Defense of Non-Conformity, Title page – Preface

Defense of Non-Conformity · Title page – Preface

A Rational Defence OF Non-conformity: WHEREIN THE Practice of NON CONFORMISTS IS Vindicated from Promoting Popery, and Ruining the CHURCH, imputed to them by Dr. Stillingfleet in his Unreasonableness of Separation. ALSO His Arguments from the Principles and Way of the Reformers, and first Dissenters are Answered. And the Case of the present Separation, truly stated; and the blame of it laid where it ought to be. And the way to Union among Protestants is pointed at.

By GILBERT RULE, Minister of the Gospel.

Ezek. XLIII. 10, 11.

Thou Son of Man, shew the House to the House of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their Iniquities, and let them measure the pattern, &c.

And if they be ashamed of all that they have done, shew them the form of the House, and the fashion thereof, &c.

LONDON, Printed for Iohn Salusbury, at the Rising-Sun, near the Royal-Exchange in Cornhil. M DC LXXXIX.

THE PREFACE.

THE fierce Contentions of this Age about the Mint, and Annise, and Cummin of Religion, (I mean Religious Ceremonies that men have devised and imposed) hath, in a great measure hindered people from minding, with that application that becometh the weightier things of the Law; to wit, the love of God, and of our Neighbour, and due regard to the promoting of true holiness, and the Salvation of mens Souls, the heavy Sufferings of many in England, and in Scotland, for not complying with such things, as their imposing Task-masters did not so much as pretend to give Scripture warrant for, are too notorious to be denied, and too smarting to be forgotten: How many thousands have been put on this sad Dilemma? either to wound their Consciences, or to be destroyed by taking away their Estates, Liberties, Livelihood, and life it self. But now the Lord (in his infinite wisdom, and tender mercy to an undeserving generation) having by some late Revolutions, first broken the Yoak of the Oppressors, and made them, for some time taste a little of the Cup that they had made their brethren drink deeply of; and then gratiously, and wonderfully, delivered both contending parties from that utter ruine that was manifestly impending; and made us like them that Dream'd, and done exceeding abundantly for us, above what we could think, out done our faith, as was foretold, Luk. 18. 8. He hath by this surprising providence, laid an Obligation on all Protestants (and they who are such in earnest, will mind it) to turn to the Lord from every evil way, that hath been in their heart or hand; and particularly to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace; to endeavour to speak, and do the same things; and where that cannot be attained, (through want of light, and other sinful disorders of the Soul, not easily, nor soon removed, without that pouring out of the Spirit from on high, promised, Isa. 33. 15. and else where; which we should daily, and earnestly pray and wait for.) To bear with one another in Love. They who know no other way to Unity, but Uniformity, will for ever miss of their design, unless either all men were perfect in knowledge, and wholly freed from irregular passions, or Conscience were wholly laid to sleep, and its use banished out of the World.

Toward this blessed end, peace among Protestants, sober reasoning between Dissenting Parties, may have some usefulness; even Eristick Writings, may prove Irenick, if managed, and read, with that Spirit that becometh the gospel; that is, with due love to truth and peace; and if I did not judge this book to be of that tendency, I should never consent that it should see the light. The Apostle giveth us two excellent directions for attaining this end, Phil. 3. 16. (beside the duty of forbearing one another, till the Lord clear mistakes to them who are out of the way, which he doth more than insinuate, ver. 15.) but alas, even about these ways to peace we contend, as will appear in this Treatise: Yet in my opinion, the Apostle doth there clearly hold forth, that there is a rule to which all are obliged to conform their actions, and principles, and particularly, Church Administrations: Let us walk by the same rule: In all reason, this rule must be Divine, in that it is here generally injoyned to be minded, and that by all Christians. Is it imaginable that the Apostle intendeth to oblige all the Churches to take a rule of mans making for directing them how they shall please God? Besides, Church, or humane Canons never were, or are like to be the same in all Churches; nor indeed can they of the things that are left to the Church to order at her discretion, that which is fit in one place, may be most unfit in another. Wherefore if the Apostle had aimed at these, he would have spoken of Rules, not a rule. We have then cause to think, that the way to Church peace is to take the Word of God for the rule by which all the affairs of his House should be ordered: If we would enjoyn nothing, peculiar to Religion, to be observed, but what is warranted there: And would not be too busie in making Canons, for determining these things that are Extrinsick to Religion, its Rites common to it with other solemn actions, further than necessity requireth, and in these determinations, keep within the bounds of the general directions of the Word of God: If we would do all things in the Church decently and in order; and then make nothing such by our Will and Authority; but enjoyn the Observation of these things, that Scripture hath declared to be such, or nature, and civil custom hath made such: If we would content our selves with that decency and order that was in the Apostolick Church: Our Controversie would soon be at an end. It is true, even where Scripture is taken for the rule, there might be some different apprehensions about the meaning of this rule, what it enjoyneth; but they who sincerely seek the mind of God in his words, and depend on him for the light of his Spirit, readily will either find what they seek, or will soberly and peaceably differ from their brethren. But when this rule is laid aside, and mans wisdom must injoyn what is fit in God's Worship, (even though they be Learned, Wise, and Holy men, and in authority in the Church, yet not infallibly guided; and much more when any of these Qualities are wanting) there can hardly he an end of controversie, it will be hard to set bounds to their multiplicity (of which the Popish Church is a fatal Witness) and hard to bring them to an end by composing them, unless blind obedience be asserted; at least as to some things: And how many things these shall be, who knoweth?

The other Direction that the Apostle giveth in that place, is, let us mind the same things: Vnity in design is very conducive to Vnity in Heart and Practice: When all have one end before them, they will the more readily fall into the same way leading to that end; as when many are travelling to the same City, they will readily go in the same road; or if one take a gainer way, as he thinketh, then another, yet they will not fall out about that. Let us then all make the one thing needful, our business; let us mind serious and practical Religion; and in Subordination to that, let us mind the Conversion, and Edification of the Souls of the people under our charge: Let us set our selves against Immorality, Ignorance, (which, alas, doth abound every where) Atheistical and careless neglect of Religion: Let us labour to awaken the people to mind how they shall be saved, and put them in mind of the hazard of resting on out side Worship, whither it be with, or without the Ceremonies that we controvert about: If we all have a true Idea of that Religion, that we should labour to instill into the minds of people, and have that impression if the weight, and indispensable necessity of it, that the Apostle expresseth, 2 Cor. 5. 11. knowing therefore the terrour of the Lord, we perswade men: If we were one in this, it would much contribute to oneness in things that are more remote from the essence and life of Religion. But while we mind our own things which must needs be very different) while one sort is for their Grandeur, and Riches, and Dominion, and Ease; and another is for his Ease and Applause among one sort of men: While we are for keeping up a party, for victory over them that we contend with, and for maintaining our credit, so as we are ashamed to change, least we fall under the imputation of being once in a mistake: I say, while these different ends and motives are suffered to influence us, we must be far from agreement about any thing that hath been the Subject of our Debates, while Lusts war in our Members, Wars, and Fightings will be the product of them, Ja. 4. 1. As this purging of our selves, from bad things might conduce to the Churches peace, so might a joynt endeavour on both sides to purge the Church from bad Men; an Ignorant, Scandalous, Heady, and Vnsober Ministry is a great let to peace: God will not be at peace with the Church, while such are countenanced, and good men cannot with any satisfaction behold such Scandals to Religion, and such effectual Instruments of the ruine of Souls, continued in the Church: Such Ministers are Make-bates in the Church: While some effectual course is not taken to remove them, the Church is like to have little peace, either with God, or in her self. Let all then (if they would see Religion flourish, and the Church setled in peace) contribute their endeavours to get the unsavoury Salt (that hath long made us unpleasing to God) cast out; and to oppose the entrance of them into the Holy Function of the Ministery, who are not in some tollerable measure such as the Apostle requireth, and are not in a probable capacity, by their life, and doctrine, and diligence, to do good to Souls; and let none countenance or plead for unfit persons, either to be admitted into, or kept in the Church: Pity to mens Persons, or Families, being horrid cruelty, when the ruine of Souls is the necessary consequent of such Acts: When love to the Salvation of men beareth sway with us above zeal for a Party, we will easily be prevailed with in this. If this piece of Reformation be endeavoured, all Ranks must put hand to it, the people by discovering such, where they are, and not calling, nor countenancing them, when they want a guide to their Souls: And Magistrates, by endeavouring the regulating of such Laws as do in any wise open the door to such men to enter, or protect them when they already are in places: And Ministers in their station, by rejecting such Candidates of the Ministry, as are not duly qualified, and censuring the immoralities of such as have made a shift to get into that Office, notwithstanding of their notorious unworthiness.

In order to obtaining the Peace of the Church (which we all prize and desire) Reformation is also necessary; peace and purity will not long be separated the one from the other; personal reformation must not be wanting, if it will give hope of Peace, even from Enemies, Prov. 16. 7. much more is it the way to be blessed with peace from our Friends; without it there is no peace with God, nor Man, but such as is a Curse to them who have it, 2 King. 9. 22. Isa. 32. 17, 18. Church Reformation must also truly be endeavoured by us, if we would have Church-peace; it is no token for good, when sinful Evils (Images of Jealousie, that provoke the Lord to jealousie) are in the Church, and yet all agree in these ways; none lament them, none reprove them, none take care to keep their Garments clean of the Corruptions of the Time; like those whom the Lord doth so highly commend, Rev. 3. 3. If we expect peace, we must be humbled before the Lord, for our personal and publick Deviations, and be ready to confess them before the World; we must take Shame, if we expect that he should favour, and honour us. See Ezek. 4…, 10, 11. While we are fixed in evil ways, and will not be convinced; or so proud that we are ashamed to acknowledge that we have been out of the way: God nor Man can make no peace with us. Neither is this all, but we must turn from our evil ways, of whatever sort they be particularly, while Church Grievances are continued; while no effectual course is taken, and that unanimously, and with serious application, to remove Scandals, to satisfie the Consciences, and quiet the Minds of such as are grived; how can Attempts for Peace have any success? I suppose it will not be denyed by sober and intelligent Men, that there are faults in the Church (tho' some do strangely Hyperbolize in declaiming of her perfection; but they that are in that strain, of whatever party they be, do little understand the Scripture Patern, and the Church-way that themselves own, and do not compare the one with the other) Non-residences, Pluralities, want of Parochial Discipline, abuse of Excommunication, making that which passeth for Church Discipline and censures; to be more destructive to mens purses, than to their vices; and other such things, are too grosly evil to be defended, and too well known to be denyed, or dissembled. It were one good step toward peace, if there might be a prospect of getting such Enormities done away; and the affairs of the House of God managed in a way more like that of the Gospel. It might also make for our Peace, if all of us, of both parties, should put on a Spirit of meekness, and rather lament what we cannot approve, than reproach one another for such things. An unsober, and fierce Spirit hath too much appeared on both Hands; our Zeal for and against the things controverted, is no way proportioned to the things themselves. Many have not a different degree of Zeal against the grossest parts of Popery, from what they use against some of the Rags of that Whors attire; tho' all be unjustly charged with this, yet it is too evident to be the temper and way of some: Its true immorality in Ministers, and visible Enmity against the practice and power of Religion, may justly stir the indignation of a serious Christian, but to be so affected toward all that differ from us, in the lesser matters of Religion, is a Zeal not kindled from Heaven: On the other Hand, the odious comparison that is made between Popery and Presbytery, preferring the former as more Eligible, which is frequent in the Mouths, not of the Rable only, but of Men of Name and Authority in the Church, doth not savour of that meekness guided by a sound judgment, which becometh the Gospel: Let them who are Godly and Sober on both sides, love and esteem one another in the Lord; and we may hope for more peace in the Church, than yet we have seen. This ill temper now hinted at, should be shunned by all, and reproved where it appeareth, by them who would promote the peace of the Gospel.

If by all the means mentioned, or other good ways, peace cannot be obtained, we must not step out of Gods way to obtain it; Truth must be bought at any rate, but Peace may be too dear to be bought by a Christian: It may be impossible, it may not lie in us to live peaceably with some men; yea, or with a Church, Rom. 12. 8. Holiness is simply necessary not Peace, Heb. 12. 14. Wherefore it is to be expected, that we should yield in the matters of God (however little they maybe comparatively) as one may and ought to do, for peace sake, in his own matters; Men cannot command; their Light & Consciences, are unplyable things to worldly, or carnal Arguments; yea, to those that seem to have somewhat in them more divine, seeing the least Evils is not to be done, or assented to for attaining the greatest good: Over-powering light to change our minds, or forbearing one another, till that light arise; are the true methods to compose Debates in the Church. Assent and Subscrption to what is required, while an inward dislike of it remaineth, is away to Peace in a Church; that the Lord doth not approve, and that will not have Stability, nor a good Issue.

I have no further account to give of this book, but that it was written a few years ago, which must excuse some passages that may seem not to suit our present case: It was a doing when King James came to the Crown; the case of Protestants soon after made it appear unseasonable to contend about our private Sentiments wherein we differ, when we all were like to be undone by a Deluge of Popery. But now after the state of the Nation hath been unhinged, and is in a hopeful way to be setled, it may seem allowable, if not necessary, that each Party should put in their claim, and give the best reasons they can for their prete…sions; and that with all moderation and peaceableness: And having so done, what they should leave it to them who ought to judge, what is fittest to be chosen. This I have endeavoured ut potui, non ut debui, wishing that some other person, by whom it might have been done to more advantage, had taken this Task: Some may readily dislike the way of managing this debate, following the Antagonist foreign: but this I could not well shun. The Reverend Doctor's method not being very exact, and many things that might stumble an ordinary Reader, being brought in by him, where it could little be expected. This way I thought most useful for them who want instruction; and others, as they do not need any help that I can afford them, so they can suffer no prejudice by this manner of reasoning. I submit all that I have said, to the censure of the judicious, candid, and unbyass'd Reader, and to the Authority of the Church of Christ▪ in any of her Lawful Assemblies. If any shall judge that I have yielded too much; or, that I have condescended too little for the sake of unity, I am willing to be corrected, by any who shall bring plain Scripture, or solid reason, for what they alledge.

p. 1A Rational Defence OF Non-conformity, &c.

THey who find themselves under an Obligation from the Authority of a Holy and Jealous God, to regard the Purity of his Worship, and keep their Consciences from being defiled with the Corruptions that Men have brought into that Worship, are at this day under most Severe Persecution, and that from their Fellow-Protestants, (which is no small aggravation of their Trouble) when the common Enemy is ready to destroy us, and the Religion that we do jointly profess: But our Brethren are not satisfied with our other Sufferings, but we are lashed with the…r Tongues and Pens, and exposed as the most contemptible and most unreasonable of Men; and that not only by the Common sort of Ministers and People, that are of the opposite Party, (whose Zeal against us carrieth them commonly to profess, that Papists are better than Presbyterians, and that Religion rather to be chosen than this. A great Token of Respect to the Protestant Religion! as if all the Principles of it, in which we agree with them, were of less value than the Cermonies, owned as Indifferent things, wherein we differ from them,) but even by the Reverend and Learned duplicate page p. 1duplicate page p. 2Dr. Stillingfleet, a Man formerly Eminent for his Moderation; yet in this Bock, now under examination, treateth his Antagonists with that Contempt and Severity that was not expected from a man of his worth. That poor suffering party, though they have no Shelter against their other Afflictions, but to make that GOD their Refuge, for Obedience to whom they suffer; yet may be allowed, I hope, a modest Apology for their way and practice, by which that Reproach that is cast on them may be rowled away, and their Innocency vindicated. In order to this, I have made bold to attempt the Answering of this Book (looking for his help whose Cause we plead.)

But before I meddle with the Book it self, it is needful to survey his long PREFACE, consisting of 94 pages, wherein his main business is to fasten on the Non…conformists a most heavy Charge, as if they were Promoters of the Interest of Popery.

Sect. 2. If any Dissenters of that Time did use the Excellent B. Jewel (whose Memory is still precious among all Protestants) vngratefully and spightfully for preaching his Opinion, in Defence of the Church-Order of England, they deserve Blame; it had been their part to vindicate their Principles by a sober and rational Defence against the Bishop's Arguments, but not to shew Disrespect to a person who had so well deserved for his Learned Labours against Popery. But I do not well understand how this unworthy Carriage should consist with the Character that the Dr. doth afterwards give of these Dissenters, as to their moderation and compliance with the Church's way, when he hath a mind to expose the present Non-conformists as far degenerate from their Ancestors in the same Profession. But of this more in its due place.

Sect. 3. He complaineth (p. 2.) of his own hard Usage on the like Occasion. His Sermon entituled, The Mischief of Separation, was indeed solidly refuted by several Non-conformists, and in that sence his Sermon was hardly used; but I never heard before, that hard Arguments were counted hard Vsage from an Adversary; and if Bishop Jewel had no harder Usage for his Sermon, there was no need of this Complaint, unless it were to make his own hard Fate the more conspicuous, by so venerable a Parallel. This Reverend Author should consider, That tho' we owe and give all due deference to the Memory of Bishop Jewel, and to the Worth of Dr. Stillingfleet, for their Labours in Defence of Protestantism; yet it is neither Ingratitude nor Incivility in us to defend the purity of Gospel-Worship p. 3Worship against their Assaults: We honour them, but retain our Liberty of dissenting from them, and of owning our Dissent, when they mistake, and are out of the way. We call no man Rabbi, having one Master, CHRIST, whose written Word we make the Rule of our Faith and Worship. But one great part of the Doctor's hard Vsage lieth in this, That it hath been maliciously suggested by some, and too easily believed by others, that he was put on that Work with a design to inflame our Differences, and to raise Persecution. I confess Malice to suggest Evil, and over-easiness to believe it, is a thing too common among Dissenting Parties; the Lord heal these Distempers on both hands; but the particular Ground of this Charge on his Antagonists, should have been mentioned. If any have suspected that he was put on the Work; if the work be good, that doth extenuate the fault of such Suspicion. I know no Evil in following either the Advice or Command of others to do our Duty: So that hither to there is no Ground for the heavy Charge of Malice and malign Credulousness. If any have judged his Design, that is not fair dealing, such Secrets are to be left to the Judgment of him who knoweth the Hearts. But tho' I have a great deal of Charity in reference to the Intentio Operantis; yet it is not so easie to pass a favourable Judgment on the Intentio Operis; but he endeavoureth afterward his Vindication in this, where I shall attend him.

Sect. 4. His professed Design in preaching that Sermon, was only his just apprehension, That the Destruction of the Church of England, under a pretence of Zeal against Popery, was one of the likeliest Means to bring it [Popery] in. Here he supposeth, (if I understand what he saith) that the Protestant Dissenters aim at the destruction of the Church of England; or at least, that Non-conformity tendeth to destroy it, than which no imagination can be more groundless; nor can I conceive what should give cause to such a thought, unless it be an extravagant Idea, that some men frame to themselves of the Church of England, as if her Essence consisted in the Ceremonies, and the removing of these were the destruction of the Church: We, who Dissent from that which they call the Church of England, are far from such low and dishonourable thoughts of Her; we look on her as a Reformed part of the Church of God, professing the Protestant Religion, in opposition to the Errours of Popery, but mixing this True Religion with some humane Ceremonies; and therefore we think, that opposing of these Ceremonies is so far from tending to the Destruction of the Church, that it conduceth much p. 4to reforming of Her: But suppose the Ceremonies were good and lawful things, it is still a strange Notion, and inconsistent with the Sentiments concerning them, that our Brethren do profess, that they are indifferent things, and of no necessity: If they be so what hazard is there of the destruction of the Church, from their being laid aside? If the Non-conformists had their wish, it would inferr no other Alteration in the Church, but the removal of such Accidents, which the A betters of them do, say, That possunt adesse vel abesse sine subjecti interitu; such Incoherences would not have been expected from so Learned a Pen.

Sect. 5. It is also unfairly (to say no worse) hinted, That Non-conformists Zeal against Popery is but pretended, and that the real Design is to destroy the Church of England; we can clear our selves of both before a higher Bar, and therefore lay little weight on such Suggestions; neither do we meerly dislike the Ceremonies, because they are Popish; he knoweth that we have other Arguments against them; I hope Non-conformists shew their Zeal against Popery in other things: Nor do we desire the Destruction of the Church, that these Ceremonies may fall to the Ground, but the removing of the Ceremonies that the Church may be more acceptable to him, who can make her stand in despight of the Gates of Hell. If he charge us with the Church's Ruin, because our Divisions about the Ceremonies may tend to it: For answer; Let it be considered, who giveth culpably the Rise to these Divisions, Whether they who forbear the Ceremonies, because Sinful; or, they who do violently impose them, tho' Indifferent, in their Apprehension: But this will afterwards fall to be further discoursed. I deny not, that Papists design the Ruin of the Church of England, but not as Ceremonious, but as Protestant; they do not design to destroy Her by removing what the Non-conformists scruple, but by taking away what they agree with Her in: And therefore there is no Cause to think, that the removing of the Ceremonies (which Non-conformists desire) though under a pretence of Zeal against Popery, or under whatever other pretence, should be one of the likeliest means to bring it in; which our Author feareth.

Sect. 6. The Learned Dr. hath caught this Notion, That Non-conformists, by their Zeal against Popery, are like to be Instruments of bringing it in; and he seemeth to be very fond of this fine Conceit; runneth away with it at a great rate; is confirmed in it from the proceedings of Papists, (p. 2.) starteth a Paradox, (p. 3.) p. 5As it seemeth to unthinking People, (like the Non-conformists) that when Papists … appear no longer in that Work, others out of meer Zeal against Popery, should carry it on for them; and these unthinking people are carried away with meer no se and pretences, and hope those will secure them most against the Fears of Popery, who talk with most passion, and with least understanding against is; and more to this purpose. One may think it little Glory for the highly Learned Dr. Stillingfleet to labour in refuting such a contemptible Adversary, as he here representeth: But their Wisdom, and Learning, and Reasons for what they hold, will (I hope) find more Equitable, and less Supercilious Judges in the world; neither will Hectoring stop their Mouths, though they are ready to be silent to plain Scripture or solid Reason. He judgeth (p. 3, 4.) That East and West may meet, and the most furious Antagonists (of Popery) may become of the easiest Converts: Deus avertat omen. If we may form any Conjecture of what may be, from the Observation of what hath been, easie Conversion to Popery is liker to be found among his own party, who are tame and gentle towards Popery, and no way furious. And if any be furious against it, let them bear their blame. We applaud and practise Rational Zeal against it, but not Fury, for The Wrath of Man worketh not the Righteousness of God. He cannot get out of this fear concerning many Thousand zealous Protestants: I deny not, but there is cause of Fear; for many have got sound Principles in their Heads, without saving Grace in their Hearts; and the Knowledge and Fortitude of most is very weak, and the best have Cause to fear themselves, and look to him who is able to make them stand; but I hope all the Ground of Fear is not on our side.

Sect. 7. But now the Learned Author cometh closer to his Design, viz. To lay down Grounds of his Opinion, that he is so confirmed in, That the principles and practice of Non-conformists do tend to re-introduce Popery among us; one is, That they mistake what Popery is, being as much afraid of an innocent Ceremony, and of the Cross, as of real Idolatry: and of Kneeling, as of Adoring the Host.

Ans. 1. The Dr. might have known, that the learned Labours of some Non-conformists against Popery, do sufficiently testifie, that they are not ignorant what it is. 2. We generally know, that the Ceremonies are not Popery, but lo…k on them as a part of Popery, but are far from equalling them with some other parts of Popery, that are far …re grosly evil. 3. We never counted even p. 6the nocent Ceremonies used in England (for innocent Ceremonies, we know none but those of God's Institution) so bad as real Idolatry; nor Crossing and Kneeling, so bad as worshipping Images, tho' we count both sinful, and dare practise neither: Therefore if we should come to see our Mistake in the one Case (which we expect not) yet there is no Ground for the Consequence of this alledged by him, viz. That we should suspect our selves deceived in the other also, unless he would say that every Discovery of a Mistake that Men make about the smallest matters in Religion, will shake the very Foundation of their Faith; which I hope he will be very far from asserting, left they that have read his Irenicum in former years, and now read his Sermon, and this Defence of it, should inferr that which Good Men will be far from imputing to a person of his worth, especially when he doth not deny, but rather own a Change in some things now debated, p. 72. of the Preface.

Sect. 8. It looketh like another Ground, that Non-conformists serve the Designs of Papists, that When they find the undoubted Practices of the Ancient Church condemned as Popish and Antichristian, by their Teachers, they must conclude Popery to be of much greater Antiquity than really it is, and when they can trace it so very near the Apostles Times, they will soon believe it setled by the Apostles themselves.

Ans. 1. Here is still a confounding of something that is Popish with Popery, a part taken for the whole, an Accident, without which Popery can well consist, and which doth subsist without Popery, with the body and substance of Popery. He looketh on his Antagonists (according to his wonted Esteem of them) as very mean Logicians, when he will have them conclude the Antiquity of Popery in those things that he and we do jointly dislike it in, from the Antiquity of some Rites that were used under that Apostasie, and which we have continued among us under the Reformatiom. 2. It were still as bad a Consequence from our traceing some things near to the Apostles times, to inferr that they were setled by the Apostles: For we can make it appear, that not only soon after the Apostles times, but in their times, some things were in the Church that they did not setle; as the Love-Feasts, which they reproved and abolished after that abuse of them was observed. 3. To call those things that Non-conformists Scruple, (Viz.) The Ceremonies, the undoubted practices of the Ancient Church which may be traced near to the Apostles times, is gratis dictum, a bold begging of the question: the proof of it we expect.

p. 7Sect. 9. It will, saith he, (P. 5.) be very hard to perswade considering men, that the Christian Church should degenerate so soon, so Vnanimously and so Vniversally, as it must do, if Episcopacy and the use of Significant Ceremonies were any parts of the Apostasie. Here is still the great Antiquity of these things taken for granted but not proved. But further, his Considering men, if they read and consider the Scripture, will easily be perswaded that a Church may very early and quickly degenerate, and that Vnanimously and Vniversally; especially in some things that are of lesser concern in Religion. How suddenly did the Church of Israel degenerate, and Aaron with them, when Moses was but 40 days absent in the Mount, & that in matters of higher moment than what we contend about; even worshiping a Calf for God? see Ex. 32. 1. and particularly Vers. 8. And the Lord foretold to Moses their after Apostasies, Deut. 31. 16. And Moses took notice of their Apostasies while he was yet with them, and how soon they would break out after his departure, 27. 29. How Quickly, Vnanimously, and Vniversally did the ten Tribes apostatize after Solomon's decease? And is not the whole History of the Church of Judah under her Kings, a witness of this? When ever a bad King arose, presently the pure Worship of God was turned to Idolatry. In the days of Joash, as soon as Jehojada was gone, how quickly did a Faction, with a Complement to the King, turn the whole Nation to Idolatry? 2 Chron. 24. 17, 18. These Apostasies were in higher points than we now speak of; and yet, How quickly did the Church thus degenerate? And that this should not be thought strange, even in the Gospel-Church we may see, if we consider what Christ telleth us, of the Tares sown while men sleep, and growing up insensibly, and without Observation: Also the degeneracy that the Church fell into, even while the Apostles were alive, and faithfully watching over her; and that, both in Doctrine and Practice, is evident in the Errours in Corinth and Galatia; in the Abuses in publick Administrations at Corinth, insomuch as the Apostle behoved, even in his own time, to make a Reformation, by bringing back to Apostolick Example, and the Law of Nature, for reforming some Indecencies among them; and to Divine Institution, for reforming their Enormities, 1 Cor. 11. 1. 20. 23. If these evils crept in under the Inspection of the Apostles, What wonder is it if Men afterwards began in some things to deviate in Church-practice?

p. 8Sect. 10. Yea, the Apostle, 2 Thess. 2. foretelling the Antichristian Apostacy, v. 3. telleth us, That that Mystery of iniquity did then work, v. 7. This Allegation the learned Dr. putteth off with a Scoff, p. 17. but we must not therefore part with it. It is evident, that there was then a tendency among some of the Members of the Christian Church to several of these Evils, which being grown up to Maturity of Wickedness, Antichristianism was afterwards made up; not to speak of the gross Heresies that then were, and others that were foretold, Act. 20. 29, 30. The Ambition of Diotrephes was a fermenting toward Lordly Prelacy, 3 Joh. ver. 9. So was the Idolizing of some Ministers among the Corinthians, 1 Cor. 3. 4. So the turning aside to the Jewish Ceremonies, a carnal, gawdy sort of Religion, not contented with the simplicity of Gospel-Worship, for which the Galatians are reproved, Gal. 4. 9. The worshipping of Angels, voluntary Humility, subjection to Ordinances, touch not, taste not, handle not, Will-Worship, Col. 2. 18. Forbidding of Meats and Marriage, 1 Tim. 4. 3. and in a word, the turning the Spiritual Religion of GOD into a Carnal outward Shew. All these, I say, was a working toward the vile Superstitions that afterward grew up under the Antichristian Apostasy, of which our Ceremonies are some Remains. Now, if there was such a secret working of such Evils in that time, is it any wonder that some unallowable practices should be in the Church, soon after the Apostles, and be little taken notice of?

Sect. 11. And this is yet less to be wondred at, if we consider the defects and uncertainty of the History of the Church in Times next after the Apostles, as it was in the first Times of the Church, before the Law, which the Jews call foreign, Dies inanitatis, because of the want of the Light of History. It was little better with the Christian Church at first. We have very little distinct account of her Order; and what we have, is but in some things, not so full as to enable us to pass a Judgment with Confidence of all their Practices in Church-Administrations: It is no good Argument, there is no mention of Dissent from, or Non-conformity to the Church-practices of the First Times; …rgo there was none; especially considering that the Writers of those Times (who were glorious Lights, yet Men, and subject to mistakes and passions) would not readily give account of what might make against their own practices. And it can be made appear, that the best of the Church Guides, after the Apostles, were in mistakes greater than what we p. 9now scruple at: But the early Degeneracy of the Christian Church (which our Author thinks it so absurd to imagine) is witnessed by the most ancient History, and nearest to these Times. Eusebius, lib. 3. c. 29. relating out of Egesippus the Martyrdom of Simon Son of Cleopas, second Bishop of Jerusalem, who had seen the Lord, and was his Cousin-Germain, he addeth, that After that the Sacred Company of the Apostles were worn out, the Church having before been a pure Vi…gin, the Conspiracy of detestable Errors, through Deceit of such as delivered strange Doctrine, took rooting, &c. If Heresie so soon got head, what Absurdity is it to think that lesser Evils might early prevail? This may be also proved in reference to the Rites used in the Church, how early there was a degeneracy in these, out of Irenaeus, who lived in the second Century, Epist. ad Victor. Episc. Rom. Quae varietas observantiae (pascatis, & jejuniorum) non … primum ne que nostris temporibus caepit, sed multo aute nos (ut opinor) qui non simpliciter quod ab initio traditum est tenentes, in alium morem vel per negligentiam, vel per imperitiam postmodum decidere. Where it is evident, that Irenaeus imputeth such negligence and unskilfulness even to the First Age, and nearest to the Apostles, if not in the days of some of them, as made them fall from Christs Institution in some things. The consideration of all which maketh me wonder at the Confidence of the learned Author, who saith, that So sudden and insensible a Change of the Church is so incredible, that they that think it could be, may on the same Grounds believe that other parts of Popery did as soon prevail. That this Change did soon prevail, we believe not, but that it might, we see no Absurdity in it; and for other parts of Popery, we can tell when most of them begun, and therefore are not obliged from the Antiquity of one part of it, to acknowledge the same of another; neither is there any Inconveniency in asserting, that these Mistakes crept in insensibly. Seeing the Apostle speaketh of them as a Mystery that was long working, before it came above-board. What he saith of humane Policies keeping long to their first Institution, maketh little to his purpose, both because the contrary is most frequently observed; they often degenerate, and that unobserved by the Vulgar, through the Cunning of Statesmen; and because corrupt Nature is not so apt to deviate from Humane Constitutions, as from those that are Divine. Few Politick Frames have been so often, and quickly, and easily changed, as the Religious Worship of the Jews was, in the time of the Judges and Kings. I hope by this time it will appear, that the Principles p. 10of the Church's Enemies (so he falsly calleth the Non-conformists, who are no Enemies to the Church, but to her humane Ceremonies) bringeth no such mighty prejudice on the Cause of the Reformation, as he with confidence inferreth from what he had discoursed; for we neither own such Antiquity in the Ceremonies; nor, if we did, would that inferr the Antiquity of Popery in its grosser parts.

Sect. 12. He again chargeth his Adversaries, that They must forgo the Testimony of Antiquity, and that by so doing they run into insuperable Difficulties in dealing with the Papists, which his Principles do lead through; for they can justly charge Popery as Innovation. And to that purpose citeth Bishop Sanderson (p. 6.) In answer to him and the Bishop too, We say, 1. That we do not forgo the Testimony of Antiquity; though we do not Idolize it, as some do; we will not be conclud…d by it against Scripture, and not often without Scripture, but take its help to search into the Mind of God revealed in His Word: Its greatest Admirers must needs forgo it sometimes, both Papists and Prelatists; and the ancient Authors themselves do not seldom disown all Authority in them or any men to determine in the Controversies of Religion: But I shall not digress into this Debate, What Weight is to be laid on Antiquity; it is enough at present that we deny, and our Adversaries have not proved (nor shall they ever be able to prove) that Bishops and Ceremonies are so ancient as they affirm them to be; what Instances he intendeth, or can give from his present Adversaries, (the Non-conformists) that they maintain such principles as destroy the Justice and Equity of the Reformation, I know not; when we meet with them, we shall consider them; mean while we profess our selves ready to disown all Principles that can be made appear to be of that tendency.

Sect. 13. Bishop Sanderson's three ways how Non-conformists promote Popery eventually, tho' not intentionally, which he mentioneth, p. 7. are such as to unbyassed men will seen unworthy of the learned Bishop to propose, or the learned Dr. to applaud; the first is, By helping to pull down Episcopacy, at which, he saith, Rome rejoiced. But, will any say that this Joy of Rome was because Episcopacy is such an Enemy to Popery; when they have it as well as we, and when it is not to be seen in any Protestant Church as in England? yea, I must say, Except in England. Is it not obvious, that their Joy was for our Broils on that occasion, and not for the Ruin of that which they love so well? Will any deny that Rome rejoiced as much at the pulling down of Presbytery in Scotland, and the hindrance p. 11of its Settlement in England, for our Changes, Anarchy, and Confusions are their Advantage? The Second is, Their opposing the interest of Rome, with more Violence than Reason. The Third is, Their frequent mistaking the Question, especially through the necessity of some false Principles, which they will maintain, whatever come of the common Cause of the Reformation. It is not easie to reply to these; I shall only say, there is no Truth in what is here said, nor the Candour becoming a Disputant, in saying of it, without any pretence to proving it. Let not the Dr. think that the Bishop's foreign will convince us; the Folly and Indiscretion that he is pleased next to grieve us with the Imputation of, and to back again with the same learned Bishop's Authority, (p. 8.) is another of his Arguments, which we will not attempt to answer, save with the words of Psal. 123. 3, 4. Have mercy upon us, O Lord, have mercy upon us, for we are exceedingly filled with contempt, our Soul is exceedingly filled with the scorning of those that are at ease, and with the contempt of the proud. What he after mentioneth of the Popish Instruments, being for the most violent courses, doth not concern us, who endure, but use no Violence: Let them look to it, who with such Violence do press their Brethren in things acknowledged Indifferent, which they think unlawful, and ruine them for not yielding. What Service this may do to the Papists, who are such Lovers of Violent Courses, let the World judge. The Jews, by indiscreet zeal, brought the Romans on them, which they designed to shun: If he will prove our zeal against Popery to be also indiscreet, we shall endure the parallel. He cannot get that Notion out of his Head, (p. 9.) that was met before, That Non-conformists attempt to overthrow the Constitution of the Church, because they are against the Ceremonies. What Service this may do the Papists, may be considered: to make the Protestant Religion, which, I suppose, doth constitute the Church of England, have a Trifle (such an Indifferent Ceremony must be) for such a part of her Constitution, as with it she is overturned, they will be apt to inferr, that we reckon our Religion a Trifle. Let it be considered, whether talking at this rate doth not look liker a Transport, than what can be justly charged on the Non-conformists.

Sect. 14. Who doubteth but the Papists envy the Church of England, and wish her torn in pieces, and wish there were no Bishops in England, and that they have endeavoured to destroy her Constitution and Government? But what is all that to the purpose? Doth it hence follow, that they who dislike her Bishops and Ceremonies are doing p. 12the same Work? The Tendency (much less the Designs) of Papists and Non-conformists can never be drawn into one Channel, till he prove, that it is the Ceremonies of the Church of England that Papists aim to destroy, and not the Protestant Religion in it; and that their spight at the English Bishops, is, not because they are Protestant Bishops, but because they are Bishops. It may, with as much shew of Reason, be said, That a Physician promoteth the design of his Patient's Enemy, who aimeth to kill him, whereas the Physician's Work is, to remove his Disease; both would have the Man what he is not, but there is no Concurrence between them, either in their intention or tendency of their Work. What followeth doth as little prove his point, as I shall shew by brief Answers to his Questions: Did not Cranmer, Ridley, &c. suffer Martyrdom by their (the Papists) means? Ans. Yes, but not because Bishops, but as Protestants. Did not they own the same Episcopacy which is now among us, and which men by Book upon Book seek to destroy? (p. 10.) Ans. That maybe a Question, but I now suppose they did: these worthy Servants of God had Reformed much, but left this Unreformed; they did worthily in their Generation, yet as men who are Imperfect, we may rather wonder, that in that time of Darkness, which they had been born in, and under the prejudices of their Education, they discovered so much of Errour, than that they in that Crowd of Corruptions that they had to purge out, over-looked this.

Sect. 15. Some further Argumentative Questions he moveth; Is all this (writing against Bishops and Ceremonies) done for the honour of the Reformation? Is this the way to preserve the Protestant Religion among us, to fill mens minds with such prejudices against the first Set…ment of it, and to make the World believe, that the Church-Government then Established, was repugnant to the Institution of Christ; and that our Martyr-Bishops exercised an unlawful Authority over Diocesan Churches? But wh…ther will Mens indiscreet Zeal carry them? Here's a Tragical Outcry, as if Non-conformists went about to destroy Religion, because they are not for Bishops and Ceremonies: What a strange unaccountable fondness have these Men for their Diana, who talk at this rate! If this Discourse have any Nerves, it will at once condemn all these, as the worst Enemies that true Religion hath, who have found any fault in a Reformed Church, as if it were a thing impossible, that a True Reformation should be an Imperfect Reformation. But thus it is with Men who have left Scripture-Guidance, and become fond of Humane Authority in Religious Matters. p. 13We honour the Reformers, but do not Idolize their Persons; where they follow Scripture, we follow them, (and the Apostle required no more of his Followers, 1 Cor. 11. 1.) but where they recede from the Rule we must needs Dissent.

Sect. 16. It may very much clear us, & silence such Clamours of our Adversaries, if we consider that the English is not the only Imperfect Reformation, that hath been in the World, and that what our Author here alledgeth, would equally justifie all their defects, and condemn all Endeavours after further nearness to Primitive Institution. To give some Instances, How many Reformations do we read of in the Jewish Church, which no doubt were approved of God, and rejoiced in by Good Men, in so far, as they were a casting off of false Gods, and a worshipping of Jehov…h, and yet had this nigrum Theta set on them by the Spirit of God, that the high pl…ces still remained, and the People still Sacrificed in them; yet only to Jehovah. This is noted even of S…lom…n, 1 Kin. 3. 2, 3. (and it's like it was one of his first Steps of Degeneracy, tho' the want of a Temple might seem to have excused it; yet it is noted as a Fault, as Pis…a…r observeth, and the Particle foreign, attamen, only, importeth no less.) It is also noted of Manesseth, in his last and best daies, 2 Chron. 33. 17. and of Azariah, 2 King. 15. 5. and of Jotham, 2 King. 15. 35. and of many others, which need not be mentioned. Now is it imaginable, that none of the Godly in Judah were dissatisfied with this Depra…ati…n of God's VVorship, nor scrupled to leave the Temple, and to go to the high places to worship; and if there were any such, Might not all this be applied to them? Was it for the Honour of the Reformation? Was that the way to preserve the Worship of Jehovah? Mast Reformers be charged with a wrong Way of Worship? If this had been an insig…ificant Declamation against them, so is it now against us. To come nearer home, Do not all the soundest Protestants rejoice in the Lutheran Reformation, as to the main, and yet blame it in some things? Were not all English Protestants glad of what King Hen. 8. did against the Pope, and in some other points of Religion, and yet they thought not fit so to applaud that Setlement, as to look after no further Reformation: Why then should it be thought in us a disgracing of the Reformation, that we desire some things to be still mended?

Sect. 17. We thank him for his Charity, that he will not say, that we are set on by the Jesuites, but misregard his Saying, That we do their Work; a groundless and unproved Assertion. I wish there p. 14were no Ground for Recrimination▪ which I shall forbear: If his Forty Years Meditation have enabled him to prove the present Episcopacy agreeable to the Institution of Christ, and to the best Churches, we must yield the Cause, but we intend to hear his Proofs first. It is a needless Question that he asketh, Wherein doth our Church differ from its first Setlen …ut? Seeing he knoweth that we blame the first Setlement, eatenus, tho' we applaud it in the main; and what he cited out of Dr. Taylor the Martyr (p. 11.) saith no more, but that some Holy Men discovered the Evil of Popery, and laid down their Lives in opposition to it, but had not yet come to see the Evil of some of the Appurtenances of Popery. Dr. Taylor and others rejoiced to see God worshipped in English, which had been in Latin, as by Parrots, but did not see the Evil of such a Frame of Worship, having known no other. So the same Dr. Tay…or, when Bp. Bon…er was about degrading him, Swore by St. Peter, (Acts and Monuments, p. 174.) as Joseph by the Life of Pharaoh, but that doth not justifie such a practice.

Sect. 18. He now undertaketh (p. 11, &c.) to make it appear, that the Jesuitical Party had a great hand in the beginning of the Separation, (as he calleth it.) How doth this consist with what he had said, That he will not say, that we are set on by the Jesuits? That Papists did not Separate at first in Queen Elizabeth's Daies, we can give no Account, knowing that Policy, not Conscience, often governeth their Actions. That Non-conformists did go along with the Church in all her practices, he largely insisteth on afterward, and there it is to be considered whether it was so, or not; and if o, what is our Concern in it. He telleth a long Story of Jesuits imployed under the Disguise of more zealous Trotestants, to oppose the Liturgy, &c. and to set up a Separation; the truth of which I shall not dispute; for it hath alwaies been the way of that active party to endeavour the Dividing of them that are not of their Communion. But, I know not what Blame that can reflect upon the Non-conformists, or their practices; I do not doubt, the same party had a hand in the Divisions of Calvinists from Lutherans, and are willing to take all occasions to divide, that they may ruin; but if the Lord turn it to Good, and to their Disappointment, and if his Servants keep his Way, while they part from the way of other Men, let the Jesuits do their worst, and let us do our Duty, there is neither harm nor blame in it. Were it not very easie for us, … we had any confidence in such Arguments, to shew what a hand Jes…its ha…e in p. 15setting on our Adversaries, in such peremptory cleaving to their Indifferent Ceremonies, that they will rather see the Church torn in a thousand pieces, than part with one of them; and in prosecuting Men, tho' never so found in the Articles of the Church's Doctrine, and Innocent and Holy in their Conversation, because they cannot yield over the Belly of Scripture-Light, and of their Consciences, to the Use of these Trifles: Doth not this look more like a Design of Jesuits to embroil the Church, that they may ruine her; while such measures are unaccountable, and the Admiration of all the Reformed Churches that behold our Differences?

Sect. 19. Whether the Papers he speaketh of, and the Confession of Heath the Jesuit, and the Letter mentioned, have any thing of Truth, or be a Sham (as many such things have been in our daies) it were such a wild-Goose chase to follow forth the Enquiry, as I do not hope to come to the end of it; and it were not Operae pretium to find the Truth of it. That Coleman, Hallingham, and Benson are named in the Letter, and also recorded by Mr. Fuller, and others as forward Non-conformists, proveth no more, but that the cunning Jesuits knew how to insinuate into the most Unwary, as these with Button are represented to be, by their forwardness beyond others, as appeareth, Fuller's Ch. Hist. Book 9. Pag. 81. & Pag. 108. Where he saith, they cut-did all of their own Opinion: And was there ever a Party, among whom some might not be found fit Tools by their Indiscretion, to be imployed by cunning Artificers, for raising Troubles, without casting a Reflection of Blame on the whole Party? But our Author should have at the same time taken notice out of the same Historian, p. 76. that the Bishops in 5 Eliz. 1563. being impowered by their Canons, began to urge Subscriptions to the Liturgy, Ceremonies, and Discipline of the Church, and by so doing gave Rise to these Mens▪ and others, appearing as they did, and branded the Refusers with the odious Name of Puritans. P. 102. he sheweth, that the same Canons being now, (Nine Years after) ratified by Parliament; The Bishops began to urge Subscription more severely than before, which made many Dissenters keep their private Meetings in Fields, Words, their Friends Houses, &c. And may not one rationally think, that the Jesuits might (in their own way) prompt the Bishops to this Severity, as well as the Dissenters not to yield to it?

Sect. 20. The notions that Jesuits have of Spiritual Prayer, mentioned, p. 15. (some of them extravagant enough) the learned Dr. p. 16useth as a repreach to the Non-conformists; how rationally, let the VVor…d judge, seeing we never vented nor owned such Fancies; only we think Set Forms of Prayer unfit to be used, where Ministers are tolerably gifted to pray without them; and that all the praying that we read of, to have been either practised or commended in the Apostolick Church, was without Book, the Spirit, not the Book, helping their Infirmities, even as to what they are to pray for, or the Matter of Prayer, Rom. 8. 26. When he saith (p. 16.) that It is not improbable the J…suits were the first Setters up of this way in England; …nd that it was never known here, or in any other Reformed Church before this time. If he me…n Prayer without a Set-form, (if he mean any thing else, it is not to the p…rpose▪) it is a rash and untrue Assertion; Was ever Prayer without Book condemned by any R… formed Church? Yea; Can any Reformed Church be instanced where it hath not been, and is not used? Or, let him mention, a Reformed Church that hath restrained Extempor… Prayer, and imposed a Set-form. But this Debate he resumeth afterward, and till then, we shall leave it; it doth not savour of tha… … regard to the Spirit of Prayer, that is promised to be …ured out on the people of God, Z…h. 12. 10. to mock the using o… his help, to pray wi…hout a Book, as a Charm Effectual with j…dicious P…ople, and to je…r the zeal and warmth of Devotion that appeareth in it: Many know the Advantage of what he thinketh but a Fancy; let him abound in his own Sence, for, De gustiius non est …. If by me…ns of this manner of worshipping God, the Division wonderfully …, as he saith, I hope it was not the Debauched nor Unserious that were so taken with that way, and therefore this Encrease was no reproach to it.

Sect. 21. He citeth the Admonition given in to the Parliament, 14 Eliz. of which he saith the Authors (Mr. F…ller's Church History, p. 102, 103. maketh Mr. Thomas Cartwright Author both of the first and second Admonition) would have neither Papists nor o…ers e…strained to communicate. I do not understand whether any person should be constrained to partake of the Lord's Supper, (for I suppose that is meant) otherwise than by forcible perswasions, which is the Compulsion meant, Luk. 14. 23. Brugensis saith, it expresseth vi…vangelij; so others, That Ord…nance was never appointed by the Lord to be a Test of a Man's Prof…ssion, while he is uncapable to improve it to higher ends. But if the Admonition plead for Tolerating of Popery, (I have not the book by me, and therefore cannot p. 17determine in this) we are far from approving it. Though we think we have a Right, by the Gospel, not only to Toleration, but further Co…ntenance for our way; yet, if we might chuse, we had rather be under the severest Pe…secution, than have the least hand in obtaining Liberty to that Idolatry: We must not do, yea, nor wish Evil, that Good may come. What he citeth out of Archb. Whit gift, and Archb. Grindal, p. 17, 18. I look on as Invectives against the Non-conformists of the same stamp with his own; they are Parties, and therefore not to be adduced as Witnesses. Dr. Sutclife saith no more than we will say, that our Divisions give advantage to the Papists: Let them who are the culpable Cause of the Divisions look to it. The Prophecy cited out of Mr. Solden, is to the same purpose, and needeth no other Answer.

Sect. 22. The politick, hellish Advices given by the Jesuit Contzen, and Seignior Ballarini, make nothing against us at all, tho' he filleth p. 19, 20, 21. with them; for all that can be thence inferred is, That they labour to divide Protestants, and this D…vision falleth out according to their wish. Now the Division hath its Rise from the Impositions of one party that assume the Name of the Church, and the Scruples of another party. If the Church impose that which is lawful and necessary, and the other party scruple that, and so divide; in that case the Dissenters must bear the blame of the Division, and are guilty of co-operating with the common Enemy, in ruining the Protestant Religion: But if the Church, by Her Impositions, burden the Consciences of Her Members with things that She counteth Indifferent, (i. e.) Needless, and the Scruplers reckon as unlawful, and have just ground so to do; then the blame of Separating, and of helping the Papists to ruin our Religion, lieth at the Church's door; wherefore all this might have been spared. Let the learned Dr. soundly refute our Principles, and then cast what blame he will on us; but till that be done, (which we expect not) let him …ake heed where the blame will be laid, when the Secrets of Men shall be judged. It may be observed in these Advices, that the Jesuits, as their Master the Devil often doth, speak some Truths out of a bad end.

Sect. 23. Next he cometh (p. 22.) to reproach us with the Indulgence that was granted March, 1671-2. as being procured by the Papists. If any Non-conformists had a hand in procuring Liberty (which I do not believe) to them, I think their Brethren will disown them in that Act. That Papists had a hand in it, is not improbable, both for p. 18their own ease, and to make the Difference among Protestants the more conspicuous: But was it fit, that we should forbear a necessary Duty because of their ill Design? We did not join in the practices of the Church before that, but worshipped God after his own Institution, without Humane Ceremonies: All the Change in our way on that Occasion was, that what before we had done in corners, and with hazard, then we did safely and openly; and, what fault was in this? But, One saith, that the Presbyterians suspected the kindness, and joined with the Conformists, like wise Men, and refused the Bait: Who said so, or on what Ground, I know not; we went no further from the Conformists, than Conscience of Duty had made us do before; but it had been a strange thing, if when Liberty was granted us to worship God in his own way, we had then joined with a Superstitious Worship, which we could not do before. If that Author mean, That Presbyterians were then willing to concurr with the Conformists, as their Protestant Brethren, in all things lawful, to disappoint the Designs of the common Enemy, we approve of that Inclination, and think the Dr. cannot charge us with any thing to the contrary in practice: Wherefore it is without all Reason, that he dateth the Presbyterian Separation from that time, p. 23. Their building Meeting-houses, and using Separate Meetings, p. 24. will not prove it; for the one they did before, and the other was but a more publick owning of what was their private practice, when under the lash of the Persecution. Defending their practice by writing, is no proof neither: If he can prove, that they do it on Principles that will justifie any Separation, let them be blamed; but this, I suppose dropt from his Pen without due consideration. That they chuse Ministers one after another, is as little proof as the rest; how to judge I know not, of what his credible Person informs him, Of ten Ministers coming into one City. It is a hard Case, when Ministers put to great hardships by the Five Mile Act, that it being suspended, they might not live in Corporations for their Accommodation. Let the Author of the Peaceable Design (cited p. 25.) answer for himself; I am sure, such Non-conformists as I have conversed with, never approved of the Tolerating of Papists.

Sect. 24. Mr. Nye is produced (p. 27.) as owning, that Jesuits had a hand in our Divisions (whoever denied it) in perswading the unlawfulness of hearing the Conformists preach. Whoever broached that Principle, it was never received among the more sober and intelligent of the Non-conformists, especially the Presbyterians; p. 19it is their Corruptings of God's Ordinances, not their dispensing of them, that we refuse to join with them in; and when we cannot join in the one without the other, we must forbear both; which is by a necessity from them, not our choice; but of this he will give fitter occasion to speak afterward. What he citeth out of Mr. Baxter, p. 28, 29. 30. tho' there be Expressions of the keen Spirit of that learned Writer, which might have been a little softened, yet all that he saith, proveth no more but this; From among the Non-conformists have gone out some Sects, that by their unsound principles have given advantage to the common Enemy, which we deny not, but lament; but if this prove our way evil, and tending to Popery, the same must be concluded against the Reformation from Popery, where the German Anabaptists sprung up; yea, Christianity shall not escape, for did not Gnosticks, and other like Hereticks, arise from among Christians, even in the Apostle's days?

Sect. 25. The Dr. (p. 31.) triumphantly appealeth to any impartial Reader, Who most serve the Popish Designs, those who keep to the Constitution of the Church of England, or those who fell into the course of separation. I hope the Judge that he constituteth, having considered his Allegations, and the Answers hitherto discoursed, will acquit us of all accession to Popish Designs; but if we should take as much pains to retort the same blame on his party, as he hath done to accuse us, it were easie to guess where the Sentence of Condemnation would fall; but I delight not in such unbrotherly work, and there is the less need for it, that day unto day uttereth speech, to discover the sidings of that party with the Enemies of our Religion: That the Papists designed to force all to seek a general Toleration, is not unlikely; but that Non-conformists did desire or seek it, is unjustly insinuated.

Sect. 26. When I consider what he writeth (p. 33, 34.) I see cause to retort his own words on him, which he useth, p. 23. If such bold and notorious untruths are published now, what account may we expect will be given to Posterity of the passages of these Times? He doth represent the Non-conformists very unfairly, if not very falsly; as that on the Discovery of the Popish Plot, the Non-conformists seemed to be Like men roused out of a deep sleep, amazed, confounded, fearful of every thing, mistrusting all that were not in such a consternation as themselves. VVere they not as vigilant and jealous over the Papists, as other Protestants even before that time? Yea; who that will see, doth not know that they exceeded their Neighbours in this; he hath forgotten what he p. 20had before so often declaimed against them, That they pretended to be the most zealous Protestants about their fear of Popery, their indiscreet zeal against it, &c. with which he besprinkles most of his pages: But now, of a sudden, they are transformed into a sort of Men asleep, having neither fear of, nor zeal against it. How doth passion blind men? Impedit ira animum, &c. Their fear and consternation on the discovery of the Plot, is as groundlesly affirmed as their sleep before it: No doubt, they were apprehensive of Danger, as all the Protestant Nation were, and still are; but what Signs of such Disorder was among them, he doth not say, because he could not; therefore a general Accusation was more apt to calumniate them by. But it may be (and it is beyond a may be) they fasted and prayed more than some others did on this occasion, and that some reckon a sign of Guilt and Fear, beyond what is to be found in good men. Some (saith he) in this case pressed the Dissenters to study Union among Protestants; But were they then, or ever, backward to it on sinless terms? or, would they have had them abandon the light of the…r Consciences for Peace-sake in that time of danger? He again chargeth the Non-conformists, that Formerly they carried smoothly towards the common and innocent Papists, as they stiled them, and thought them equally capable of Toleration with themselves. It were well done in the Dr. if he can make this appear against any one Non-conformist; but if it be spoken with reference to them in general, nothing can be more calumnious. It is of the same stamp that followeth, p. 34. Their trucking under-hand for Toleration with the Papists; they represent, saith he, those of the Church of England, as Papists in Masquerade. Did ever any Non-conformist talk at this rate of Conformists in general, as he would have his Readers believe? And if it have been said of some, and those of no mean degree in the Church, time partly hath tried, and it is like, will further try the truth of it; I commend his Humanity, and being free of undue heat against the Papists, on occassion of that horrid Plot. If there was due heat, we require no more; but he doth most injuriously charge us with rage and fierceness in that case: I know not, that the wise and sober among the Non-conformists (if he will let it be said, that there be any such among them) did exceed due bounds of the zeal of God against such a party of his Enemies. He next fighteth with the popular Censures that then passed on many of the Clergy, which we are not concerned in. I wish him to consider, that as sometimes vox populi is vox diaboli, so also not seldom it is vox Dei.

p. 21Sect. 27. He hopeth that the Non-conformist Ministers (whom he taunteth as high pretenders to, and self-applauders in wisdom and self-denial) would in so critical a Time have joined with them against the common Enemy, or let them know their Sense of the present state of things. Except in their Ceremonies, the Non-conformists were never backward to join with them, and much less at that time; for letting the Church-men know their sense of things, I know not what occasion they had for that, except in their Sermons, in which they were asplain and faithful against Popery, as their Brethren were. He next falleth heavily on the Plea for Peace, and true and only way of Concord, as most Vnseasonable and Divisive pieces. The Author of these Books is of age and ability to answer for himself, and yet living and writing: I need say nothing for him, only this I make bold to say, abating the vehemency of the stile, and forwardness of that learned man's genius, which sometimes run into over-lashes, that another cannot so well defend as himself; for the substance of the Books, let the Dr. try it when he will, he may possibly find it a hard-enough Task to deal with them. What that Author saith in the name of the whole party, (which the Dr. taketh advantage from, p. 37.) doth not oblige the party further than they see Cause to own it.

Sect. 28. The Reverend Dr. doth begin, p. 39. to give account of the occasion and Design of his Sermon, which was answered by several Hands, and in defence of which, this Book now under our consideration was written: I shall concern my self little about it, being ready to give all possible Charity to the design of so worthy a person, in undertaking and managing that Affair. I shall consider what is said on this occasion, no further than shall be needful to the defence I now manage of our present way. It is most injur…ous that he asserteth, that (by such Books as he had mentioned) the zeal of many was turned off from the Papists against those of the Church. Is there any thing in these Books that favoureth Papists? or any thing that maketh the Church of England worse than that of Rome? If withdrawing from the Corruptions of the Church be defended, this hath no tendency to lessen Zeal against Papists. He that complaineth of hard usage, (tho' without cause) should not so retaliate, as to call his Brethren, who differ from him, and give reasons for their so doing, an enraged, but unprovoked company of Men. This, and much of that nature, we resolve patiently to bear. He must give us leave to deny what he imputeth to our way, p. 40. That It is a great, p. 22dangerous, and unaccountable Separation: If his Arguments against it prove as hard as his Words, it will not be easie to stand before him; if this be to touch us with a soft and gentle hand, as, ibidem, what will his severities prove? Sure he hath forgot himself, when with the same breath he calleth us peevish and partial men, and saith, he resolved to give us no just provocation by reproachful Language, or personal Reflections.

Sect. 29. The Vnseasonableness of this make-bate Sermon is objected, which he attempteth to disprove with a Flood of Words, all built on this Foundation; That the Church was reviled, run down by a popular Fury, &c. This is the usual respect the learned Dr. is pleased to treat his Antagonists with. Other men think, that a modest Dissent and with-holding Communion in unlawful things, backed with solid Reasons given for so doing, was all that the Non-conformists were guilty of; and that, that needed not give such an Alarm as if there had been a Design to ruin the Church, as he fansieth; and unbyassed men will think, that such a Sermon, on purpose chosen to be preached before the Magistrate, rather than before his Ordinary Hearers, doth not savour so much of a design to guard the Consciences of the People against Non-conformity, as of some other Design; what that was, may be easily guessed at, for all that is said to the contrary. I speak now of the Tendency of the thing, rather than of the Intention of the person; but I rather chuse to wave this matter than contend about it, being more concern'd about the Truth of what was said, than the Season of Saying it. I shall be as little concerned about the sharpness and severity of his Sermon, which is the other Objection that he answereth from p. 44. though I am sure, what I have already noted in this Preface, sheweth, that such a way of treating Dissenters is not ab hoc homine alienum; but I must do him that right, as to acknowledge, that there is more mildness expressed in the Sermon than here, he being galled by the pungent Reasons of his Answerers; yet there wants not some Vinegar in the Ink that the Sermon was written with; but, I confess, that is so common a fault among imperfect men, that we must say, Veneam damus petimus que vicissim; for my part, I study to shun it, but if I be overtaken in this fault, I am willing to be admonished and corrected. We think Schism as great a Sin as the Dr. doth; and seeing he thinketh the blame of it is on our part, I judge it but consequent to that Opinion that he exposed it, (and us by reason of it) with all its Aggravations; and if we cannot clear our selves in this p. 23matter, let us lie under as much blame as he can load us with. But withal, I hope he will remember, that if the Schism be caused by the fault of his party, all the sad imports of his excellent Discourse will return on his own Head, and those of his way: Wherefore I wish all this had been waved, and the merits of the Cause only minded.

Sect. 30. The Expression that his Adversaries are so offended with (to wit) that he saith (p. 49.) The most godly People among them can least endure to be told of their faults; is, as I think, not sufficiently vindicated, by saying, that He meant it of them who will not hear their own Teachers telling them of the sin of Separation; as Mr. B. alledgeth; for they that are so unteachable, are not the most godly of the Non-conformists: I hope there are among them who can hear Sin of whatever sort charged on them, and soberly consider what is said; and if on Enquiry they be convinced of a fault, will humble themselves, and confess, if not, will soberly clear their Innocency by Reasons. Far less is it a fit Vindication of this Assertion, to apply what he had said to Dr. O. Mr. B. Mr. A. and the rest of the Answerers of his Sermon. I hope he doth not think that Defence of Truth, or of that which one is convinced to be such, is alwaies the Sin of not enduring to be told of faults: Neither do I by so saying referr the determining of our Debates to mens Fancies, which he hinteth, p. 47. that we call the Dictates of Conscience (I am sorry that he doth either so undervalue Conscience, or reflect on the worthy Persons that answered his Sermon.) If we cannot shew plain and evident Reasons for what we say, (as he requireth) we refuse not causa cadere.

Sect. 31. He telleth a very formal Story, p. 51, 52. of the Effects of his Sermon, of the mimick Gestures of the Non-conformists, when it was spoken of; the Truth of which History, tho' I doubt, I cannot disprove. It neither was worth his writing, nor my confuting. He thinketh it lay at bottom of many mens Stomachs, that he did not perswade the Church of England to the Dissenters. Who did ever require that? We pretend to no Authority over Her; if she would have condescended to us for Peace sake (which that Party talk so much of) to forbear imposing her unnecessary things, which we judge unlawful, that should have satisfied us. But he thinks (p. 53.) it had been unseasonable to speak of Alteration of Laws before Magistrates, who are tied to the Laws; that such Alteration is one of the weightiest things. Ans. Supposing (as he there saith) his private Opinion for Abatements, there was no need of proposing the Alteration p. 24of Established Laws; but the exposing of them that were under the lash of Inconvenient Laws, may well be forborn, before the Executors of these Laws, by a man that thinketh that Abatement should be made of the rigour of these Laws; I do not think (as he doth) that the alteration of every Established Law is a Matter of such weight as any thing that can be taken into consideration, provided the consideration about it be by such as have Power to alter it: What is more common than altering of Laws when they are found inconvenient? Our first Reformers thought not so under Edward 6. The Liturgy (and the Law for it) was altered when excepted against by Mr. Calvin abroad, and some Zealots (so the Historian speaks) at home, Full. Chur. Hist. 6, 7. p. 386. Why may not this be done now, when Dissatis…action is become more universal? But it is a supposition that I can give no account of, that the Laws against Non-conformity (for of these his Discourse must be understood, if it be at all to the purpose) should be so looked on, as that they concern the preservation of the Church and Religion: That Church and Religion must stand on a tottering Foundation, that cannot be preserved, if those things be laid aside which are acknowledged to be indifferent. But thus it is to dote on Mens Inventions; it is ordinary to equal, if not preferr them, to Christ's Institution, Mark 7. 13. Mat. 15. 6. Qui amat ranam, ranam putat esse Dianam.

Sect. 32. But the Dr. is not content, not to advise the altering of these Laws, where it had not been very pertinent to propose it, but he bringeth Reasons able (as he thinketh) to preponderate all the Considerations that any might use for changing them; these Reasons are in number Six; the 1. is, The Impossibility of satisfying all Dissenters. Must therefore none be satisfied, because all cannot? Some will be satisfied, if you will but forbear imposing what God hath not commanded: Others will not be satisfied, unless you forbear also some of Christ's Institutions, such as Infant Baptism; is it reason to neglect the doing the one of these for Peace and Unity, because you cannot do the other? The 2. is, The Vncertainty of gaining any considerable number by Relaxations. If any man look on this as uncertain, it must be either because he knoweth not what we scruple at or because he thinketh us resolved to dissent without reason, when the reason of our Dissent is removed; but, I hope the Dr. is neither so ignorant, nor so uncharitable: He may be well assured, that by relaxing the Imposition of humane Ceremonies, all the Presbyterians shall be gained to join in worshipping of God p. 25with the present Church; and I hope he will not say, that they are no considerable number in England. His 3. Reason is, The difficulty of keeping Factions out of the Church, considering the ungovernableness of some mens Tempers and Principles. Answ. If the Discipline that Christ hath instituted be duly exercised in the Church, that will either make men governable, yea, actually govern them; or it will exclude them out of the Church, and so Factions shall cease in the Church: But it is a strange piece of Ecclesiastical Policy, on supposition that some will prove ungovernable, to obtain the making of Civil Laws for imposing those things on mens Consciences, which the Imposers count need nots, and they on whom they are imposed, know them to be unlawful. This is the way to make them ungovernable (in reference to these particular Impositions) who would tamely submit to any Yoke that is not contrary to that of Christ. But it seems the Dr. looketh on all that scruple at human Ceremonies as ungovernable Persons: And we rationally think, that his Party are resolved, that we shall either be governed by their Will, (not by the Word of God) or they will take the most effectual ways that they can to keep us out of their Church. I confess, Conscience is an ungovernable thing, except by the Laws of Christ; but it is much the Strain of some of his Party, (I am confident the Reverend Dr. doth not mean so ill) to ridicule and cry down Conscience in private persons, that they may be governed by the publick Conscience, (a Soloecism in Divinity, never heard of before) i.e. The Will of the Superiours; the thing, to wit, Blind Obedience, is an old Popish Tool, to enslave Consciences; but such an express affronting of Conscience, (God's Deputy in the Soul) is a new Invention that this Age is honoured with.

Sect. 33. His 4. Reason is, The danger of breaking all in pieces by a Toleration. Ans. Toleration is both commanded in Scripture, Rom. 14. 1. Eph. 4. 2, 3. In this last place it is joined with endeavouring after Unity, so far is it from being the way to break all in pieces, as the Dr. thinketh. It is also condemned, Rev. 2. 2, 20. wherefore it should not have been so generally censured, as a Church-ruining thing. Beside, Toleration is not that which we plead for in the first place, but that the things that grieve our Consciences may be removed, that so we may join with you in worshipping God in his own way, that we may need no Toleration; but if that cannot be obtained, our next desire is, that we may be suffered to worship God in that way that is acceptable to him by our selves, when we cannot do it p. 26with you; neither is it a vast and universal Toleration of all Blasphenius, Heresies, and Vnpeaceableness, that we contend for, but a forbearing of such as live peaceable in their Dissent from you in the smaller Concerns of Religion. This Toleration would break nothing in pieces, but the denying of it tendeth to break all in pieces: For while Men have the use of their Conscience, they will Dissent, and serve God in the way that they apprehend pleaseth him, without mens leave, when they cannot do it with their leave. It is a great mistake to think that Unity among Christians lieth only or mainly in Vniformity, and not rather in Consent, in the main points of Religion, and loving forbearance in reference to the rest.

Sect. 34. The 5. is, The exposing our selves to the Papists and others, by receding too far from the first principles and frame of our Reformation. This is plain enough; yet without wronging the scope or sence, it might have been thus expressed more openly, We are ashamed to mend, l…st Men should think that we once were wrong. This Reason, if it prove any thing, will conclude against all Reformations: Might it not have been pleaded against the abolishing the high places in Solomon's, Azariah's, and Josiah's time; (of which before?) This will expose us to Baal- Worshippers, as too far receding from the first Principles of our Reformation: Might not the same have been in K. Edward 6's time, and in Q. Elizabeth's time, in the one of which somewhat was mended that was defective in the Reformation by Hen. 8. And in the other Praying for the Dead, and some other things were laid aside, that had been under Edw. 6. It is beyond my capacity to understand how this could expose you to the Papists or any other; what could they say, but that some of their Superstitions were at first over-lookt, which now you see the Evil of, and think fit to remove them? What advantage could they make of all this against the Church of England? It will be hard to convince those of mistake, who think, that cleaving to these Ceremonies doth more expose the Church to the Papists, and give them hope of their thinking at last of returning to them, when they see how loath they are to go too far from them. This Principle seemeth to make what we have done, or the first Frame of the Reformation, the Rule of the Reformation, rather than the Word of God: Neither can the laying aside of humane Ceremonies be rationally esteemed a receding very far from the Frame and first Principles of the Reformation, seeing they are of so inconsiderable moment, and next to nothing, compared with the weighty points of Truth that we gained by the p. 27Reformation. It is known to them, who have lookt into the History of the Council of Trent, that this very principle put an effectual Bar to all Reformation in the Papacy, that was so much desired, and stickled for by some. His sixth Reason is, The difficulty of keeping out priests, pretending to be allowed Dissenters: This reason is near of Kin to that which papists use against Peoples reading Scripture; The difficulty of keeping men from catching Heresy by it: If the Dr. here suppose the Dissenters to be well affected to the Priests, and willing to have their Company; or so unskilful, that they cannot discern a Priest's Droctrine, from that of a Protestant; or to admit Ministers among them, to the Discharge of that office, without Trial, and Testimonials: Or, if he suppose, that when men are allowed, by Law, to Worship God without Ceremonies; that the Law is so laid asleep, that men may do what they list: If, I say, all these things be supposed, this Reason may seem to have some weight, but without such a supposition, it is lighter than Chaff, and unworthy of the Pen of the learned Dr. Stillingfleet.

Sect. 35. I perceive the Dr. cannot get that fancy out of his Head, That the strength and union of the National Setlement dependeth on continuing of the present Impositions, and that they are necessary to keep out Popery. Enough hath been already said, to lay open the fondness of this Imagination, and its inconsistency with what Sentiments about the Ceremonies themselves do on other occasions declare, when it serveth a turn. After some indecent contempt of Mr. A. in reference to what he had said of the Dr's Sermon, he distinguisheth (p. 55.) between Lay-Communion and Ministerial Conformity, that he meddleth with the former, not the latter, his reason is, If the People thought themselves bound to do what is their Duty towards Communion with the Church, many Ministers would change their Mind. I contract, but not misrepresent what he saith. To this I return two things, 1. Why Ministerial Conformity should not be taken into consideration in such a Discourse, is not easily understood: But that we may see the Dr. hath a mind not only to make a distinction but a difference between Non-conformist Ministers and their People, according to the Maxime, Divide & impera. If all the People might lawfully conform, and the Ministers also could submit to what he calleth Lay-Communion, is no regard to he had to the many Hundreds (not to say Thousands) of ministers, many of them Eminent, and most, if not all of them, compleatly fitted for the Work of the Gospel, and who have God's and His Church's Call to that p. 28Work? Is there no Consideration to be used by the Church, how the Labours of all these may not be lost, while the Harvest is great, and the Labourers few? (unless it be thought, that the Case is not so now) and, Shall they all be rendered useless, rather than the imposing of Subscription and Assent to what is confessedly not instituted before born? Doth this savour of that Regard to Souls, and of that love of Peace and Unity that our Brethren make such a noise with, when it suiteth their purpose? Tho' they think us no Ministers for want of Episcopal Ordination, yet we cannot think so of our selves; and that one Principle sheweth them the greatest Schismaticks that are among Protestants; for by it they unchurch most, if not all the Reformed Churches, and unminister all their Pastours and nullifie Baptism and all the other Ordinances that are among them.

Sect. 36. The other thing that I reply to this distinction of the Dr's is, That we have such rational and well-grounded Scruples even against Lay-Communion, that is, joining in their Service, and the use of the Ceremonies, that nothing that we yet have seen, is able to remove, as I hope the Progress of this Debate shall make appear. He alledgeth, (p. 6.) that The scruple of the Surplice is worn out, kneeling at the Sacrament is generally allowed by the more moderate Non-conformists: For the sign of the Cross, Mr. Baxter saith, The sin (if it be one) in using it, is not the Persons who bring the Child to be baptized, but the Ministers; and that he also debateth for the use of the Liturgy. To all this I answer, We have the same Scruple against the Surplice we had of old, but do not for it withdraw, it being the Minister's fault, not Ours. For Kneeling, it is our own act, and therefore we must either be dispensed with in it (which the Church will not do) or for bear the Sacrament in which it is; for we utterly deny, that the more Judicious of the Non-conformists do allow it; neither do I see how they can, and disallow other Ceremonies; for they all stand on one bottom (to wit) that they are not instituted: but more of this in its due place. For Mr. Baxter's Authority we lay little weight on it; he hath his own Singular Opinions which neither party do unanimously allow. His Reasons in their place we shall Consider. What he saith of the Crossing the Baptized Party, I know not that I shall hereafter be put in mind of it, wherefore I answer, That tho' it be the Ministers Action, yet it is the Parties (or his Representatives) passion; and that Personal. It cannot be done on my Person, or my Child's without my Consent and Submission; as if p. 29I willingly suffer Holy Water to be sprinkled on me, I am culpable in reference to that Superstition: So it is in this case.

Sect. 37. The heavy Complaints that he maketh, Pag. 58. of the unmanly and barbarous usage that he met with for his Sermon, I am wholly a stranger to, and can pass no Judgment on it; but if this be as he saith, it is no way to be justified. But he should not charge the party with this: There are some Scurrilous and Mean wits among all Parties of men, who have no other way to express their Zeal against what they dislike: And if we should trouble the world with such publick Resentments of the same kind of dealings, and worse, that we and our way have met with, and Daily do meet with, not only from the Rabble and drunken boozers of his party; but from Pulpits and the Press, not by the baser Phamphelteers only, but famous Authors (witness Dr. Heylin's History of Presbytery) we might write Books abundance. His citation of Bishop Whitgift cometh little short of a full proof of what I now say, in that he representeth us as Depravers, Raillers, Back-b…ters, Inventors of Lyes, and spreaders of false Rumors; and that of the best deserving men, if they but come short of pleasing our humour.

Sect. 38. The Dr. next, p. 59. taketh a view of the forces that he saith were mustered up against his Sermon, and passeth a Verdict on each of his Adversaries, which I shall not stay to Consider. Only I think he Treateth Mr. B. with too much of the same sharpness, that he complaineth he hath received: Tho' I think none who knoweth the writings of that learned man, will applaud his severe strain. And for Mr. A. whether the Dr. was piqued by some home Thursts that he had met with from him, I know not; but a man of his Worth and Learning should not have been so dispised, and his VVriting Represented so Contemptibly as the Dr. dealeth with him; the facetiousness of his strain needed to have bred no such Disgust; it is neither so. Low nor Scurrilous as the Author would make us believe; others look on it as a condiment to prevent Taedium and nauseousness. I know none that blameth the excellent Writings of Mr. Fuller, which have a pleasantness not unlike that of Mr. A's. The debate that next falleth in between the Dr. and Mr. A. about the true meaning of the Text, of the Dr's. Sermon, he now waveth; as I shall also do that about the proof of a Deity, which I think might have passed, as Forreign to this purpose.

Sect. 39. One of his Antagonists (p. 71.) chargeth him with changableness, in writing here contrary to what he had written in p. 30his Irenicum, about which he maketh Diverse Apologies. A change in this Learned Man is too visible, and if it had been to the better, it had not been Culpable; but because his Changes do not so much concern our present debate about Conformity to the present Church-way, I shall not meddle in that matter at this time: Especially a change being (upon the matter) acknowledged by himself, p. 76. One thing I cannot pass over; That he had Asserted in his Irenicum, that if others cast them wholly out of Communion, then is their Separation necessary: which he would reconcile with what he here writeth, p. 47. by shewing a difference as to this between the Excommunication of the Church of Rome, and of the Church of England: for saith he, Our Church doth not cast one wholly out of Communion for meer Scrupulous Non-conformity, but alloweth to Communicate in some parts of worship. 2. Ours is but the lesser Excommunication; which he confesseth, publick defamers of the Orders of the Church to be under, ipso facto, by the Canons; but that it layeth on no Obligation till duely Executed: But the Excommunication of Rome is with an anathema. All this is very little to the present purpose: for if we be all, ipso facto, Excommunicated, and if this Excommunication be most frequently (as it is) Executed against us, and capias's issued out commonly against us; and all this for meer Scrupulous Non-conformity (as he calleth it) by these means we are de facto, put in such a Case, as we cannot enjoy all the Ordinances of God among them; and therefore we must either live without Gods Ordinances; or have them out of Communion with their Church. Again, he Alledgeth p. 75. that he could not mean, that there was an equal reason in these cases, when he expresly determineth, That, in the case of our Church, men are bound in conscience to submit to the orders of it: Neither doth this help the Matter; for if we think (as we do) that we are bound, in Conscience, not to submit to all the Orders of the Church, some of them being unwarranted by the Word of God; and if for this Opinion, and suitable Practice to it, we be so excommunicated, as we cannot enjoy God's Ordinances with the Church; then we are cast wholly out of the Church, and our Separation must be Lawful, on the ground that of old he had laid down. But pag. 76. He would, in that case, allow us a serupulous forbearance of Acts of Communion; but not to proceed to a positive Separation. But if we make use of his Allowance, the Church, who is of another mind, putteth a Bar to our Enjoying all God's Ordinances: What can we then do, but either live without them▪ or proceed to that, which he is pleased to call a positive Separation? p. 31We are not convinced, that our Practice is condemned by the wiser Protestants abroad, for all the Letters that he mentioneth; of which, in their place: And it is a rash Assertion (which he knoweth cannot be Tried) pag. 77. That if a Council were called of all the Protestant Churches in Christendom; we should not doubt of their Determination, of the unlawfulness of the present Separation. He, our Author, maketh good the saying, Quod misere volumus, id facile credimus; any man that hath seen the Vniformity, in almost all things, that is between our mode of Worship and their's; and the great Deformity that is between theirs and that of the Church of England, will find reason to expect a quite contrary Determination from such an Assembly. We may appeal in this case even to some of the Sons of the Church of England. The excellent and Pious, and Learned Sr. Matthew Hales, in his Book of Schism, hath this passage. In times of manifest Corruptions and Persecutions, where Religious Assembling is dangerous, private meetings, howsoever beside publick Order, are not only Lawful, but they are of necessity and Duty. All pious Assemblies in times of persecution and Corruption, however practised, are indeed, or rather alone, the Lawful congregations and publick Assemblies, though according to form of Law, are indeed nothing but Riots and Conventicles, if they be stained with Corruption and Superstition.

Sest. 40. He answereth an Objection▪ pag. 77. That the Publishing of this Book is now unseasonable, being a hindrance to the Vnion of Protestants, to which there seemeth now to be a general Inclination. He Alledgeth (p. 78.) that the principles of Non-conformists hinder that Vnion, and lay a foundation for perpetual Divisions. He knoweth that we will not own this, and therefore proveth it (as he thinketh) On the principles laid down by some of the Dissenting Brethren; Let the constitution be never so easie to themselves, others may make use of their grounds, and carry on the Difference as high as ever. I wish he had told us what these grounds are. But it is an Odd kind of Reasoning; we will not endeavour Union with them who may be Tollerated, because they who are not to be Tolerated, will expect the same favour. The ground on which we plead for forbearance, is, our Scruple about what you confess to be no Institution of Christ nor necessary duty; we in our Conscience judge it unlawful, and can shew good reason for our so judging: How this ground can be Improved by any body to heighten Differences, unless it be by the peremptoriness of them that will Impose such Things, I do not understand. p. 32He professeth to be for Vnion that will lessen differences, and not weaken, but strengthen the Protestant Religion: Now let any judge whether the Union that is founded on the ground proposed be not such.

Sect. 41. He saith, p. 97. That Vniversal Liberty differeth from Vnion, as loosing from binding; and it is strange, if that which Papists lately thought the best Means to bring in Popery, should now be lookt on as the most effectual way to keep it out. Ans. We do not, nor ever did plead for Vniversal Liberty, which was that which no doubt Papists aimed at, ergo nihil dictum. But suppose, saith he, the Indulgence be at present strictly limitted to Dissenting Protestants, we are not sure it will always continue so; Will not the same Reasons, as to Scruple of Conscience, suffering for Religion, &c. be extended further when occasion serveth, and Popery getteth footing on the Dissenters Grounds? Ans. Were it not as rational for us to say, Tho' we can now join with the Church of England, in her present Ceremonies, what know we how soon on the same grounds she may bring in all those of Popery? Let us forbear evil surmising, and mind our present Duty, especially seeing the way to prevent this feared Evil is obvious, (to wit) that no Indulgence be granted after, but what there is as good Reason for, and as little hazard from, as is at present: Neither do we plead for Indulgence meerly on the grounds of S…ruple of Conscience, or Suffering for Religion; but on other grounds in conjunction with these, as hath been a little above expressed. It is like our Grounds may be comprehended in his wide-Bellied, &c. but if by it he means all grounds of Forbearance now may be extended to plead for an undue Toleration, then all Forbearance of Christians that dissent in any thing, must be unlawful, which is contrary to the Scripture formerly mentioned, and to the general Sentiments of all Christians, except Papists, whose Religion standeth by Blood and Cruelty.

Sect. 42. Where (saith he) hath the Church of Rome more Labourers and a greater Harvest than under the greatest Liberty of Conscience? Witness the state of the Northern Kingdoms, compared with the number of Papists in the united Netherlands; I can soon tell him where, (to wit) under Episcopal Persecution of Protestants in Britain. If this be a mistake, these Nations have been for some Years in a Dream. Again, his Instance is wide from the purpose, for we plead not for a Toleration of all sects, and particularly not of Papists; what Toleration is in the Netherlands, themselves can best give account of. He asserteth it impossible to keep out Popery, where p. 33Toleration is allowed; and I assert it as impossible to keep in Christianity in an impure Church, where it is not allowed; and yet there is no inconsistency between the two Assertions, if we distinguish between a Limited Toleration, which we plead for, and one Vnlimited, which he all along speaketh of. To talk of Toleration thus without distinction, is to walk in the Clouds, and not descend to the thing in debate, which is unbeseeming a Disputant.

Sect. 43. He bringeth Three Arguments, p. 79, 80. to prove his Assertion; 1. Because of the various waies of creeping in under several Disguises, which the Priests and Jesuits have, and can never be prevented, where there is a general Indulgence for Dissenters, and an unaccountable Church-power is allowed to separate Congregations.

Ans. 1. This Argument Supponit falsum, which we have often disclaimed; to wit, That we plead for a general Indulgence to Dissenters; we desire it may be limitted to men of peaceable Principles and Practices; to such as differ from the publick way in matters not Fundamental nor near to the Foundation (and for our part, who are Presbyterians, we seek forbearance only in things that are acknowledged to be none of Christ's Institutions,) and in things that are neither against Godliness, nor the Peace of Church or State. Another Falshood that he supposeth, is, That we plead for an unaccountable Church-power in Separat… Meetings. We plead for no Power in them, but what a good account can be given of from Scripture; and what is allowed commonly to a Church as such. 2. I mention'd before a way of preventing the creeping in of Priests and Jesuits, for all their Cunning, (to wit) The due Exercise of Church-Discipline, in all the ways that shall be tolerated, especially in the admission of Ministers to their Office; and if these Foxes creep in at undiscerned cranies, if Discipline be in vigour, they may be cast out again, before they can do any considerable harm to the Flock.

Sect. 44. Argument 2. Because it will be great hardship, when mens heats are over, for them (the Papists) only to be deprived of the Liberty of their Consciences, when the wildest of Phanaticks are allowed it.

Answ. 1. Still the old Supposition must found all his Arguments. We plead for no Toleration to any Phanaticks (properly so called) much less to the wildest of them. 2. There are many weighty Reasons why Papists should be denied that Liberty that is allowed to Protestant Dissenters; from the Grossness of their Heresies, the Idolatry of their Worship, the Unpeaceableness of their Principles, p. 34such as dethroning Kings, and cutting off all people that are Hereticks in their Sence; their Principle of bearing down all Religion but their own. Had a Non-conformist spoke as much on the behalf of Papists, what a noise would our Author have made about it, that we do their Work, &c. His 3. Argument is, Because the diversity of Sects that will be kept up by this means, will be alwaies thought a plausible Argument to draw men to the Popish Pretences of Vnity. Ans. By whom will this be thought? Surely, by no man that considereth, 1. That Unity in Error and Idolatry is no perswading Argument to them who regard the Truths of God. 2. That our Differences are in things of the smallest moment in Religion, and managed with Christian Love and Meekness, (for who exceed these Bounds▪ may be punished by the Laws, notwithstanding a Toleration granted.) 3. That the Popish Unity is but pretended, there being more and weightier Differences among them, than among us; as the Dr. well knoweth, and hath, by his learned Labours, made the World know. His 4. Argument is, Because the allowed Sects will in probability grow more insolent upon a legal Indulgence, and bid defiance to the Setled Constitution, as we have seen already by the yet visible Effects of the former Indulgence. Ans. 1. He hath little Charity for his Brethren, in expecting such things from them, and less in making such an Observe on what is past, without any ground known to unbyassed men. If he mean of any Indecency in Speech or Behaviour among the vulgar, we cannot answer for that; there is too much of it on both hands: Neither is it fit, that on such a frivolous Ground the Sober and Conscientious should be persecuted. 2. If Insolency shall happen (as God forbid) to be the consequent of Liberty to Dissenters, let the Guilty be punished by the Law. We plead for Toleration to Mens Consciences, not to their Immoralities; but, Are we to expect, that the Laws of Men should work more upon them than the Grace of God? Ans. Not on their Minds and Wills to change them, but on the outward Man to restrain them. Such an Effect may be rationally expected, and is daily observed in other Cases. It is an odious Representation, as if the Vse of the Liberty pleaded for were only to preach and pray, & write & dispute against one another; and as absurd an Inference, that there seemeth to be much of Sence and Reason in the Papal Pretence to Vnity and Infallibility. Whatever our Author, or the by-slanders that he mentioneth may think, they who have a just Abhorrence of Popery, will think, that none of the Divisions that are amongst us, are so bad as it by far, tho' we desire p. 35neither to excuse nor extenuate them: Nor do we refuse to concur in our Station in any good way to heal these Distempers.

Sect. 45. The rest of the Dr's Preface is taken up in expressing his cond…scendency to the Dissenters, in the things that they scruple, tho' he pleadeth for the Ceremonies as Lawful, (which is afterward to be debated) yet he would have a Liberty allowed, that they who scruple them, may have the Ordinances without them. If this were put in practice, it would be one step toward healing: But it seems the Church-men are not of his mind: However, we do thankfully own his moderation. His other Condescendencies to such as scruple Joining in the use of the Liturgy, are for the most part very commendable, and might make England Happy, if they were practised. But till some appearance of that be, it will be needless for us to tell our Sence of them in particular: But his kindness to his Brethren of the Ministry doth not so well appear by his Discourse from p. 88. He is willing to gain the People, but seemeth to look on the Ministers as Competitors; his Reasons for dealing so with them it were not hard to answer; but considering, that there is little hope of seeing even what he holdeth to be made practicable, I think it needless to contend about it; only I must tell him, that tho' we be as far as he is against Lay-men, (as he speaketh) or any unordained Person, usurping the Office, or doing the Work of a Minister, yet his Proposals are very lame, as to affording any Ministers at all. And then what do all his commendable yieldings, as to the People, signi…e? Would he have them have Separate Meetings, but no Ministers in them to Administer the Ordinances of God to them? This is a sort of Toleration that would neither be for our Advantage, nor the Credit of the Church that alloweth it: So that in a great many Pages he hath said nothing.

There is nothing further to be noted in the Preface; for we wish the Proposals that he maketh, for Reforming some Abuses in the Church, p. 93. might take effect.

Having now got through the Preface, I proceed to the Book, which the Learned Author divideth into Three Parts; the 1. is, An Histori…al Account of the Rise and Progress of the Separation. The 2. is, Of the nature of the Separation. The 3. is, Of the Pleas f…r the Separtion. I shall accordingly divide this Examination, and follow him, foreign, so far as the clearing of our Principles and Practice does require it. The Name of Separation is justly odious p. 36in the Church; and it is certain, that where-ever it is, some great Blame lieth on the one Party or the other, and sometimes on both; but there often is a sad and undesirable Separation, attended with bad Consequences, where yet the one Party is wholly innocent. I should here speak somewhat to open the nature of that Separation that the Learned Dr. chargeth us with, but that were to anticipate what is to be discoursed, animadverting on the Second part of his Book, and therefore I now wave it.

PART I. The Dr's Historical Account of the Separation, Examined and Answered.

IN his Sect. 1. he premiseth two things, in prosecuting which, his First Part of his Book is taken up. The first is, That although the present Reasons for Separation would have held from the beginning of our Reformation, yet no such thing was then practised or allowed, by those who were then most zealous for Reformation.