An Apology for the Nonconformists Ministry, Treatise · Part 1 · Objection 7 – Objection 8
7 Obj. You think we should grant you leave to Preach; but what leave did you give us when you were in power? Then such requests could not be heard.
Ans. Whom do you speak this of? Of all the silenced Ministers, or some? of most, or few?
1. We were never at all in any other power, than to Preach the Gospel, and administer the Sacraments to the people of one Parish, and to guide them by Gods Word. For my own part, it hath in all changes been my lot to be among them of the unpleasing or the afflicted side. What the Parliament would have done, if Cromwell had not garbelled them, I know not. But when the Presbyterians seemed uppermost, I was looked on as a dissenter. When that which they call the Rump was uppermost, I was de jure by their Order sequestred, though not de facto, and greatly under their displeasure. And with the Army I was out much more. Cromwell was not for me, because I was not for him. When was it then that we were in Power? A power of Ordination no Minister in the County that ever I heard of, claimed or used. None of us did Impose our hands in an Ordination. When the Commissioners for trying Ministers cast upon me some of their work, I disclaimed it, till the angry importunity of many Episcopal Divines, that were referred to my Examination, and would else have lost their augmentations or places, prevailed with me to keep them in. A great part of the Episcopal Ministers in our Country (and in all that I knew) were never removed. And those that were, might have had other places; and I knew not that any were by any of Cromwells Orders forbidden to Preach or use the Common-Prayer in private houses, till towards the later part of his Usurpation; which yet I never knew any execute within the reach of my (then) acquaintance. For my own part, by the approbation aforesaid, and Certitificates, I kept many in their Benefices, (even the Vicars own Curate that in 1640 was cast out before I was called to the place.) And I published in Print in my own name and my Brethrens, our detestation of the casting out of any competent worthy Minister for his judgment for Episcopacy and Conformity, much more for being in arms against the Parliament, or Preaching against them. And I published it as our earnest request, that all men that were utterly ignorant, Heretical and scandalous, or of vicious debauched lives, might be cast out, without respect to other opinions, or Civil causes; and that all the rest might unite their labours, and be encouraged. This is yet in Print. And I met with few of my acquaintance in the Ministry that were not of the same mind.
And I had some more trial as to practise, when Cromwell forbad (as even now I said) the sequestred Ministers to live within two miles of their old Benefice, and commanded t…em to quit the houses, our Vicar was never disturbed, nor I never came within the house. I never forbad him to preach.
And at a Chappel we had another conformable Minister that read Common-prayer, and said somewhat like a Sermon often, one Mr. Turner, infamous for ignorance, drunkenness, railing, and living by unlawful marryings, and making his Ministry a scorn. This Curate I connived at many a year, till his death. I provided a Preacher at first once a day, and afterwards twice, to be resident on the place. I allowed Mr. Turner his Stipend, but intreated him not to meddle with the Ministry. For besides his vicious life, I examined him, and could not perceive that he understood scarce any Article of the Faith; nor had the fortieth part of the knowledg or ability of many of the Wevers, or some of the Plowmen of the Parish. Musculus his Common-places Englished was all the Books that I could perceive he had, and that he Preached out of. But he would continue to read Common-prayer, and did, though he might have had his Stipend as much without it. Judg by this whether we were over-forward to silence the Sons of the Church, or cast them out.
3. But what reason or conscience is it, that if you can say Cromwell, or the Parliament, or Rump cast out such Ministers, that therefore we that had no hand in it, must be silenced? Or if you can name forty Ministers in England (as I cannot) that consented unto this, that therefore eighteen hundred that never consented should be forbidden to Preach? Yea, those that declared themselves to be against it?
4. And you know that even the Usurpers allowed the Wives of the sequestred Ministers the fifth part. For my part I never asked you so much.
5. And either the unjust silencing of Ministers by the Usurpers, was well done, or ill done? If ill done, it should be your warning to take heed of sinning as they did; for sure their practices seem not so right and lovely to you, as to be worthy of imitation. They Beheaded Mr. Love, and Imprisoned many London Ministers, and others, for the Kings sake; and you think not, sure, that you must therefore do so too?
8 Obj. But we are not to distinguish of Nonconformists, when Conformity is necessary to the order of the Church. If a few honest men suffer among a company of Schismaticks, Presbyterians, Independents, Rebells, they must take it patiently, and not blame their Rulers, but themselves that chuse so bad companions. The greater part of you deserve it.
Ans. We are not blaming our Governours, but our selves, not for our Nonconformity, but for serving God no more diligently when we had time. But, 1. can you not distinguish, and yet be just? what not the innocent from the guilty? nor friends from foes? This is not the first confusion and evil that want of distinguishing hath caused in the world.
2. If your, I say, your Conformity be more necessary than all our Preaching and Ministry, and will help more souls to Heaven, go on with it, and let it prosper. But be sure that you are not mistaken.
3. Are Presbyterians so intollerable a sort of people? Or will the bare opinion, that singular Churches have all Church-power of Christs institution among themselves, while they submit to the Civil Government, prove men otherwise sober, to be unsufferable? You know Dr. Hammord and other Episcopal Divines do assert an Independency of Diocesan Churches (which he saith de facto in Scripture-times had no Presbyters but one Bishop and his few Deacons.) And you know Dr. Stillingfleet (of whose judgment Bishop Reinolds and many Conformists have profest themselves to be) maintaineth that no one form of Church-Government is of Divine Right and Institution. And if so, then the Independents and Presbyterians refuse none that is of Divine Institution.
4. But are you sure that you mistake not, to the injury of the sufferers? I can tell the world and you, that I knew but one Presbyterian Minister in all VVorcestershire; and that one was not of our Association; nor any one Independent associated with us, (though there were three worthy Ministers in the County so esteemed) there was not one of the Associated Ministry that was so much as reputed Presbyterian or Independent (but Episcopal, some were, that now conform); much less Anabaptists, or of any other Sect; but held the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, and loved a Christian as a Christian, and were for the uniting of all the Churches that are sound in the faith, and in the things necessary to Church-Communion, even upon the ancient Primitive terms.
And when I think of the Association of VVestmorland, VViltshire, Dorcetshire, and other Countrys, I have reason by their Articles to think they were of the same mind.
And must such abundance be silenced for the opinions of a few, whom they never signified any consent to?