A Second Admonition to Edward Bagshaw, Part 2 · Section 43 – Section 49
Sect. 43. E. B. 7. Falſe doctrines at leſt implyed.This we affirm, 1. Becauſe we know not how elſe to preſerve our Chriſtian Liberty (which it is an indiſpenſible duty to maintain) but by ſeparating from thoſe that would unduly take it from us.
R. B. Theſe univerſal terms not limited nor expounded are to be taken univerſally; And ſo here are two falſe doctrines; one that it is indiſpenſible duty to maintain all our Chriſtian liberty, and the other that we know not how elſe to maintain it▪ But if by this Liberty, you mean but ſome ſort of liberty, and not all, you ſhould have diſtinguiſhed, if you would not deceive. And if by [we know not] you intend only a Confeſſion of your own ignorance, that would be no proof of the point in hand, becauſe that may be true, which you know not.
1. There is a Liberty called Chriſtian, Q. 1. Whether it is an indiſpenſible duty to maintain all our Chriſt…an liberty, or what?becauſe it is eſſential to Chriſtianity; (as to be freed from the Covenant of Works, and from the Guilt and Reign of ſin, and from the power of Satan, and the ſtate of enmity againſt God, &c.) 2. There is a Liberty called Chriſtian, becauſe it is procured and given us by Chriſt, though not eſſential to Chriſtianity; (as to eat of this meat or that, fleſh or herbs, to be free from the obſervation of certain dayes, and Cuſtoms, and Ceremonies, not ſinful in themſelves.) 3. There is a Liberty called Chriſtian, becauſe Chriſtians have it in common with all other men, or with many: (as to marry or not marry; to live in this Countrey, or that; to be free from oppreſſion, injuries, ſlanders, perſecution, when they can.)
And we muſt diſtinguiſh of the word [Our] that is, we muſt ſhew how far this Liberty is Ours indeed. 1. It is one thing to be Ours Neceſſarily, or as you ſay Indiſpenſibly, and another thing to be ours when we can get it, keep it, or uſe it, without a greater loſs than it will compenſate, or a greater hurt to others. It is one thing to be ours in fundamental right, to be uſed at fit times, and another thing to be ours, to be alwayes uſed.
Prop. 1.Luke 14. 18. The Liberty which is eſſential to our Chriſtianity or Godlineſs, is indiſpenſibly to be maintained and exerciſed,Iſa. 61. 1. Gal. 5. 1.2 Pet. 2. 19, 20, 21.
Prop. 2.Act. 18. 26. All degrees of the ſame liberty muſt be maintained,2 Tim. 2. 26. as well as the eſſentials; that is,2 Cor. 3. 17. we muſt labour to be as free as we can from all the degrees of ſin, and miſery: But we cannot here have what we would.Heb. 2. 14, 15.
Prop. 3. There is a Liberty to uſe certain things as ſtatedly or ordinarily Indifferent,Gal. 4▪ 3, 9. which is none of Ours (to uſe them) in ſeveral Caſes,Romans 8. 15, 2. which take away the Indifferency,Iohn 8▪ 31, 36. (as in caſe of ſcandal, or greater hurt to others or our ſelves,Romans 6. 16, 18, 22. or of the reſtraint of juſt authority.)
Prop. 4. The ſame muſt be ſaid of forbearing things indifferent.
Prop. 5. Our Liberty from perſecution, oppreſſion, injuries, ſlanders, muſt be patiently let go, as being none of ours, when it cannot be kept by lawful means, or without a greater hurt, Acts 22. 28, &c.
Prop. 6. But our Liberty in either of theſe three laſt mentioned Caſes, ought not cauſeleſly to be taken from us by others, nor muſt be cauſeleſly caſt away by our ſelves; nor ſhould we yield to falſe Teachers, who would deceive the Churches, by telling them that they are under Divine Obligations, when they are not; and make them believe that things lawful are unlawful, and things indifferent are neceſſary, Gal. 2. 4, 5. Col. 2. 16, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23. Acts 15. 1 Cor. 7. 21, 22.
The third Propoſition is it that I am to prove. And Pauls becoming all things to all men, to ſave ſome, a Jew to the Jews, his ſhaving his head, his circumciſing Timothy, with the reaſons of it, his reſolution to forbear the eating of fleſh, rather than offend the weak, and his perſwading others to do the like, do fully prove it. He maintaineth the Chriſtians Right of Liberty againſt falſe Teachers; but he maintaineth not the Exerciſe of it, when he had reaſon to let it go: For Liberty is not neceſſity, 1 Cor. 9. 1. Am I not free? 4, 5. Have we not power to eat and to drink? Have we not power to lead about a Siſter, a Wife, as well as other Apoſtles? 12. If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheleſs we have not uſed this power, but ſuffered all things leſt we ſhould hinder the Goſpel of Chriſt.—15. But I have uſed none of theſe things—19▪ For though I be free from all men, yet have I made my ſelf ſervant to all, that I might gain the more: And unto the Jews I became a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; To them that are under the Law, as under the Law, that I might gain them that are under the Law: To them that are without the Law, as without Law, that I might gain them that are without Law. To the weak I became as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means ſave ſome. And this I do for the Goſpels ſake—See 1 Cor. 8. 13. Rom. 14. 21. It is good neither to eat fleſh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother ſtumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.
Chriſt himſelf ſaith, Matth. 17. 26. Then are the children free: notwithſtanding leſt we ſhould offend, go thou, &c. and give them for me and thee.
1 Pet. 2. 16. As free, (that is, as ſuch as by Chriſt are freed from true bondage, but not from order and ſubjection, and therefore [not having or uſing liberty for a cloak of maliciouſneſs, but as the ſervants of God. No man hath liberty to be unruly or hurtfull.
Rom. 7. 3. If her husband be dead, ſhe is free from that Law, and yet may give away that freedom.
Yea, of the very liberty from the Jewiſh Law, the Apoſtle ſaith, Gal. 5. 13. For ye have been called unto liberty (q. d. therefore let not falſe Teachers perſwade you that you are bound to that which you are freed from) only uſe not liberty for an occaſion to the fleſh, but by Love ſerve one another] q. d. in the exerciſe of this Liberty you muſt do or not do the things you are at liberty in, as may do moſt good, according as the Law of Love requireth, and not as your own carnal intereſt and luſt inclineth you: For all the Law is fulfilled in one word, in this, Thou ſhalt Love thy neighbour as thy ſelf.
1 Cor. 16. 25, 28, 29, 30, 31. Whatſoever is ſold in the Shambles eat, asking no queſtion for conſcience ſake—But if any man ſay unto you, This is offered in ſacrifice to Idols, eat not, for his ſake that ſhewed it, and for conſcience ſake (Thus our liberty is not to be exerciſed againſt Love: for we have no liberty to hurt our brethren) 29. Conſcience I ſay, not thine own, but of the others: Thus others by weakneſs, and conſequently Rulers by authority may reſtrain the exerciſe of our liberty) For why is my liberty judged of another mans Conſcience? that is, Not that his Conſcience is the Rule of my Right, or his judgement taketh away my title to liberty; but his intereſt and the Law of Love, do take away my Right of uſing my liberty to anothers hurt. 3. For if I by grace be a partaker (that is, lawfully according to my Chriſtian liberty) why am I evil ſpoken of for that for which I give thanks, (that is, it is a fault in thoſe that accuſe me of ſin, when I do that which is lawful, in it ſelf, abſtracted from the Conſequents or ſcandal): Whether therefore ye eat or drink, (which are things indifferent as to the kind of food) or whatſoever ye do (how lawful in it ſelf ſoever) do all to the glory of God (For the intereſt of the End muſt guide and reſtrain you in the uſe even of things in themſelves indifferent: For no man hath liberty to diſhonour God, nor to hurt another, (nor to diſobey juſt power.)
I beſeech you therefore while you promiſe men liberty, be not your ſelf, and make not them the ſervants of ſin, 2 Pet. 2. 19. And take notice that Liberty muſt be diſtinguiſhed as to Right, and as to Vſe, And that the uſe muſt often be denyed, and not maintained.
2. Let us next ſee Whether there be no way but ſeparation in our Caſe, Q. 2. Whether there be no way but ſeparation, to preſerve our Chriſtian liberty?to preſerve our liberty? Paul hath here ſhewed you another way: 1. By doctrinal defence to defend it againſt falſe Teachers, that would doctrinally brings us into bondage. To maintain againſt ſuch as you who add to Gods Laws, that we are not bound to do that which is not commanded, or to forbear that which is not by God forbidden, though you ſay we are. 2. To uſe our Liberty as it tendeth to Gods glory and mans good, and diſuſe it when it croſſeth theſe, (but not deny our right.) This is the Scripture way of preſerving it: and not to think that we have no way to preſerve it, but by doing hurt, or croſſing Love by Church-diviſions.
3. No falſhood is a juſt defence of our Chriſtian liberty: But to ſay, that a true Church is no true Church, or true Worſhip is no true Worſhip, or that it is not Lawful to communicate where it is lawful, is a falſhood. Therefore it is no juſt defence of our Liberty.
Sect. 44. E. B. p. 12. 2. Being preſent where thoſe things are uſed in the Worſhip of God, which God hath not commanded, this would involve us in the guilt and contagion of them: nor do we believe (however we have your word for the contrary) the Lord will otherwiſe interpret it; ſince he hath ſo ſtrictly charged us, to keep far from a falſe matter, and not to partake in other mens ſins.
R. B. Here are two more falſe doctrines intimated:8. Falſe doctrine. 1. That to uſe things in the Worſhip of God which he hath not commanded (without exception) is a ſin. 2. That being preſent where they are uſed,9. Falſe doctrine. involveth us in the guilt.
Where note, 1. That it is not Part of the Worſhip, but things uſed in the Worſhip, that he ſpeaketh of. 2. That I proved the contrary to both theſe at large, and the man ſaith only that he hath my word for the contrary, and giveth not a ſyllable of anſwer to my twenty inſtances, and many undenyable reaſons to the contrary. Doth he not either highly eſteem his own reaſon and authority, that thinketh it ſhould be received, if he do but ſay the word, without attempting to anſwer whats ſaid againſt him: or elſe doth he not greatly deſpiſe his own Readers and followers, in taking them for ſuch credulous ductile ſouls, as will take his bare word without expecting any reaſon from him to confute what is ſaid on the other ſide? Or is all this on preſumption, that his Reader will not know what I have ſaid? Sermon Notes, Meeters, Tunes, printed Bibles (as printed) and divided into Chapters and Verſes, the words of a Sermon or Prayer, the particular Method, Cups, Tables, &c. are uſed in the Worſhip of God without any particular command, or any command for this, rather than that, in caſes of indifferency: And yet all theſe are not therefore unlawful.
And I proved that all Miniſters, and Families ſin in Gods Worſhip, and yet that it is not therefore lawful to ſeparate from them all. If you your ſelf ſay that you ſay nothing in preaching or praying but what is commanded you, and that your Worſhip hath no ſin, you deceive your ſelf, and the truth is not in you. But if you think it a ſin for any to hear you, or have communion with you, why do you not plainly tell your hearers ſo? To keep far from a falſe matter, (as from writing falſhoods by the dozens) and not to partake of other mens ſins, is one thing; and for Children to tell their Fathers, or People their Paſtors, we muſt not worſhip God with you, becauſe in Forms, Words, Method, you do ſomething not commanded, yea, becauſe through error you do ſomewhat ſinful, is another thing.
Sect. 45. E. B. Laſtly, Whatever pretences may be uſed, for the keeping of Peace, yet (to ſpeak ſtrictly ſo as to ſatisfie Conſcience) Peace is but ill bought, if we muſt purchaſe it at ſo dear a rate as the loſs of truth: And this Truth concerning the ſole Soveraign Power of our Lord Chriſt in appointing all matters of his Worſhip—is a point ſo neceſſary to be maintained, and ſo utterly inconſiſtent with the ſuppoſing that any thing is to be obtruded which he hath not commanded, that we dare not allow our ſelves in the practice of any thing which may prejudice that fundamental.
R. B. 1. How oft have I anſwered that ſaying about ſelling Truth for Peace, Whether not ſeparating be prejudicial to a fundamental, viz Chriſts Soveraignty?and muſt hear it again in the old confuſion without any notice of what hath been ſaid. See my Treatiſe of Infant Baptiſm on that point particularly. Do I fell thirty three Truths, when I read thirty three untruths in your Writings? Do I ſell Truth, if I ſhould hear you preach or pray erroneouſly, and impoſe your confuſed prayers on the people? or impoſe this or that Metre or Tune on them in ſinging of Pſalms?
2. Here you ſay [Matters of Worſhip] before it was [in Worſhip.] And even the word. [Worſhip] is taken ſo variouſly, as calls for explication, before we determine whether man may appoint matters of Worſhip: For if you will call [putting off the Hat] and reverent geſtures, in particular, and Metres, and Tunes, and the Method and words of the particular Prayer or Sermon, by the name of Worſhip, then man may appoint it.
3. It is an untrue ſuppoſition, and but a begging of the queſtion, that our preſence with any thing obtruded unlawfully, is a prejudice to that fundamental of the Soveraignty of Chriſt. All men that ſin do ſin againſt his Soveraignty: And all that obtrude any thing unlawfully, ſin againſt it by that obtruſion. But if you obtrude a raſh and paſſionate prayer on the people, or an erroneous or diſorderly prayer, or an ill-compoſed Hymn or Pſalm, their preſence is no approbation of your error, nor denying of Chriſts Soveraignty.
Do you, or can you believe and make all your followers believe, that the Synagogue-Worſhip, and the Temple-Worſhip were kept ſo pure, by the Prieſts, Levites, and Phariſees in Chriſts dayes, as that there was nothing of humane Tradition obtruded? Or nothing but what God commanded? Can you believe this? Or can you believe that Chriſt was not uſually or often preſent there? See Luke 4. 16. At Nazareth where he had been brought up, as his cuſtom was, he went into the Synagogue on the Sabbath day—And of Paul its ſaid, Acts 17. 2. As his manner was, he went in to them, and three Sabbath dayes reaſoned—Or do you believe, that Chriſt was a ſinner? and that he contradicted his own Soveraignty? What! and yet be a perfect Saviour? Who is it now that prejudiceth fundamentalls?
Sect. 46. E. B. And we judge we have ſufficient warrant from what the Apoſtles did in a like caſe, Acts 15. 24. For if they reproved ſuch as preached up Circumciſion and other Legal Ceremonies, at that day, when as the Apoſtles had given them no ſuch Commandment, ſaying of them, that they ſubverted or ſpoiled the ſouls of the Diſciples, then may we affirm the like of thoſe men now, who in things equally indiſpenſible, do act with every whit as little authority, from whom on that very account we think it our duty to ſeparate.
R. B. 1. The authority of the King and lawful Magiſtrates is more about the Circumſtantials of Worſhip (as whether Abiathar ſhall be High Prieſt, &c.) than the falſe Teachers was about that doctrine.
2. The Apoſtles do indeed declare that they ſent them not to preach,The Caſe Acts 15. or not ſuch doctrine: But thats not the thing on which they lay the great accuſation, but on the falſe and dividing doctrine which they preached. Chriſt ſaith of one that caſt out Devils in his Name, and followed him not, Let him alone; he that is not againſt us, is for us: And Moſes wiſht all the Lords people were Prophets: But theſe falſe Teachers would have made the keeping of Moſes Law to be neceſſary to ſalvation: And can you prove that the Miniſter doth ſo, whom I uſe to hear? Do all the Pariſh Miniſters do ſo? Can you ſee no difference between one that ſaith, The Law or Cannons command me to uſe this Surplice or Form as an indifferent thing:] and one that ſaith [Except you do this or that, you break Gods Law and cannot be ſaved: Except you ſeparate from all Pariſh Churches, you ſin againſt God, and prejudice a fundamental? Sure it is one thing to ſay, God ſaith this, or binds you to this, or forbids you this? and its another thing to ſay, The King, or the Biſhop ſaith it.
3. And what is it that keepeth you from ſeeing how ſtrongly you confute your ſelf?Acts 15. againſt the Sparatiſts. Is there a word in Acts 15. to forbid all Church communion with thoſe that taught even this ſubverting falſe doctrine? How many Texts be there that intimate that the Churches long (without a prohibition) held communion with the erronious judaizing Chriſtians? Till they grew obſtinate, and grew up to a Hereſie, and were the Separaters themſelves, and did ſubvert the Goſpel and faith of Chriſt. But yet prove that ſuch doctrine is held by our Pariſh Churches, and I will leave them: Do not the Independents offer to ſubſcribe the Doctrine of the Church of England? Sure then they think its Doctrinals to be ſound.
Sect. 47. E. B. By two Arguments you labour to defend your irregular way of Communion: 1. That in the Primitive Churches there were many corruptions, which the Apoſtle writes againſt, but doth not adviſe any becauſe of them to ſeparate. But I anſwer—It is not corruption or error barely conſidered as ſuch, that we account to be a ſufficient ground of ſeparation: But the Impoſing of that error with on high hand, and making a ſubmiſſion to it (at leaſt in our practice and outward obſervance) the very condition of Communion: This we ſay, is a thing which neceſſitates us to make a ſeparation.
R. B. Mark that you diſtinguiſh not of Corruption or Error, Mr. Bagſhaw's too looſe communion with all Hereticks that impoſe not.nor except any, but what is Impoſed. And when I had anſwered all this ſo fully, why will you deign to confute a Book, while you diſdain to take notice what it ſaith?
1. Who would have thought that you are ſo much looſer in your communion than we are? I will ſeparate from that Church which in the eſſential matter (Paſtor, or all the flock) after admonition retaineth ſuch Corruption and Error, as is directly contrary to any eſſential point of Chriſtianity, though they impoſe it not on others: But by theſe words it ſeems, as ſcrupulous as you are, you would not ſeparate from Hereticks or Ungodly ones, if they do not Impoſe their Hereſie and Impiety!
2. How oft have I urged you to prove, that our publick Pariſh Miniſters whom I adviſe men to hear, do Impoſe any more than you your ſelf do?His own Impoſing. By chooſing what Chapter to read, you impoſe on the people to hear that Chapter then or none? By chooſing what Place, Hour, Method, Words, ye…, Matter, and Metre, Tune, &c. you impoſe upon the people to joyn in all theſe, or not to have communion with you therein. And ſo our Teacher doth by reading Common-Prayer and wearing the Surplice, impoſe on us to hear him ſo reading, or to ſtay away. But he maketh no Laws: he commandeth us no Ceremony: They are commanded by others, and not by him: And it is not in your own practice of any thing forbidden of God, that I adviſe men to have communion with ſuch; but only in Gods true Worſhip, though in the circumſtances or manner the Miniſter himſelf, ſay or do ſomething that is forbidden; as every Teacher in the world doth, though not in the ſame degree. It is one thing to ſubmit to be preſent at the Worſhip, which the Paſtor performeth in ſome faulty manner: And another thing wilfully to do evil your ſelf, or to approve of his failings or your own.
Sect. 48. E. B. To which I add only this, that however the preſenting our bodies at a Worſhip which we do not inwardly approve of, may render us excuſable, and juſtiſte us among men, yet we are ſure it will not in the ſight of God who hates hypocriſie—
R. B. Though you confound,Of approving what we joyn in. I muſt diſtinguiſh the eſſentials of the Worſhip from the circumſtances, and outward imperfections in the manner. I do inwardly approve of the matter or ſubſtance of the Worſhip which I joyn in, in the main; and labour to pray with my heart when I joyn in the Common-prayer; though I conſent not to the whole Method, nor to the defects. And when I hear a man in free prayer uſe confuſion, diſorder, unſeemly words,Whether he be an Hypocrite, who joyneth with any manner of Worſhip which he approveth not? and when I hear one man drop the error of an Arminian, or a Lutheran, another of an Antinomian, another of an Anabaptiſt, another of a Separatiſt, &c. in his prayer, I do not inwardly approve of that error or diſorder, any more than of the defects of forms: And yet if it were hypocriſie to be preſent, I would joyn with no man living. Can all your hearers inwardly approve of all that you ſay, if you preach and pray but as you write? If they can, its time to pitty them. And are they Hypocrites elſe for joyning with you?
Sect. 49 E. B. p. 14. 1. This is clear in Scripture,Self-contradiction. that our Lord Chriſt (who was himſelf holy and ſeparated from ſinners) did never call or deſign his Church to be an impure mixt body of holy and unholy without any diſtinction, blended and hudled up together, but—to be an holy ſeparate people—and to depart from unrighteouſneſs.
R. B. 1. Remember Reader, (for he will not remember) that but even now he told us, that it is not Corruption and Error barely as ſuch, that is a ſufficient ground of ſeparation, without Impoſition: And now here is nothing but Mixture of Holy and Vnholy. Reconcile theſe if you can.
2. Chriſt that was perfectly ſeparated from ſinners, had yet ordinary communion with ſinners in a ſinful or culpable manner of performance (unleſs the Jews were all perfect) Therefore our ſeparation muſt be ſuch as Chriſts was, in our meaſure.
3. Impurity, and unholineſs, and ſin is not the Matter of Gods Call, or deſignment either in the Church or out; but of his Permiſſion: But Communion with thoſe Churches which by permiſſion have ſin and impurity in them, is a commanded thing. And they that muſt depart from iniquity,Whether no Church may be communicated with that is not ſuch as Chriſt called and deſigned it to be? muſt not alwayes depart from the worſhipping Aſſembly where ſome unrighteous perſons are. Your argument, if it be any, muſt run this: Chriſt did never call or deſign his Church to be an impure mixt body of holy and unholy. The Pariſh Churches which you perſwade us to communion with, are impure mixt bodies: Therefore the Pariſh Churches are ſuch as Chriſt never called or deſigned them to be. Suppoſe we grant you the Concluſion: Whoever is a ſinner is ſuch as Chriſt never called or deſigned him to be. But your Queſtion intimateth that you would argue thus. [Whatever Church is ſuch as Chriſt did not call it or deſign it to be, is not to be communicated with: But all the Pariſh Churches are ſuch as Chriſt did not call or deſign them to be; Ergo—The Minor you prove, Whatever Church is an impure mixt body of holy and unholy, &c. is ſuch as Chriſt did not call or deſign them to be: But the Pariſh Churches are ſuch—
But I anſwer you; 1. A Church is no Church that wants the Eſſentials required by Chriſt: But he that will not communicate with Church or perſon that wants the Perfection which Chriſt calleth them to, ſhall communicate with no Church or perſon on Earth.
2. The word [mixt] is ambiguous; and implyeth a double act; one of the Impure part, and that Chriſt deſigneth not, but forbiddeth: the other of the holy, who joyn with ſome that are unholy; and that in ſome Caſes Chriſt commandeth, and did practiſe himſelf.
3. Without diſtinction indeed it ſhould not be: for Diſcipline is appointed to diſtinguiſh regularly.
4. Take home the argument, and try it on your ſelf. [Whatever Church is ſuch as Chriſt did not call and deſign it to be, is not to be communicated with: But a Church that hath an erroneous Preacher, or an erroneous ſinful people is ſuch as Chriſt did not call or deſign it to be: Ergo—And will you then communicate with any in the world, or any with you?