Baxters Narrative of His Life and Times, Part 2 · Section 10 · Floating text 9

Baxters Narrative of His Life and Times · Part 2 · Section 10 · Floating text 9

p. 248A Defence of our Proposals to his Majesty for Agreement in Matters of Religion.

Concerning the Preamble.

§ 1. WE are not insensible of the great Danger of the Church, through the Doctrinal Errours of many of those with whom we are at difference also about the Points of Government and Worship now before us. But yet we chose to say of the Party, that we are agreed in Doctrinals, because they subscribe the same Holy Scriptures and Articles of Religion, and Books of Homilies as we do. And the Contradictions to their own Confessions, which too many are guilty of, we thought not just to charge upon the Party; because it is but Personal guilt. As to the differences (which in Charity and for Peace, we had rather extenuate than aggravate;) it is of Objective Conceptions that we speak, there being a difference in the things, as well as in our apprehensions. And we conceive that [The Ancient Form of Church-Government, and the Soundness of the Liturgy, and freedom from corrupting unlawful Ceremonies,] are Matters that are worthy a conscionable regard: and no such little inconsiderable things as to be received without sufficient trial, or used against the Disswasions of our Consciences. No Sin should seem so small as to be wilfully committed; especially to Divines. He that will sin for little or nothing, is not to be trusted when he hath great Temptations. Whosoever shall break one of these least Commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven: but whosoever shall do, and teach them the same, shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven, Matth. 5. 19. And whether the Imposor or the Forbearers do hazard and disturb the Church, the nature of the thing declareth. To you it is indifferent before your Imposition; and therefore you may without any regret of your own Consciences forbear the Imposition, or perswade the Law-makers to forbear it. But to many of those that dissent from you, they are sinful; and therefore cannot be yielded to by them without the wilful violation of their Duty, to the absolute Soveraign of the World. If in the Church of Rome, the Conscience of a Subject forbid the use of Crucifixes, and Images, and Chrism, and Holy Water, &c. is it therefore they? or is it the Pastors that needlesly impose these Things, that are the Disturbers of the Church? The Princes might have forborn to make a Law restraining Daniel three days from Prayer; but Daniel could not forbear praying three days, though the Law commanded it: And which of them then was the Disturbers of the Peace? If you say that we are wilful, and our Consciences are peevish and misinformed; Charity and Modesty requireth you not to overvalue your own, or groundlesly vilifie the Judgments and Consciences of your Brethren. We study as hard as you; and are ready to joyn with you in the solemnest Protestations, as before the Lord, that we are earnestly desirous to know the Truth: and we suppose we stand on the calmer side the Hedge, in point of Temptation: for if we err it is to our cost and loss, and have little but Reproach and Suffering to entice us willingly to mistake. And we are always ready to try by Argument which Side it is that is mistaken.

§ 2. May not we crave that necessary things may be secured to us, without being interpreted to seem to insinuate Accusations against you? As it is not the Authors of this Answer personally considered, that we could be imagined to accuse, because we knew them not; so there are others besides the party with whom we are seeking a Reconciliation, that may be averse to the practice of those things about which Divines are doctrinally agreed in, especially that part of the Vulgar who are practically of no Religion. And it is very displeasing to us to be called out to an Accusation of others; as being a Course that will tend more to exasperate than reconcile. Fain we would have had leave to Petition for our Liberty and for the security of Religion, without accusing any of being injurious to it. But it is the unhappy Advantage of those that are uppermost, that they can cut out at pleasure such work for those that they would use as Adversaries, that shall either make them seem their Adversaries, or appear to be really the Adversaries or Betrayers of the Truth, and cast them upon Inconveniences and Odium which way soever they go. But to be plain with you. if you would but agree with us in the practising and promoting the Practice of those things about which you profess to be agreed in Principles, p. 249our Differences in all other things would quickly be at an End. The great Controversies between the Hypocrite and the true Christian, whether we should be serious in the Practice of the Religion which we commonly profess? hath troubled England more than any other: None being more hated and derided as Puritans, than those that will make Religion their Business, and make it predominant in their Hearts and Lives, while others that hate them, take it up in custom, for Fashion, or in jest, and use it only in Subserviency to the Will of Man and their Worldly Ends, and honour it with Complements, and paint the Skin while they stab the Heart. Reconcile this Difference, and most others will be reconciled.

§ 3. Whether this signifie any Repentance for the voluminous Reproaches which many of you have written against those you call Puritans, your Amendment will interpret. That you will give us Liberty in our Family-Duties alone is a Courtesy that you cannot well deny a Papist or a Mahometan, because you have there no Witnesses of what they do; and yet we shall take our selves beholden for it, so low are our Expectations. But is there no Duty that private Christians owe to one another, for the furthering their Salvation, but only for their several Families? why may not those that on the Lord's Day repeat a Sermon in their Families, admit a Neighbour-Family to be present, which is not able so to help themselves? A great part of the Families among the Poor are composed of such as can neither write nor read, and therefore know not how to spend the Lord's Day when they are out of the Congregation: And a Sermon forgotten will hardly be so well practised as if it were remembred; and the Ignorant will hardly remember it if they never hear it but once. At least methinks it should be an Encouragement to you, when you have studied what to say to the People (rather than matter of Offence) to see them so far value it, as to desire to fasten it in their Memories. And if several Families join also in the singing of Psalms of Praise to God, and calling on him for a Blessing on the Minister and themselves, is this a Crime? when perhaps most of those Families either cannot pray at all, or not with such cheerful Advantage, by themselves: If you are against such mutual Helps as these, you are against the Benefit of the Peoples Souls: The Lord pity the Flocks that have such Pastors. If you are not against them, why are you against our Desires of encouragement in them? Have the Laws of the Land secured any of these to us against your Canons? If they have, why have so many Families formerly been undone, for such Exercises as these? and for fasting and praying together for the Pardon of their Sins? To deal freely with you, we are constrained so well to know with whom we have to do, that our Business is to request you of the Clergy, not to provoke the Law-givers to make any Law against this: That it may not become a Crime to Men, to pray together, and provoke one another to Love, and to good Works; when it is no Crime to talk, and play, and drink, and feast together. And that it may be no Crime to repeat a Sermon together, unless you resolve that they shall hear none which is worth their repeating and remembring. And whereas you speak of opening a Gap to Sectaries for private Conventicles, and the evil Consequents to the State, we only desire you to avoid also the cherishing of Ignorance and Prophaneness, and suppress all Sectaries, and spare not, in a way that will not suppress the means of Knowledge and Godliness. As you will not forbid all praying or preaching, lest we should have Sectarian Prayers or Sermons, so let not all the People of the Land be prohibited such Assistance to each others Souls, as Nature and Scripture oblige them to, and all for fear of the Meetings of Sectaries: We thought the Cautions in our Petition were sufficient, when we confined it Subjectively to those of our Flocks, and Objectively to their Duties of exhorting and provoking one another to Love and to good Works, and of building up one another in their most holy Faith. And only by religious peaceable means of furthering each other in the ways of eternal Life: And for the Order [They being not opposite to Church-Assemblies (but subordinate) nor refusing the Guidance and Inspection of their Pastors (who may be sometime with them and prescribe them their Work and Way, and direct their Actions) and being responsible for what they do or say (their Doors being open there will not want Witnesses against them, if they do amiss). And is not all this enough to secure you against the Fear of Sectaries, unless all such Helps and mutual Comforts be forbidden to all that are no Sectaries. This is but as the Papists do in another Case, when they deny People Liberty to read the Scriptures lest they make Men Hereticks or Sectaries. And for the Danger of the State, cannot Men plot against it in Ale-houses, or Taverns, or Fields, or under Pretence of Horse-Races, Hunting, Bowles, or other Occasions, but only under pretence of Worshipping God? If they may, why are not all Men forbidden to feast, or bowl, or hunt, &c. lest Sectaries p. 250make advantage of such Meetings, as well as to fast and pray? God and wise Men know that there is something more in all such Jealousies of Religious Duties.

§ 4. Do you really desire that every Congregation may have an able, godly Minister? Then cast not out those many Hundreds or Thousands that are approved such, for want of Re-ordination, or for doubting whether Diocesans with their Chancellors &c. may be subscribed to, and set not up ignorant ungodly ones in their Places. Otherwise the poor undone Churches of Christ will no more believe you in such Professions, than we believed that those Men intended the King's just Power and Greatness, who took away his Life.

But you know not what we mean by Residence, nor how far we will extend that Word. The Word is so plain, that it's easily understood by those that are willing: But he that would not know, cannot understand, as King Charles told Mr. Henderson. I doubt the People will quickly find that you did not understand us. And yet I more fear lest many a Parish will be glad of Non-residence, even if Priest and Curate and all were far enough from them, through whose Fault I say not.

§ 5. Two Remedies you give us instead of what we desired for the Reformation of Church-Communion: 1. You say, Confirmation if rightly and solemnly performed will alone be sufficient as to the point of Instruction. Answ. But what we desired was necessary to the right and solemn Performance of it. Doth not any Man that knoweth what hath been done in England, and what People dwell there, know that there are not more ignorant People in this Land than such as have had, and such as desire Episcopal Confirmation? Is it Sufficient in point of Instruction, for a Bishop to come among a company of little Children and other People, whom he he never saw before, and of whom he never heard a Word, and of whom he never asketh a Question which may inform him of their Knowledge or Life; and presently to lay his Hands on them in order, and hastily say over a few Lines of Prayer, and so dismiss them? I was confirmed by honest Bishop Morton, with a multitude more, who all went to it as a May-game, and kneeled down, and he dispatched us with that short Prayer so fast, that I scarce understood one word he said; much less did he receive any Certificate concerning us, or ask us any thing which might tell him whether we were Christians; and I never saw nor heard of much more done by any English Bishop in his course of Confirmation. If you say that more is required in the Rubrick, I say then it is no Crime for us to desire it. 2. And for your Provision in the other Rubrick again scandalous Communicants, it enableth not the Minister to put away any one of them all, save only the malicious that will not just then be reconciled. Be not angry with us, if in sorrow of Heart, we pray to God, that his Churches may have experienced Pastors, who have spent much time in serious dealing with every one of their Parishes personally, and know what they are and what they need, instead of Men that have conversed only with Books, and the Houses of great Men; or when they do sometimes stoop to speak to the ignorant, do but talk to them of the Market or the Weather, or ask them, what is their Name.

§ 6. To your Answer we reply, Those Laws may be well made stricter: They hindred not the Imposition of a Book to be read, by all Ministers in the Churches, for the Peoples Liberty for Dancing, and other such Sports on the Lord's Day, and this in the King's Name, to the ejecting or suspending of those Ministers that durst not read it. And those Laws which we have may be more carefully executed. If you are ignorant how commonly the Lord's Day is prophaned in England by Sporting, Drinking, Revelling and Idleness, you are sad Pastors that no better know the Flock: If you know it, and desire not the Reformation of it, you are yet worse. Religion never prospered any where so much, as where the Lord's Days have been most carefully spent in holy Exercises.

Concerning Church-Government.

§ 7. Had you well read but Gersom, Bucer, Didoclavius, Parker, Baynes, Salmasius, Blondell, &c. yea, of the few Lines in Bishop Usher's Reduction which we have offered you, or what I have written of it in Disp. 1. of Church-Government; you would have seen just Reason given for our Dissent from the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy as stated in England; and have known that it is unlike the primitive Episcopacy: But if that which must convince you, must be brought nearer your Eyes, by God's help we … to do that fully whenever we are called to it.

p. 2518. The Words which you here except against with Admiration of the Corruptions, Partialities, Tyranny, which Church-Government by a single Person is lyable to, was taken by us out of the Book commonly ascribed to King Charles himself called Icon. Basil. but we purposely supprest his Name to try whether you would not be as bitter against his Words, as against ours, and did not esteem Fidem per personas, non personas per fidem.

And further we reply, it is one thing for a Bishop to rule alone when there are no Presbyters, or to rule the Presbyters themselves alone: and another thing when he hath Presbyters yet to rule all the Flock alone; for by this means, he quoad Exercitium at least degradeth all the rest, or changeth their Office; which is to guide as well as to teach: As if the General of an Army, or the Collonel of a Regiment should rule all the Souldiers alone; doth he not then depose all his Captains, Lieutenants, Cornets, Corporals, Serjeants, &c. But especially, it is one thing for Ignatius his Bishop of one Church that had but one Altar to rule it alone (though yet he commandeth the People to obey their Presbyters) and another thing for an English Diocesan to rule a Thousand such Churches alone! And when all is done, do they rule alone indeed? Or doth not a Lay-Chancellor exercise the Keys? so far as is necessary to suppress private Meetings for Fasting and Prayer, &c. and to force all to the Sacrament, and enforce the Ceremonies, and some such things; and for the great Discipline it is almost altogether left undone. We are sorry that you should be able to be ignorant of this; or if you know it, that such Camels stick not with you, but go down so easily.

Instances of things amiss.

§ 9. 1. That which you cannot grant (that the Diocesses are to great) you would quickly grant if you had ever conscionably tryed the task which Dr. Hammond describeth as the Bishops Work; yea, but for one Parish, or had ever believed Ignatius and other ancient Descriptions of a Bishop's Church.

But is it faithful dealing with your Brethren or your Consciences (pardon our Freedom in so weighty a Case) to dispute as though you made a Bishop but an Archbishop to see by a general Inspection of the Parish-Pastors that they do their Office, and as if they only ruled the Rulers of the particular Flocks (which you know we never strove against)? when as no knowing English Man can be ignorant that our Bishops have the sole Government of Pastors and People, having taken all Jurisdiction or proper Government (or next all) from the particular Pastors of the Parishes, to themselves alone. Is not the Question rather as whether the King can rule all the Kingdom by the Chancellor, or a few such Officers, without all the Justices and Mayors; or whether one Schoolmaster shall only rule a thousand Schools and all the other Schoolmasters only teach them. You know that the depriving of all the Parish Pastors of the Keys of Government is the matter of our greatest Controversies: Not as it is any hurt to them, but to the Church, and a certain Exclusion of all true Discipline. And whether the Office of the Bishops of particular Churches infimi Ordinis, vel… gradus, be not for Personal Inspection and Ministration, as well as the Office of a Shoolmaster or Physician, you will better know when you come to try it faithfully, or answer fearfully for Unfaithfulness. We know that the knowing Lord Bacon in his Considerations saith so as well as we.

And for what you say of Suffrag…s, you know there are none such.

§ 10. 2. We are glad that in so great a matter as Lay-Chancellors Exercise of the Keys in Excommunications and Absolutions, you are forced plainly, and without any Excuse to confess the Errors of the way of Government. And let this stand on Record before the World to Justify us when we shall be silenced and reproached as Schismaticks, for desiring the Reformation of such Abuses, and for not swearing Canonical Obedience to such a Government.

§ 11. 3. And you have almost as little to say in this Case. Mark Reader, that we must all be silenced, and cast out of our Offices, if we subscribe not to the Book of Ordination ex Animo, as having nothing contrary to the Word of God: And the very Preface of that beginneth with the Affirmation of this Distinction of Orders, Offices, Functions, from the Apostles Days, and one of the Prayers ascribeth it to the Spirit of God; and yet now it is here said, that [whether a Bishop be a distinct Order from a Presbyter or not, is none of the Question]: That must be none of the Question when the King calleth them to treat for a Reconciliation or Unity, p. 252which will be out of Question against us when we are called to subscribe, or are to be forbidden to preach the Gospel.

And let what is here confessed for Presbyters Assistance in Ordination, stand on Record against them when it is neglected or made an insignificant Ceremony.

§ 12. 4. In the last also you give up your Cause, and yet it's well if you will amend it. Whether the Canons be Laws, let the Lawyers judge: And whether all the Bishops Books of Articles (as against making Scripture our Table-talk, and many such others) be either Laws, or according to Law, let the World judge.

The Remedies offered for reforming these Evils.

§ 13. 1. Whereas to avoid all Exception, or frustrating Contentions or Delays, we offered only Bishop Usher's Platform (subscribed also by Dr. Holdsworth) that the World might see that it is Episcopacy it self that we plead for; you tell us that it was formed many Years before his Death, and is not consistent with two other of his Discourses: In which either you would intimate that he contradicteth himself, and could not speak consistently, or that he afterward retracted this Reduction. For the first, We must believe that many Men can reconcile their own Writings, when some Readers cannot, as better understanding themselves than others do. And that this reverend Bishop was no such raw Novice, as not to know when he contradicted himself in so publick and practical a Case, as a Frame of Church-Government; Nor was he such an Hypocrite as to play fast and loose in the things of God: But upon Debate we undertake to vindicate his Writings from this Aspersion of Inconsistency; only you must not take him to mean that all was well done, which as an Historian he saith was done. And as to any Retraction, one of us (my self) is ready to witness that he owned it not long before his Death, as a Collection of fit Terms to reconcile the Moderate in these Points, and told him that he offered it the late King.

And whereas you tell us that the conforming of Suffraganes to Rural Deaneries, and other such, are his private Conceptions, destitute of any Testimoney of Antiquity: We answer, No marvel, when Rural Deaneries were unknown to true Antiquity. And when in the Ancientest Church, every Church had its proper Bishop, and every Bishop but one Church, that had also but one Altar. But surely the Corepiscopi were no Strangers to Antiquity, as may appear (before the Council at Nice) in Concil. Ancyran. Can. 12. and in Concil. Antiochin. Can. 10. &c. It was unknown in the days of Ignatius and Iustin Martyr, that a Church should be as large as a Rural Deanry, containing a dozen Churches with Altars, that had none of them peculiar Bishops: But it was not strange then that every Church had a Bishop; and if it were Rural, a Chorepiscopus. As also you may gather even from Clemens Romanus.

The Quarrel which you pick with the Archbishops Reduction for not Naming the King, as if he destroyed his Supremacy, is such as a low degree of Charity, with a little Understanding, might easily have prevented. Either you know that it is the Power of the Keys, See Queen Elizabeth's Injunctions and our 39 Articles.(called Spiritual and proper-Ecclesiastical) and not the Coercive Power circa Ecclesiastica, which the Archbishop speaketh of, and all our Controversie is about, or you do not know it. If you do know it, either you think this Power of the Keys is resolved into the King, or not: If you do think so, you differ from the King, and from all of your selves that ever we talked with, and you contradict all Protestant Princes, that have openly disclaimed any such Power, and published this to the World to stop the Mouths of Calumniating Papists: And we have heard the King, and some of you, disclaim it: And how can you then fitly debate these Controversies that differ from all Protestant Kings, and from the Church! But if you your selves do not so think, had you a Pen that would charge the Archbishop for destroying the King's Supremacy, for asserting nothing but what the King and you maintain? And if you knew not that this Spiritual Power of the Keys, as distinct from Magistratical Coercive Power, is the Subject of our Controversie, we dispute to good purpose indeed with Men that know not what Subject it is that we are to dispute about! so that which way soever it go, you see how it is like to fall; and how Men that are out of the dust and noise will judge of our Debates. And here we leave it to the Notice and Observation of Posterity, upon the perusal of all your Exceptions, How little the English Bishops had to say against the Form of Primitive Episcopacy contained in Archbishop Usher's Reduction, in the day when they rather chose the increase of our Divisions, the Silencing of many Hundred p. 253faithful Ministers, the scattering of the Flocks, the afflicting of so many thousand godly Christians, than the accepting of this Primitive Episcopacy: which was the Expedient which those called Presbyterians offered, never once speaking for the Cause of Presbytery. And what kind of Peace-makers and Conciliators we met with, when both Parties were to meet at one time and place with their several Concessions for Peace and Concord ready drawn up, and the Presbyterians in their Concessions laid by all their Cause, and proposed an Archbishops frame of Episcopacy: and the other side brought not in any of their Concessions at all, but only unpeaceably rejected all the Moderation that was desired.

Lastly, They hear desire it may be observed that in this Reduction, Archiepiscopacy is acknowledged: And we shall also desire that it may be observed, that we never put in a word to them against Archbishops, Metropolitans or Primates, and yet we are very far from attaining any Peace with them.

And we desire that it may be observed also, that understanding with whom we had to do, we offered them not that which we approved our selves as the best, but that which we would submit to, as having some Consistency with the Discipline and Order of the Church, which was our End.

Of the Superadded Particulars.

§ 14. 1. This is scarce Serious: The Primate's Suffragans or Chorepiscopi are Rural Deans, or as many for number: The Suffragans you talk of by Law are other things, about Sixteen in all the Land. The King's Power is about the Choice of them as Humane Officers, but as Pastors of the Church or Bishops, the Churches had the Choice for a Thousand years after Christ, through most of the Christian World. And what if it be in the King's power: Is it not the more reasonable that the King be petitioned to in the Business? The King doth not choose every Rural Dean himself: And is it any more destructive of his Power to do it by the Synods, than by the Diocesan? This use the Name and Power of Kings is made of by some kind of Men, to make a noise against all that cross their Domination, but all that is exercised by themselves is no whit derogatory to Royalty. And yet how many Men have been Excommunicated for refusing to Answer in the Chancellor's Courts, till they profess to sit there by the King's Authority?

§ 15. We much doubt whether you designed to read the Archbishop's Reduction when you answered our Papers: If you did not, why would you choose to be ignorant of what you answered, when so light a Labour might have informed you? If you did, how could you be ignorant of what we meant by Associations, when you saw that, such as our Rural Deaneries was the thing spoken of and proposed by the Reduction? And 1. Are the Rural Deaneries think you, without the King's Authority? If not, what mean you by such Intimations? unless you would make Men believe that we breathe Treason, as oft as we breathe (as the Soldier charged the Country-man for whistling Treason, when he meant to plunder him). 2. And what though Associations may not be entered into without the King's Authority: Do you mean that therefore we may not thus desire his Authority for them? If you do not, to what sence or purpose is this Answer? Sure we are, that for Three hundred years when Magistrates were not Christian, there was Preaching, Praying, and Associating in particular Churches hereunto without the Kings Authority, and also Associating in Synods: And after that for many a Hundred year the Christian Magistrates confirmed and over-ruled such Associations, but never overthrew them, or forbad them.

§ 16. But the Apostles of Christ, and all his Churches for many hundred years, thought all these Subscriptions and Oaths unnecessary; and never prescribed, nor required either them or any such: So unhappy is the present Church in the happy Understandings of these Men of Yesterday, that are wiser than Christ, his Apostles and Universal Church, and have at last found out these necessary Oaths and Subscriptions. And you are not quite mistaken: Necessary they are, to set up those that shall rule by Constraint as Lords over God's Heritage, and necessary Engines for the dividing and persecuting of the Church: But judge thou, O Lord, according to thy righteousness, in the day which is comming.

But the Examples of Corporation, and Colledges are brought in, who prevent Offences by Subscriptions and Oaths. And even so hath Christ (whose Spirit would impose nothing on the Churches but things necessary) appointed a Vow and Solemn p. 254Covenant to be the way of Entrance into his Church: And the Apish Spirit which followeth him (to counter-work him) by the Addition of Humane Churches, Sacraments and Ordinances, doth also imitate him in making their Oaths and Promises necessary to engage Men to their Service and Institutions, as Christ hath made Baptism necessary to engage us to his Service and Institutions. And your Arguments for Diocesans are so weak, that we wonder not that you think both Oaths, Subscriptions, Prisons, Confiscations and Banishments necessary to enforce them.

What you add of [such Persons as have themselves exacted Conditions of their Communion not warranted by Law], we understand not: Either the Law warranteth Men to own Christ for their Saviour, and to own their own Membership in the particular Church which they demand constant Communion with, or it doth not. If it do not, we have reason to desire more than is warranted by that Law. If it do, you should have done well to instance what Persons and what Exactions you mean. If you speak this of all the Churches of the… Land that dislike… your Prelacy, it is too gross an untruth to have been uttered in the Light. If you speak only of some Persons or Parties, that is no reason why others should be deprived of their Liberty and Ministry. Nor indeed is it good Arguing that such Oaths and Subscriptions as the Church of old did never know, may be imposed by the Laws of Men, because some Brethren have lately required such Conditions of their Communion, as are imposed by the Laws of God. But let us prevail with you to drive this no further than the Persons, (whoever they be) did drive it whom you blame: Their utmost Penalty on the Refusers of their Conditions was Non-Communion with them; (A thing which many of you voluntarily chose). Let this be all our Penalty for refusing your Oaths and Subscriptions (if we can get no better from you): But shall we be Silenced, Imprisoned, Confiscated, Banished, for refusing your Oaths and Subscriptions, because somebody imposed Things which the Law allowed not in order to their own Communion. These are no fit Proportions of Justice.

§ 17. Out of your own Mouths then is your Government condemned. What Act of Parliament ratified your Canons? What Law imposed Altars, Rails, and the forcing of Ministers to read the Book for Dancing on the Lord's Days? Or what Law did ratifie many Articles of your Visitation Books? And did the Laws sufficiently provide for all those poor Ministers that were Silenced or Suspended for not reading the Dancing Book, or any such things? What the better were all those for the Laws that were Silenced, or driven into Forreign Lands? But perhaps the Laws will provide for us indeed as you desire.

Concerning the Liturgy.

§ 18. 1. The Doctrine is sound.This is spoken of the Old Common Prayer Book, and not of the New, where the Doctrine in point of Infants Salvation is changed. But the Apocryphal Matter of your Lessons, in Tobith, Iudith, Bell and the Dragon, &c. is scare agreeable to the Word of God.

2. Whether it be fitly suited, let our Exceptions and other Papers be heard before your Judgment go for infallible.

3. What Mens Prayers you take your Measure or Encouragement from, we know not: But we are sure that if all the Common Prayers be twice a day read, the time for Psalms and Sermons will be short. And yet were they free from disorder and desectiveness in Matter, we could the better bear with the length, though other Prayers and Sermons were partly excluded by them.

4. Though we live in the same Countreys, we scarce differ any where more than in our very Experiences: Our Experience unresistably convinceth us, that a continued Prayer doth more to help most of the People, and carry on their Desires, than turning almost every Petition into a distinct Prayer; and making Prefaces and Conclusions to be near half the Prayers. And if the way of Prayer recorded in Scripture (even in the Jews Church, where Infirmity might be pleaded more than now) were such as yours, we shall say no more in that against it: But if it were not, be not wise then overmuch.

5. We are content that the Liturgy have such Repetitions as the Scriptures have, so it may have no other! And we are content that all Extemporate Prayer be restrained which is guilty of as much Tautology and vain Repetition as the Liturgy is: If this much will satisfie you, we are agreed.

p. 2556. Nor are we against any such Responsals as are fit to the Ends you mention: If ours are all such (upon impartial Examination), let them stand.

7. But the Question is, 1. Whether the Greek and Latin Churches in the three first Ages, or those of later Ages, be more imitable. 2. And whether the other Reformed Churches have not more imitated the ancientest of those Churches, though we have more imitated the latter and more corrupt. 3. And whether our first work be to stop the Papists Mouths by pleasing them, or coming too near them, when we know they that are likest them in all their Corruptions please them best. Yet are we not for any unnecessary difference from them, or affection of causless singularity.

As to the Reformed Churches Testimony of our Liturgy, shall their very Charity become our Snare? If they had liked our Form of Prayers best, they would some of them have imitated us. And our Martyrs no doubt, they honoured as we do, not as suffering for the Modes and Ceremonies of that Book, as opposite to the Reformed Churches Mode (for so they suffered not); but as suffering for the Sound Doctrine and True Worship of the Protestants, as opposite to Popery and the Mass.

§ 19. Your Reasons to prove your Impositions not too rigorous, are 1. Because they are by Law: If we tell you that so is the Spanish Inquisition; you'l say, we compare our Law-givers to the Spaniards: If we say that your New-mentioned Martyrs were burnt by Law in England, you'l say that we compare them to Papists. But all these are Laws: And so are those in Reformed Countreys which are against Bishops and Ceremonies: Do you therefore think them not too rigorous? 2. Your other Reason is, that the Rigour is no more then is necessary to make the Imposition effectual. You never spake words more agreeable to your hearts, as far as by your Practices we can judge of them. Either you mean effectual to change Mens Iudgments, or effectual to make them go against their Iudgments, or effectual to rid them out of the Land or World. The first you know they are unfit for: If you think otherwise, would you that your Judgments should have such kind of helps to have set them right? The second way they will be effectual with none but wicked Men and Hypocrites, who dare Sin against their Consciences for fear of Men: And is it worth so much ado to bring the Children of the Devil into your Church? The third way of Efficacy, is but to kill or banish all the Children of God that are not of your Opinion: for it is they that dare not Sin against Conscience whatever they suffer: And this is but such an Efficacy as the Spanish Inquisition, and Queen Mary's Bonfires had, to send those to God whom the World is not worthy of. You know every Man that is true to his God and his Conscience, will never do that which he taketh to be Sin, till his Judgment is changed: and therefore with such it can be no lower than Blood, or Banishment, or Imprisonment at least, that is the Efficacy which you desire: And if no such rigour be too much, its pity the French, that murthered 30000 or 40000 at their Bartholo…ew days, or as Dr. Peter Moulin saith 100000 within a few Weeks, and the Irish that murthered 200000 had not had a better Cause: For they took the most effectual way of rigour.

But when God maketh Inquisition for the Blood of his Servants, he will convince Men that such rigour was too much, and that their Wrath did not fulfil his Righteousness.

You shew your Kindness to Men's praying in the Pulple without your Book: Make good what you say, that such Praying is of no great Antiquity, and we will never contradict you more! Or if we prove it not the Ancientest way of Praying in the Christian Church, we will give you free leave to hang or banish us, for not Subscribing to the Common Prayer Book: which the Apostles used, and which was imposed on the Church for some hundred years. But it seems you think that we are beholden to meer Sufferance without Law or Canon for conceived Prayers: How long then it will be suffered we know not; if we must live by your Patience.

§ 20. It seemeth that our Converse and yours much differ: The most that we know or meet with had rather be without the Liturgy: and you say, That the People generally are well satisfied with it. By this time they are of another Mind. If it were so, we take it for no great honour to it; considering what the greater Number are in most places, and of what Lives those Persons are (of our Parishes and Acquaintance generally or for the most part) who are for it: Or what those are that are against it, and whom for its… sake you desire your effectual rigour may be exercised against. The Lord prepare them to undergo it innocently.

p. 256§ 21. Doth there need no more to be said for the Ceremonies? How little will satisfie some Men's Consciences! Lawful Authority hath in other Countreys cast out the same Bishops and Ceremonies which are here received: Doth it follow that they are good in one Country, and disorderly and undecent in another? Or that our Authority only is infallible in judging of them?

Is not God's Worship perfect without our Ceremonies, in its Integrals as well as its Essentials?

As for Circumstantials when you saw us allow of them, you need not plead for them as against us. But the Question is, whether our Additions be not more then Circumstances.

§ 22. We suppose that you give all to the Cross in Baptism which is necessary to a Humane Sacrament: And this we are ready to try be just Dispute.

When you say that never was Moral Efficacy ascribed to them, you seem to give up all your Cause: for by denying this ascribed Efficacy, you seem to grant them unlawful if it be so: And if it be not so, let us bear the blame of wronging them. The informing and exciting the dull mind of Man, in its duty to God, is a Moral Effect from Moral Efficacy. But the informing and exciting the dull Mind of Man in its Duty to God is an Effect ascribed to our Ceremonies: Ergo, a Moral Effect from Moral Efficacy is ascribed to our Ceremonies. The major cannot be denied by any Man that knoweth what a Moral Effect and Efficacy is: that which worketh not per modum Naturae in genere Causae efficientis naturalis only, but per modum objecti, vel in genere causae finalis, upon the Mind of Man, doth work morally: but so do our Ceremonies: Ergo—sure the Arminians that deny all proper Physical Operations of God's Spirit, as well as his Word, and reduce all to Moral Efficacy, will not say that Ceremonies have such a Physical Efficacy more than Moral. And if not so, the good Effects here mentioned can be from no lower Efficacy than Moral. And the minor which must be denied, is in the words of the Preface to the Common Prayer Book, and therefore undeniable. The Word of God it self worketh but moraliter proponendo objectum, and so do our Ceremonies.

§ 23. There is a great difference between Sacramental Ceremonies, and meer Circumstances, which the Reformed Churches keep. These we confound not, and could have wished you would not. Our Cross in Baptism is [A dedicating sign (saith the Canon) or transient Image, made in token that this Child shall not be ashamed of Christ crucified, but manly fight under his Banner against the Flesh, the World, and the Devil, and continue Christ's faithful Servant and Soldier to his Lives end. So that 1. It is a Dedicating Sign, performed by the Minister, and not by the Person himself, as a bare Professing Sign is. 2. It engageth the Party in a Relation to Christ [as his Soldier and Servant]. 3. And in the Duties of this Relation against all our Enemies, as the Sacramentum Militare doth a Soldier to his General; and that in plainer and fuller words than are annexed to Baptism. 4. And it is no other than the Covenant of Grace or of Christianity it self, which this Sacrament of the Cross doth enter us into, as Baptism also doth. It is not made a part of Baptism, nor called a Sacrament, but as far as we can judge, made essentially a Humane Sacrament adjoyned to Baptism. The Reformed Churches which use the Cross, we mean the Lutherans, yet use it not in this manner.

§ 24. This is but your unproved Assertion, That the Fault was not in the Ceremonies, but in the Contenders: we are ready to prove the contrary: but if it had been true, how far are you from Paul's mind, expressed Rom. 14. & 15. and 1 Cor. 8. You will let your weak Brother perish, and spare not, so you can but charge the Fault on himself; and lay Stumbling-blocks before him, and then save him by your effectual rigour, by Imprisonment or Punishment.

§ 25. Those seem a few to you that seem many to us: Had it been but one hundred such as Cartwright, Amesius, Bradshaw, Parker, Hildersham, Dod, Nicolls, Langley, Paget, Hering, Baynes, Bates, Davenport, Hooker, Wilson, Cotton, Norton, Shephard, Cobbet, Word, &c. they had been enough to have grieved the Souls of many Thousand godly Christians; and enough for any one of the Reformed Churches, had they possessed them, to have gloried in; and many far meaner are yet the glory of the Ancient Churches, and called, and reverenced as Fathers. But we doubt this same Spirit will make you think that many Hundred more are but a few to be Silenced e're long. And then your Clemency will comfort the poor People that have ignorant or deboist Readers instead of Ministers (for too many such we have known) that it was their Pastors faults that obstinately refused to Conform, when they had promised it; that is, that repented of the Sin of their Subscription when they discerned it: And had they never been ignorant enough to Subscribe, they had never entered: And the many hundreds which you thus keep from the Ministry, you make nothing of.

p. 257§ 26. Whether Diocesanes be a lawful Authority as claiming Spiritual Government, and how far Men may own them even in lawful things, are Controversies to be elsewhere managed. We justify no Man's leaving his Ministry upon the Refusal of any thing but what he judged unlawful, yea, and what was really so.

§ 27. Whether any Offence were given (though not enough to warrant Separation) let our Argumentations on both sides declare. The said Declaration of the Churches Sense is not the smallest part of the Scandal. Calling a humane Sacrament, indifferent, or no Sacrament, proveth it not to be as it is called. That the Nonconformists were the Cause of Separation, who did most against it, is easily said, and as easily proved as the Arrians proved that the Orthodox were the cause of the Schism of the Luciferans who separated from the Church for receiving the Arrians too easily to Communion.

§ 28. Church Matters in this much differ from Civil Matters; and its one thing to change a Church Custom when it dangerously prevaileth to corrupt Mens Understandings, and another thing when there is no such Danger. So Hezekiah thought when he destroyed the Brazen Serpent, and Paul (who before circumcised Timothy) when he said, If ye be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing. Could Men have foreseen that the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome in the imperial Churches, would have been sublimated to such a challenged Supremacy over all the Christian World, we suppose the Ancients would have held it their Duty to have removed the Primacy to some other Seat.

§ 29. According to your Councils will you be judged of God? The Not-abating of the Impositions is the casting off of many hundreds of your Brethren out of the Ministry, and of many thousand Christians out of your Communion: But the abating of the Impositions, will so offend you, as to silence or excommunicate none of you at all: For e. g. we think it a Sin to Subscribe, or swear canonical Obedience, or use the transient Image of the Cross in Baptism, and therefore these must cast us out: But you think it no Sin to forbear them, if the Magistrate abate them, and therefore none of you will be cast out by the Abatement. But it seemeth that your Charity judgeth the bare displeasing of your Apetite to the Ceremonies, is a greater evil than the silencing and excommunicating all us, your poor Brethren, though our Imprisoment follow: Nay, this is not all; For your Displeasure will be only that another Man subscribeth not, crosseth not, &c. while you may do it your selves as much as you please.

Whether the casting out of so many Ministers and Christians, for such things do more subserve the main ends of publick Government, than the forbearance would do, if you know not, we leave you to God's Conviction. As also whether these things be well imposed, and Mens Obedience to Authority, and the Peace of the Church, and its Uniformity or Unity, be well and justly laid upon them: Such Concessions indeed might bear you out far.

Concerning particular Ceremonies.

§ 30. Why then is it not as meet that one Gesture be used by all in singing Psalms or hearing Sermons? Why doth the Ministers stand in Prayer, even in the Sacrament Prayer, while the People kneel? We speak against none of your Liberty in using either kneeling or Holy-days, and perhaps some of us mean to use both our selves; but only beseech you, that they may be no more imposed than the ancient Church imposed them, and we desire no more; and if you reverence Antiquity, why will you not imitate it, in point of Imposition, as well as in the thing it self. But yet that Antiquity was against Kneeling on the Lord's Day at the Sacrament, and that they had but few of our Holy-days for many hundred Years, we suppose you are not ignorant.

§ 31. It's well you have no more to say against Liberty to forbear the other three Ceremonies; the more unexcusablde will you be, when you silence and excommunicate those that use them not.

§ 32. And its strange that meaner understandings than yours cannot see why Men should forbear that which is not to be valued with the Churches Peace: A Lye or a false Subscription, is not to be valued with the Churches Peace: And is it therefore a Wonder to you that Men should scruple them? It is fitter Matter for the Wonder of good Men, that after so long Experience, those that will needs be the Lords and Governors in spiritual Matters, should so resolvedly lay the Churches p. 258Peace upon such things as these, where they know beforehand, that Men of no Conscience will all be peaceable, and thousands of godly People are unsatisfied; and that they will needs take all for Disturbers of the Peace, who jump not with their Humour in every Ceremony, how willing soever to be ruled by the Laws of God.

§ 33. We are glad that you justify not Innovation and Arbitrariness; and yet desire not such a Cure as some do, by getting Laws which may do their Work.

§ 34. If your want of Charity were not extraordinary, it could not work effectually to the afflicting of your Brethren and the Church; when we tell you what will end your Differences, you know our Minds so much better than our selves, that you will not believe us: But you will be confident that we will come on with new Demands: This is your way of Conciliation; when you were to bring in your utmost Concessions in order to our Unity, and it was promised by his Majesty, that you should meet us half way, you bring in nothing, and persuade his Majesty also that he should not believe us in what we offer, that it would be satisfactory if it were granted! You say that it will give Dissatisfaction to the greater Part of his Majesty's Subjects! We are more charitable than to believe that a quarter of his Majesty's Subjects! are so uncharitable, as to be dissatisfied if their Brethren be not silenced and excommunicated for not swearing, subscribing, or using a Ceremony, while they may do it as much as they list themselves. And whereas you say, that there is no assurance given that it will content all Dissenters; you know that there are many Dissenters, as Papists Quakers, &c. for whom we never medled: And we think this an unjust Answer to be given to them, who craved of his Majesty, that they might send to their Brethren through the Land, to have the Testimony of their common Consent, and were denied it, and told that it should be our work alone, and imputed to no others.

In Conclusion, we perceive your Counsels against Peace are not likely to be frustrated: Your Desires concerning us are like to be accomplished: You are like to be gratified with our Silence and Ejection, and the Excommunication and Consequent sufferings of Dissenters. And yet we will believe that blessed are the Peacemakers, and though Deceit be in the Heart of them that imagin Evil, yet there is Ioy to the Counsellors of Peace, Prov. 12. 20. And though we are slopt by you in our following of Peace, and are never like thus publickly to seek it more (because you think that we must hold our Tongues, that you may hold your Peace) yet are we resolved by the help of God, if it be possible, and as much as in us lieth, to live peaceably with all Men, Rom. 12. 18.

§ 102. Hereupon some very very learned, godly Men, renewed their former Speeches, [That it was a vain Attempt to Endeavour a Reconciliation with such Men! that their Minds were exasperated, and they were resolved to monopolize the Favour of our Prince, and all Honours and Preferments to themselves: That there was no hope they would do any thing for the promoting of strict serious Godliness, or any thing that deserved the Name of Ecclesiastical Discipline: That undoubtedly they do but draw us on, partly to spin out the time till they are ready to persecute us without any danger to themselves, and partly to set us together by the Ears, and otherwise abuse us, by drawing us to grant them that which they know our Brethren cannot grant.]

§ 103. To all this I answered for my own part, [That though Charity commanded me to hope that there were some Men among them better than this Description doth import, yet my Reason forced me, all things considered, to have as low Expectations of this Conference as they had; and that I made no doubt but that the End would verefie much that was said; that for my own part I looked e're long to be silenced by them, with many hundred more, and that all this was but to quiet Men till the time. But yet for all that I was fully convinced that it was our Duty not only to yield to an offered Treaty, but to be the Seekers of it, and follow it on till we see the Issue: 1. Because we are commanded if possible as much as in us lieth, to live peaceably with all Men. 2. Because though we have too great a probability of such an issue as they describe, yet we are not certain of it; and the least possibility of a better Issue, may shew us that we should wait on God, in the use of the Means, till we are disappointed. 3. Because we have no other means at all to use: To keep our Flocks and publick Work we cannot: For the old Laws will be in force again, if we say nothing; and new ones will further enforce them if there be need. And for our parts we are not formidable to the Bishops at all, were our Number five times as great as theirs: For we abhor all Thoughts of Sedition and Rebellion, and they know that this is our Judgment, and therefore how should they be afraid of Men, whose Consciences bind them to p. 259make no resistance to the legal Exercise of a lawful Authority. If it were the Anabaptists, Millinaries or Levellers they would fear them. But for my part, I thought it very unmeet that such a Word as intimated any formidableness in us, should ever come out of our Mouths, either to them, or to our People, or among our selves; for it seemeth to intimate either that we would resist, or would have them think so. 4. And I looked to the end of all these Actions, and the chief things that moved me next the pleasing of God and Conscience, is, that when we are all silenced and persecuted, and the History of these things shall be delivered to posterity, it will be a just Blot upon us if we suffer as refusing to sue for Peace, and it will be our just Vindication when it shall appear, that we humbly petitioned for, and earnestly pursued after Peace, and came as near them for the obtaining it, as Scripture and Reason will allow us to do, and were ready to do anything for Peace, except to sin and damn our Souls. And for my own part, I could suffer much more comfortably when I had used these means, and been repulsed, than if I had used none. 5. And Lastly, I gave them all notice, that I hoped if we got no more, to have an opportunity by this Treaty to state our Difference right to the understanding of Foreigners and Posterity, and to bear my Testimony to the Cause of Truth, and Peace, and Godliness, openly under the Protection of the King's Authority, both by Word and Writing, which they that sat still would never do; but look on with secret silent Grief till all is gone; and then have their Consciences and others tell them, that they never made any just attempt, or spake a Word to prevent the Ruine.

§ 104. But as to the point of yielding too far to them, I told them first, that moderate Episcopacy was agreeable to my Judgment, and that they knew that I medled not as a Presbyterian, but as a Christian that is obliged to seek the Churches Peace: And also that others may accept of those Terms as better than worse, which yet they cannot take to be the best. And if we mist it as to the way or terms, our Brethren that thought so had the Liberty to acquaint us with our Error, and to set us right.

§ 105. Shortly after this, instead of the Diocesans Concessions, it was told us that the King would put all that he thought meet to grant us into the Form of a Declaration, and we should see it first, and have Liberty to give notice of what we liked not, as not consistent with the desired Concord… (and so the Diocesans cannot be charged with any mutability, as having ever granted us such Abatements which after they receded from): We thankfully accepted of this Offer, and received from the Lord Chancellor the following Copy of the Declaration.

This Copy of a Declaration the Lord Chancellor next sent us to peruse and alter before it were published, that it might satisfie our Desires. Received on Sept. 4.