The Mischief of Impositions, Frontispiece – Dedication
Vincent Alsop. … an Original Painting in Dr. Williams's Library.
Publi…'d by …, Paternoster Row.
THE Miſchief of Impoſitions: OR, AN ANTIDOTE Againſt a Late DISCOURSE, Partly Preached At Guild-Hall Chappel, May 2. 1680. CALLED, The Miſchief of SEPARATION.
If your Church had kept to the Primitive Simplicity and Moderation, the occaſions of moſt Controverſies had been taken away. Dr. Edw. Stillingfleet's Rational Account, p. 102.
I will not conceal my mind! In things purely Indifferent, Multiformity joyn'd with Charity, does no leſs advance the glory of God than Uniformity. Dr. Fuller Def. of Ch. Hiſtory.
Sacra Scriptura eſt lex Eccleſiae, fidei menſura; Regula Intellectûs; Humanae Ratiocinationis fraenum. An.
LONDON: Printed for Benj. Alſop, at the Angel and Bible in the Poultrey, over againſt the Stocks-Market, 1680.
To the Right Worſhipful Sir T. R. Knight.
SIR!
SInce your Command gave occaſion to the Conception of this Diſcourſe, juſtice will oblige you to ſtand for its Godfather; which you may ſafely do without danger from the Canon. The height of my ambition was to provide my ſelf of a Right Worſhipful Suſceptor, when Favourites may command the Patronage of the Right Honourable: thus every man will anſwer for a Great mans Error, when the poor mans Truth may go unchriſten'd: for thus the Poet,
An heaven-born-Truth (like poor mens infants) may
For want of Godfathers, unchriſten'd ſtay,
And find no Prieſt; when every ſtander-by,
Will be a Goſſip to a Great mans Lye.
Among the many diſcouragements I ſtruggled with in anſwering your deſires and the Doctors Sermon, there was none more terrifying (though many ſo) than that it was a Sermon, and a Sermon premunited with the Lord Mayors Order. The former; becauſe it ſeem'd indecent to Arraign a Diſcourſe, that came with the Certificate of the God of Heaven, and had ſo honourably been acquitted by the Gods on Earth: To this I had nothing to ſay in my Defence, but that, He that will plead the priviledg of the ſanctuary, muſt keep within the verge of it. I have heard of a Gentleman, that being long proſecuted in the high Commiſſion for ſtriking a Reverend Clergy-man, pleaded that Mr. Parſon was not in his Canonical Habiliments, and therefore ought not to inſiſt upon his character; and Archbiſhop Laud voted for the poor mans diſcharge, becauſe it was but Lay-battery to cudgel a Coat; which would have been Theomachy upon a Caſſock: I muſt borrow the ſame Plea; That the Reverend Doctor ought not to ſtand upon the priviledg of a Preacher, unleſs he had kept cloſer to his Commiſſion, and preacht nothing for, but what really was the Word of God: But to be open with you, Sir, It was the latter that put me hardeſt to it, when I ſaw the flag of London ſtreaming before the Ship; for I proteſt to you, I am always ready to ſtrike ſail to the meaneſt Yatch that hangs out the Colours of ſo ſacred a Name, ſo great an Authority: And yet I rub'd through that, by conſidering, that the Order was for its Printing, not againſt my Anſwering; and though that Licenſe made it more vendible, yet not at all more unanſwerable; and ſo I hope we are paſt the worſt, for I never much Dread thoſe Polemical pieces, whoſe greateſt ſtrength lies in the left-hand Page before the Title. And yet I was a little ſtumbled at the Order, which deſires the Doctor to Print, not only what he had preached, but what further he had prepared to deliver at that time; which (me-thought) lookt ſomewhat like the Implicit faith required by the Rubrick, which enjoyns the Miniſter to uſe one of the Homilies ſet forth, or hereafter to be ſet forth by Common Authority.
In the very entrance of his Epiſtle Dedicatory, the Doctor takes notice of a Report raiſed, it ſeems, by ſome ill men (that's the Alamode phraſe) that he intended to ſtir up the Magiſtrates and Judges to a perſecution of Diſſenters. I was not a little troubled, that a perſon of his Character ſhould be ſo unworthily miſrepreſented, and miſinterpreted; and no leſs joyful, that the Doctor has ſo timely and zealouſly diſclaimed a deſign ſo horrid in it ſelf, ſo unbecoming the Place he then bore, and the Title he juſtly wears; nor can I imagine whence a ſuſpicion, as ſcandalous as groundleſs, could be foſter'd, except from this one thing, That his Sermon was preach't to thoſe Righteous perſons, who (in the matter of Conformity) needed no repentance, when the Harangue had been more pertinent and proper for a Conventicle, to thoſe Sinners whom he preſumes to need it.
But ſo far was he from blowing up the coals of perſecution, that he profeſſes his only deſign was to prevent all occaſion of it, by finding out a certain foundation for a laſting union among our ſelves. And not without good reaſon: for ſeeing there are but two ways to extinguiſh a raging fire, the one by pouring water upon that mercileſs Element, the other by withdrawing the fewel that feeds, but never fills its inſatiable appetite; the Dr. judg'd it the wiſer courſe to convert all the Diſſenters, that there might be nothing to burn; rather than leaving ſuch combubiſtle matter to quench the fiery fury of perſecution: for if there were no offenders, there would neither be room for pardoning mercy, nor vindicative juſtice; and if he could perſwade all men to conform upon ſuch eaſie arguments, the whole Generation, Kind, and Tribe of Eccleſiaſtical Informers, muſt be extinct, and fail for ever.
However, an union, and a laſting union; and a foundation, nay a certain foundation for that laſting union, are terms of that melodious chime to our ears, that his tendries muſt needs be highly acceptable, even when their diſproportionateneſs to thoſe ends give us feeble hopes that they will prove effectual.
All union that pretends to be laſting, muſt be real and cordial; and that it may be ſo, muſt neceſſarily be founded upon terms conſiſtent with the conſcientious principles of the united parties: force may poſſibly juſtle and thruſt men into one place, but never into one mind; and fraud may palliate for a while the threatning ſymptoms, but will never eradicate the cauſes of the malady: ſuch was that union between the Greek and Latin Churches, haſtily patcht up in the Council of Florence, where his Holineſs, like an old bungling Botcher ſtitcht together the two ill-matcht pieces, which preſently dropt aſunder, and the rent was made worſe. All dough-bak'd Alliances will give again; and thoſe differences which are compromiſed upon unequal terms, laſt no longer than a fair juncture ſhall tempt the aggrieved party to a rupture. So have we ſometime ſeen a mighty Conqueror impoſe ſuch terms upon the conquered, that they ſuppoſe it one tacit Article in the Peace, That it ſhall endure no longer than the injured and weaker ſide can get power to juſtifie its violation.
This laſting Ʋnion (the Doctor thinks) is impoſſible to be attained, till men are convinced of the evil and danger of the preſent Separation: but others think (with equal plauſibleneſs) that it is impoſſible to be attained till men are convinced of the evil and danger of the preſent Impoſitions: and the Dr. was once of that mind, when he proved ſo learnedly, Iren. p. 1, 2. That things neceſſary for the Churches peace muſt be clearly revealed: Which principle had he and others adhered to, his Weapon-ſalve for the Churches wounds had been as common and famous as the ſympathetical Powder which Sir K. Digby aſſures us is in France ſucceſsfully practiſed by every Barber. But why is Union impoſſible but upon ſuch conviction? Is it impoſſible for the ſame Power that impoſed theſe ſevere conditions of Union, to relax and remit them? We uſe to ſay, Eodem modo quo quid Inſtituitur, deſtituitur: There's no more goes to Repeal a Law, than to Enact it: Nay, it's more poſſible for our Eccleſiaſticks to wave what they confeſs indifferent, than for the Laity to comply with what they judg ſinful. But if inexorable ſtiffneſs has made their condeſcention impoſſible, who created the impoſſibility? If Union (as matters now ſtand) is become deſperate, who put matters into that deſperate poſture? It's unreaſonable that any ſhould create a neceſſity of ſeparation, and then complain of an impoſſibility of union: but 'tis eaſily obſerved, that men to conciliate repute to their own humors, call what they have a mind to, abſolutely neceſſary; and that to which they bear an averſion, ſimply impoſſible. The Grandees of the Church knew full well, that the generality of the Nation who ſeriouſly attended Religion, had contracted ſuch principles as either condemned the Ceremonious appendages as ſinful or unuſeful, and therefore ſinful becauſe unuſeful: they knew well alſo, that theſe Impoſitions had loſt much of that ſtock of credit upon which they had formerly ſet up for themſelves, and driven a pretty trade among us: They muſt needs know too, that to perpetuate the old Conditions, would be but to perpetuate old diviſions, and create new ones; why then would they venture ſo precious a lading as Peace, in that old worm-eaten bottom, wherein it muſt certainly miſcarry? But if it be impoſſible to attain Union at cheaper rates with men, we muſt look up to Him to whom nothing is impoſſible, who can open their eyes to ſee the things that belong to our common peace; and in the mean time enable us to diſcharge the things that belong to our duty, and bear thoſe evils which ſhall attend them. What a fine world now muſt moderate and unconcerned Chriſtians have between theſe two, ſome have ſworn to endeavour a Reformation according to the word of God, and others ſeem to have taken a ſolemn Oath never to come up to that Rule; and between them both, Ʋnion is impoſſible.
Well! ſay what we will or can, it's impoſſible to attain a laſting Ʋnion till Diſſenters are convinc'd of the evil of their Separation. Pray then convince them of it! That he will do with a wet finger; for the preſent Separation (ſays the Doctor) is carried on by ſuch principles as not only overthrow the preſent conſtitution of our Church, but any other whatſoever. If that be the worſt on't, we'l endeavour to carry it on by better principles that ſhall overthrow neither; will that pleaſe him? But what if I ſhould return; that the preſent Impoſitions are ſupported by ſuch principles as will divide, not only our Church, but any Church whatſoever. This would be but a Rowland for his Oliver: And I am ſomewhat confident, that fairer probabilities may be offer'd for this Aſſertion, than the other; for as to matter of fact, it's moſt evident, that from the firſt Infancy of the Goſpel-ſtate, when the Church was in its Minority of years, and Adult ſtate of perfection, to this very day, nothing has more diſorder'd the outward face of the Church, than the Lordly, Imperious Impoſition of dubious matters: Thus the Judaizing Dogmatizers, who would ſtretch all mens Conſciences to their own Laſt, and compel them to a conformity to the antiquated Law of Moſes, began the brawl, and their ſucceſſors in pride have danced after their meaſures, to the World's confuſion. Nor has any Engine of the Devil more batter'd and ſhaken the well-compacted Walls of God's Jeruſalem, than theſe roaring Eccleſiaſtical Canons: And if we examine the principles upon which they proceed in exacting theſe unneceſſary and doubtful terms of Union, we ſhall find them the very ſame upon which proud Rome has introduced the whole Lirry of her ſuperſtitious Obſervances, viz. an unaccountable power in thoſe that are the Top, to make them do and ſay any thing that are at the Bottom; in which Obſervances, and upon which Principle, the Chriſtian World never yet united, and it's more than probable never will.
But I intend not to confront, but modeſtly examine the truth of the Doctor's Aſſertion, namely, Whether the preſent Separation be carried on by ſuch principles as not only overthrow the preſent Conſtitution of our Church, but of any other whatſoever. And there are two Inquiries I ſhall make upon this ſubject: Firſt, Whether the principles by which the Separation is carried on, will deſtroy any other Church? Which if it be true, and that the Diſſenting-Churches are built upon ſuch mouldering foundations, ſuch ſelf-deſtroying principles, it is next to miracle that they ſhould yet ſtand, and neither fall with their own weakneſs, nor the weight of Oppreſſion wherewith they have been ſurcharged; that they ſhould be continually batter'd with violence from without, and undermined by policy from beneath, and yet no conſiderable breach be made in their intrinſick Frame and Conſtitution! Now to put this Queſtion out of all queſtion, I will make a reaſonable motion, Leave the Diſſenters quietly to overthrow themſelves by their own bad principles, and ſo ſhall the Church of England avoid the odium of Perſecution, which of late has no very good name; and the Separators as Felones de ſe, ſhall be condemned to have a ſtake driven through them, who, like the fooliſh woman, pluckt down their own houſe upon their own heads, with their own hands. Give them but reſpite from outward fury, and commit them to be crumbled to nothing by the inconſiſtency of their own principles; and they muſt lay upon themſelves, not the Church, the guilt of their own deſtruction. The Diſſenters have outlived one twenty years of vexation; and if men could be quiet, may outlive twenty more, and in time outgrow all their weakneſſes; ſo that it may tempt an Impartial Conſiderer to think their preſent conſtitution immortal, which no outward aſſaults, no inward Schiſms has been able to diſſolve. There are two things uſually pleaded for the ſouls Immortality; the one, that it's not compounded of Contraries, ſuch as by inteſtine jars may diſſolve its eſſence; The other, that it's not obnoxious to external Impreſſions, ſuch as may ſtorm, and break in piece… its powers. And on both thoſe accounts, the Diſſenters humbly hope their Congregations may prove Immortal, ſeeing they have not felt utter ruine from the latter, and do not much fear a diſſolution from the former.
Secondly, Let us a little enquire, what truth there may be in the other branch of the Doctors Propoſition; That the Separation is carried on by ſuch principles as will overthrow the preſent conſtitution of the Church of England. I ſhall not aſſume the confidence to ſay, That then its preſent conſtitution is none of the beſt and ſtrongeſt: but this I may with modeſty aſſert, That the principles upon which the Diſſenters proceed, will pluck down nothing that Chriſt ever built, nor pluck up any thing that Chriſt ever planted; and if they ſhould pluck up a few weeds which the envious one threw over the hedg, whileſt men ſlept, the good corn would thrive the better for ſuch weeding; if they ſhould pluck down a few Imaginations which curioſity has carved, and ſet up in the Nitches on the outſide of the Church-wall, the main of the Fabrick would ſtand more firm, diſcharg'd of a needleſs cumber, without prejudice to the foundation: Some few Traditions, ſome few unſcriptural Additions, ſome ſupernumerary Ceremonies, or ſome few Encroachments upon Chriſts Regal and Prophetical Offices their principles might overthrow: but what are theſe, all theſe, to the being, the well-being, the flouriſhing being of the Church of England? Is it true, that no Ceremony, no Epiſcopacy? Was ever a Church built upon ſuch Woolſacks? Such diſcourſes as theſe tempt us to ſuſpect there's nothing ſubſtantial in that Conſtitution, which cannot ſubſiſt without theſe accidents. Are Ceremonies grown ſuch Inſeparable Adjuncts, that they cannot Abeſſe ſine ſubjecti Interitu? We may as well fancy, that to ſcowr off the ruſt, will deſtroy the Iron; or that it's impoſſible to waſh the face, without fleying of the skin: as that a Reformation, according to Gods word, will draw along with it the inevitable ruine of that Church which is founded on it, and reformed by it: And if it reſt upon any other Baſis, it needs the principles of none but it ſelf to undo it.
I can allow the Doctor to ſee much farther into theſe matters than I; and yet I cannot be perſwaded that I am ſtark blind; and with the beſt eyes I have, or can borrow, cannot yet diſcern what prejudice it can be to them that worſhip God in a more ſpruce, ſplendid, gentile mode than we do, to ſuffer us to worſhip our God in his own, old, Scripture-faſhion: It cannot be denied, that the Proteſtant Churches in France are really ſeparated from the Papal Gallican Polity: It muſt be acknowledged that their principles carry a direct oppoſition to thoſe of their Adverſaries, that their ſeparation from, and oppoſition to the National frame is much greater than that of Diſſenters from, and to the conſtitution of the Church of England; and yet the Roman Polity lives, and thrives, and proſpers, and no one of all the Popiſh Kingdoms bears a greater port, or glories more in its exteriour ſplendor and grandeur than that does: Why then cannot Conformiſts ſecure themſelves againſt the Diſſenters principles, as well as the Gallican Church, againſt thoſe of the Hugonots? And why may not Diſſenters plead for the ſame freedom, eſpecially as to the immediate worſhip of God, and ordering their own particular Societies, ſince they plead for leſs here than they there enjoy, and yet upon much ſtronger arguments? for the Diſſenters at home plead for no power to ſet up Claſſes, and Synods, Provincial or National, which yet are there indulged them; and they think they might expect a little more reſpect, as being of one and the ſame Proteſtant Religion, and not guilty of any principles which have any tendency, as they that own them have no deſign, to overthrow the preſent conſtitution of the Church; ſo that the Doctors Reaſonings are herein ſo unlike himſelf, ſo defective of that evidence and cogency wherewith he attacques the Papal Idolatry, that had I not known his Diſcourſe to have been Concio ad Magiſtratum, I might have ſuſpected it to be nothing but Ad Populum phalerae.
The principles upon which the preſent Separation (ſuch a one as it is) is carried on, are ſuch as fear not to appear before any Bar, where Scripture and Reaſon, not Intereſt and Prejudice have the Chair; which though it be not here pertinent to diſpute, but nakedly to aſſert, leaving their Juſtification to thoſe larger Volumes which are in every mans hand concerned to arrive at ſatisfaction in theſe matters; yet ſhall I direct the Reader to ſome few of them:
(1.) That every particular Church upon a due ballance of all circumſtances, has an inherent right to chuſe its own Paſtor, and every particular Chriſtian the ſame power to chuſe his own Church; I ſay not they have a power to miſchuſe, but a power to chuſe; not to chuſe any, but one that may beſt advance their own edification; at leaſt that no Paſtor be forced upon a Church, no Church obtruded on a ſingle Chriſtian without their own conſent: A principle ſo highly rational, ſo clearly ſcriptural, and of ſuch venerable Antiquity, as ought not upon ſome imaginary or pretended evil conſequences to be exploded, ſeeing the contrary principle is clogg'd with more real, than this can be with ſurmiſed Inconveniencies: I will thank my friends that will recommend to my choice an able Phyſician, a faithful Lawyer; but I am ſure I love my health, my life, my eſtate ſo well, as not to put the Election out of my own hands into theirs, who are not likely to love me better than my ſelf: and if I chuſe amiſs, the greateſt wrong will be my own: Now what Church this principle would overthrow, I am yet ignorant; If indeed ſuch tyranny ſhould prevail in the world, that men muſt be driven to Heaven, like ſilly ſheep to the Market, and this principle ſhould a little croſs the humour on't, the Churches of Chriſt would ſtand where they do, and I believe carry a clearer Counterpart of the Goſpel of Jeſus Chriſt.
It is pretended, that upon this principle men would chuſe one Paſtor to day, another to morrow, and a third the next; and ſo turn round till they are giddy, or run themſelves out of breath in a wild-gooſe chaſe, till they ſit down, and reſt in Atheiſm and Irreligion: And is this all? The Apoſtle commands us to prove all things: muſt we needs therefore never hold faſt that which is good? We ought upon great deliberation, advice and counſel, chuſe our own Paſtor; and when we have ſo choſen, ſit down under Gods Ordinance, and wait for his preſence in, and bleſſing upon his own way: And in the pureſt Primitive times, when the Churches exerciſed this power moſt, then were they moſt firmly united, and Diviſions, Schiſms and Separations the greateſt rarities among them: but ſuppoſe the worſt on't; That ſome malecontent ſhould now and then deſert the Communion of England for that of Rome; Cruelties will never remedy the evil, or the Remedy would be worſe than the diſeaſe; and what if ſome odd Maggot-pate ſhould drop out with the Diſſenters Congregations? what is all this to the overthrow of the Church? This priviledg may be abuſed, muſt it therefore not be uſed? Ʋnſetled heads, and unſtable hearts will be wandring; let them go; 'tis a good riddance of them if they be obſtinate; but where this humour has deſtroy'd one Church, this rigorous forcing of Paſtors upon the people has divided and deſtroyed hundreds.
The generality of Diſſenters in this Nation, at this day may be reduced to two Heads:
Firſt, Such who having been formerly ſixt with, and under their faithful Paſtors, by their deliberate choice, after good experience of their Miniſterial abilities to teach them the mind and will of God, of their wiſdom to adviſe them in their ſpiritual caſes; of their skill to conduct them through their emergent difficulties, of their meekneſs, ſobriety, heavenly-mindedneſs, and whatever might recommend to, and inforce upon their conſciences their ſound Doctrine, do ſtill judg it their unqueſtionable duty to abide in that Relation, and by no terrours to be driven, by no blandiſhments to be withdrawn from their overſight and guidance, according to the word of God; judging that ſuch withdrawing, ſuch ſeparation would be that real Schiſm, which hears ſo badly in, and is loaded with ſuch guilt by the holy Scriptures.
A ſecond ſort is of thoſe who having been ſometime hearers at large in their reſpective Pariſh-Churches, and coming at laſt to have more concernment for their ſouls, and the important buſineſs of another world, and finding that their Parochial Teacher was either ſo overlaid with a numerous throng of people (which he commonly, but unadviſely calls his Flock and Charge) that he cannot perſonally take care of the hundredth part of them; or ſo engaged in ſecular affairs, of more weight to him than his Paſtoral Charge, that he has neither heart nor leiſure to attend ſo troubleſome an employment; or ſo unskilful in the word of Righteouſneſs, that he cannot tolerably declare the Counſel of God for edification; or ſo unſound in his judgment, that he's more likely to poyſon than feed his people; or ſo debauched in his life, that he plucks down more in an hour, than he builds up in a year; or ſuch a Bigot for humane Inventions and Superſtitions, that the naked ſimplicity of divine Worſhip, is either clouded to render it uſeleſs, or clogged to render it burdenſome; this perſon ſeeks and finds out ſome other Paſtor (qualified as before deſcribed) to whoſe Miniſterial conduct under Chriſt (the only chief ſhepherd) he commits himſelf; and there peaceably and patiently continues, notwithſtanding the barbarick clamours of Schiſm and Separation: And all this without more prejudice to the Church he forſakes, then it's an injury to a Tradeſman to leave his ſhop, who has left it himſelf, or has his hands full of better cuſtomers.
(2.) That it is the duty of every Chriſtian to worſhip God, not only in purity of the heart, but according to the purity of Goſpel-adminiſtrations: The true meaſure of which Purity, is to be taken from its conſonancy and harmony with the word of God, which has ſufficiently either in general, ſpecial, or particular inſtructed us in the acceptable ſervice of our God: Purity of worſhip is no ſuch idle and contemptible thing, to be flam'd off with an impertinent ſtory, that we muſt not ſeparate from a true Church upon pretence of greater purity: Nor can I imagine upon what pretence, except that of greater purity, the Church of England ſeparated from Rome, if it be true what we read in Rat. Account, p. 293. That the Church of Rome is a true Church; and what he further owns, Defence againſt T. G. p. 785. I allow (ſays the Doctor) the Church of Rome to be a true Church, as holding all the eſſential points of the Chriſtian faith: and what the Archbiſhop Laud confeſſed to that Lady, who would needs go before to Rome alone, becauſe ſhe could not bear a crowd, that ſhe might be ſaved in Communion with the Roman Church: Now if Rome be a true Church, if ſhe holds all the eſſential points of Chriſtianity; If ſalvation may be attained in that Communion, why was there ſuch a ſtir about reforming of Accidents, when the Eſſentials were ſecured? Why ſuch a Conteſt about a little eaſier way, when the other way was paſſable? Why all this a-do about a purer Church, when the other is confeſſed a true Church? Theſe things then will follow in the lump from the Archbiſhops and Doctors Conceſſions: 1. That a perſon, or party may ſeparate from ſome true Church, which holds all the eſſential points of the Chriſtian faith, without the Imputation of a Schiſmatick. 2. That a perſon or party may ſeparate from ſome Church where ſalvation is attainable, without peril of the guilt of Schiſm. 3. That the only Reaſon (that yet appears) to juſtifie the Church of Englands departure from Rome, is, that it is lawful in ſome caſes to withdraw from the Communion of a true Church, wherein all the eſſential points of faith are owned, and wherein ſalvation may be attained; for the ſake of greater purity of worſhip, greater clearneſs of Doctrine, and greater ſecurity of ſalvation. Is it then lawful for England to ſeparate from Italy for greater purity? It may be lawful for others to ſeparate from England for greater purity: 'Tis readily acknowledged, that the Impurity of the Roman Synagogue is much more, unconceivably more than that of the Church of England; and therefore there was not ſo great cauſe to leave the latter, as the former upon that account; but in aſpiring after Conformity to the Inſtitutions of Chriſt, we are not to conſider ſo much what is behind, as what is before; not ſo much what we have left, as what we have yet to reach; nor ſo much the Terminus aquo, from what ſtate of Impurity we have emerged; as the Terminus ad quem, to what ſtate of purity we would arrive: for if it be true that there is ſuch a ſtate of Purity to be obtained, and ſuch a ſtate of Impurity to be avoided, as will juſtifie our forſaking of this for that; and ſuch a meaſure of both theſe as will not; It muſt be exactly ſtated, what is the loweſt degree of corruption that will, and what is the higheſt that will not warrant a ſeparation: The Diſſenters being judges, there are enow at home to excuſe their ſeceſſion; The Romaniſts being judges, there are not enow abroad to vindicate the Church of Englands ſeparation; and the former are more confirm'd in their judgment, ſince the Doctors Epiſtle Dedicatory to the now B. of London, prefixt to his Defence againſt T. G. where he openly avows on the behalf of the Engliſh Church, that it has reformed thoſe abuſes only, which have crept in ſince the times of the firſt four general Councils: Now the laſt of theſe four firſt being held at Chalcedon, An. 451. there were ſuch Corruptions crept into the Church before that time, which if impoſed upon any as the condition of enjoying the means of their ſalvation, will juſtifie a ſeparation; but I ſhall the leſs inſiſt upon this, becauſe I am confident the Church of England never gave the Doctor a Commiſſion to declare ſo much in her name, and I believe will give him as little thanks for his labour.
(3.) That every Chriſtian is obliged (at leaſt neceſſitate praecepti) to live in the uſe of all Gods Ordinances and Commandments; and therefore it will follow, 1. That where all Chriſts Inſtitutions are not to be had, a Chriſtian may peaceably withdraw from that ſociety, and ſeek them where he can find them: Now they ſay the caſe is this; That though we ought not to commit one ſin to enjoy all Chriſts Ordinances, yet there are ſome wanting in this Church, which if you would commit a thouſand ſins to purchaſe you cannot have them: The preamble to the Office of Commination, intimates ſome ſuch matter. Brethren, in the Primitive Church there was a godly Diſcipline, that at the beginning of Lent, ſuch perſons as were notorious ſinners, were put to open penance and puniſhment in this world, that their ſouls might be ſaved in the day of the Lord; and that others admoniſhed by their example, might be more afraid to offend: Inſtead whereof, until the ſaid diſcipline may be reſtored again (which thing is much to be deſired); it is thought good, that at this time in your preſence ſhould-be read the general ſentences of Gods curſe againſt impenitent ſinners. Now view this paragraph well in its parts. 1. There was a godly diſcipline in the Primitive times, if we could have kept it. 2. That this diſcipline was of unſpeakable benefit to the people; notorious ſinners were put to open ſhame, others warned by their cenſures, and the end of all was the ſalvation of their ſouls. 3. That this Ordinance is not to be found in the Church at this day; which is a great loſs. 4. That it is a thing to be much deſired; and therefore it cannot but be worth the while to ſtep over two threſholds for it: it's worth a wiſh (if wiſhing would do it) with the moſt ordinary Chriſtian on earth. 5. That there's ſomething ſet up inſtead of it; but quo warranto, we are not informed, nor who has power to chop and change any Inſtitution of his, for a new trick, a Quid pro Quo, contrived by men. And therefore we may fairly hope, we ſhall not be condemned for Schiſmaticks for practiſing what they deſire to practiſe; but alas we can, and they cannot, becauſe none hinders them. 2. It will follow alſo, that where the Inſtitutions of Chriſt may be found, yet if they be fetter'd and chain'd to, or mixed with ſinful Conditions, 'tis the ſame caſe as if they were not at all to be had; for we can do nothing, but what we can lawfully do.
To name no more at preſent; we cannot have our Infants baptized without the Aerial ſign of the Croſs, as a Medium whereby it is dedicated to Chriſt. What then ſhall we do? Here we may have a part or two of worſhip with innocency, and peace of conſcience: but if we will walk in all Chriſts inſtitutions, we muſt ſeek elſewhere: What ſhall we do then? muſt we ſpend our Lords days in an undecent trotting up and down the Town for one ſcrap here, a ſnap there? or ſhall we ſit down under a well-fixed order of Worſhip and Diſcipline, and joyn with other Congregations occaſionally in what they have? This is the general courſe of Diſſenters, and will deliver us from that argument wherein they ſo much triumph, That though we cannot joyn with them in all parts of worſhip, yet are we bound to it ſo far as we are perſwaded it is lawful ſo to do: for we are fully perſwaded 'tis our duty to partake of, and communicate in every Ordinance of Chriſt, and therefore ſtatedly and fixedly to adhere to that Church, where, to that Paſtor by whom they are all adminiſtred, not neglecting other Congregations, as Providence ſhall invite, to participate of what they afford, and what without ſin we may have.
(4.) That it is ſinful to ſubmit, ſubſcribe aſſent to dubious and obſcure terms of Communion: How far this principle will be allow'd us, I know not; but this I know, the Reverend Doctor once allow'd himſelf the benefit of it, when he juſtified the Separation of the Church of England from Rome, Dialogue, p. 165. We think (ſays he) the requiring of doubtful things for certain, falſe for true, new for old, abſurd for reaſonable, is ground enough for us not to embrace communion with that Church, unleſs it may be had on better terms. And we think that this is ground enough for us, as well as himſelf, not to embrace the Communion of this Church, ſeeing there are impoſed upon us doubtful things for certain, new for old, and we think too, falſe for true; I ſay we think ſo; and it was but the Doctors [we think] that he oppoſed to T. G. And we think further, that this will vindicate us from thoſe loud, but empty outcrys of Schiſm and Schiſmaticks; for ſo the Doctor aſſerts, Ibid. We have often proved, that the impoſing unreaſonable conditions of Communion, makes the Church ſo impoſing guilty of the Schiſm. I have told the Doctor what we think, I will tell him now why we ſo think, that doubtful things are impoſed on us for certain, falſe for true; and among many others I aſſign this one inſtance, That in the Catechiſm of the Church, wherein the Laity are concern'd, this Doctrine is contained, That Infants perform faith and repentance by their ſureties; and ſuch repentance too, whereby they forſake ſin; and ſuch faith, whereby they ſtedfaſtly believe the promiſes of God made to them in that Sacrament.
You ſee, Sir, how the Importunity of the Doctor has drawn us out of our reſervedneſs; Diſſenters have been modeſt to their great prejudice, and had rather diſpute the matter upon other Arguments, than thoſe drawn from the ſinfulneſs and unlawfulneſs of the things required, out of that great veneration they have ever had for the Church of England; and yet we hope, that they that call and invite, nay provoke, and force us to this task, will not be ſo diſingenuous to trapan us into the ambuſh of a penal Statute; it being unworthy of Gentlemen, and perſons of Honour, firſt to be our Tempters, and then our Accuſers.
(5.) That every Chriſtian is obliged to walk with, and in all the ways of God, ſo far as they have attained: ſo far as they have the knowledg of Gods Will, they are to live up to it; ſo far as they ſee their freedom from bondage, they are to ſtand faſt in it; ſo far as they are advanced towards a perfect reformation, they are to perſevere. All retrograde motions are dangerous; for who knows but that the leaſt declenſion from the ways of God may terminate in Apoſtacy? Foreſeeing Chriſtians therefore will not dare to tread back thoſe ſteps they have taken towards perfection, but rather will be preſſing forward to whatſoever degree of exactneſs in this life is attainable: We queſtion whether we ought not to aſpire and endeavour after greater purity; but it's paſt all queſtion with us, that we ought not to retreat to greater Impurity; Diſſenters are ſo far from divding, that they would be growing up into greater Union: they would walk as they have attained to know, and would know more, that they may walk farther; know clearer, that they may walk holier; and for what they cannot attain by ſtudy, prayer, and the due uſe of all good means, they would humbly wait upon God, till he ſhall, and that he may reveal even that thing alſo unto them: But ſome are ſo haſty and impatient, that they will neither ſtay Gods leiſure, nor theirs, but drive knowledg into their heads, and their brains out of their heads, with the great Churchbeetle.
(6.) Laſtly, I have heard ſome of them own this principle, That where the Church has no power to command, there it cannot be the peoples duty to obey; for power to command, and obligation to obedience being Relatives, muſt be affirmed or denied equally and reciprocally: if then the Church has no power from Chriſt (and whence ſhe ſhould derive it but from him, I cannot divine) to impoſe theſe things in Controverſie, it can never be proved their duty to obey in the premiſes: 'Tis a ſad ſight to ſee how Diſſenters have been teazed with that Text, Let all things be done decently, and in order; but the clamour grows very weak from that Quarter: and now a new Text has been found out, which, they hope, will kill and ſlay all before it: As we have already attained, let's walk by the ſame rule; from whence they argue with ſingular acuteneſs, we muſt walk as we have attained, and therefore we muſt walk as we have not attained; if we be otherwiſe minded we muſt wait till God reveal it to us; therefore, though we be otherwiſe minded, we muſt act as if like-minded; and though there be various degrees of light and knowledg, yet we muſt come up to an uniformity of practiſe, as if there were no variety of degrees; which makes a man a certain creature about ſix pence better than a horſe, though ſome think upon that principle he's a ſhilling worſe: But theſe Doctrines of the Doctors, are collected and raiſed from the Text, juſt as our Collectors raiſe a Tax upon indigent, non-ſolvent people, who come armed with a Law, and a Conſtable, to diſtrain for that which is not to be had, rather than the King ſhould loſe his Right; and certainly never was Text ſo ſtrained and diſtrained to pay what it never owed; never man ſo Rack't to confeſs what he never thought; never was a Pumice-ſtone ſo ſqueez'd for water which it never held; nor ever a good Cauſe ſo miſerably put to its ſhifts, as to preſs thoſe innocent Texts againſt their wills, which refuſe to come in as Volunteers to the ſervice.
Notwithſtanding what has been ſaid; it ſhall ſtand for not-ſpoken, if the Doctor can prove his aſſertion, That the preſent Separation is carried on by ſuch principles as will overthrow any Church whatever: Thus then he proceeds. If it be lawful to ſeparate upon pretence of greater purity, where there is an agreement in Doctrine, and the ſubſtantial parts of worſhip: then a bare difference in opinion, as to ſome circumſtantials in worſhip, and the beſt conſtitution of Churches, will be a ſufficient ground to break Communion, and ſet up new Churches. Now becauſe this dead weight always hangs lugging on one ſide, give me leave to put a Counterpoiſe on the other ſide, to make it hang more even: If it be lawful to impoſe the Ceremonies upon pretence of decency and order, and to exact ſubmiſſion to them upon pretence of Peace and Ʋnion, then may bare will and pleaſure be a ſufficient reaſon to raiſe the ſevereſt perſecution, to force Communion againſt conſcience, or to deſtroy all the Churches of Chriſt on earth for a bare difference in opinion as to ſome circumſtances.
Let us however with all tenderneſs examine this way of Reaſoning, always proteſting; 1. That we will not be cheated with that expreſſion of pretence of greater Purity: for we do not allow hypocriſie to be a ſufficient ground of Separation. 2. Nor with that other expreſſion, a bare difference in opinion, which we would explain both here, and hereafter, if we underſtood the meaning of it: Theſe things premiſed, I obſerve in his Argument ſome things prudently ſuppoſed, and thoſe ſuppoſals as wiſely improved. Firſt then, here are ſome things very prudently ſuppoſed: As (1.) that there is a confeſſed agreement between the differing parties in Doctrine: But where ſhall we find that ſyſtem of Doctrine, in which the Agreement is ſuppoſed to lye? ſhall we ſeek it in the Holy Scriptures? In vain! one party can find a Church-power there to make Canons, in which the other party ſhall be bound to acquieſce upon pain and peril of the guilt of Schiſm: but the Diſſenting-party can ſee no ſuch matter: Thoſe again have found a Doctrine there, that the Addition of any thing in ſpecie to Gods word or worſhip, which he has not commanded in genere, is culpable; but the other party wonder where they pickt up this ungrateful Doctrine; ſhall we then go ſearch for this ſuppoſed, or confeſſed agreement in the 39 Articles? there, or no where, we may expect to meet with it; but here alſo are we miſerably diſappointed, for the Doctor himſelf has ſatisfied us in his Rational Account, p. 54, 55. That the learned Primate of Ireland (underſtand not B. Ʋſher, but Bramhall) tells us the ſenſe of the 39 Articles of this Church. Neither doth the Church of England define any of theſe Queſtions neceſſarily to be believed, either neceſſitate praecepti, or Medii—but only bindeth her ſons for peace-ſake not to oppoſe them; And more fully in another place. We do not ſuffer any man to reject the 39 Articles of the Church of England at his pleaſure, yet neither do we look upon them as eſſentials of ſaving faith, or legacies of Chriſt and his Apoſtles, but in a mean, as pious opinions, fitted for the preſervation of Ʋnity; neither do we oblige any man to believe them, but not to contradict them. Now if this be true, I would fain learn how the Doctor can be ſo confident that we are agreed in Doctrine, when we are at a loſs, and wholly to ſeek in what Doctrine to agree?
You are ſurprized (Sir!) I doubt not at this diſcovery: Has not the Church of England defined in her 39 Articles any thing neceſſarily to be believed? then it ſeems the eſſence and exiſtence of a God is not defined to be neceſſary. Are theſe Articles no eſſentials of ſaving faith? then it's no eſſential point of faith to believe, that Chriſt is the eternal Son of God. Are theſe but pious Opinions? then it's a pious Opinion that we are juſtified by faith without our own merits: Is it enough not to contradict them, and that we are not obliged to believe them? then an Atheiſt is agreed in the Article of the Godhead, if he has but wit enough to keep a good tongue in his head: And the Socinian is agreed in the Article of the Trinity; the Papiſt agreed too in the Article againſt Tranſubſtantiation, provided always they can but bite in their ſentiments; nay the Proteſtants at Rome are agreed in the Articles of Trent, the Chriſtians in Conſtantinople are agreed in the Alchoran, for I think they do not believe them, and yet have ſo much wit as not to contradict them.
Here they torment us with new-coyned Diſtinctions, of primary and ſecondary, affirmative and negative Articles; ſome more refined, others of an inferiour Alloy; Well then, let us ſuppoſe that the negative, ſecondary, the Articles of the lower Claſſis are not neceſſary to be believed in order to ſalvation; Are we agreed in the primary, affirmative, and thoſe of the higheſt form? I doubt not! for granting that the Diſſenters aſſent to them, and the Aſſenters diſſent; or ſuppoſe on the other ſide, the Conformiſts agree to them, and the Nonconformiſts diſagree; 'tis all a caſe, they are in the ſame degree of diſtance from each other: Now the plain truth is this; The Diſſenters generally agree with that book, which is commonly called the 39 Articles, which was compiled above a hundred years ago, and this book ſome men call the Church of England; but then they are far from Agreement with the leading Clergy-men of this generation (who as near as we can gheſs do conſtitute the Church): And this is certain, that the Rulers and Teachers of the Church do really differ from one another, and therefore Diſſenters muſt needs differ from ſome of them; but which of them is the Church, we know not; If both parties, the Church muſt neceſſarily be of two Religions; and ſo this pretended agreement is not real and ſincere, but notional, ſpeculative and imaginary.
(2.) 'Tis further ſuppoſed, that the diſagreeing parties are yet agreed in the ſubſtantial parts of worſhip: To which I muſt anſwer, 1. That we know of no Commiſſion, no Charter granted by Chriſt to any Church, to inſtitute any parts of worſhip at all, whether ſubſtantial, integral, or circumſtantial, or by what other deviſed terms they be diſtinguiſhed, or confounded, 2. Nor have we heard of any Rule aſſigned by Chriſt to warrant them how to diſterminate the ſubſtantial parts of worſhip from the Integral, or the integral parts from the circumſtantial: How eaſie a thing were it to demoliſh a ſubſtantial part of worſhip, pretending it to be only a circumſtantial part? or to magnifie ſomething of their own, which they have dreſt up like worſhip, and then exact Conformity to it, and Union in it in the Name of Chriſt? for it's a common obſervation, That when they would wheadle us into Compliance, then every thing is but Circumſtance; but when they proceed to chaſtiſe us for Nonconformity, then the ſame things are nick-named ſubſtantials, matters of moment, ſuch as without which no Church, no Government, no Worſhip can poſſibly breathe or ſubſiſt.
And yet if the matter were well ſearcht into, perhaps we are not ſo clearly agreed in the ſubſtantial parts of worſhip: An outward viſible ſign of an inward and inviſible grace, whereby a perſon is dedicated to the profeſſion of, and ſubjection to the Redeemer, is a ſubſtantial part of worſhip: If it be inſtituted by Chriſt, 'tis a divine, lawful part of worſhip, and he will bleſs it; If only appointed by man out of his great tenderneſs to ſupply the defects of Chriſts Inſtitution, this is alſo a part of worſhip, but humane; it has the matter, and outward form, only wanting the right efficient cauſe; it wants that which ſhould give it the ſtamp of Authentical and warrantable worſhip.
Again, we ſee with our eyes worſhipping towards the Altar, the Eaſt, and at the ſound of the word Jeſus: and theſe things are made the Motive of worſhip, if not ſomething elſe; perhaps no Canon enforce theſe, but yet they are generally practiſed by all that hope to make earnings and good wages out of the Churches preferments. Now whether the Conformiſts exceed the Canons, or the Nonconformiſts fall ſhort of them, 'tis ſtill the ſame caſe, and there will be the ſame or greater difference, than if the former kept level with the Rule, and the other came ſhort of it; or the latter came up to the Rule, and the other tranſcended it.
The Doctor will tell us, That to bow at the Name of Jeſus, is no more than going to Church at the Tolling of a Bell, Defence, p. 864. and is very facetious and pleaſant with his adverſary T. G. drolling about Whittingtons Bells, and Meg of Weſtminſter, p. 867. nor ought any man dare to check the excellent wit of theſe Repartees, only it had been wiſht he had beſtow'd a little fancy on Whittingtons Cat: but I aſſure the Doctor in many indifferent mens judgment, the Objection is not ſo eaſily dofft off; for why may not an Image give warning to the eye when to worſhip God, as well as a Bell to the Ear? 'Tis true indeed, the Papiſts have preferred an Image higher, than to be Motivum Cultûs; but the queſtion is, Whether they do not ſin in applying it to this lower uſe, to make it an ordinary ſtated Motive to worſhip? If they do, how ſhall we excuſe our own Adorations? if not, why do we not introduce Images into our Churches, as well as theſe other of bowing towards the Altar, &c? which if once our Church-men ſhall venture upon (as with equal reaſon they may do), they'l find them not a Bell to Toll Diſſenters into the Church, but thouſands of Aſſenters out of it. Beſides his Illuſtration is very lame, though witty enough; for the Bell tolls out of worſhip to Convene the people to the worſhip of God: but the ſound of the word Jeſus is uſed in the midſt, in the height, in the heat of worſhip, when the ſoul ſhould be moſt firmly, ardently intent upon its Devotion, and not ſit liſtning and watching, as Whittingtons Cat watcht the Mouſe (there 'tis for you) for the caſual ſtarting of a word, and the dropping of two ſyllables. But if it be a duty to give external reverence to God when ever the word Jeſus is named, there's more need of it in our ordinary Converſes, and the ſecular affairs of this world, when thoſe divertiſements diſtract our minds from the actual thoughts of God, which might be retrieved by this Doctrine; and ſo that word might do the ſervice of another Bell, I mean that which in Popiſh Countries goes Ting tang, ting tang, before the Hoſte, when carried to the ſick, or dying, from which all that meet it are obliged to take the hint, and fall down and worſhip.
The moderation of that Canon, 1640, which recommends bowing towards the Eaſt, or Altar, is very commendable: In the practiſe or omiſſion of this Rite, we deſire the Rule of Charity preſcribed by the Apoſtle may be obſerved; which is, That they which uſe this Rite, deſpiſe not them who uſe it not; and they who uſe it not, condemn not thoſe that uſe it. I would gladly hear a fair Reaſon given, why the Apoſtle ſhould preſcribe the Rule of Charity to be obſerved in this one Rite or Ceremony, more than another? why the Rule of Charity ſhould take place in bowing towards the Altar, and yet the Rule of ſeverity in the ſign of the Croſs, and kneeling at the Lords Supper? what ſolid Reaſon can they give, why they make fiſh of one, and fleſh of another: The Apoſtle preſcribes a Rule; and they will make uſe of it, when, where, and in what caſes they pleaſe; and in others where 'tis as uſeful, lay it by, like one of their vacated Canons. Is it becauſe we are bound to walk according to the Rule preſcribed by the Church? why are not they bound to walk according to the Rule preſcribed by the Apoſtle? Are we more bound to obey them, than they the Lord Chriſt, ſpeaking in and by his immediately inſpired ſervants? why could they not have relaxed the other Canons to the moderation of this? or why not have ſcrewed up this to the inflexible rigour of the others? was it for peace-ſake that we were indulged in this one? Let the ſame Motive prevail for the ſame Indulgence in the reſt! was it to ſhew their Authority, that they may bind and looſe, command what they pleaſe, and leave what they ſee good at liberty, without rendring a Reaſon, but that of their Wills? Such arbitrary power is too great an encroachment upon the freehold of Conſcience, and Soveraignty of Chriſt, and will juſtifie any Chriſtian to aſſert that liberty againſt it, wherein Chriſt has inſtated him. Was it becauſe the people had been broken by long uſe and cuſtom to the others, and therefore they would ſtruggle hard to keep the ground they had got, when this latter was but a Novice, a Candidate, a Probationer for Acceptation, which if the people would tamely bow their necks unto, they might be cramped with a more peremptory Canon when time ſhould ſerve; but if they proved reſtiff and croſs-grain'd, the next Convocation might make an honourable retreat?
And what if now we are ſtumbling ere we are aware upon the true Reaſon of the diverſity between the tempers of this, and ſome other Canons? However, whether theſe things be commanded, or merely recommended, or barely permitted, all is a caſe as to my Argument; for I find theſe things practiſed by all our leading Church-men; All the Fathers of the Church, all the Mother-Churches are agreed; all that pretend to any hopes of comfortable Importance, are agreed to outrun the Conſtable, and though herein they outrun one another, and all of them outrun the Diſſenters; and this is a difference in ſomething more than a circumſtance, even at leaſt in a circumſtantial part of worſhip; yet muſt we be ſuppoſed to be agreed.
This laſt mention'd Canon of the Church, I hear is repealed by Act of Parliament, which plainly proves, that the Civil Magiſtrate has more authority even in matters of worſhip, than the whole Church, as a Church, when moſt ſolemnly met together in the Repreſentative Church (as they call it) of a Convocation; and yet the practiſe runs with a full ſtream towards their own old Canon, as if they ſecretly gave great Deference to the Authority of the Church againſt the Parliament, for the leading-practiſe of the grand Eccleſiaſticks is tantamount to a Canon, nay to a Law, to thoſe whoſe hopes and expectancies teach them a dependance on them; ſo that this now obſolete Canon has paſt into the nature of a Commandment, much like the old Statute, Ne Rectores proſternant Arbores in Goemeterio; the Tenor whereof runs thus: Which thing we will not command to be done, but we will commend it when it is done.
Secondly, The Doctor having prudently ſuppoſed one half, comes to prove the other half; and it's wiſely done to loſe nothing for asking: He argues thus: If it be lawful to ſeparate upon pretence of greater purity (ſuppoſe as before ſuppoſed) than a bare difference in opinion as to ſome circumſtantials will be a ſufficient ground to break Communion, and ſet up new Churches. To which I anſwer, 1. by denying the conſequence; ſtrange! what deny the conſequence? what can be plainer? Where there's an agreement, a confeſſed agreement in doctrine, and the ſubſtantial parts of worſhip; what can you pretend to divide in, to ſeparate upon, but ſome ſorry circumſtances, unleſs you will make a Schiſm about Goats Wool, or Moon-ſhine in the water? But if you pleaſe, Sir, to have a little patience, I'le tell you! ſubſtantial parts of worſhip, and bare circumſtances, are not ſo immediately oppoſed, but there lies a certain thing in the middle between them: upon which middle thing, though otherwiſe we were agreed in Doctrine, and the ſubſtantial parts of worſhip, it will be lawful to divide; I ſay it again, there is a Medium between ſubſtantial parts of worſhip, and bare circumſtances; A bare circumſtance is that which adheres to every action, as it is an action; to every natural body, as 'tis a natural body; every action, whether civil or ſacred, muſt be performed in ſome time; every body muſt be circumſcribed in ſome place; A ſubſtantial part of worſhip, is a Term of the Doctors, and his Friends making, and we may expect it ſhould be of their explaining; As far as I can underſtand, they mean by it either, 1. that which God has expreſly commanded; or 2. ſome notable parts of worſhip as the Sacraments; or 3. that which God mainly requires, as the directing our hearts to himſelf, as the object and end of our worſhip; or 4. I cannot tell what, till they tell me: but beſides theſe two extremes, there are ſome intermediate things, which are neither natural circumſtances cleaving to the perſon that worſhippeth, nor to the Religious action it ſelf, on the one hand: nor yet on the other hand, are they commanded by God, either in genere, or in ſpecie, i. e. God has neither commanded the things themſelves, nor are the things neceſſary to the performing thoſe things that he has commanded; nor any of their kind; nor are they included in any general rule, or precept of the Goſpel: And yet it has pleaſed the Church, that is, the Epiſcopal party, to exalt theſe things to a high preferment in worſhip, to ſignifie the ſame things with the Sacramental Elements, to make them neceſſary to ſalvation, as far as man can make them, that is to lay them as Conditions in the way of our enjoying the Sacraments, which, they ſay, God has made neceſſary to ſalvation; and lay the ſtreſs and weight of the Churches peace, ſafety and unity upon theſe things, tranſlated out of their proper places; and that theſe things ſo uſed, ſo applied, ſo cloathed with their preſent circumſtances, are ſinful, is not our bare opinion (as the Doctor wiſely phraſeth it) but our ſetled judgment, which we have, do, and ſhall maintain againſt them, when they have once leiſure to underſtand the Queſtion: We have therefore ſomething to divide upon, beſides ſubſtantial parts of worſhip and circumſtances. And now where is this conſequence, which to an intelligent and obſerving Reader, is the only ſtrength of his Sermon? But we need never fear it, the Clergy will be ſure to find us matter for quarrel and contention, or it ſhall go hard, beſides a parcel of inconſiderable circumſtances, which may be determined, but very ſorrily by thoſe that pretend moſt to the power; for he that worſt may, commonly holds the Candle. But 2. for further anſwer, let him go back to the former Diſcourſe, where I have proved that the foundation upon which his diſcourſe is built, is weak, and therefore the whole ſuperſtructure muſt tumble upon his own head; for he ſuppoſes there is an agreement in Doctrine, and the ſubſtantial parts of worſhip, which we either deny, or cannot grant till we are taught what he means by them.
The Controverſie therefore ſtands upon the ſame bottom on which it has ſtood theſe hundred years, and more, like that famous ſtone in the Weſt, which they ſay, a child may ſhake, but a hundred men cannot overturn. Every wrangler can joſtle our principles, but the United force of the world cannot overthrow them; True men may be killed, but Truth will outlive all enmity. This argument of the Doctors has been frequently anſwered, and expoſed; but now like an old Livery new turn'd, and freſh trim'd up with a new Lace, it paſſes for a ſpruce piece of Gallantry, a brisk ſally of Ratiocination; ſo conſiderable it is, who it is that ſpeaks and writes, more than what is ſpoken or written! So have I known a ſorry Jade, which in the hands of the poor Countrey-man, would not give five Marks; when in the hands of a Gentleman, a little curried up, well managed by a nimble Jockey, and ſtoutly voucht for by one that was no ſlave to his word, fetch roundly Twenty Guineys at the hands of a youngſter that had more money than wit.
What has hitherto engroſt the whole ſtrength of the Doctors Reaſon; he now comes to ſet a fine edg and gloſs upon with his Rhetorick: To ſeparate (ſays he) conſidering the variety of mens fancies about theſe matters, is to make an infinite Diviſibility in Churches, without any poſſible ſtop to further Separation. Which is nothing but the Eccho of that Charge, which from their Roman Adverſaries has ſo long and loudly rung about their own Ears. I ſhall only ſay, That the power which he aſcribes to National Churches, conſidering the great variety of the fancies and humours in finding out and impoſing their own Inventions, will but make burdens innumerable and intolerable, without any poſſible ſtop to further and greater vexations; only let him not always miſcall Conſcience by the ſcandalous name of Fancy! The very truth is, we have no Mathematical Certainty in theſe matters; no ſuch Demonſtration, Cui non poteſt ſubeſſe falſum, which Archbiſhop Laud (and by conſequence the Doctor) requires of all Diſſenters; when yet he could find no ſuch Demonſtration for the being of a God (as I ſhall evince ere long). But ſome will ſcruple where they need not; and others to cry quit with them, will impoſe where they ought not; and thus between weakneſs and wilfulneſs, between little knowledg and great pride, humble peaceable Chriſtians are like to have a fine time on't: But from ſome inconſiderable, and petty inconveniences, ſome little trouble that ariſes to a Church from the levity and volubility of mens minds, to bring in that enormous, monſtrous principle, of enſlaving all mens judgments and conſciences, forcing them to ſurrender their Reaſons to naked will and pleaſure, and put all that's worth owning in their Beings, into the hands of thoſe of whoſe fidelity and tenderneſs to keep and diſpoſe of them, they have had no better experience, and can have no good ſecurity; is a Medicine worſe than that Poyſon, even as much as 'tis better to have a Rational Soul, though ſubject to miſtakes, than the Soul of a Brute, which may be managed as you will, with a ſtrong Bit and Bridle.
Honoured Sir! you ſee how I have wearied my ſelf, to tire you, with the prolixty of this Letter; and now to refreſh you in the cloſe, I'le tell you a piece of News: The Doctor tells us, That if once the people be brought to underſtand, and practiſe their duty as to Communion with our Churches, other difficulties, which obſtruct our Ʋnion, will be more eaſily removed. It's incredible what the various Votes of the Coffee-houſes are about thoſe words; ſome ſay, Ay! If there were no Nonconformists, there would be no Nonconformity; if there were no diſagreement, we ſhould all be agreed: others again deny it; and ſay, That though the people were brought to underſtand, and practiſe all their duty which they owe to God and man, yet the ſame difference, the ſame diſtance would continue, except it be firſt proved (which they are always coming towards, but can never find a time to come to) that it is their duty to hold entire Communion with the Pariſh-Churches: others again of the more warm tempers, aſſert, That if the people could be brought to underſtand and practiſe their duty in theſe matters, thoſe Aſſemblies would be thinner than they are; and ſome proteſt it's a moſt Meridian Truth, that if men could be brought to conform in practiſe (but there lies the cunning on't) though againſt the ſhins and conſcience, all other difficulties would be eaſily removed; for they that are once engaged in a practiſe (whether by ſlaviſh fears, or worldly hopes, it makes no matter) muſt ſtudy Arguments to defend their practiſe as well as they can, and they vouch infallible experience to juſtifie their opinion; for (ſay they) throw a Dog into a River over head and ears, and if he will not take care to ſwim out, let him be drown'd.
It's mighty pleaſing to me to hear the Doctor profeſs, he has endeavoured to purſue his deſign, without ſharp and provoking reflexions on the perſons of any: for though you, Sir! have noted ſeveral paſſages, as inconſiſtent with the ſincerity of this expreſſion, yet I doubt not to clear up his Integrity. You mention Page 38. where, I confeſs, the Doctor does ſay, The moſt godly among them [Diſſenters] can leaſt endure to be told of their faults. This did a little ſtartle me, but not ſtumble me into a disbelief of his Honeſty: for though he tells us, he has not uſed provoking reflexions on the perſons of any, i. e. by name; yet he might with a good conſcience, and without contradicton to his word, make ſharp provoking reflexions upon the whole generation of the Diſſenters, and condemn them in the lump: And whereas you inſiſt upon't, that the expreſſion is either a ſcurrilous Sarcaſm, unbecoming a Sermon; or very unchriſtian, as preſuming to judg mens hearts; or a ridiculous piece of non-ſenſe, ſeeing they cannot be ſuppoſed the moſt godly (except they be all Villains) among them, who cannot bear reproof for their faults, which is a main part of godlineſs: yet I have this to ſay; 'Tis exceeding hard for Miniſters when they mount the Pulpit, to leave their pride and paſſion behind them in their Studies, or in the Desk: beſides a Sermon, except a little larded with a line or two of bitterneſs, would not have pleaſed the pallate of the Reader from the Preſs, whatever it might, ſome of the Auditors from the Pulpit: Nor muſt you, Sir! be too rigid in exacting all things to the preciſe Rule of Gods word, when the Doctor in his Sermon has propounded you another Rule than that of the word to walk by.
In a word, Sir! the greater trouble I have given you in this Epiſtle, will eaſe you of much in the Diſcourſe it ſelf; And having here opened the ſprings of his Reaſonings, you may with more eaſe and delight trace them in all the windings and twinings of the ſtreams. If I obtain your pardon, I ſhall receive it as a Reward; and for you, not to Cenſure, is more than ſome twenty mens Commendation; and if I fall ſhort of your expectation, I ſhall yet gain one advantage, That you will not hereafter engage, in what is above him,
Your Faithful Servitor, T. P.