might against the Scribes and Pharisees in Christs time either in respect of their Doctrine which was loaden with Traditions their standing which was not according to Law their lives which were vicious yet Christ not only permits but requires us to attend the truths they deliver Secondly They plead that our Saviour himself did Communicate where such did Officiate So D r Bryan In some Countries I am sure there are many Sober Godly Orthodox able Preachers c. And if you know any Country where it is worse consider if Christ himself did not joyn with worse This is attested by another Reverend Person Our Saviour Christ used to attend on the publick Worship in his time notwithstanding such formalists and superstitious ones as the Scribes and Pharisees did officiate in it Thirdly They say that the sin of the Minister is not theirs nor doth bring any detriment to them though they Communicate with him So M r Baxter A Ministers personal faults may damn himself and must be matter of lamentation to the Church who ought to do their best to reform them or get better by any lawful means but in case they cannot his sin is none of theirs nor doth it make his administration null or ineffectual nor will it allow you to separate from the Worship which he administreth So the Ministers sent to Oxford do assert Some evil men may and always have de facto been Officers and Ministers in the Church c. and the wickedness of such men did not null or evacuate their Ministerial Acts for our Saviour would have the Scribes and Pharisees heard while they sate in Moses Chair c. And that the Ministrations in such a case are not invalid and that the People suffer not by it they further prove 1. Because they officiate not in their own name So the Old Non-Conformists It hath evermore been held for a truth in the Church of God that although sometimes the evil hath chief authority in the
the old Non-Conformists as M r Hildersham There is nothing in our Assemblies but we may receive profit by it c. And again There is nothing done in God's Publick Worship among us but what is done by the Institution Ordinance and Commandment of the Lord. So among the present it is own'd by both Presbyterians and Independents by the former in the Morning-Exercise Why may it not be supposeable that Christians may be moved by reasonable considerations to attend the Publick Forms the substantial parts of them being thought agreeable to a Divine Institution though in some Circumstantials too disagreeable So it 's acknowledged That in private Meetings the same Doctrine and Worship is used as in the Parish Churches only some Circumstances and Ceremonies omitted By the latter We know full well that we differ in nothing from the whole form of Religion established in England but only in some few things in outward Worship But I shall have further occasion to treat of this under the third General As for the Ministry of the Church 1. It is acknowledged to be true and for substance the same which Christ hath established So M r Bradshaw I affirm That the Ministry of our Church-Assemblies howsoever it may in some particular parts of the execution happily be defective in some places is for the substance thereof that very same Ministry which Christ hath set in his Church This he speaks as he saith of those that do subscribe and conform according to the Laws of the State 2. That they have all things necessarily belonging to their Office so the grave and modest Confutation maintains The preaching of the whole truth of God's Word and nothing but it the administration of the Sacraments and of publick Prayer as they are all parts of the Ministers Office prescribed in the Word so they are all appointed to our Ministers by the Law 3. They owne That all the defects in it whether in their Call or Administration do not nullifie the Office Thus much M r Bradshaw doth contend for So many of our Ministers who in the Book of Ordination are called Priests and Deacons as in all Points concerning the substance of their Ministry are qualified according to the intent of the Laws have their Offices Callings Administration and maintenance for the substance thereof ordained by Christ. And yet I deny not but there may be some accidental defects or superfluities in or about them all yet such as do not or cannot be proved to destroy the nature and substance of any of them This is maintained at large in the Letter of the Ministers in Old England c. p. 86 87. And the like is also affirmed even by those of the Congregational way so the Brethren in their Apology The unwarrantable power in Church-Governours did never work in any of us any other thought much less opinion but that the Ministry thereof of the English Churches was a true Ministry So M r Cotton The power whereby the Ministers in England do administer the Word and Sacraments is either spiritual and proper essential to their Calling or adventitious and accidental The former they have received from Christ c. The latter from the Patron who presents or the Bishop who ordains c. Whoever has a mind to see their Ordination defended may consult Jus Divinum Ministerii Evangelici part 2. p. 12 16 17 25 c. Jus Divinum Râ—gim Eccles. p. 264 c. Cawdry's Independency a great Schism p. 116. and his Defence of it p. 35 37. Thus far therefore we see how far it is agreed that the Church of England is a true Church in its Doctrine Worship and Ministry But when we come to consider what the Church is they own thus to be true there we shall find that they do differ The Presbyterians generally own a National Church and have writ much in the behalf of it as may be seen in the Books quoted in the Margin others look upon it as a prudential thing and what may lawfully be complyed with So Mr. Tombs It is no more against the Gospel to term the believers of England the Church of England than it is to term believers throughout the World the Cahtholick Church nor is it more unfit for us to term our selves Members of the Catholick Church nor is there need to shew any institution of our Lord more for the one than the other But those that will not own it to be a true Church in respect of such a constitution or that speak doubtfully of it do yet assert as much of the Parish Churches It s acknowledged by all that the distribution into Parishes is not of divine but humane institution but withal its thought by some agreeable to the reason of the thing and somewhat favoured by Scripture and by experience has been found to be of such convenience advantage and security to Religion that a person of great eminence hath more than once said 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 another very worthy person saith 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 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 intollerable 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 which Mr. H. Jacob the Father of the Congregational party wrote for communion with against Fr. Johnson and in respect to which be 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 we will hearken to the abovesaid Author he saith again and again that the general sence 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 left he should be thought to incline to one side I shall produce the testimony of such as are of the Congregational way
which men's minds have been corrupted I find in whatsoever they differ one from another yet in this they agree That it 's unlawful to hear in publick which I am perswaded is one constant design of Satan in the variety of ways of Religion he hath set on foot by Jesuits amongst us Let us therefore be the more aware of whatsoever tends that way Of this Opinion also is M r Tombs though he continued an Anabaptist who has writ a whole Book to defend the Hearing of the present Ministers of England and toward the Close of the Work hath given forty additional Reasons for it and in opposition to those he writes against doth affirm Sure if the Church be called Mount Sion from the preaching of the Gospel the Assemblies of England may be called Sion Christ's Candlesticks and Garden as well as any Christians in the World I shall conclude this with what M r Robinson saith in this Case viz. For my self thus I believe with my heart before God and profess with my tongue and have before the World that I have one and the same Faith Spirit Baptism and Lord which I had in the Church of England and none other that I esteem so many in that Church of what state or Order soever as are truly Partakers of that Faith as I account thousands to be for my Christian Brethren and my self a Fellow-member with them of that one Mystical Body of Christ scattered far and wide throughout the World that I have always in spirit and affection all Christian Fellowship and Communion with them and am most ready in all outward Actions and Exercises of Religion lawful and lawfully done to express the same And withal that I am perswaded the hearing of the Word of God there preached in the manner and upon the grounds formerly mentioned both lawful and upon occasion necessary for me and all true Christians withdrawing from that Hierarchical Order of Church-Government and Ministry and the uniting in the Order and Ordinances instituted by Christ. Thus far He. From what hath been said upon this Head we may observe that though these Reverend Persons do go upon different Reasons according to the Principles they espouse though they agree not in the Constitution of Churches c. yet they all agree that the Parochial Churches are or may be as I have observed before true Churches of Christ that Communion with such Churches is lawful and that we are to go as far as we can toward Communion with them Though they differ about the Notion of Hearing as whether it be an Act of Communion and about the Call of those they hear yet they all agree in the lawfulness of it And therefore to separate wholly in this Ordinance and from the Parochial Churches as no Churches are equally condemned by all 3. They hold that they are not to separate from a Church for unlawful things if the things accounted unlawful are not of so heinous a nature as to unchurch a Church and affect the Vitals of Religion or are not imposed as necessary terms of Communion 1. If the Corruptions are such as do not unchurch a Church or affect the vital parts of Religion So saith M r Tombs Not every not many Corruptions of some kind do un-church there being many in Faith Worship and Conversation in the Churches of Corinth and some of the Seven Churches of Asia who yet were Golden Candlesticks amidst whom Christ did walk But such general avowed unrepented of errours in Faith as overthrow the foundation of Christian Faith to wit Christ the only Mediator betwixt God and man and salvation by him Corruptions of Worship by Idolatry in Life by evil manners as are utterly inconsistent with Christianity till which in whole or in part they are not unchurched For till then the Corruptions are tolerable and so afford no just reason to dissolve the Church or to depart from it So M r Brinsley Suppose some just grievances may be found among us yet are they tolerable If so then is Separation on this ground intolerable unwarrantable in as much as it ought not to be but upon a very great and weighty cause and that when there is no remedy So M r Noyes Private Brethren may not separate from Churches or Church-Ordinances which are not fundamentally defective neither in Doctrine or Manners Heresy or Prophaness To all which add the Testimony of D r Owen and M r Cotton The former asserts That many errours in Doctrine disorders in sacred Administrations irregular walking in Conversation with neglect and abuse of Discipline in Rulers may fall out in some Churches and yet not evacuate their Church-state or give sufficient warrant to leave their Communion and separate from them The latter saith Vnless you find in the Church Blasphemy or Idolatry or Persecution that is such as is intolerable there is no just ground of separation This is universally own'd But if any one should yet continue unconvinced let him but peruse the Catalogue of the faults of nine Churches in Scripture collected by M r Baxter and I perswade my self he will think the Conclusion inferr'd from it to be just and reasonable Observe saith he that no one member is in all these Scriptures or any other commanded to come out and separate from any of all these Churches as if their Communion in Worship were unlawful And therefore before you separate from any as judging Communion with them unlawful be sure that you bring greater reasons for it than any of these recited were 2. They are not to separate if the Corruptions are not so made the Conditions of Communion that they must necessarily and unavoidably communicate in them M r Vines speaks plainly to both of these The Church may be corrupted many ways in Doctrine Ordinances Worship c. And there are degrees of this Corruption the Doctrine in some remote Points the Worship in some Rituals of mans invention or custom How many Churches do we find thus corrupted and yet no Separation of Christ from the Jewish Church nor any Commandment to the Godly of Corinth c. to separate I must in such a Case avoid the Corruption hold the Communion But if Corruptions invade the Fundamentals the foundation of Doctrine is destroyed the Worship is become idolatrous and what is above all if the Church impose such Laws of her Communion as there is a necessity of doing or approving things unlawful in that Case Come out of Babylon The Churches of Protestants so separated from Rome But if the things be not of so heinous a nature nor thus strictly required then Communion with a Church under defects is lawful and may be a Duty So saith M r Corbet in the name of the present Non-Conformists We hold not our selves obliged to forsake a true Church as no Church for the corruptions and disorders found therein or to separate from its Worship for the tolerable faults thereof while our personal profession
of some errour or practice of some evil is not required as the terms of our Communion And M r Burroughs himself doth grant as much and more for he saith Where these Causes are not viz. the being constrained to profess believe or practise contrary to the Rule of Faith or being deprived of means altogether necessary or most expedient to salvation but men may communicate without sin professing the truth and enjoy all Ordinances as the Free-men of Christ Men must not separate from a Church though there be corruption in it to gather into a new Church which may be more pure and in some respects more comfortable And as though such corruptions should be imposed as terms of Communion yet if not actually imposed upon us our communicating in the true part of God's Worship is never the worse for the said imposition as long as we do not communicate in those corruptions as M r Bradshaw doth argue So though they should be imposed and be unavoidable to all that are in Communion that is not a sufficient reason for a total separation as it is also own'd for saith one When the corruptions of a Church are such as that one cannot communicate with her without sin unavoidably that seems to me to be a just ground though not of a positive yet of a negative though not of a total yet of a partial separation it may be a just ground for the lesser but is not so for the greater Supposing then the corruptions in a Church not to be of an heinous nature not respecting the Fundamentals of Religion supposing again they are not necessarily imposed and unavoidable then Separation for the sake of such is unwarrantable But to make this the more uncontroulably evident I shall consider the Corruptions as they respect Worship or Discipline In Worship I shall consider the defects of it in it self in the Ministration the Ministers and those that joyn with it and shew that these do not disoblige from Communion in it and attendance upon it 1. The defects of Worship if not essential are § 1 consistent with Communion and no just reason for withdrawing from it This the Brownists did acknowledge with some qualification Neither count we it lawful for any member to forsake the Fellowship of the Church for blemishes and imperfections which every one according to his Calling should studiously seek to cure c. So M r Cotton Suppose there were and are sundry abuses in the Church yet it was no safe ground of Separation When the Sons of Eli corrupted the Sacrifices of God their sin was great yet it was the sin of the people to separate and abhor Thus a Reverend Person in his Farewel Sermon doth rightly instruct his Auditors A means to hold fast what you have received is diligent attendance on the publick Ordinances and Worship of God if and when you can enjoy them in any measure according to God's Will though not altogether in the manner you desire and they should be administred in c. Though I dare not advise you to join in any thing that is in it self or in your judgment evil till you be satisfied about it yet I must advise you to take heed of Separation from the Church or from what is good and God's own Ordinance c. For the fuller proof of which it may not be amiss to produce the several Arguments used by them in confirmation of this Truth As First To break off Communion or to refuse it for such defects would be to look after a greater perfection than this present state will admit of So the Brownists do declare None is to separate from a Church rightly gathered and established for faults and corruptions which may and so long as the Church consisteth of mortal men will fall out and arise among them And M r Jenkin argues upon this Principle Must not he who will forbear Communion with a Church till it be altogether freed from mixtures tarry till the day of Judgment till when we have no promise that Christ will gather out of his Church whatsoever doth offend This was it that amongst other reasons conquer'd the prejudices of that Good Man M r J. Allen and kept him from Separation of which we have this Account He knew of how great moment it was that the publick Worship of God should be maintained and that its Assemblies should not be relinquished though some of its Administrations did not clearly approve themselves unto him because upon the account of some imperfections and pollutions in them supposed or real to withdraw Communion is evidently to suppose our selves join'd before our time to the heavenly Assembly or to have found such an one upon Earth exempt from all mixtures and imperfections of Worshippers and Worship The want of this prudent consideration makes many to expect more than can be expected and to look upon every defect or corruption as intolerable to prevent which therefore M r Baxter doth give this Advice to his Brethren Teach them to know that all men are imperfect and faulty and so is all mens Worship of God and that he that will not communicate with faulty Worship must renounce Communion with all the World and all with him Secondly They argue our Saviour and the Apostles did not separate from defective Churches and Worship but communicated in it notwithstanding the corruptions and therefore it s not unlawful for others so to do No doubt it was written for our instruction saith a Reverend Person our Lord Jesus Christ who was as zealous for purity in God's Worship as much against corrupt mixtures of mens inventions therein as any can pretend to be used to attend on the publick Worship in his time notwithstanding the many corruptions brought into it That he went into their Assemblies not to joyn in any Worship but only to bear witness against their corruptions is no where written but rather the contrary is held forth in Scripture when he acknowledgeth himself a member of the Church of the Jews approves of and justifies their Worship as right for substance that salvation might be attained therein which he denies to be attainable in any other Worship John 4.22 we know including himself amongst those that worshipped God aright what we worship for salvation is of the Jews This is sufficiently proved by many that Christ did communicate with the Jewish Church and is granted as well by those of the Congregational as Presbyterial way And yet Doctrine Discipline and Worship were much corrupted of which M r Hildersham doth give a specimen but especially D r Bryan There were many great corruptions in the Church of the Jews in Christ's time the Priests and Teachers were ignorant and wicked and had a corrupt and unlawful entrance into their calling and the People were like to the Priest generally notoriously and obstinately ungodly and the Worship used in that Church was wofully corrupt
means which are most edifying It s answered by a Reverend Person They may say at all times when they have nothing to outweigh their own edification So that edification may be outweighed and then it can be no standing and sufficient reason So M r Burroughs declares in this case Men must consider not only what the thing is in its own nature but what it is to them how it stands in reference to their relations It is not enough to say the thing is in it self better but is it better in all the references I have and it hath Is it better in regard of others in regard of the publick for the helping me in all my relations may it not help one way and hinder many ways Of the same opinion is M r Baxter Many things saith he must concur and especially a respect to the publick good to know which is the best So that edification is not to be judged of alone our own improvement is not to determine us in our actions and especially not with respect to Church-Communion for then other reasons do give Law to it and over-rule it This we see those that dissent from the Church in other things agree with her in And they give several reasons and arguments for it First If we were sure we could not profit yet we must come to do homage to God and shew reverence to his Ordinance This is M r Hildersham's opinion Secondly The leaving a Church for better edification is built upon a false and dangerous principle which is that we must always chuse the best So M r Burroughs To hold what in its self best must be chosen and done not weighing circumstances or references is a dividing principle And afterward he saith a Christian without comparing one thing with another will hack and hew and disturb himself and others in the ways of Religion I believe some of you have known those who whatsoever they have conceived to be better than other they have presently followed with all eagerness never considering circumstances references or consequences but the thing is good it must be done yet being wearied with this they have after grown loose in as great an excess the other way Thirdly This principle of better edification if followed would bring in confusion So M r Hildersham This factious disposition of the hearers of Gods Word hath in all ages been the cause of much confusion in the Church of God and greatly hindred the fruit of the Gospel of Christ. This saith M r Brinsley the moderate Author of the late Irenicum M r Burroughs will by no means allow but condemns as the direct way to bring in all kind of disorder and confusion into the Church and I think none who are judicious but will therein subscribe to him It will not be amiss to transcribe his own words It is in it self a better thing to enjoy a Ministry of the most eminent gifts and graces than one of lower but if this should be made a rule that a man who is under a Pastor who is faithful and in some good measure gifted upon another mans coming into the Country that is more eminent he should forsake his Pastor and join to the other and if after this still a more eminent man comes he should leave the former and join to him and by the same Law a Pastor who hath a good People yet if others be more likely to receive more good he may leave his own People and go to them what confusion and disorder would there be continually in the Church This is condemned also by the New England Ministers This M r Cawdrey doth expose If a man may lawfully separate from a true Church c. only with a good mind to serve God in Church-institutions true or conceited by his own light all the Secretaries and Separists Donatists Brownists in the World may be justified This saith another speaking of hearing for this reason is a Church-destroying Principle sure if one member be not fixed then not another nor another c. and then not the Pastor nor Teacher and so farewel Churches Fourthly This will be endless So M r Burroughs Men must not separate from a Church though there be corruptions in it to gather into a new Church which may be more pure and in some respects more comfortable First Because we never find the Saints in Scripture separating or raising Churches in such a case And Secondly There would be no continuance in Church-fellowship if this were admitted for what Church is so pure and hath all things so comfortable but within a while another Church will be more pure and some things will be more comfortable there And he concludes with this prudent maxim The general peace of the Church should be more regarded than some comfortable accommodations to our selves So M r Baxter What if twenty Ministers be one abler than another in their several degrees doth it follow that only the ablest of all these may be joyned with because that all the rest do worse And yet this must be if edification be always to be consulted and is to determine us in our choice of Ministers Churches and Ordinances Fifthly They say edification doth not depend so much upon the external administration of Worship as Gods Blessing and that we are not to break the Order Peace and Union of the Church for the sake of it The former is asserted by M r Hildersham It s our sin and shame and is just cause of humbling to us if we cannot profit by the meanest Minister God hath sent The power of the Ministry dependeth not on the excellency of the Teachers gift but Gods blessing The latter is maintained by M r Vines It s said order in an Army kills no Body yet without it the Army is but a rout neither able to offend or defend So haply order in the Church converts no body yet without it I see not how the Church can attain her end or preserve themselves in begetting or breeding up Souls to God Therefore is the advice of Mr. Baxter Do not think to prosper by breaking over the hedge under pretence of any right of Holiness so of edification whatsoever following any party that would draw you to Separation The mischief of which is represented by Dr. Tuckney Experience saith he hath taught us that the Church of God hath been poorly edifyed by those who have daubed up their Babel with untempered mortar c. when the Church is rent by Schisms and Factions and one Congregation is turned into many Conventicles falsely now called Churches this doth diminish weaken and ruine Lastly When they do grant that edification may serve to guide us and that we may hear where we can most profit it s with such limitations and cautions as these it must be seldom in a great case without offence and contempt Thus Mr. Hildersham I dare
are tolerated is not presently necessary So for the Members thereof otherwise worthy hereupon to abstain from Communion with such a Church in the participation of the Sacraments is unlawful Secondly They plead that the communicating in Gods service with open sinners whom the Godly in some of our Assemblies are enforced to communicate with is not sufficient to make such prophane or to pollute to them the holy things of God So the old Non-Conformists So M r Vines The presence of wicked men at Gods Ordinances pollutes not them that are neither accessary to their sin nor yet to their presence there This M r Burroughs disclaims You are not defiled by the meer presence of wicked men in the Sacrament for that is a meer deceit and gull that some would put upon men that differ from them but thus are you defiled if you do not your duty and the uttermost you are able to purge them out But if this be done according to the power and capacity Persons are in it s universally granted that the Innocent shall not suffer for the Nocent So Mr. Ball The precept of debarring scandalous offenders bindeth them to whom God hath given this power and them only so far as God hath put it in their power But God regularly doth not leave that power in the hand of one single Steward or some few private Christians And if the Steward or one or few private Christians cannot debar the unworthy from the Lords Table it is manifest the Ordinance of God is not defiled to them by the presence of the wicked whom they desire to reform or expel but cannot because power is not in their hand to do it lawfully This they confirm 1. From the examples of the Prophets and good men who of old joyned with many that were notoriously stained with gross sins from the practice of our Saviour that communicated with such in the publick service of God from the practice of Christians in Apostolical times all which the old Non-Conformists do insist upon This is also pleaded by those of New-England and others This would make all the sins of the Congregation to be ours So M r Baxter If you be wanting in your duty to reform it it is your sin but if bare presence made their sin to be ours it would also make all the sins of the Assembly ours From all which it appears that their sence is that scandalous Members are no sufficient reason for Separation for that must be either be cause it s commanded in Scripture or that those that do communicate with such are in so doing corrupted also but if neither of these be then we may safely Communicate with such or in a Church where such are without sin Thirdly To separate upon this ground is to maintain a Principle destructive to the Communion of the Church visible which consists of good and bad This M r Cotton is peremptory in It is utterly untrue to say that Christ admits not of any dead Plants to be set in his Vineyard or that he takes not to himself a compounded body of living and dead Members or that the Church of God is not a mixed Company c. From the ill effects of which M r Cartwright used to call this Separation upon pretence of greater purity the white Devil And because there are some Scriptures that seem to look this way and are made use of by those that make mixed Communion an argument for Separation therefore they have taken off the force of them If a Brother be a Fornicator c. the Apostle exhorteth not to eat with him To this they answer That if it be meant of excluding such an one from Church-Communion it must be done by the Church and not a private person But you are not commanded to separate from the Church if they exclude him not So M r Baxter c. That it concerns not religious but civil Communion and that not all civil society or commerce but familiar only For which they produce several reasons 1. They argue from the notion of eating bread which is a token of love and friendship in phrase of Scripture not to partake of or to be shut from the Table is a sign of familiarity broken off So Mr. Ball c. 2. The eating which is here forbidden is allowed to be with an Heathen but it s the civil eating which is only allowed to be with an Heathen therefore it s the civil eating which is forbidden to be with a Brother So Mr Jenkin c. 3. The eating here forbidden is for the punishment of the nocent not of the innocent To these there are added others by the old Non-Conformists As for other objections they are also undertaken by the same hands and to which M r Baxter's answer is sufficient If you mâ—â—k all the Texts in the Gospel you shall find that all the separation which is commanded in such cases besides our separation from the Infidels and Idolatrous World or Antichristian and Heretical Confederacies and No-Churches is but one of these two sorts 1. Either that the Church cast out the impenitent by the power of the Keys Or 2. That private men avoid all private familiarity with them but that the private Members should separate from the Church because such persons are not cast out of it shew me one Text to prove it if you can This saith M r Vines hath not a syllable of Scripture to allow or countenance it But supposing it be allowed that we ought not to separate from a Church where corrupt Members are tolerated or connived at under some present circumstances as for want of due proof or through particular favour yet it seems to be allowable where there is no Discipline exercised or taken care of For then we are without an Ordinance To avoid this objection I shall consider 2. The case with respect to Discipline and shall § 2 shew from them 1. That the want of that or defects in it are no sufficient reason for Separation 2. What Discipline is exercised or taken care of in the Church of England The former of these they do own and prove First As Discipline is not necessary to the being of a Church This was of old maintained by M r Cartwright who thus argues That Church Assemblies are builded by Faith only on Christ the Foundation the which Faith so being whatsoever is wanting of that which is commanded or remaining of that which is forbidden is not able to put that Assembly from the right and title of so being the Church of Christ For though there be many things necessary for every Assembly yet they be necessary to the comely and stable being and not simply to the being of the Church And afterward he gives an instance in the Dutch Assemblies or Lutheran Churches which he saith are
a duty on a Believer that he disjoyn and separate himself from such a Church And they give this reason for it that then they must separate from all Churches So M r Baxter c. Is it not a high degree of Pride to conclude that almost all Christs Churches in the World for these thirteen hundred Years at least to this day have offered such Worship unto God as that you are obliged to avoid it and that almost all the Catholick Church on Earth this day is below your Communion for using Forms and that even Calvin and the Presbyterians Cartwright Hildersham and the old Non-Conformists were unworthy your Communion I know there are several Objections against Forms of Prayer but I know also that these are answered by them But since the most common is that of quenching and stinting the Spirit I shall briefly give their sence of it They say 1. To say that persons should use no set Form but pray as moved by the Spirit is a fond errour 2. They say that the Spirit instructeth us what to ask not in what phrase of speech It stirreth up in us holy desires but giveth not ability suddenly and without help to express and lay open our hearts in fit method and significant Words Ability of speech is a common gift of the Spirit which the Lord bestoweth upon good and bad c. 3. That the measure of the Spirit standeth not in Words and Forms but in fervent sighs and groans 4. That there is nothing letteth but that in such Forms the hearers hearts may profitably go with the same both to humble to quicken and to comfort And D r Owen cannot deny but that they may be for edification and that persons in the use of them may have Communion with God 5. They say that the Scriptures insisted upon in this case are grounded upon mistakes and are misapplyed as M r Tombs in particular hath clearly manifested Fourthly I shall consider what their opinion is as to the English Liturgy or Common Prayer both as to the Liturgy it self and Communion in it As to the Liturgy it self it s acknowledged 1. That the matter for the most part is good sound and divine and that there is not any doctrinal passage in any of the Prayers that may not bear a good construction and so Amen may be said to it as D r Bryan with others do maintain 2. That as no Church for this 1400 Years has been without its publick Forms so ours is the best So the old Non-Conformists Compare the Doctrines Prayers Rites at those times throughout in use in the Churches with ours and in all these blessed be the name of the Lord we are more pure than they And it s not much short that we find in M r Baxter in the name of the present Non-Conformists 3. That which is accounted faulty is tolerable and hinders not but that its acceptable to God and edifying to pious and well-disposed Persons Tolerable So M r Corbet The Worship contained in the Liturgy may lawfully be partaked in it being found for substance in the main and the mode thereof being laudable in divers Forms and Orders and passable in the most though in some offensive inconvenient or less perfect Acceptable to God So the old Non-Conformists In them that join with the Prayers according to Christs command and liberty of absence from Christ hath not been shewed notwithstanding the corruptions we hold the Prayers to be an holy acceptable Sacrifice to God c. Edifying to well-disposed Persons To this purpose M r Hildersham M r Rogers c. And accordingly M r Corbet professeth his own experience Though I judge their Form of Worship to be in many respects less perfect than is desired yet I have found my heart spiritually affected and raised towards God therein and more especially in receiving the Lords Supper I judge this Form may be use formally by the formal and spiritually by those that are spiritual It is my part to make the best of it being the established Form As to Communion in the Liturgy it is granted 1. That there is no cause to renounce it or the Communion of the Church for it and that so to do is a Sin 2. That all the Reformed Churches in Christendom do commonly profess to hold Communion with the English Churches in the Liturgy if they come among us where it is used 3. It s declared on the part of the old Non-Conformists That they ordinarily and constantly used the Communion-Book in their publick Ministrations and that the People generally were in their days satisfied in it And for the present it s declared We can lawfully not only hear Common-Prayer but read it our selves I shall not trouble the Reader with the several Objections against the Liturgy and the answers return'd to them by the old and present Non-Conformists but shall content my self with that which it seems was much insisted upon in the days of M r Ball and their reply to it The Liturgy in the whole matter and Form thereof is too like unto the Mass-Book If the Liturgy be Antichristian it is so either in respect of the matter or of the Form Not of the matter for that which properly belonged to Antichrist the foul and gross errors is purged out Not of the Form for Order and Phrase of speech is not properly Antichristian 2. That the English Liturgy is gathered according to the Ancients the purest of them and is not a collection out of the Mass-Book but a refining of that Liturgy which heretofore had been stained with the Mass c. and is not a translation of the Mass but a restitution of the ancient Liturgy Thus saith that Learned Person and much more to whom many others do likewise consent And in this Mr. Tombs is so zealous that he concludes I cannot but judge that either much ignorance or much malice it is that makes any traduce the English Common-Prayer Book as if it were the Popish Mass-Book or as bad as it and to deter men from joyning with those Prayers and Services therein which are good as if it were joyning with Antichrist the Pope when they can hardly be ignorant that the Martyrs in Queen Mary ' s days were burnt for it is impudent falsehood Having thus far considered the Forms I shall now § 3 proceed to shew what their opinion is of the gestures required in Lay-Communion such as kneeling at the Sacrament and standing up at the Creed and Gospels As to Kneeling 1. It s granted that the posture in the Sacrament is not determined So Mr. Baxter I never yet heard anything to prove Kneeling unlawful there is no Word of God for or against any gesture 2. It is granted whatever the gesture of our Saviour in it was yet that doth
not oblige This M r Tombs hath undertaken to shew 1. Because this gesture seems not to have been of choice used by Christ. 2. Because S t Paul omits the gesture which he would not have done if it had been binding 3. He mentions the night and calls it the Lords Supper and if the time be not necessary much less the gesture 4. If the gesture doth oblige then Christians must use the self same that Christ used 3. It is granted that the nature of the ordinance doth not forbid kneeling So M r Bains kneeling is not unbeseeming a Feaster when our joy must be mingled with reverent trembling So M r Baxter The nature of the ordinance is mixed And if it be lawful to take a pardon from the King upon our knees I know not what can make it unlawful to take a sealed pardon from Christ by his Ambassador upon our Knee Hence M r Bayley reckons it as an error of some Independents that they accounted sitting necessary as a rite significant of fellowship with Christ and a part of our imitation of him and for both these reasons declared it necessary to keep on their hats at the time of participation 4. It is granted not to be idolatrous So M r Bains Kneeling is neither an occasion nor by participation Idolatry kneeling never bred Bread-worship And our doctrine of the Sacrament known to all the world doth free us from suspicion of adoration in it To these M r Tombs adds 1. that the Papists adore not the bread at putting into their mouths but at the elevation It being inconsistent with their principles to worship that which is not above them 2. That the worship of God not directed to a creature but before it as an occasional object of adoration to God is not Idolatry 3. That yet in the Church of England the Elements are not occasionally so but the benefits of Christ in the Lords Supper and 4. Kneeling is not to the Bread but as the signification of an humble and grateful mind as he shews from the Rubrick 5 thly Those that do account it inconvenient yet account it not to be unlawful Thus M r Cartwright Kneeling in receiving the Sacrament being incommodious in its own nature and made far more incommodious by Popish superstition is not therefore so to be rejected that we should abstain from the Sacrament if we cannot otherwise be partakers of it because the thing is not in its own nature unlawful So it s said of the old Nonconformists Kneeling at the Sacrament was disliked by all but yet thought tolerable and that it might be submitted to by some of the most learned From all which we may conclude with Mr. Vines that the posture being a circumstance of action as well as the time and place is not of the Free-hold of the ordinance and with Mr. Baxter that those that think they must not receive kneeling think erroneously As for standing up at the Creed c. Mr. Baxter saith his judgement is for it where it is required and where not doing it would be divisive and scandalous Nay elsewhere he saith that t is a convenient praising gesture c. Thus I have considered the most material points in which the Lay-members of the Church of England are concern'd and shew'd that the lawfulness of the things injoyned upon such is declared and justified by the suffrage and judgement of as eminent Nonconformists as have lived in the several ages since that unhappy controversie was first set on foot amongst us And now what remains but that every one concerned set himself seriously and impartially to consider it and it becomes such so to do when they go against the stream of the most experienced writers of their own party who might pretend to understand the case as well if not better than any that were conversant in it It becomes such when they bury that under the condemnation of false worship which the Lord the author of all truth doth allow in his service When they forsake the prayers of the Congregation and depart from the Table of the Lord and break off society and communion with the Churches of Christ c. when they expose Religion to contempt and the truth of God to reproach by the rents and divisions in the Church as M r Ball doth represent it It becomes them when our division gratifieth the Papists and greatly hazardeth the Protestant Religion and by it we may lose all which the several parties contend about as Mr. Baxter hath proved It becomes them when the Church of England is the bulwark of the Protestant Religion amongst us at home and that according to the noted saying of Mr. Egerton The withdrawing totally from it would more effectually introduce Popery than all the works of Bellarmine It becomes them when this is the Bulwark of it abroad and all the reformed Churches in the world have a venture in this Bottom which if compar'd to a Fleet the Church of England must be acknowledged to be the Admiral And if it go ill with this Church so as that miscarry there is none of the Churches of Christ this day under Heaven but are like to feel it as M r Brinsley discourses Lastly It becomes them when divisions and separations draw down the displeasure of God and lay us open to his Judgements Therefore Dr. Bryan after he hath largely insisted upon the Argument and the present case amongst us doth thus apply himself O that I could prevail with you to lay sadly to heart the greatness of the sin of divisions and the grievousness of the punishment threatned against it and hath been executed for it and that the Leaders and encouragers of private Christians to make this sinful separation would read oft and me ditate upon S t Jude's Epistle to v. 20. and that the multitudes that are willing to be led by them would follow the prescription of the means here to preserve or recover themselves from this seduction v. 20 21. And that both would leave off their reviling the Government Ecclesiastical and the Ministers that conform and submissively behave themselves by the example of Michael c. I shall conclude the whole with the peaceable and pious advice of Mr. Bains Let every man walk within the compass of his Calling Whatsoever lyeth not in us to reform it shall be our zeal and piety to tolerate and with patience to forbear especially in things of this nature which concern not so much the outward Communion with God or man essentially required in a visible state as the due ordering of business in the said Communion wherein there be many superfluities and defects silvâ tamen Ecclesiâ yea and such a Church notwithstanding as wherein the best and truest Members circumstances considered may have more cause to rejoyce than to grieve ERRATA PAG. 5. l. 25. r. soundness p. 7.