The Two Steps of a Non-Conformist, Tract
THE TVVO STEPS OF A Nonconformiſt Miniſter; Made by him, in Order to the obtaining his liberty of Preaching in Publick. Together with an APPENDIX about coming to Church in reſpect to the People.
Publiſhed for a Teſtimony in his Generation, by a Lover of Sincerity and Peace.
1 Tim. 5.21.
Doing nothing by Partiality.
LONDON, Printed for Thomas Parkhurſt, at the Three Crowns and Bible, at the lower end of Cheapſide, near Mercers-Chappel. 1684.
The Firſt Step, BEING My Paper to the Biſhop.
My Lord,
THE Deſign of this Paper is Union between the Moderate Biſhop, and Sober Nonconformiſt; and there is but one Rule muſt be laid down in order thereunto, ſuppoſing both ſenſible that an endeavour after Concord as Brethren in the ſame Reformed Religion, is an undeniable Duty, and that a wilful neglect of it cannot be anſwered to God by either Party, whoſoever of them ſhall be found in default. The Rule is this, that the Nonconformiſt be ready to do in the ſincerity of his Conſcience what he can, and that out of the like Conſcience to God the Biſhop then does bear with him in what he cannot, at leaſt ſo far I hope as the Law and the Government, or his Duty thereunto, according to his own private Judgment of diſcretion, will give way.
The Nonconformiſt is to conſider well the importance of ſuch Texts as require Subjection to the Higher Powers, and he is out of Conſcience to the Fifth Commandment to comply with their Injunctions to the uttermoſt that may give ſatisfaction, ſo far as he can without ſin. The Biſhop is to conſider the import of ſuch Texts as tell us what a dangerous thing it is to give occaſion to the doubtful to do anything againſt their Conſciences; and he is out of Conſcience to the Sixth Commandment (for fear of deſtroying him for whom Chriſt died) to take heed as he would of his life, to put a man upon any more than he is convinced he can ſafely do. When the Nonconformiſt now does what he can, the Law of God will bear him out in that which he forbears, and if he ſuffers, he hath peace in his Soul. If the Biſhop likewiſe ſhall receive a man upon this account, as one that cannot require more of him, leſt he wound his weak Conſcience, and ſo ſins againſt Chriſt, I doubt not but the Law of Charity and Mercy, that is, the Law which is Gods, will juſtifie him alſo as to whatſoever he falls ſhort in the fulfilling the Law of Man.
It is true if the Biſhop diſpenſeth, and the Nonconformiſt exceeds, the penalty may be ſued, if there be any, and any body be ſo affected. It is Law (I ſuppoſe) in Foro Civili, and we muſt never Reſiſt: but it is no Law in Foro Dei, or Conſcientiae, for the Authority of thoſe greater Laws of Nature and Religion, does ſuperſede the Execution, ſo that there is no guilt (as to God's ſight I mean) contracted in the omiſſion. God ſays, Thou ſhalt not do any thing which will deſtroy thy Brother, or wound his Conſcience. The Law ſays, Thou ſhalt put him to do thus, and not diſpenſe with him. Whom ſhall the good Biſhop chuſe to obey, the Law of his God, or the Statutes of the Realm?
Having therefore thus propoſed the Rule, I will proceed to Practice.
There are two things (My Lord) neceſſary for me by the Act for Uniformity, to obtain a liberty of the Pulpit. The one is I muſt read before the Biſhop the 39 Articles and aſſent to them, and you muſt give me a Licenſe; when I have got this, I may be ſent to Gaol if I ſubſcribe not the Declaration in the ſaid Act, and that is the 2d thing then I muſt do likewiſe. If I do this alſo, your Lordſhip muſt give me a Certificate and that with my Licenſe will ſerve, ſo that I count then no man can and no friend will put a bar to my Preaching, where I am peaceably deſired.
Indeed there is the Declaration of Aſſent and conſent required farther of ſuch as have any preferment in the Church, but if I ſeek nothing but Liberty to Preach, this cannot be impoſed, becauſe I have no Place to make it in, according to the Act, and I muſt therefore in all points elſe be dealt with no otherwiſe than a perfect Conformiſt.
Now for my doing theſe two things (ſuppoſing my ſelf willing to do both ſo far as I can, and your Lordſhip willing to condeſcend to me in what I cannot,) I do apprehend that in reading the Articles, I may take leave as I go along to make my explication of any Article, and if my ſenſe be ſuch as is agreeable to your Lordſhips Judgment, or at leaſt what you judg fit to be allowed, you may paſs me as to the Articles; and if you will then afford me the like liberty of Explication in Subſcribing the Declaration alſo, I have no more to do but to ſet down my explications of the one and the other, and leave both to your Lordſhips candour and conſcience to receive me or reject me, as it ſhall pleaſe God and your Lordſhip.
I begin with the Articles.
The Thirty nine Articles of the Church I receive as Articles for Concord, (according to the Title) and not as Articles of Faith, and I ſuppoſe my ſelf therefore not tyed up to the Authentick ſenſe of the Impoſer (as I think we are in Laws) but to be allowed the liberty of a Doctoral Interpretation; That is, whereas in a Convocation every Doctor there (or Member thereof) is ſuppoſed or granted, in paſſing ſuch Articles or Canons to abound in his own ſenſe, ſo long as he can but reconcile the words to it. Let a man make any rational conſtruction of an Article which is agreeable either to the preciſe words (for that he may well think to be the mind of ſome or other of the Doctors,) or to the ſenſe which he believes to be the meaning of the major part, though varying from the words (for that, above any, when it can, is to be embrac'd) it is ſufficient (I count) in point of Conſcience, for his Aſſent to the ſame. Neither do I by an Aſſent to a thing according to my preſent Judgment, ſhut up my underſtanding from receiving and owning any farther, or other Truth, whereof I ſhall be convinced hereafter. This liberty being foreprized, I do declare my unfeigned Aſſent to the ſaid Articles, with theſe Explications or Cautions.
As Chriſt died for us, and was buried: ſo alſo' is it to be believed, that he went down into Hell.Art. 3. I aſſent to the words, they are Scripture, and my Creed, but I am uncertain of the meaning.
Chriſt did truly riſe again from death, and took again his body, with fleſh, bones, and all things appertaining to the perfection of mans Nature, wherewith he aſcended into Heaven, and there ſitteth, until he return to judge all men at the laſt day.Art. 4. That Chriſt aroſe and aſcended with his proper fleſh and bones, it is certain, yet whether upon his entring into the heavenly glory (as Enoch and Elias) this fleſh and bones of his were not transformed into a ſpiritual body, I do queſtion, ſeeing the Apoſtle tells us expreſly, That fleſh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. We may refer this fleſh and bones therefore to his Riſing and Aſcenſion, but leave it in dubio in regard to his Sitting in Heaven.
In the name of the Holy Scripture, we do underſtand thoſe Canonical Books of the Old and new Teſtament, of whoſe Authoríty was never any doubt in the Church.Art. 6. By [Church] I underſtand the whole Catholick Church, or this Church of England; for it is evident that there hath been doubt made of ſome Books in our Canon by Antient Particular Churches and Fathers.
The Three Creeds, Nice Creed, Athanaſius's Creed, and that which is commonly called the Apoſtles Creed, ought thorowly to be received and believed: for they may be proved by moſt certain Warrants of Holy Scripture.Art. 8. The word [thorowly] I underſtand only in regard to the Articles of thoſe Creeds, not in regard to the Proem and Concluſion of the Athanaſian Quicunque vult, which is inconſiſtent I hold with the Goodneſs of God, and Natural Religion.
The condition of man after the Fall of Adam, is ſuch, that he cannot turn and prepare himſelf by his own natural ſtrength and good works to Faith, and calling upon God: Wherefore we have no power to do good works pleaſant and acceptable to God, without the Grace of God by Chriſt preventing us, that we may have a good will, and working with us when we have that good will.Art. 10. By the words [no power] and [cannot] I underſtand a Moral power and impotency, which lyes in ſuch a diſpoſition, as that a man never will, without the ſpecial grace of God: but not ſo, as if we had no power at all that is Phyſical; or as if the terms of the Covenant of Grace were Impoſsible to any.
We are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jeſus Chriſt by Faith, and not for our own works or deſervings: Wherefore that we are juſtified by Faith only, is a moſt wholſom Doctrine, and very full of comfort, as more largely is expreſſed in the Homily of Juſtification.Art. 11. By the words [Faith only] I underſtand what Paul means by [Faith without works] that is, Faith in oppoſition to works, that would make the reward to be of debt, and not of grace, or to works of the Law, works which the Law requires to Juſtification (which none have, and if any be juſtified at all, it muſt be therefore without them, not in oppoſition to Repentance, and Evangelical Obedience: and though it be for Chriſt's ſake, or his merits, and not ours, that he accounts us righteous, yet is our Faith, Repentance, and ſincere Obedience, the condition upon which he does it; or rather the Righteouſneſs it ſelf, which upon the account of Chriſt's deſerving, he accepts unto life everlaſting.
Works done before the grace of Chriſt, and the inſpiration of his Spirit, are not pleaſant to God, foraſmuch as they ſpring not of Faith in Jeſus Chriſt, neither do they make men meet to receive grace, (or as the School-Authors ſay) deſerve grace of congruity: yea, rather for that they are not done as God hath willed and commanded them to be done, we doubt not but they have the nature of ſin.Art. 13. When good works done before grace are ſaid to have the nature of ſin, I underſtand that thô ſuch works are good quoad operis ſubſtantiam, yet they are evil quoad modum quo ordinantur ad vitam aeternam, and conſequently when they are ſaid not to be pleaſant unto God, I underſtand, not acceptable unto Salvation. I judg that the doing what we can through the ſtrength of free will, and common grace, is not to be diſcouraged, and to be held in ſome good ſenſe preparatory to ſaving Converſion; yet becauſe there is no full promiſe made thereunto as the condition of obtaining that grace which is ſpecial, it is truly ſaid, that ſuch works do not make us meet for receiving, or do not of congruity deſerve the ſame.
Predeſtination to life is the everlaſting purpoſe of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath conſtantly decreed by his Counſel, ſecret to us, to deliver from curſe and damnation thoſe whom he hath choſen in Chriſt out of mankind, and to bring them by Chriſt to everlaſting Salvation, as Veſſels made to honour. After we have received the Holy Ghoſt, we may depart from grace given, and fall into ſin; and by the grace of God (we may) ariſe again, and amend our lives.Art. 16, 17. I apprehend the Church here does follow St. Auſtin in the Points of Election and Perſeverance; and when it is ſaid, that, after we have received the Holy Ghoſt, we may depart from grace given, it muſt be underſtood ſo, as that the Elect for all that, ſhall never finally fall away, but ſhall infallibly recover, and be ſaved.
They are to be had accurſed, that preſume to ſay that every man ſhall be ſaved by the Law or Sect which he profeſſeth, ſo that he be diligent to frame his life according to that Law, and the light of nature. For holy Scripture doth ſet out unto us only the name of Jeſus Chriſt whereby men muſt be ſaved.Art. 18. I obſerve the Church hath but one Anathema in all her Articles, and that ſeems to be denounced here againſt all thoſe who do, or ſhall hold that any perſons can be ſaved that are not Chriſtians, as if the Death of Chriſt, or benefits thereof, and the knowledge of him were commenſurate through the world. But God forbid! I am out of doubt that God hath a Government over all mankind, which is Moral in order to Life and Salvation, and that the inſtrument of that Government muſt be the Law of Grace (the Law of Innocency becoming in the ſtate of Lapſed Nature, uncapable of that end) which being at firſt promulgated to Adam after his Fall, and to Noah, muſt belong to all their Poſterity, inſomuch as every one (whoſoever he be) that lives up in ſincerity to this Law, according to that adminiſtration of it he is under, ſhall be ſaved. For my Aſſent then to this Article, I do deſire the word [by] may be eſpecially noted. I could not aſſent to this Article, if it were [in the Law or Sect he profeſſeth,] but being [by,] I hold plainly, that if a Heathen, or any Perſon that never heard the Goſpel, repents of his ſin, and truſts to a good God, and lives up to the Law (or Covenant) of Grace according to the firſt Edition of it, (I ſay, if any ſuch indeed do, Rom. 2.26. Act. 10.35.) and thereby comes to be ſaved, it is by the Chriſtian Religion which he implicitely holds in the ſubſtance with us, and not [by the Law & Sect that he profeſſeth] that he is ſaved. And this Salvation of his is in and through the Name and Mediation of Jeſus Chriſt, no leſs than ours is, who procured that Law for them and all the World, as well as for Abraham and the Jews under the Old, and for us under the New Teſtament.
The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and authority in controverſies of Faith.Art. 20. The Church I think hath [Power to Decree Rites or Ceremonies,] that is, ſome Rites, not any whatſoever, provided ſhe uſes due caution, not placing matter of Worſhip or Neceſſity, much leſs Merit or Juſtification in them, nor ſcandalizing her Members thereby, and not impoſing them, when they need not, as conditions of her Communion: Yet if ſhe does ſo, and the Impoſition be unlawful, if thoſe Rites or Ceremonies be not ſinful in themſelves, we cannot (I apprehend) refuſe our ſubmiſſion for all that, ſo long as the Supream Power confirms the ſame. Again the Church hath authority in controverſies of Faith, not to make any new Articles thereof, for that were Antichriſtian: but upon mature debate to judge what points are de fide (or neceſſary according to the Scripture to be received) and what not: Only this authority when ſhe hath done, is Miniſterial, or Declarative, not Conſtitutive of duty, as Chriſt's the Lawgiver's is, and as Princes, or the Supream Magiſtrates in his Sphear is ſo alſo. The Clergy in their Convocation is to order and ſettle them, having firſt obtained leave under our broad Seal ſo to do, and we approving their ſaid Ordinances, ſays the King in his Declaration before theſe Articles.
Whoſoever through his private judgment, willingly and purpoſely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church, which be not repugnant to the Word of God, and be ordained and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly, (that others may fear to do the like) as he that offendeth againſt the common order of the Church, and hurteth the authority of the Magiſtrate, and woundeth the conſciences of the weak brethren.Art. 34. I aſſent to this Article as parallel with the laſt mentioned, and I gain-ſay not, but the open breakers of the Churches Traditions or Ceremonies may be reproved for the ſake of others: Yet in regard that ſome of theſe Traditions or Ceremonies may be repugnant to the Word of God in the judgment of ſome men, which are not to others, I apprehend both that the reaſons of ſuch ought to be heard, and that we cannot condemn any for acting ſo among others, as to have always a care never to do any thing againſt Conſcience for Company.
The ſecond Book of Homilies, the ſeveral titles whereof we have joyned under this Article, doth contain a godly and wholſome Doctrine, and neceſſary for theſe times, as doth the former book of Homilies, which were ſet forth in the time of Edward the ſixth: and therefore we judge them to be read in Churches by the Miniſters diligently, and diſtinctly, that they may be underſtanded of the people.Art. 35. I receive this Article on an implicite faith, and I deſire that may ſerve, becauſe I have not read over the Homilies, and cannot aſſent any otherwiſe therefore, till I have.
The book of Conſecration of Archbiſhops and Biſhops, and ordering of Prieſts and Deacons, lately ſet forth in the time of Edward the ſixth, and confirmed at the ſame time by authority of Parliament, doth contain all things neceſſary to ſuch Conſecration and Ordering: neither hath it any thing that of it ſelf is ſuperſtitious and ungodly.Art. 36. I underſtand by Superſtition and Ungodlineſs, two perticular Species of that which is ſinful. I dare not ſay that there is nothing at all in the whole Book of Conſecration and Orders here mentioned, that is ſinful: The Article does not ſay ſo, but that there is not any thing in it that of it ſelf is Superſtitious or Ungodly, that is, ſinful upon the account of either of theſe particular ſpecies of ſin. And to this I think I may aſſent, at leaſt after I have added this caution, that theſe Articles were agreed upon in the year 1562. and new publiſhed by King James, and that this book therefore muſt be underſtood of the old book in his time, and not of the book as it is of late altered with the new Preface put to it, wherein there is one thing eſpecially (which I paſs here nameleſs) too too hard for my Approbation.
Having thus given my Explication, with what I premiſed before it, it is fit I make yet ſome little farther apology for this liberty. There is a threefold Interpretation according to Suarez in his excellent Book De Legibus: An Authentick, Uſual, and Doctoral (I think he calls it Doctrinal) interpretation. I have explained two of the terms in the beginning, and the third needs no explanation, and I need not it. Theſe Articles of the Church I ſuppoſe to be ſubſcribed generally with this preſumption that we may uſe a Doctoral Interpretation; but the queſtion indeed may be whether a man can ſtrictly in point of Conſcience give his aſſent, or ſubſcribe to any Article, unleſs he believe it to be true in the Authentick ſenſe, or meaning of the Impoſers, I muſt confeſs I have had ſuch an impreſſion on my mind, that unleſs I believe an Article in that ſenſe, which I take to be the ſenſe of the majority of the Convocation that paſſed the Articles, I could not chooſe but ſcruple the declaring my aſſent to it for fear of a Lye; and yet do I find that an Uſher and Hammond, the Arminians and Calviniſts do ſubſcribe the ſame Articles without making any ſcruple about their diverſity of interpretation. I find alſo that in the Council of Trent the Doctors differ'd in moſt points, yet as ſoon as they were but contrived into ſuch words as might ſalve the contrary opinions, they paſſed them as unanimous in the Council, writing after one againſt another, and citing the Council for them on both ſides. There is this difference therefore ſeems reaſonable to be made between a Law and a Doctrinal Theſis for eſtabliſhing conſent in the matter of Religion; That when the one muſt be taken ſtill in the Authentick, the other is to be conſtrued in a Doctoral interpretation. I have intimated it before, I muſt now give my reaſon, which is alſo ſaid, but not applied. It is becauſe the authority of a Lawgiver is Magiſterial or Imperative, that conſtitutes duty, and his will is uncontroulable: but the Paſtors authority, or Convent of Biſhops and Preſbyters, for agreement in points of Doctrine, is Miniſterial and Declarative only (I may uſe the ſame terms I hope I have before, and nauſeate no body) obliging not, niſi ſententia non errante, or no farther than they be agreeable to Gods Word; and while every one does judge of that, there muſt be a diverſity of interpretation, it being not equal that ſo many Articles ſhould be ſubſcribed by all, but upon that ſuppoſition. I never could be ſatisfied therefore with that coming off which is propoſed by ſome great and ingenious men (ſuch as Chillingworth) as ſufficient for ſubſcribing theſe Articles, that they underſtand nothing elſe by it, but an obligation not to preach or write againſt them. A gloſs both too laxe, becauſe they do not ſubſcribe, I engage never to write or preach againſt the Articles, b… they profeſs their unfeigned aſſent to them, and if this be underſtood of the Authentick ſenſe, they cannot profeſs it: and too ſtreight, becauſe, when they preach upon any ſuch point, they will ſpeak (do what they can) according to their own Opinion, and ſo break their Engagement. It were to be wiſhed therefore, that if ever we have a Convocation that Sits to do any thing, they would paſs ſome ſuch New Canon (moſt fit to be decreed) as may declare that the Articles and Homilies of the Church are not required to be ſubſcribed, but with this freedom of a Doctoral interpretation. Were ſuch a liberty authorized by an Act of Parliament, or Convocation, the conſcience were put out of doubt: In the mean while when others are ſatisfied with the reaſonableneſs of the thing, whether it be authorized or not, I finding my ſelf in doubt about it, am forced to this courſe, which is to ſecure my peace by my aforeſaid Explication, and my foreprized declaration concerning the matter.
I proceed now to the Subſcription, or Declaration required to be ſubſcribed by the Act.
Underſtanding by taking Arms, raiſing War, or joyning in it, and by the King, his Sacred Perſon and Authority, I ſubſcribe the firſt clauſe thereof, That it is n… lawful to take Arms againſt the King upon any pretence whatſoever.
Underſtanding the word abhor, in a cool ſenſe [I diſclaim,] and by the Commiſſionated thoſe who have, and purſue their Commiſſions according to Law, I ſubſcribe the Second Clauſe of it; And that I do abhor that Traiterous Poſition of taking Arms by his Authority (or by Law, that is, upon pretence of it, for the Poſition elſe is impoſſible) againſt his Perſon, or againſt thoſe that are Commiſsionated by him.
The Third Clauſe I take to be an Indefinite Promiſe of uſing Common Prayer, which in the main I am not againſt: And I do therefore ſubſcribe, that if I have a Publick Charge or Cure of Souls, I ſhall in the ordinary conſtant Lords Day Service, ordinarily, by my ſelf, or by my Aſſiſtant, according to the uſage of the Church, Rebus ſic ſtantibus, Conform to the Liturgy of the Church of England as it is now by Law eſtabliſhed.
Whether this be the ſenſe of the Law-giver altogether, it may be a doubt: but in this ſenſe, ſuppoſing it to be ſo, or with theſe limitations thereunto, if it be otherwiſe, I ſet my name.
The Second Step, BEING A leſſer Requeſt, the former not obtained.
IT was the policy of the Contrivers of the Act for Uniformity, that thoſe Miniſters who were engaged in the late times on the Parliament ſide by taking the Covenant, ſhould renounce it, or be debarred the liberty of their Miniſtry for twenty years, accounting I ſuppoſe that if any ſupervived that time, there could be no danger in their re-admiſſion. There was a clauſe therefore in the Subſcription beſides thoſe before going, which concern'd the Covenant, and was the foreſt part of this injunction, abiding in force till the laſt year, and then it expired. It was believed that many of the Nonconformiſts upon the expiration would have flocked in, and ſubſcribed, but I know not of any who took the Covenant, but my ſelf only who took it not, that have made any tryal upon that occaſion. Nevertheleſs to proceed in what I have begun, having Wrote this Paper, and preſented it to the Biſhop the laſt year (1682) when that clauſe ceaſed, I think good this year (1683) to Print it, upon the account enſuing.
I do apprehend there is a kind of univerſal guilt upon the Conformiſt (ſome few alwaies excepted) in receiving our late Impoſitions hand over head, as they did, which they ſhould rather have all refuſed as one man, and required explanation. How many were there prepared (the good God vouchſafe us all a ſight of our ſins, and forgive them) to declare their aſſent and conſent to all and every thing in a book before they ſaw it, at leaſt read it with any examination as they ſhould have done? How many more were there yet more forward to ſubſcribe a Declaration, wherein there were ſo many hard things to be ſwallowed, before any had wrote about them, or themſelves able to digeſt ſcarce any one branch of it? It was their intereſt to comply, but how they could declare and ſubſcribe ſo ſoon (or perhaps can yet) in Truth, Judgment and Righteouſneſs, the Lord knows.
On the other ſide, I am no leſs ſenſible of a great deal of weakneſs and prejudice among our brethren, in judging things ſinful that are not, and conſequently Superſtition in placing fear and danger in ſuch things. There is beſides, no little conceitedneſs of ſome mens being more holy than the Conformist, and conſequently Pride, Uncharitableneſs, Judging of others; and if any Perſons ſhall ſeparate from the publick on ſinful grounds, it is really Schiſm, and in real Schiſm how many evils are there included?
In this caſe of Sin and Scandal, which we ſee on both ſides, I would fain know what way there is for any of us to eſcape, but by following the rule I have laid down.
On the point of Sin. If I aſſent to the Articles, and ſubſcribe the Declaration without an Explication, then do I aſſent to what I think true, and what I think not true in thoſe Articles, and I ſubſcribe that which I take to be the good ſenſe, and that which is alſo the bad ſenſe of the Declaration, which ſeems unlawful to be done, as what neither becomes a good Chriſtian, or true Engliſh-man: But if I aſſent and ſubſcribe with an Explication, then do I aſſent only to what I judg true in thoſe Articles, and I ſubſcribe only the good ſenſe of the Declaration, which ſeems not only what is lawful, but fit to be done, both as a Chriſtian, and good Subject, who is to be Loyal to the Government of the Nation.
On the point of Scandal. If I ſhall aſſent and ſubſcribe as others, without any Caution, Limitation, or Explication, then ſhall I (quantum ad me) harden the Conformiſt (who hath Conformed blindly) in his ſin and impenitence, and draw the Nonconformiſt (who judgeth it unlawful) to do that which is againſt his Conſcience by my Example. If I do nothing, or not endeavour what I can, I nurſe up my Brethren in thoſe Evils before-mentioned, and give occaſion to the Conformiſt to ſay, Theſe men can do thus and thus, more than they do; and ſeeing they are ſuch peeviſh, obſtinate perſons, we do well to ſubmit to all that is Enjoyned our ſelves, and perſecute them, and ſo do I become a ſtumbling-block to the one, and to the other: But if I aſſent and ſubſcribe with Explication, (that is, do as much, and only what I can) then do I deliver my own Soul, neither partaking with my Brethren in theſe Evils out of which I ſtrive to bring them by my Example, nor give occaſion to the Conformiſt of any hardning, who ſeeing in me a regard to Authority, together with a care of my Conſcience in my Explications, he may come to be judged in his own Thoughts; and being ready perhaps then to hearken to any ingenuous Admonition, ſo long as it is tendred in ſuch a way as is not affected, or done with preference of my Underſtanding or Piety above his, but with Humility, and ſenſe of my own failings, at leaſt in many other things wherein he ſo much excels me, he may be brought (the good Spirit of God graciouſly aſſiſting) to that Repentance which is meet towards God, and that Reconciliation towards us, which we ſeek with him.
And now if my Dioceſan, or Metropolitan (which I would chuſe rather) or any other Biſhop (they refuſing) will vouchſafe me only this condeſcenſion in ſubſcribing the Declaration, to ſpeak to their Regiſter, that in ſetting my name to his Book, I may have leave to do it in theſe words, According to a Paper delivered in by me to the Biſhop I ſubſcribe, I ſee no reaſon but I may put my name to his Book, as well as to this Paper; and any other may do ſo too, giving in the ſame, or ſo much of it (for all our Nonconformists have not their Exceptions alike) as himſelf needs.
I would urge the Argument of Naamans Servants. If the Nonconformiſts required ſome great thing of the Biſhops, for us to come in and unite with them (eſpecially under our common danger) would not they do it? and will they refuſe us ſo ſmall a matter? If none of them for all that will be got to grant us this, then muſt I commit the Cauſe of the Nonconformiſts to Almighty God, to be Judg therein between them and us in this matter.