A Third Defense of Peace, Part 4 – Part 7
A REFLECTION on the REFLECTER on a Book againſt Sacrilegious Deſertion of the Sacred Miniſtry.
§ 1. WHen the King, being more merciful than the Canoneer Clergy, had granted Licenſes to the Nonconformiſts, for the publick worſhipping of God in peaceable Aſſemblies, many of the Clergy ſtill cryed down ſuch Aſſemblies as Schiſmatical; when before they ſeemed to lay the charge of Schiſm on them, for their want of Authority: And theſe are the men, that when it is for their Intereſt, are zealous defenders of the Royal Power againſt ſome Parliaments Limitations; but their Intereſt can extol, or at leaſt abſolve Mr. Hooker himſelf. Some of them would have perſwaded us to forbear the Liberty which the King had granted us, and ſo to be the Silencers of our ſelves, and to forbear Gods publick Worſhip till we dare Conform. And no wonder, when they apprehended ſuch diſmal Conſequents to their Church from our Preaching, as Mr. Hinkley in his Letter-book hath told you. Among others, Dr. Fulwood would have drawn us into half this guilt, on pretence of perſwading us to the moderate uſe of our Licenſes. On which occaſion I wrote a ſmall Book, to prove that wilful deſerting of our Miniſtry even when it is forbidden unjuſtly, and yet remaineth notoriouſly neceſſary to the ends of the Inſtitution) is downright Sacriledge, and worſe than alienating Church-Goods or Lands. But I took occaſion in it to deal as plainly with thoſe Non-Conformiſts who are inclined to unwarrantable Separations, as with our Accuſers. Dr. Fullwood wrote an Anſwer to this Book: I never replyed, partly that they may ſee that I can give ſuch men the honour of having the laſt word, and partly to ſave mine own and the Readers time. But now either he, or ſome other unnamed Author that is marked M. A. hath publiſhed more Uſeful Reflections on that Book. He knoweth to what uſe, and let him uſe them accordingly.
§ 2. I. Part of his Reflections are Citations out of that and other of my Books, of ſuch words as ſeem to be for them, and againſt the Non-Conformiſts and my ſelf. II. The other part is his deſcant on the words, which he diſliketh, and ſetteth them to the Tune which ſuits his Inclination, and may ſerve his turn.
Should I Print an Anſwer to ſuch ſtuff as this, and in many Sheets tell men where and how ſuch men ſpeak amiſs, the Reader might think that Satan hath ſuch power on me, as by any of his Inſtruments, at his pleaſure, to draw me to caſt away my own and other mens precious time.
§ 3. All therefore that I ſhall ſay to him ſhall be this, I. As to the firſt, that 1. I can reconcile my own words, though he cannot: And as he never deſired me to teach him to do it, I am not at leiſure to offer him my Service: All is not contradiction, which men that underſtand not words do think ſo. 2. Readers, You ſee here when they call for Moderation, and would have us come as near them as we can, they do but turn it to reproach. And one that granteth them all that they cite out of my Books, and comes as near them as I do, is nevertheleſs thought unſufferable by them, in the exerciſe of the Miniſtry and out of Jayl. This is the ſpirit of the men.
§ 4. II. To the other part I only ſay, The man miſtakes all the queſtion; which is not, Whether I be good or bad, learned or unlearned: Let this be determined with him as he will. I am ſo ignorant and bad, that I will not now trouble him with much contradiction. But the queſtion is, 1. Whether the two thouſand Miniſters were juſtly Silenced? 2. And whether if they wilfully (though ſo Silenced) deſert the Miniſtry to which they were Devoted and Conſecrated, they will not be guilty of damnable Sacriledge and Perfidiouſneſs? If the man will ſpeak to purpoſe to this queſtion, it is like that ſome one will confute his Defence of ſo great a ſin, when I am paſt this unpleaſant Military Work.
A Note on J. Varney's Book againſt the Diſſenters from the Church of England.
INſtead of Confuting it, I commend the reading of it to ſuch as would ſee which ſide hath Phanaticks. It declareth that J. Varney hath by Faith pulled down the Devils Kingdome; and that King Charles 2. ſhall be Emperour of all Nations, by whom Chriſt will govern them; greater than Turk, Pope, or French. And the way is, The Diſſenters from the Government of the Church of England muſt be made Hewers of wood and Drawers of Water, and muſt pay all Taxes and Payments of the Land, to maintain the Forces that ſhall preſerve the Land againſt them: Like Decimation.
Notes on Mr. Le Strange's Caſuiſt uncaſed.
I Have had ſome gentle Touches from this Muſical band heretofore, which I found not my ſelf obliged to anſwer. Nor ſhall I now ſay any more than this:
I. That he that fetcheth his chief Stings and Scorns from a Book, and the leaf of another Book about twenty years or longer at leaſt revoked and obliterated, ſheweth that if with Auſtin we wrote Retractations, ſuch men would turn all to reproach.
II. That I make not Mr. Le Strange's judgment the meaſure of my Repentance or Retractations.
III. That I have never had the Schooling of him, and ſo never taught him to underſtand my Writings, and therefore undertake not that things congruous ſhall not ſeem contradictions to him. But I can reconcile more than he can. For inſtance, 1. My Diſputation of Scandal, Plea Second, reconcileth what he dreamed was contradiction, about impoſing things evil by accident. 2. I can reconcile the Kings having power about the circumſtances, yea and ſubſtance of Religion; and yet that he hath none but what he had from Chriſt. But I have not leaſure for ſuch work as this.
IV. Mr. Le Strange quite miſtakes the Non-Conformiſts Queſtion, as the Reflecter doth; as if Hiſſing and Stinging were diſputing. He ſeemeth to make the Queſtion to be, Whether I be not a giddy, mutable, ſelf-contradicting Fool and Knave: Let him in that believe what pleaſes himſelf. Our Queſtion is, Whether Silencing, Fining, Impriſoning the Non-Conformiſts, be the way of Peace, and of the deſired Concord of Proteſtants? Yea, Whether Concord be poſſible on thoſe Terms, and they will ever end our ſad Diviſions.
Notes on a Dialogue between the Pope and a Phanatick.
MR. L. Strange's Dialogue minds me of this, for it is a Book not to be forgotten: The Scope of it is to ſhew, that the Non-Conformiſts are deſigning to Deſtroy the King; that their Principles are rebellious; that they have ſo far prevailed already, that we muſt have no King, or no Parliament; which yet being needful, and the genius of the Parliament thus corrupted, the King muſt chooſe his own Councellors, and take the choice from the People (to this ſenſe), and all the Loyal Subjects muſt give their hands, and liſt or engage themſelves to defend the King againſt theſe Conſpirators. Juſt the Meal-Tub Plot! But my Second Plea was written to anſwer ſuch as this; and I leave the fuller Anſwer to thoſe that are more concerned in it.
So much againſt this Regiment of Accuſers. Turba gravis Paci placidaeque inimica qui…ti.
FINIS.
End of the text · Richard Baxter, A Third Defense of Peace (1681)