Defense of Non-Conformity, Part 1 · Section 1

Defense of Non-Conformity · Part 1 · Section 1

p. 36SECT. I. The Practice of the First Non-conformists considered.

BEfore we consider his 2d. Proposition, let us try how this will abide the Test. Here are two Assertions put together, which for the greater clearness I shall consider apart; the one is Doctrinal, the other Historical: The Doctrinal part of his Proposition, is, That the present Reasons for Separation (I shall not contend about calling our practice so, not being willing to contend about words) would have held from the beginning of the Reformation.

This I deny, and shall first give the Reason of my denial, and then try the strength of what he saith for his Assertion. The Reason that I bring, is, That our Reformation was carried on by degrees; as Rome was not built in a day, so neither was it pulled down among us in a day. King Hen. 8. began this Work, but did it so p. 37lamely, that Protestants were little satisfied. There wanted not Non-conformists then, who were all the true Protestants; many of them laid down their Lives for their Non-conformity. After him, his Son Edw. 6. a religious and zealous Prince, reformed many things, but not all at once; for the Liturgy was twice Reformed in his Reign, Full. Ch. Hist. book 7. p. 386. once in his First Year, and again in a Parliament held in his 5, & 6. Years; and again, in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth; there were also some Alterations made in the Rubrick, 1 Jacob. 1603. saith the same Author. And it is known, that several things unreformed in Edw. 6's Reign, were after taken away; as may be seen by comparing his Injunctions with what afterward was practised in them. We have mention of Coming to Confession in Lent, Art. 9. of High Mass, Art. 21. Prayer for the Dead is expresly injoined in the form of bidding of Common Prayers; all which were afterward removed, name and thing; yea, these very Injunctions gave people Hope of a further Reformation; for they were only intended till a Parliament should be called. And Art. 27. People are injoined, not to violate the Ceremonies not as yet abrogated; which gave the people confidence, that such Superstitions were not to be continued as a Burden to Mens Consciences, but were used for the present supposed necessity.

Sect. 2. The Case is far otherwise with us; we are put beyond all Hope of Relief; a Yoke of Humane Ceremonies wreathed on our Ne…k, without any probability of being loosed from it: For after the King's happy Restauration, then there was the fairest opportunity that could be wished for Condescendence and Accommodation, the Ceremonies having gone into Disuetude for 20 years, and the Nation being more generally against them than ever before, by the Light of the Word, that had for so many years been more freely and fully held forth than before; and when a great number of Ministers presented a Petition for Peace, to their Brethren then commissionate to Reform the Liturgy, and used the strongest Reasons, the most earnest Obtestations, and the greatest Condescentions that could be, to obtain either a taking away of what was grievous to their Consciences, or, at least, a forbearance in them, (all which may be seen at length in the Book it self;) yet nothing was to be obtained, but Impositions made more strict, and our Yoke made heavier than before, rather than lighter; so that there remained no more Hope for our selves, or our Posterity; but either we and they must take up with a Worship, that, we are convinced, is mixt with p. 38some things that maketh it displeasing to God, or live without God's Ordinances, or worship God apart by our selves. May not we appeal to God, and to all the World, That whatever our Brethren talk of Peace and Vnity, we were for Peace, but when we spake, they were for Wars? Psal. 120. 6. while they will not abate nor bear with us in one Ceremony, (which themselves declare Indifferent) for that Peace and Vnity that they extol so highly; yea, for the keeping out of Popery, the re-entry of which they pretend to fear by our Divisions.

Sect. 3. These things being considered, it is very evident, That our Case is not parallel with that of the first Non-conformists, in reference to Communion with the Church, and therefore the Reasons that moved them to go along with the present way, do not conclude, that we ought to do the same; for, 1. There was then a necessity apprehended by some of the best men for retaining some of the Ceremonies that had been in use in Popery, lest too sudden and visible a Change (it being the out-side of Religion that the multitude doth most consider) should have scared the people from owning the Reformation; and we know, Necessitas quicquid coegit defendit: On this Ground even the Apostles retained for a time a little of the Jewish Observations, Act. 15. 28, 29. I do not say, that there was a necessity for this, but it was then thought to be, and therefore must needs influence their minds and practice, as if there really had been such a necessity: But now it is evident to unbyassed men, that there is no such necessity for retaining these Ceremonies. P…pists are so far from being brought over to us by symbolizing with them, that they conceive Hope, from that very thing, of our returning to them; as hath been made appear by several passages in their Writings and Discourses, which I now stay not to rehearse: And in very deed, our Service, especially in Cathedrals, cometh so much nearer to their way, than it doth either to the way of the Apostolick Church (so far as it is recorded in Scripture) or to the way of most of the Reformed Churches; that it were no hard task to bring in Popish Worship (abating the Service being in Latin) and Discipline (for in that also we are at no great distance from Popery) among us, without being observed by the Vulgar. And the necessity is yet the less for retaining them among us, that our People have not been bred in Popery, as in those Times, when the Ceremonies were retained, and therefore are not in that hazard that they were to …all back into Popery upon the abolishing of them; yea, it is so far p. 39from that, that the disuse of these might make Popery to be more forgotten among the people, these being some of the Ornaments by which that whorish Worship was once decked.

Sect. 4. A Second Ground, why the reason of their cleaving to the Church-way doth not conclude for our doing the like, is, They had cause to look on their Grievances but as temporary, and knew that further Reformation was designed, and might be in a short time expected, and therefore it was Reason that they should rather forbear, for that time▪ their Edification, (I mean the external means of it) that they might have had by pure Ordinances, rather than seem to make a Breach. This Reason doth not at all touch us, who are out of all hope of such purity of Ordinances in the Church, as is pleasing to God, or consistent with His Acceptance; (I mean, from us, who know the right way; for I shall not judge what acceptance an impure worship, invincibly not known to be such, may find with God) they had not in vain essayed to make Peace with their Brethren, and been rejected with a peremptory …leaving to the least Indifferent Ceremony, rather than to satisfie the Consciencious Seruples of those who doubted; which is our Case. Therefore we are (even by them who blame us for what they force us to) brought to a necessity of worshipping God apart from them, seeing we neither can now do it, nor hope that afterward we may do it with them. And this our Necessity is heightned, and our Case made yet more different from theirs at the Reformation, when we consider, That that was a time of Reformatio, Status convalescentiae; ours is rather status decidentiae, a time of Encreasing, rather than of Diminishing the number of Superstitions, and coming nearer the Popish Modes, rather than going further from them. Instances of this are not a few; take for a taste the allowing of Plays on the Lord's day; (the zealous promoting of the Book of Sports by that party, is not yet forgotten) whereas that day was, Art. 24. of King Edw. the 6's Injunctions, before mentioned, appointed to be given wholly to God in hearing the Word of God read and taught in private and publick Prayters, &c. A further Conviction in this Matter may be abundantly had from a book entituled, The Advances of England toward Popery; which Book, tho' our Reverend Author labours to disparage, p. 35. of his Preface, yet agreeth so well with what men see with their Eyes, that it is not fit to be slighted; for, Tho' some be mentioned, and blamed in that Book that appeared most zealous against popery, yet it is no Rarity for Words and Deeds to clash. Quid verba p. 40audio cum facta videam? And if it be true, that the Author before his death was sensible of the Injury he had done to some, yet his Evidence that he bringeth will still be compared with what every one saw to be the tendency of some mens way. I might here alledge the obligation of the National Covenant that we are under, as they were not to whom the Dr. would make our Case parallel, tho I never thought, that that Bond made any new Duties or Sins, that were not such antecedently; yet the Oath of God maketh the Tye that we are under to Duty, and against Sin, more weighty, and aggravateth the sin of doing what is contrary to it; but of this afterwards. I conclude then, that the present Reasons of Separation would not have held from the beginning of the Reformation, quod erat probandum.

Sect. 5. The learned Dr. (p. 2.) after explaining the terms of his Assertion which we have denied, proveth the Identity of Reason, in their Case and ours, by the Ceremonies, Liturgy, &c. being the same. Let all this be admitted; as they were dissatisfied with these then, so are we now; but we join not in these practices, as they did, and worship God without them, as they did not; because our Case doth not make these things appear so needful as theirs did, because we have no Hope of Reformation, as they had; beside our being under an additional Tye against such Superstitions, which they were not under. Not content with this, the Dr. thinks to prove, that we are more obliged to join in the Church's Worship, than those at the Reformation: 1. Because of the Number, Diligence, and Learning of our allowed Preachers. 2. Because the Ceremonies are retrenched. 3. Because of the Mischiefs that we have seen of Separation. To the first I answer; As what we complain of in the present Ministry, is not the Ground of our with drawing (though it is a sad Grievance, and tendeth to make the Ordinances of the Lord to be abhorred in the Eyes of the people; as the ways of Eli's Sons did, 1 Sam. 2. 17.) so neither can their Commendation by him given, be a sufficient Reason for our joining in corrupted Ordinances. I confess, the number of the present Ministers is greater than in those days, the generality of the Clergy continuing Popish; and I am far from derogating from some among them, who are learned and diligent (and … add) pious men, and sound Protestants: But as for the far greatest part of the Parish Ministers, that the people are most edified by, or disappointed of their Edification, they are either Strangers to England, or strangely byassed, who see not cause p. 41to complain of their Ignorance, Idleness, and vitious Conversation, if not of all these three. To the Second; I know not what retrenchment hath been made of Ceremonies, since the beginning of Q. Elizabeth's Reign, but I know Additions have been made, if not as to Imposing, yet as to Use, and some Additions to the Holidays hath been imposed; but if they were fewer than they are, they are enough to corrupt the Worship of God, and furnish as strong an Argument to forbear such corrupted Worship, as if they were more numerous. A grain of Arsenick may justly make one forbear a Dish in which it is, as well as if there were two or three in it. To the Third; As he hath seen Mischiefs of Separation, and we do not extenuate them, so have we of Impositions, yea, all the Mischiefs of that kind are justly imputable to these Impositions, they being the Cause of the Separation; and, causa causae est causa causati. Our Ancestors had hope of freedom from that Yoke, as hath been said, which we have not; therefore no Inconvenience (that is not our Sin) can warrant us to join with, and in the depravations of the Worship of God, which were our Sin, as neither can such inconvenience excuse us to live without Ordinances alwaies, as the former Non-conformist… might do for a time.

Sect. 6. In his 2. Section, he cometh to the proof of the other part of his Assertion, to wit, That there was no Separation practised or allowed by those who were most Zealous for the Reformation. He confesseth there were different apprehensions about some few Things; but denieth that they were the Things now Scrupled at; and that any Separation was made because of them. I shall not much dispute either of these, because the Cause that I defend is not much concerned in them, but standeth on a better foundation, than the opinions or practices of men: And because our case and reasons differs from theirs as hath been shewed, yet shall I a little examine what he alledgeth under both these heads. For the former of them; he proveth it only from Mr. Roger, Scrupling only the square Cap and Tippet; and B. Hooper Scrupling only the Episcopal H…bit, to which afterward he submitted: And Bucer and others scrupled the Liturgy till it was reformed, but none after that scrupled any of the Things now in Controversy. Here is Fall…cious if not false History, for with Rogers and Hooper, called Ring-leaders of the party by one who was no friend to them▪ are re…koned others who had sted beyond Sea, and suck'd in both the Air and Discipline of the place where they lived, and renounced all Ceremonies practised by Papists, conceiving that such ought not only p. 42to be clipt with the Sheers, but to be shaved with the Razor; yea, all the stums thereof to be pluckt out. Fuller Ch. Hist. Lib. 7. pa. 402. These fugitiv…s (if it be not too bad a name for them) I understand of Hen. 8's. Reign of whom Fox, Act. and Mon. Book 3. p. 145. in the History of Hooper, one of them, they being also joined with them by Fuller. Is all this no more than two mens scrupling only some Habits? Or is not here rather a considerable number exactly of our opinion about all humane Ceremonies in the worship of God? 2. What he saith of Mr. Rogers is a very Imperfect Representation of him, for Fox, Act. and Monu. Vol. 3. pa. 131. (the place which he citeth) saith no such thing, as that this was Mr. Rogers only scruple: and Mr. Fuller (loco citato) saith the contrary. Mr. Fox is telling a story of his Dissent from a Determination of the Bishops and Clergy in the Reign of Edw. 6. for wearing of Priests Caps and other Attire belonging to that order: Mr. Rogers said, He would not agree to that decree of uniformity, unless it be also decreed, that the Papists for a difference betwixt them and others, should wear on their sl…eves a Chalice with an Host upon it; which sheweth his factious and resolute way of refusing that thing, on that occasion, rather than, that he did not scruple any thing else; and it hath no shew of probability that such a wise and holy man, would stick at that, and not at other Ceremonies, that had as little warrant, and were more intrinsick to Religion and worship, and so less in the power of men to be Determined.

Sect. 7. 3. We may say the same of excellent Hooper who was long at Zurick, and very dear to Bullinger, and one of those that had suck'd in the Air and Discipline of the Places where they lived, and were for rooting out of Ceremonies. He was a Ring-leader of these, and this his scrupling the Episcopal Habit is never mentioned as the whole of his Opnion about Ceremonies, but is taken notice of on a particular Occasion. For his after submission; it was by the force of Temptation, being in prison, and Deserted by his patron, the Earl of Warwick. Fuller ubi supra, p. 404. And with what reluctancy he did it, see p. 405. 4. That on the review of the Liturgy in the Reign of King Edw. 6. there was little or no Dissatisfaction left; at least as to the things now scrupled, is still false History; for that review was Anno 1547. Full. Ch. Hist. Lib. 7. p. 386. whereas 1550. he telleth us pa. 402. of two parties discovered, Conformists and Non-conformists, and the one against all the Ceremonies.

Sect. 8. That there was no separation at first he next asserteth; p. 43but people (tho scrupling them) complyed with the use of Liturgies and Cerimonies. May be it was so at the very first, while Reformation was hopefull going on. I have already shewed why we are not bound by such Examples: I shall now Apologize for the unimitable practice of the those holy men, to excuse them atanto, though not atoto. The glorious Change that then was wrought in the Church, did so affect then, & engage their zealous hearts to Gods Ordinances, that they did not so throughly consider, as they ought, the sinfulness of the Ceremonies: They had got so many things reformed, the evil of which was so incomparably beyond that of the Ceremonies, that these seemed as nothing to them. It is known that the limitted & scant powers of our Souls, our Understandings, Affections; yea, our Senses are by some vehement Objects so diverted, as that meaner Objects at the same time cannot move them, nor be noticed by them. It was much that these men discovered any evil in the Ceremonies, but that the principles that the Reformation was built on led them to that; (to wit) That Scripture is the Rule by which the Affairs of the House of God must be ordered; but it is no wonder that they did not so fully discover the Evil of them, nor were so affected with it, as we who have had longer time and less hindrance to think on these things. I am far from thinking, that they had either less Light, or less tenderness of Conscience than we, but that their Mind and Conscience were exercised about higher Matters, which we have (through the Lord's goodness) so settled to our hand, that reforming of these is not our Work. They were imployed to do the hardest part of the Work; to cast out Antichristianism; it was left to others that succeeded them to cast out of the House a little of Antichrist's Furniture, that had been forgotten, or by minding greater things, over-lookt, lying in some corners of the House: So that it doth no more inferr blame on us forbearing the use of the Ceremonies that they used them, while they reformed the Church from Popery, than it was a Blame to Hezekiah, Jos…ah, and such Reformers, who took away the High Places that other Reformers had left, when they threw out Baal's Worship.

Sect. 9. This may satisfie an unbyassed mind, that our non-compliance with the Liturgy and Ceremonies is consistent with all that respect that is due to those excellent Persons, who in the beginning of the Reformation practised otherwise; for we owe such respect to no man, nor men, as to reckon them infallible in Opinion or Practice. Also what hath been said may take off the edge of the Dr's p. 44jeering Insinuations, That these things are now such Bug-bears to scare People from our Communion, and make them cry out in such dreadful manner, of the mischief of Impositions, as though the Church must unav…idably be broken in pieces by the weight and burden of two or three unsupportable Ceremonies. We have little Answer to this sort of Argumentation, only we say, It is not Childish Fear, but Conscience guided by Scripture, that scareth us; neither do we count these Ceremonies such as will break (tho' they defile) the Church, but they are too heavy for our Consciences to bear, and the example of men using them, can yield us no ease of this Burden. When the Dr. doth thus ridicule the Scruples of Conscience, that his opposites pretend to have, either he thinketh, that an Erring Conscience is to be cured by contempt and scorn, or that we do only pretend to Conscience in our Dissent: The former is no sign of a good Casuist, nor the latter of a good Christian; for such will not judge, lest they be judged. He stormeth much at two Expressions of one of his Antagonists; one is, That it is unreasonable, that Men should create a necessity of Separation, and then complain of the Impossibility of Vnion: Hath our Church (saith he) made new Terms of Communion, or altered the old ones? Ans. Though the Terms of Communion be not new, as to the matter of them, they are perpetuated on new grounds, which make them now harder to be submitted to than before, for they were brought in at first on a present Necessity, as then was thought, the Nation being Popish, and ready to abandon the Reformation, if that was offended. Now it is not so; they were continued in a Reforming time, and now fixed in a time when no such thing is to be expected, but rather the contrary: They were retained in the Morning twi-light of the Reformation, but now in the Noon-day of Gospel-light long shining among us, fixed in perpetuity, so that the present Prelates give a new Being to these Stumbling-blocks; especially, they are new grounds of Separation, because now they are scrupled at more than at first; and though the things were before, yet they did not such Mischief then as now; and therefore, they who continued them when thus hurtful, (though it were granted, that the hurt of them arose from the mistake of the Scruplers) do create a necessity of Separation, while they may remove these scandals, and will not. But they that scruple, cannot remove their Scruples. The other Expression is, That continuing of the Ceremonies, is, venturing our Peace in an old Worm-eaten Bottom; which the Dr. against all Reason, understandeth of the Reformation, but is indeed to be understood p. 45of the Ceremonies. The Reformation is founded on Scripture, a sure and sound Foundation. The Ceremonies on Mens Will and Authority, and therefore justly termed a Worm-eaten Bottom. That he saith, There was no Non-conformists in K. Edw. 6. days, is before disproved; and if there had not, while we can give Scripture-ground for our Non-conformity, we need not be ashamed, tho' Martyrs and other Reformers acted otherwise.

Sect. 10. That Dr. Ames can bring no other Instances but Rogers and Hooper, is nothing against us, who have before shewed that a Party they had, of whom they were the Ring-leaders. He seemeth, p. 5. to lay some weight on P. Martyr and Bucer, perswading Hooper to submit to the Episcopal Habit; I deny not but they di… so, and he at last yielded to their Advice; but P. Martyr, in the Epistle cited by the Dr. (to wit) Ep. Theolog. Hoopero, p. mihi, 1085. doth there fully declare his dislike of these things, and of all Humane Inventions in God's Worship, only that for the necessity that then was, adviseth the Use of them; as the Apostles on the like ground (as he there mentioneth) forbad eating of things strangled, &c. He highly commendeth Hooper's Zeal in endeavouring, Vt ad castam simplicem que puritatem christiana religio denuo aspir…t; and desireth, Vt omnia paulatim resecentur—quae parum aut nihil habent, quae ad solidam aedificationem referri p…ssint, & redundare potius & superflua quodammodo piis animis judicantur. And he commendeth the practice at Strasburg, (where he lived) Vbi vestrum discrimina quoad sacra sunt sublata, as being Morem candidiorem & apprime resipientem Apostolicam ecclesiam: And after he saith, Accendit hoc meum desiderium, partim quod in ritibus, quamproxime vellem ad sacras literas accedere, at que meliorum temporum ecclesiae imitatione persequi, partim quod animadverto, papae sectatores adhuc his reliquiis conari speciem saltem missae instaurare: And afterwards, Si pateremur prius evangelium & propagari & altas radices agere, melius fortasse & facilius persuaderentur homines ut hos externos apparatus removerent. And he addeth a Similitude of one that was sick, and recovered by degrees, who cannot forbear the use of some unfit things, that in health he will willingly put away. Doth not all this fully express what I have already said, That all the Ceremonies ought to have been cast out at first? That the Reformers, partly by the Church's, and their want of due light (like one in a state of Convalescency) and partly out of a design to gain, and not offend the Papists, did for a time retain these Ceremonies, with a design to have them afterward removed? And is it not plain, p. 64that P. Martyr, under our circumstances, would be a Non conformist as well as we? The opinion of this good man is yet more clear, and against the Dr. out of another Epistle, Amico cuidam in Anglia, who none that readeth the Letter, and knoweth the History, can doubt to be Hooper, p. (mihi) 1126, 1127. where he saith, De pil… vero rotundo vel habitu, extra sacra gestando, non arbitramur esse plus quam opor…eat rixandum, at de vestibus ut Sacris in ministerio ipso adhibendis cum sp…ciem Missae referant, & sunt merae papatus reliquiae, Dominus Bullingerus cens…t non esse illis utendum; ego vero et si usui ejusmodi ornamentorum semper sum adversatus—idcirco tardior eram ad suadendum, ut potius episcopatum abdicares, quam u… illarum vestium usum reciperes; attamen quia scandala ejus generis vidi prorsus evitanda, propterea in ejus sententiam fucile cessi. He after adviseth, that he may not act against his Conscience, and sheweth, that he himself, when at Oxford, though he were Canonicus, yet would never wear the Surplice in the Quire. I say nothing of Bucer, not having his Book, Script. Anglican. but it is reasonable to think that he was of the samemind.

Sect. 11. That Mr. Bradford was a Non-conformist he cannot deny, but saith, A good man had an unreasonable Scruple. Might not we answer the same way to all his Allegations of the Martyrs and first Reformers compliance with the Ceremonies; (to wit) That good men did not scruple where it was reasonable that they should. The words that he cited out of the Act. and Monument. Vol. 3. P. 319. where Mr. Bradford calleth Martyrdom the Lord's Cognizance, and not Tippets, &c. do rather make against than for his Design; for it's plain, that he putteth Tippets, &c. in the same Rank with Shaven Crowns, and calleth them Antichristian Baggage; and no reason can be given why these should be so called, except that they are brought into Religion by Man, not by God; which agreeth to all the Ceremonies. Who they were that kept secret Meetings under B. Ridley, it is needless to enquire. The Dr. guesseth, that they were furious Anabaptists or secret Papists. I know no reason for this guess; but because he is resolved▪ that there shall be no No…-conformists then, such as are now; but that there then were some excellent men, who disliked the Ceremonies, I have shewed; that some of them did use them notwithstanding, I acknowledge. That any did separate, I do not undertake to prove; nor can he prove the contrary, so much as probably. I am sure, there were Principles then maintained by a Party of men, which would have made them do as we do, if their Practice had been sufficiently p. 65adapted to the Sentiments that they had about the Ceremonies, which maketh it not unprobable that some of them did withdraw; though it may be the men of more note among them, who considered the necessity of their Case, as warranting that Practice, might do otherwise; but it is no way likely, that the Church did so furiously impose these things on the Consciences of Scruplers, as we are now imposed on.

Sect. 12. The Dr's long Harrangue, p. 6, 7. to condemn our practice by the contrary practice of the first Reformers, doth either prove nothing, or it concludeth, that it is possible that such holy Men could mistake: Which before he himself had imputed to holy Mr. Bradford, one of them here mentioned by him. Their Holiness, Learning, Integrity, Industry, profound Judgment, Mortification, did not entitle them to Infallibility. Were it not easie to name many more men of all these excellent qualities, who have had their Navi? The laying such weight on men, hath been an useful tool to build up Antichristian Babel, b… taking People off from eyeing Scripture Authority in the matters of Christ, and putting that of Men in its room. Doth the Dr. thing it strange, that a dissenting Artifi…er (a term suited to that Contempt of Non-conformists that his Book is full of) should be in the right, when one more Holy and Learned than he is in the wrong; especially in things of that moment that the Ceremonies are of? For, I look on it as taunting, not disputing, to talk of the mighty importance of the Ceremonies to the Souls of Men; the Beams of Vnlawfulness in them, of which a Mote could not be seen by the Reformers; we count them of such Importance, as a tender Conscience ought to refuse them, and yet not of such mighty Importance as many other things are. We see a M…te, not Beams, of unlawfulness in them, whatever our Ancestors thought of them: Neither is this because of a dark and Jewish Dispensation that they were under, while all the clear Gospel-Light of Division and Separation is reserved for our Times, as the Author pleasantly dreams that we think; they were not so favoured with a general Sun-shine of Light as we are, Popish Darkness being then but going away: But for the Light of Division and Separation, we look on it as gross Darkness, and leave it to our imposing Brethren, who cause the Division. Neither was it the Reformer's want of Zeal for Religion, but want of Light and Zeal against Ceremonies, that caused their different Practice from …urs; they Burnt for the former, not for the latter▪ Neither is it strange, that they should have no suspicion of the unlawfulness p. 48of these things, when they went to suffer, seeing these things never were controverted between them & their Persecutors. Was it never heard of, that true Martyrs had Mistakes that were extrinsick to that on which their Sufferings were st…ted? What he citeth out of Jacob, the Non-conformist against Johnson the Separatist, p. 7. doth not touch our Case, for the Separatist… that then were, went on other Grounds than we do; of which after; and if Mr. Jacob used some Arguments that were ill grounded, l…t him answer for it.

Sect. 13. As to the Historical Account that he giveth, Sect. 3. of the English Exiles in Queen Mary's Reign at Frankford, and elsewhere, I shall not controvert it, only I shall make a few Animadversions on it, having first in general noted, That it is no wonder (nor is it argumentative against us, who take Scripture, not Mens Opinions for our Rule) that they who in England were inured to that less-pure way of Worship, did cleave to it abroad, till by seeing and learning away more consonant to Scripture, they fell in with that: And it is as little to be wondred at, that some gave more pliable Ears to the right way that they were instructed in, in strange places; and others clave more obstinately to that they had been bred with; (we know what a prejudice Education causeth) and he…c… arose those Contests that he mentioneth. If he could prove (as he cannot) that all the Non-conformity that is in England, was brought from beyond Sea, he saith nothing, unless he also prove, that it was not brought out of the Scripture. We must not reject every thing in Religion that is not of English Original, lest we by so doing throw off both Christianity and Protestantism.

S…ct. 10. In particular, I first take notice of what he saith, p. 8. These (English Exiles) with the People in all other places, Geneva excepted, kept to the Orders established in our Church. Here is a notable Falshood, (to wit) That all the Exiles kept to the Orders of the Church of England; himself excepteth those at Frankford; and Mr. Fuller, above-cited, telleth us of a Party of Non-conformists, before that time in England, headed by Rogers and Hooper; no doubt some of them fled from the Marian Persecution, and it is not probable they would use the Ceremonies that here grieved them, when they were under no Law to …ompel them. Another thing that I take notice of, is, He challengeth Mr. Baxter for saying, That at Frankford the Contest was between them who were for the English Liturgy, and them who were for a more free way of Praying; but I see not how this is disproved by him; the Confirmation of it may be p. 49rather gathered from the Accompt he giveth of these Debates, p. 9. (to wit) that when the Magistrates first required them not to dissent from the French in Doctrine or Ceremonies, and then took off that restraint: Yet they altered the English order, and brought it nearer to the French Model; which we know doth not impose a Liturgy, nor restrain free Prayer; but at most proposeth a Directory, wherein are some set Forms, as helps to them that need them. To say, that those who laid aside the Responses, Litany, and Surplice, …d many other things, were still for the English Liturgy, is to speak at random. But he omitteth a material passage, (because it maketh against him) with which Fuller, Ch. Hist. lib. 8. p. 27. supplieth us, out of the same History that the Dr. citeth, (to wit) The Troubles at Frankford: That they laid aside the Liturgy, Surplice and other Ceremonies in Service and Sacraments, both as superfluous, and superstitious: wherein then did they differ from Non-conformists?

Sect. 14. He saith, p. 9. That the Question among them was not, Whether a Liturgy, or not; but whether the Order of Divine Service, was not to be accommodated, as much as might be, to the French. This is to confess, that they did not contend for the English Liturgy, as he telleth us some others did, who were dissatisfied with their deserting of it. But I further Assert, That the Controversy was between a Liturgy and Directory, to wit, between the way of England, and that of the French Protestants, who have no Liturgy, but as other Protestant Churches had; an order of publick worship, for directing unqualified Ministers; such many behoved to be in the beginning of Reformation from Popery, to the set Forms, in which they were not tied, whom the Lord had competently gifted for the Work of the Ministry: So as in the best Reformed Churches; these Directories were by Degrees disused, as Crutches are by a Lame Man, as he recovereth the use of his Limbs. p. 10. He telleth us of some resolute Conformists at Zurick and Strasburg, who were earnest with the Non-conformists at Frankford. We deny not that there were such among them, who suffered for Protestantism. What those of Frankford say p. 10. of not defacing King Edward's Laws, must be understood of Laws for the Protestant Religion, not of those for Ceremonies; otherwise it had been protestatio contraria facto; and p. 11. Their not dissenting from their Brethren wholly at the ransom of their Lives for this Doctrine, must needs have the same interpretion, if we will reconcile them to themselves. And their extenuating, p. 50as much as might be the Alterations they had made, sheweth them to be peaceable Men, that shun Offence, if possible; but doth not prove them to be for the English Liturgy; yea, or for any Liturgy.

Sect. 15. He speaketh (p. 11.) of Knox and Whittingham, finding their (the Exiles at Frankfora's) Zeal for the English Liturgy, desired Calvin's judgment of it. I find no such Zeal at Frankford, for the English Liturgy: but the Dr. will have it so in despite of History, that telleth us of their laying aside its Ceremonies as Superfluous, and Superstitious: of which before. It was not those of Frankford, but of S…rasburg, whose Zeal for the Liturgy (if it may be so called, for they desire but the Substance of it to be retained; quitti…g the Ceremonies, and things which the Country could bear) occasioned the calling for Calvin's Judgment. Fuller, Ch. Hist. lib. 8. s. 3. p. 29, 30. out of Troubles of Frankford, p. 24. In giving Accompt of Calvin's Answer to their Desire, he representeth Calvin as byassed and selfish; being throughly heated in a cause, that so nearly concerned him: It had been fairer to have refuted his opinion, than to judge his Thoughts and Motives. He saith also, that what Calvin thought most unfit, yet he thought tolerable. Calvin saith not so, pace tua dixerim, he saith, There were in it, multae tolerabiles ineptiae; not that all things in it were such: Any that know Calvin's Principles will say, that he thought some things in it no ineptiae, and other things not tolerabiles. And what he saith of the Tolerableness of these fooleries is no more, but that they might be born with for a time; because they could not be corrected primo statim die. He doth then not count them tolerable; for he approveth them that appeared against them (tho he Condemneth the most unseasonable contest, that was in that Church) neque tamen (saith he) eorum Constantiam repr…hendo, qui, ut pro justa causa depugnent, in vilem contentionem trahuntur. He speaketh of these things, as not to have been tolerated, even in England, after the Progress of the Reformation. Si hactenus in Anglia viguisset sincera religio, aliquod in melius correctum multaque detracta esse oportuit. Much more to this purpose is in that Epist. which is (mihi) 200, cited by the Dr. for 164. It is true, he speaketh of his easiness, to yield in indifferent things, such as are External Rites. This must be understood of Rites common to Religion: and others, not of sacred Ceremonies; or if of those, it is for a Time of urgent necessity, not always, that they may be Tolerated. That Calvin gave no incouragement to Separation, if p. 51the Ceremonies were continued, is said gratis; and in defiance of his own Words, while he commendeth them, who stood up against them; and the Sequel proved, that Calvin was so understood by them who regarded his judgment; for Fuller, p. 31, 32. giveth us the Story of their hard usage by the other party; and of their departure from them, being Headed by Whittingham, after Knox's removal, and setteth down the Names of them, who separated themselves from the Congregation of Frankford.

Sect. 16. He denieth (p. 12.) That Calvin was in his Judgment for free Prayer, because in his Ep. 55. (mihi 87.) to the Protector of England; he approveth a certain form, and giveth Reasons for it. It is evident, that Calvin giveth this Advice for the necessity of the Church▪ that then was, Popery being then scarce well removed, and there being few Pastors tolerably gifted for their work, and some who Laboured to sow the Seeds of Errors in Christs newly dressed Fields, whom he calleth cerebrosos homines; I suppose he meaneth the Anabaptists. That Calvin designed no more, by this is manifest, both because at Geneva, and other Churches that owned Calvin's Doctrine, Prayer was not restrained by an imposed Liturgy; but mens infirmity relieved by some forms also; because Calvin, in the same Letter to the Protector, adviseth, that all the abuses brought into Popery, should be removed; and that by bringing back things to Christ's Institution, as the Apost. doth, 1 Cor. 11. 23. Inde (saith he) colligend… generalis Doctrina, tum de legitima reformatione & quae Deo accepta sit; igitur ad ipsum purum dei verbum redeundum nobis esse, etenim supererunt mixturae ex hominum ingenio prolatae, totidem extabunt polutiones quae homines distrahant a recto eorum usu quae Dominus in ipsorum salutem instituerat, and much more to that purpose: No Non-conformists will desire a further Reformation, than Calvin there adviseth to; however he was forbearing with some things for the present necessity, as good men then generally were. He telleth us that the Ceremonies (making no exception of the few that were retained) were lenocinia quae miseras animas ad malum perducerent: That no Admonition against the abuse of them, will hinder men to be hardened by them. He confesseth that Ceremonies should be Accommodated to the Peoples Capacity, but we must beware, least under that pretext, any thing be left that proceedeth from Satan or Antichirst; and compareth such a way of reforming to leaving of the High Places untaken away. He blameth leaving of some things unreformed, to … the D…ss…tisfaction of p. 52some; and saith, that in our own Matters, such yielding is allowable, not in Gods matters; and that God will be with us, if we keep his way, whatever Men think or act against us. Who ever, without prejudice, readeth that excellent Ep. will not look on Calvin, as a Favourer of either the English Liturgy, or Humane Ceremonies.

Sect. 17. He doth very unduly represent Calvin's Judgment expressed in his Ep. to Cox and his Brethren, 165 (mihi 206.) He there mentioneth nothing mis-represented to him, save that Cox and his Party had precisely urged the English Ceremonies, and that they would remit nothing of them: But now by their Letter he perceived, that they had shewed themselves magis humanos & tractabiles: Here indeed are different Representations; but not of the State of the Controversie, or things controverted: Which of them was truest, we shall see a little after. It is false to say, That he expresseth himself satisfied, that the matter was so composed among them; his Words are, Totum negotium placide fuisse compositum gaudeo; he was pleased with their peace, not with their decision. And that this was falsly by Cox, and the rest, represented to Calvin, will appear, when I shall shew that their Debate made a very unpeaceable end. Calvin doth not mention Lights to be an Excuse for his Letter; but Them and Crosses, he mentioneth as superstitious usages to be abolished: Neither needed he a miserable shift to excuse any thing that he had written: His first Letter on Knox and Whittingham's Information, advising the abolishing of the Ceremonies; his second on Cox's Information, applauding their supposed peaceableness, which he rejoiced in, tho he could not obtain his first desire.

Sect. 18. That they at Frankford did compromise the matter, as he alledgeth, p. 13. I do not find. Fuller saith, p. 30. That Calvin's Letter struck such a stroke, especially in the Congregation at Frankford, that some therein, who formerly partly approved, did afterwards wholly dislike; and more who formerly disliked, did now detest the English Liturgy. Our Author telleth us of Dr. Cox's setting up the Litany, which put Knox in a rage, so as he declaimed against the English Church, as far as his Wit and Ill-will could carry him. Woe to the World, if such partial and false History carry the Day! But we see what we are to think of the most ancient and remote History, when, so near our own time, matters of Fact are so unjustly represented. Fuller, u…i supra, telleth us, That Dr. Cox, a Man of high Spirit, p. 53with some of his Friends, arrived there, and, March 13. discompose the Model of their Service; first answering aloud after the Minister, and on the Sunday following, one of his Company, without the Consent and Knowledge of the Congregation, got up into the Pulpit, and there read all the Litany; and Citeth for this, Troubles of Frankford, p. 38. whereat Knox highly offended, Preaching from his Ordinary Text, shewed the English Book to be Superstitious, Vnpure and Imperfect. Is here any thing of Rage, or what did not become sober Zeal for God, and his Ordinances, which were interrupted in their peaceable Administration by a proud-Stranger, intruding into the Pulpit without a call from the Minister or the Church?

Sect. 19. We are told by the Dr. ibid. from a Letter of Grindal to Ridley, that the Church at Frankford was well quieted by the Prudence of Mr. Cox and others, which met there, for that purpose: But a more Impartial Historian (out of the Book that the Dr. pretendeth to follow), tho he be no Non-conformist, telleth us what a peaceable end this Debate came to; even such an end, as a blo…dy Victory useth to bring to an unhappy War: And such a Peace as the Non-conformists in England at this day have under Prelatists of the same temper with Dr. Cox; and such as the poor Jews had in Shushan, when the King and Haman sate down to eat and drink, Esth. 3. 15. The fore-cited Author, p. 30, 31. telleth how Cox prevailed by new Recruits out of England: And Knox's Party again by the Favour of the Magistrate, and the French Minister: And that Cox's Party being depressed, embraced a strange way to raise themselves, and accuse Knox to the State, of Treason against the Emperour; and that in Eight places of a Book of his. The seven last the Historian saith, may be well Omitted. The first is, That he called the Emperour no less an Enemy to Christ, than was Nero. This the Impartial Historian cryeth out on; the Words being spoken some Years before in England, by one that owned no Natural Allegiance to the Emperour; that they should be charged on him, by Men of his own Religion, in Exile with him, to the endangering of his Life: And of this, he saith, alluding to Rachel's Words, With great rather than good Wrestling, have I wrestled, and prevailed. So was Mr. Knox advised by the Magistrate to depart; not forbidden by the Congregation (as the Dr. saith) to Preach: And those that clave to him, were scattered. Here is Episcopal Peace, and here is a taste of the Spirit and Methods, by which they carry on their Cause. But further, the s…me Author telleth us, how harshly the Coxioens p. 54(it is his own word) used the other party, ejecting their Church-Officers, without taking any notice of them, or asking their consent. Also how they refused to let the matter come to Hearing or Arbitration, by which he saith, Cox's party lost much Reputation. How they reproached the other as Schismaticks, when they had made the Shism in a peaceable Church. And after he telleth us, how Cox's party brake among themselves about other things, oftner than once, and that to a scandalous heighth. Which may be seen at length in the Author. If this be convenient in a Congregation, let any judge; it is strange that the Dr. and Mr. Fuller both, should Read these Historical passages, with so different Spectacles.

Sect. 20. The Dr. telleth us, Sect. 4. P. 13, 14. That the Controversy was not carried out of England with them, but as Hooper in Switzerland, so they in Geneva, and elsewhere, got a better likeing of their Church-way, than of Ours; that being such as the Country would bear: And it is hard to remove Prejudic…s, especially when they have such Abetters, whose Authority goes beyond any Reason with them. And that is the true Foundation of our unhappy Differences, that yet continue. I have abridged his Words; but given the full sence of them. And now I shall Note a few things on this Discourse. 1. He will not allow it, it seems, that Non-conformists of old, or late, have ever made the Bible the Rule of their worshipping God: No, they are meer Consuetudinary Men, and soon taken with any new Fashion, and so Obstinate, that they will not part with any Custom, when once taken up. Thus he is pleased to picture those that dissent from him: We expected more Charity from him. 2. If Non-conformists cannot prove what they hold, by Scripture, and sound Reason; let them lie under as much of his Reproach, as he shall please to cast upon them. But if they can, I hope he will retract this rash Censure. 3. If Custom did so far Influence these men, methinks the Customs that they had first received in their native Country, should have been a sufficient Antidote against all Foreign Infection to the contrary. But their being taken with the way in other Countries, rather sheweth, that their former way was built on Custom and Education; and that the Change was from Scripture Light, that they had met with abroad, which they could not resist. 4. I have shewed before, that they had these principles before they went abroad; even in King Edward 6's. Time, there were not a few of that way. 5. It is strange that all Countries beside England, are so Clownish, that they cannot bear the Pomp and Ceremonies of Divine Worship here used: How then p. 55doth Popery get any Entertainment beyond Sea, even among the Sw…ssers; which Religion will vie with Ours in outward Splendor? If the Genius of a Nation did determine men in Religion (as the Dr. insinuateth in this cas…) how is it that the Ceremonies are not used among the Protestants in France, which is the pattern for Modishness and Gaiety to England, and other parts of the World? but this is so indigested a Notion, that it doth not well become the Learning of Dr. Stilling fleet; tho it be good enough for some to rant with over a Pot of Ale. 6. Whether our party or his, be more guilty of Obstinate insisting on mens Authority, in defiance of Reason, let the World judge. We are content to set aside all the Authority of men, Ancient and Modern; and to referr our debate simply to the Determination of Scripture: But mens Authority is the Argument that the Dr. in this Book doth most insist upon. I hope the Reader may by this time perceive, whether the Dr. doth truly or faIsly Assign the Foundation of our Differences, which I, with him, acknowledge to be unhappy.

Sect. 21. He saith, p. 14. That in the English Reformation, they proceeded more out of reverence to the Ancient Church, than meer opposition to Popery (which some other Reformers made their Rule.) Here are two mistakes not to be passed in silence▪ 1. The Ancientest Church had none of the Ceremonies; they were neither in the Apostolick Church, nor in that which was near it. How ancient they were, he will after give occasion to enquire. So that England took for their pattern, the Church that was much declined both in Antiquity and Purety. 2. What can be more grosly false, than to say, that other Reformers made meer opposition to Popery with their rules. Two things make the contrary evident. 1. They did not reject all that Papists held, as, That there is one God, &c. 2. They rejected nothing of Popery, but what they gave other reasons for, than that the Papists held it: (to wit) That it was contrary to Scripture, or not instituted by Christ; and so condemned in Scripture, as vain Worship, being a Teaching for Doctrines, the Commandments of men. We make Symbolizing with Papists, or other Idolaters, an Argument against the Ceremonies; but we reject them not on that account only; and so meer opposition to Popery, is not the rule of our Reformation.

Sect. 22. He complaineth that Calvin and others, did insinuate, that the English Reformation was Imperfect. Nay, they openly main…ained it; and so do we. He doth twice mis-represent Calvin's p. 56Words, p. 14, 15. That he had avowed in the Letter before-cited to the Protector, That the best Rule of Reformation, is, to go as far from Popery as they could. No such Words are to be found in that Letter; nor any thing that will import so much. He doth indeed press the removing of all Popish Ceremonies, as having been abused to Idolatry; and citeth, Psal. 16. 4. Where David saith, That he will not take up the names of idols in his mouth…, but he neither maketh this the Rule, nor the best Rule of Reformation. He knew that Scripture and Institution (which he had a little before-mentioned) was the Rule, and a far better Rule than that: Tho' even that hath its use to direct us in Reformation of the Church. Again, he saith, That Calvin yieldeth to this Moderation, that such Ceremonies might be retained, as were easie, and fitted to the Capacity of the People; provided they were not such as had their beginning from the Devil, or Antichrist. His words are, Adeoque Ceremonias ipsas ad usum & captum esse accommodandas; sed non minus constanter affirmo, Videndum esse ne sub illo praetextu toleratur quicquam quod a Satana vel Antichristo profectum sit. Here is no advice to retain any Humane Ceremonies, but all of that sort fall under that Censure, they being not from God, and being Parts of Worship, they are from Satan, or Antichrist; but he would have all the Externals of Worship, so fitted to peoples capacity, as that they do not hinder, but rather help in the inward exercise of it. And if Calvin did yield in that Infancy of the Reformation (which I think he did not, otherwise he could not blame the Imperfection of it) That the Ceremonies might be retained, it maketh nothing for perpetuating of them. The Dr. saith, They proceeded by this Rule of Moderation, taking away all the Ceremonies that were of late Invention: And he saith, p. 14. That the Ceremonies retained, were more ancient than the great Apostasy of the Roman Church. It had been fit to have removed all that were of Humane Invention, for Antiquity can neither prejudice Christ's Institu…ions; nor warrant Mens. But it is not true, that all the Ceremonies retained were so ancient, as shall be made appear in due time, foreign, of Kneelling in the Act of receiving the Lord's Supper. Neither will it free our Ceremonies from being Popish, that they were before the great Apostasy, if it be made appear, that they were with a considerable degree of the Apostasy; yea, and a part of it.

Sect. 23. He endeavoureth to free our Ceremonies from Popery, because the Cross is used by Papists in the Scrutinies before Baptism; we p. 57use it after Baptism; and Kneeling is not strictly required by the Roman Church, in the act of Receiving; as appeareth by the Pope's sitting, or a little leaning. For the first, What great difference doth it make, whether Crossing be used before or after Baptism, seeing it is not to be omitted, but belongeth to that Sacrament, as one of its Adjuncts? Our quarrel with it is not that it is used after Baptism, but that it is used, being none of Christ's Institutions, but of Man's Invention, and abused in the Popish Administration of Baptism. For the Second, I hope he will not deny, that Kneeling in the act of Receiving is the constant Practice, and required among the Papists; and, That the Pope, who to them is above the Laws of God, should be exempted from the Laws of their Church, is so insignificant an Argument against Kneeling, being required by them, that I wonder to see it used by so Learned a man. For his Plain Linen Garment, only used instead of many of the Popish V…stments, which was used in the time of Jerom and Austin; I deny that it is the only Vestment that they use as appropriated to Religion and religious Persons; any who read…th the Book of Canons, made Anno 1603. Can. 74. may see the contrary, the Reverend Clergy there busying themselves to order the fashion of Cloaths, that all of them should use. But, that the Surplice is as ancient as Hierom and Augustin, I shall not now examine, seeing it is too well known, that many Abuses were crept into the Church sooner than their days; the one flourishing in the end of the Fourth Century, the other in the Fifth. I see no cause why any man should stand amazed at the noise that is made against the mischief of these Impositions, as he saith, p. 16. seeing all that he hath said, do…h not clear them from being Men's Devices in God's Worship, and consequently vain Worship, which is a burden to any Conscience that regardeth Christ's Authority more than that of Men.

Sect. 24. He pretendeth, Sect. 5. to give Reasons why the Ceremonies were retained by our Reformers, tho' they were distasteful to some Protestants, and like to prove the Occasions of future Contentions. These Reasons are three, 1. Out of a due reverence to Antiquity. 2. To justifie the Reformation before Enemies, in that we would not break with them for meer indifferent things. 3. To shew our consent with the Protestant Churches. To these I return a word or two in general, and then shall answer them particularly. …. Why was not Scripture consulted in this weighty matter, which wise men think is a safer and better Rule of Reformation than any of the Three here mentioned? p. 58Shall we slight or cross Christ's Institution in the Worship of God, for the sake of Antiquity, or Papists, or Protestants either? I am far from thinking, that our Reformers had so little regard to Scripture; nay, that was the Weapon they alwaies used against the Papists, tho' in reference to the Ceremonies, they did not so well consider it, as they should have done. But the Dr. and his Party seem to lay little weight on it in this Controversie, for he maketh little or no use of it through this large Book, which is somewhat strange in a Controversie of Divinity. It is foreign, to use weapons so far different from those of the Apostles; and therefore I hope they will not prove mighty through Christ, as his were, 2 Cor. 10. 4. None of these Reasons, nor all of them in conjunction, is sufficient to establish any point of Truth, or to warrant any part of Divine Worship: Wherefore they should first have proved the Ceremonies to be lawful, and then these three Reasons might well have come in as Auxiliaries to confirm the use of them; but to manage the Worship of God by such Considerations, without any other Reason was too slender a Ground to proceed upon.

Sect. 25. Let us now consider his three Reasons in particular. For the First, Due reverence to Antiquity. Ans. 1. We reverence Antiquity as much as our Brethren do, but with these two Cautions; 1. That we preferr the first Antiquity to that which was later; the Apostolick Church, to the Ages of the Church that succeeded. If they can shew us any footsteps of the Ceremonies in that Church, we shall embrace them, if not, give us leave to reject them, even out of Reverence to Antiquity. 2. We do not own Antiquity, (where there was no Infallibility, as was in the Apostles) for the Rule of our Faith or Worship. We know, the Church may erre, and did very soon begin to decline; of which somewhat before, and more afterward. We reverence Antiquity so far, as not to recede from it without sufficient warrant from Scripture or clear Reason; and to reverence it further, is to idolize it, and put it in the place of Divine Authority. Ans. 2. Why are not our Brethren uniform in their Reverence to Antiquity? Do not they desert Antiquity in more things, and those of more moment than the controverted Ceremonies are? Will they deny the naevi patrum that Divines, both Papists and Protestants, have observed? They have laid aside the osculum, that then was called pacis, sanctum, vel fraternitatatis, used presently after Prayer, which Tertullian calleth Signacul…m orationis; the Agapae, that, notwithstanding of the Apostles check, 1 Cor. 11. 21, 22. were used in Tertullian's time, sometimes p. 59before the Lord's Supper, sometimes after; also the Baptizing (if not only, yet more ordinarily) the day before Easter and Pentecost; the Trina immersio; the Communio Infantum; the Gustatio mellis & lactis, all used in Baptism in Tertullian's time. Of the same sort are the diluting of the Wine with Water, in the Lord's Supper; the sign of the Cross used in Omni conversatione, as Tertullian hath it; The carrying the Eulogias, or consecrated Symbols, to the Sick and others; all these in the Second Century. In the Third Century were brought in Offerings and Prayers for the Dead, and Exorcism in Baptism. What a world of Ceremonies were added in the Fourth Century, is too well known. Now, all these were as ancient as the Times of the first Christian Emperors, to which the Dr. saith, p. 17. that Our Reformers endeavoured to reduce the state of the Church; if it was thought fit, and no disrespect to the Fathers, to reject their practices in some things as innocent as our Ceremonies, why not in them also, there being no more warant in the Word for the one sort of things than the other? This is to make Respect to Antiquity to …erve a turn, or mens own designs; which I hope our worthy Reformers were far from, whatever may be said of their Successors.

Sect. 26. Ans. 3. If the Dr. had pleased to tell us how ancient the Ceremonies that he contendeth for are, we should have considered his Allegations; I am sure he cannot equal them in Antiquity, with the Rites above-mentioned, which yet his Church rejecteth. We affirm them to be Novel Inventions, brought in under a considerable, tho' not the highest, Degeneracy of the Church; when we meet with his proofs to the contrary, they shall be answered. I wonder to hear from such an Antiquary as Dr. St…llingfleet, That purging out of these Ceremonies is a Reforming 1600 years backward; as if all the controverted Ceremonies, or any of them, had been in the first Century, in the very daies of the Apostles; I suppose he will find it a hard Task to prove this. By what hath been said, it is easie to discover the weakness of what he alledgeth about giving unspeakable Advantage to the Papists, by reforming 1600 years backward; for neither do we own the Ceremonies to be so old; nor could Papists have any advantage, if we reject what is unwarranted by the Word, however ancient it be. Indeed, if we should part with Scripture, and referr the decision of our Controversies with the Papists only to …hurch-History, it were to give them advantage, if we should disown any thing so ancient, but I hope the Dr. will not p. 60advise us to that course, and therefore there is no hazard. It addeth to this unspeakable advantage in the Dr's Opinion, That when they (the Non-conformists) are pinched with a Testimony of Antiquity, presently cry out of the Mystery of Iniquity already working in the Apostle's Times, as tho' every thing that they disliked were a part of it. Ans. Tho' we have hitherto met with none of his pinching Arguments from Antiquity, yet we think that Allegation no such ridiculous Evasion as he would make it, seeing the Spirit of God was pleased to give us this warning; and after-Ages gave a clear proof of the fulfilling of this Scripture, by the ripening of those Inclinations that were among some in the Apostles days, of falling back to beggarly Elements; Gal. 4. 9. and subjecting themselves to mens Ordinances: touch not, taste not, handle not, Col. 2. 20, 21. into the highest of Superstition and Depravation of the Worship of God, as Antichristianism came to a height. If the load of humane Traditions were a part of that Mystery of Iniquity that was adult under Antichrist, why should we not think that these Beginnings were a part of these first workings of it, that the Apostle complaineth of? If we make any thing that disliketh us, a part of that working Mystery of Iniquity, that we cannot prove to be evil, and to have had its Rise in the decay of the Church, let us bear the blame. He saith, the rejecting of the Ceremonies gave a great check to the Reformation in France, and citeth for it Thuanus and Balduinus, both Papists, without pointing to their words, or places where they may be found; wherefore I look on what he saith as gratis dictum: And if it were true, it saith no more, but that there were two in France, that were fond of humane Ceremonies, as there are many in England. VVe have cause to bless the Lord, that the Reformation in France was not checked, but made very glorious Progress, was owned by many, great and small, was sealed with the Blood of many Martyrs. And that it was not universally received, we may rationally impute to the supreme Power being against it, which useth to have the Command of the Consciences of the greatest and carnal part of the world: But what the Dr. saith in prosecuting this reason, I wish he would reconcile with his Third Reason, That England retained the Ceremonies, to shew their consent with other Protestant Churches.

Sect. 27. His Second Reason is, to manifest the Justice of the Reformation, by letting Enemies see, that we did not break Communion with them for meer indifferent things. Ans. 1. Papists might have p. 61seen that, if they would have opened their Eyes, without our retaining any of their Ceremonies; (to wit) That we brake with them on weighty points of Heresie and Idolatry, and not for Ceremonies alone. Ans. 2. When we had separated from their Church, on such weighty Accounts, we were not to retain any thing that they had corrupted the Worship of God by, to please them; neither could we retain those to shun breaking with them, having already broken with them on other accounts. Ans. 3. The Dr. taketh it for granted, which is the foreign, the Question between him and us, (to wit) That the Ceremonies are meer indifferent things. If he prove this, he must carry the day. What Advantage the Popish Bishops (for all their Subtilty and Learning that he talketh of) could have made of rejecting of these as well as the rest of humane Ceremonies, I know not; they had a large Field to expatiate in with the People, by holding forth to them: How many Usages of the ancient Church the Reformers had rejected, that were (in the Dr's sence) meer indifferent things, as Holy Water, Cream, Salt, Spittle, &c. How little addition could the rejecting the Cross, Surplice, &c. with the rest, have made to their strength? What he citeth out of P. Martyr, is abundantly answered Sect. 10. for he speaketh not of Vestments used in, but out of Worship, about which, he would not have such Contentions made at such a time, but have them removed afterward. The Dr. citeth his words Indefinitely, Other Reformed Churches; but the Author's words are, Per multas Ecclesias n…n ab evangelio alienas. I suppose he meaneth the Lutheran, or rathe Greek Churches; for P. Martyr well knew; That in the rest of the Reformed Churches no such Vestments were used.

Sect. 28. Let us now hear his Third Reason, to shew their consent with other Protestant Churches; and he instanceth in the Lutheran Church. Ans. 1. This Reason could not be used by the English Reformers, because they would surely rather have imitated the Calvinist Churches, with whom they agreed in Doctrine, than the Lutheran Churches, from whom they differ'd in considerable points of Doctrine; if they had designed to symbolize with other Churches; and had been influenced in their determination of this matter by that design, sure they would have symbolized with the soundest Churches. Ans. 2. Neither could this Reason have had any weight if they had used it, seeing there were m…re Protestant Churches of a contrary Practice; and therefore the Protestant Churches would have carried the rejection of the Ceremonies; whether the notes had p. 62been ponderanda or numeranda. Ans. 3. If our Reformers had design'd a Consent in Ceremonies with the Lutheran Churches, why did they retain these, and not the rest used among them, which are (most of them) as little liable to Exception, as those retained, and are not by their multitude such a burden as those of the Papists? I hope the Dr. when he considereth better, will retract this Argument; for there is no Reformed Church on earth, that the Church of England sheweth any Consent with in her Ceremonies. Ans. 4. I have elsewhere shewed, from good Authority, That the Lutheran Churches at first had no humane Ceremonies, but what they now have, crept into those Churches afterward, as other Evils did, which Luther did not authorise.

Sect. 29. He will not only have Lutherans, but the chief among the Calvinists, to be of his Opinion. He citeth, Calv. Ep. ad Sadol. That he was for restoring the Ancient Face of the Church: His words (which I found not easily in that long Ep.) are, Vt instauretur vetusta illa ecclesiae facies quae primo ab hominibus indoctis & non optimis deformata & foedata, postea a pontifice Romano, & ejus factione, flagitio se lacerata & prope deleta est. It is evident, that he is not speaking of Ceremonies only, but mainly of the Doctrine of the Church, that was in Controversie between him and the Cardinal: Also, that it is the Apostolick Church that he speaketh of, whose Face he acknowledgeth to have been deformed before Antichrist came to an height. He citeth also Calvin de vera Eccles. Reformatione, ch. 16. which Book I find not in the Catalogue of Calvin's Works; only among his Tractatus Theolog. I find a Supplex exhortatio to the Emperour and Diet at Spire, De necessitate reformandae Ecclesiae; which I have diligently lookt into, and find no such Passage in it, but much contending against Humane Ceremonies: And he apologizeth for their casting them out, by shewing, Quod nihil vel primo digito attigimus, nisiquod christus pro nihilo ducit, cum frustra coli Deum humanis traditionibus pronunciat. Wherefore, if Calvin owne Symbolical Ceremonies (as the Dr. alledgeth) we must understand him of those of Divine Institution, or charge him with Inconsistency with himself. Oecolampadius (saith he) lookt on the Gesture in the Sacrament as indifferent; so do we; therefore we think Kneeling ought not to be imposed: And when it is so imposed, it loseth its Indifferency, having a shew of Adoration of the Bread. I have not Bucer's Book, and therefore say nothing to the citation out of him, but that his Authority will not prove the Opinion of the Calvinist Churches that we debate about.

p. 63Sect. 31. Our Author, after this Digression returneth to the Historical part of his discourse, Sect. 6. He telleth us, that in the beginning of Que…n Eliz. Reign, the Exiles returned from abroad, with secret dislike of the Ceremonies, but the Act of Conformity being passed, and the Vse of the Liturgy strictly enjoined, there was no Separation; some of them accepted of Preferment in the Church: The Bishops shewed kindness unto them for their Zealous Preaching. A few remarks on this, will serve to clear our way. 1. It seems the Episcopal Party had not such respect, as was fit to the Consciences of their dissenting Brethren, in that they were getting Laws made, to force them to that, which they could not perswade them to by the Gospel: but this is the Old Spirit of that party, which still createth trouble to the Church. 2. That some of them accepted of Preferment (and these he nameth; Gilby, Whittingham, are among them, whom Fuller placeth in the Ranck of fierce Non-conformists,) sheweth how loath they were to divide from their Brethren, as long as they were suffered to keep their Consciences undefiled. 3. He omitteth to tell us, that these men would never subscribe to the Liturgy, nor use the Ceremonies; which Mr. Fuller, Lib. 9. p. 76. informeth us of, that not only these fiery men (as he calleth them) but even the moderate Non-conformists, as Mr. Fox, Mr. Lawrence Humfrey, refused to subscribe. 4. It was a commendable piece of Moderation in the then Bishops, that they suffered these Men to Preach; notwithstanding of their Non-conformity. Indeed there was cause for it; they were able and useful men, and the Church had much need of their Labours: Fuller saith, p. 65. Tolerability was Eminency in that Age. A Rush Candle seemed a Torch, where no brighter Light was seen before; where he telleth us of a Sheriff's Preaching for want of other to do that work, and how sorrily he performed it. If the present Bishops would exercise the same moderation, they needed not to be afraid of Separation.

Sect. 31. He proceedeth to tell us, that these Non-conformist Preachers first let fall their dislike of Ceremonies, and gaining Ground, they called them the Livery of Antichrist, and enflamed the People, and this was the first Occasion of pressing Vniformity with Rigor: Some were silenced; as kindness had made them Presumptuous, this made them Clamorous. Mr. Fuller giveth another account of this matter, p. 76. The English Bishops conceiving themselves Impowered, by their Canons, began to shew their Authority, in urging the Clergy of their Diocess, to subscribe to the Liturgy, Ceremonies, and Discipline of the Church; p. 64and such as refused the same, were Branded with the Odious Name of Puritans; and p. 81. He sheweth how Ministers were contented, before B. Grindal (one of the most moderate, but pressed to Rigor by the rest) who asked them, have we not a Godly Princess, speak, is she Evil? A Question fitter for the Inquisitors in Spain, than a Protestant Bishop. That the Non-conformists preached against the Ceremonies, is neither to be doubted nor wondered at; so did our Lord and Master, and his Apostle Paul: It was their duty to teach people to observe all that Christ hath Commanded, that being their Commission; if they spake Falshood, or Truth in an undue manner, they were liable to Correction. What our Author calleth inflaming the People, others will call faithful warning of them, against what might displease God, and defile their Consciences. Any who enflameth them to unsober, or unpeaceable principles or practices, let them bear their blame. I see nothing in their Carriage, under the Bishops forbearing of them, that deser…eth the Name of presumption, nor under their Sufferings, that should be called Clamorousness, as the Dr. calleth their informing their Friends at Geneva, how they were used. But it is the Spirit of that party to use cruel Severity against them, that differ from them, and reproach them, if they say they feel it: Patience and Stoical Apathy are not the same thing. There is nothing yet said by the Dr. that can cast the Blame of Separation on the Non-conformists, or free the Bishops of it.

Sect. 32. He saith further, p. 19. at the end; About this time the dissenting Party being exasperated, by silencing some of their most Zealous Preachers, began to have separate Meetings, where they Preached and Prayed, and had the Sacraments. Here we have out of the Mouth of an Adversary, the true Cause and Original of the Separation, tho' somewhat unfavourably represented; the cause of it was, they could not have Gods Ordinances, without Mans Inventions, their Ministers being silenced, who administred them purely; and tho', but some of them at first were silenced, yet the rest were under the same Condemnation by the Law, and daily expected the Execution of the Law on them; and all the People could neither have the ordinances by those that were as yet unsilenced, nor could they live without them: So that it was not Exasperation, but desire to wait on God in his own Ordinances, that made them take that course. This account of it themselves give (as the Dr. hath it, p. 20. before the Bishop of London, whose Discourse to them the p. 65Dr. relateth, unbecoming the Moderation of B. Grindal, charging them with lying pretences, without any Ground mentioned, and unbecoming the Learning of a Bishop, charging them with Condemning the Reformation.

Sect. 33. The next thing he insisteth on, is, Beza's advice to the Ministers and people; who, tho' he sheweth his dislike of the Ceremonies, and adviseth the Ministers not to subscribe; yet presseth the silenced Ministers not to Exercise their Function against the will of the Queen, and the Bishops: And the People to wait on the Word and Sacraments; notwithstanding of the Ceremonies; that they might by these means obtain a through Reformation: And to Ministers, he saith, that they should not leave their Functions for the Sake of the Ceremonies. In which Advice the Dr. doth much insult. How impartially Beza's opinion in this case is represented by the Dr. I know not, not being able at present to get a sight of the Book; but some other Citations already examined, make me jealous; especially, seeing the Dr. maketh Beza contradict himself; for p. 21. he maketh him advise the silenced Ministers to live privately, and not exercise their Functions against the Will of the Q. and the Bishops. But p. 22. he maketh Beza say to them, that the Ceremonies are not of that moment, that they should leave their Functions for the sake of them. But whatever were Beza's opinion, Non-conformists of old and late, took the Word of God, and not the Authority of Men, for the Rule of their Faith and Practice: They honour such as Beza, and are ready to receive Instruction from them; but must have leave to examine all by Scripture, as the Beraeans did the Doctrine even of Paul. Again, Beza is far from advising Ministers to forbear Preaching a together, because restrain'd by the Magistrate: That principle never obtained among Protestant Divines; and is to be examined afterward; but he disliked their publick appearance in that case, which may be constructed a Defiance and Contempt of the Magistrate. For they had hired a Hall in London (as publick as any Church) for their Meetings. Christ's Apostles were private, with the Doors shut, when they might not be publick, and so should we; and yet not give over Preaching and Hearing when Men forbid us: We should do it peaceably and inoffensively; but do it notwithstanding. For his Advice to the People, I cannot approve it; yet doth it not reach our Case; for he adviseth to Conformity for the present, with express mention of their Hope of a further Reformation; which we are out of all hope, that ever our p. 66Clergy will yield to. In Beza's Resolution of a Case mentioned by the Dr. p. 23. I desiderate one cause of Separation from a Church, (to wit) Imposing unlawful Terms of Communion, unless either this be comprehended under the right use of the Sacraments, that he mentioneth; or such withdrawing be not properly a Separation, but a being driven away.

Sect. 34. He saith, this Advice of Beza's put an effectual stop to the Separation. I find no such thing in History, but rather the contrary. The same opinion he citeth of Gaulter ep. dedicat. in homil. ad 1. Ep. ad Corinth. & Zanchie ep. lib. 2. p. 391. where Gualter complains of the Lyes and Prejudices against the Church of England. I wish it have not been Lyes written by that party, that made him write so, and Zanchie is even for Ministerial Conformity. It is an easie thing to gather Scraps and Sentences out of mens. Writings, that represent them as speaking what they never thought; and nothing is more ordinary with this Author, than to perswade himself. (at least to endeavour to perswade his Reader) that all the World are of his opinion. It is enough to us in this matter, that the Reformed Divines beyond Seas, did not use the Ceremonies, but have condemned them, and that on such Grounds, as make them unlawful to be used, (to wit) that they are Vain Worship, Additions to the Word of God, the Symbols of Popish Idolatry, &c. and if notwithstanding of all this, any of them would perswade us to use them; their Doctrine doth hinder us to obey their advice, which we look on as an overlash of Charity to the then good Bishops of England, who were Labouring to Reform the Church from Popery.

Sect. 35. He telleth us next, Sect. 7. of a New Generation of fiercer Non-conformists, the peaceable ones being worn out. It is not unusual for Adversaries to represent true Zeal as fierceness; but if there was undue forwardness among them, we defend not the Faults of Men; but the Truth of God, which they owned. There was a sinful fierceness among some of Christ's Disciples, when they called for Fire from Heaven, Luke 9. 54, 55. but this was no Argument against their cause. We, with sad Hearts behold the scandalous Fierceness, that is among some Antiprela…ists at this day, but must not change our Principles for that And was there then, and is there now no fierceness on the otherside? If we may judge of former days by the present, we may rationally ascribe the fierceness of some of the Suffering Party, to that of the persecuting Party, as the p. 67Exciting cause, for oppression maketh a Wise Man mad, Eccles. 7. 7. for the Complaint that Mr. Fox maketh of them, which he Citeth out of Fuller, Ch. Hist. lib. 9. p. 106. If the Circumstances be considered, it will be found not to prove what the Dr. bringeth it for. We must know then out of the same Author, that the Complaint in this Letter was against some particular men in Magdalen College, who were no Representatives of the Non-conformists, that it was not occasioned by any of their Principles, or Religious Practices, but by a particular injury done by these men to Mr. Fox, as he thought: And Mr. Fox was as likely to be byassed in the matter, in Controversie between him and these men he complained of, as they were: The Matter was, his Son Samuel had left the College, and gone beyond Sea, without leave either of his Father, or the College; and at his return was suspected of Popery; and for this, he was by that party, that Mr. Fox is so angry with, expelled the College. Beside all this, any who readeth that Letter of Mr. Fox's, may see a Strain, and meet with Expressions very unbecoming Old, Reverend and Good Mr. Fox, who had always professed himself a Non-conformist; tho he had more Latitude about the use of the Ceremonies, than some others had: Factiosa ista puritanuorm capita; isti ter puri puritani, and some other foul Reflections, with the odious name that Enemies gave to that Party, are very unsavory from such a Pen: But Age and supposed Injury, must bear the blame of the peevish strain, that is too manifest throughout that whole Letter. It were a hard case, if the faults either real or supposed of some, were always to be charged on all the Party: The Dr's own Party would be black enough, if they were thus dealt with; and even the Historian, no Friend to the Non-conformists, calls this Letter such a Strain of Rhetorick, as once Tully used, pro Domo sua; and imputeth the too much passion in it to the unjust Affront offered to him.

Sect. 36. Next the Dr. doth highly resent the Admonitions, First and Second, presented in the Name of the Non-conformists to the Parliament, by Mr. Thomas Cartwright: But I see not by what he citeth out of these Admonitions, wherein the bitter Zeal of that Party appeared: Neither that they despised the old Trifling Controversy about Garments and Ceremonies; for these were still the Grounds of their Non-conformity; tho they complained also of other Grievances. Neither do I find that they said all was out of Course in the Church; they owned the Protestant Religion; but p. 68desired, that the Reformation might be more through, by laying aside some of the Remainders of Popish Superstitions, formerly overlookt. I wonder why the Dr. should startle so much at their complaining of the Liturgy, Bishops, and Arch-bishops, the Way of c…lling their Clergy, the Ceremonies annexed to the Sacraments; which are the Grievances by these Admonitions laid before the Parliament, with an humble Petition for redressing of them. Seeing he knoweth, that these are the very things that our Controversie is Conversant about; and, tho' all these be not the Grounds of our withdrawing from their Worship, yet all of them are such things as we are grieved with, and desire a Reformation of. That he calleth them bold and groundless Assertions, is a more bold and groundless Assertion than any of them; for, he knoweth, Grounds have been given; which it were better to refute, than rail at. It is also strange, that he saith, That these Admonitions gave the true occasion to the following Practice of Separation; when himself assigneth another Cause of it before this, p. 18, 19. and yet another that he dateth it from, long after, (to wit) the Indulgence, Praef. p. 23. Sometimes he layeth it on the Jesuits, Praef. p. 11. and indeed, he knoweth not whe…e to lay it, missing the true Cause, which is Episcopal Rigour in their unscriptural Impositions, on the one hand; and Consciencious Obedience to the Word of God on the other. That this Cause was maintained with greater Heat than Learning, is the Dr's Dialect, not seldom occurring. That they courted the Vulgar most, is like some others of his Representations; if they did, they acted not wisely: But if the Vulgar embraced Truth, while it was rejected by the great ones, it is no new thing, such Ratiocinations did better become the Pharis…es, Jo. 7. 48, 49. than this Reverend Author. That they pleaded the Peoples Right of Election of their Pastors, we own our selves their Successors in that. Speaking (railing we approve not) against the Greatness and Pomp of the Clergy, is no popular Theme, but hath been insisted on by sober and learned men of all Perswasions. But, that doth not much move us; we are content that they enjoy their Pomp and Greatness, if they will let us enjoy the Worship of God in purity and peace. That this will inferr a Principle of Levelling in Mens Temporal Estates, is an insinuation unworthy of this Reverned Author.

Sect. 37. He still exposeth the People, p. 26. as pleased, to think what a share they should have in the new Seigniory, to wit, Presbytery in every Parish. If any had such Designs in being for that way, we p. 69blame their Intent, not their Work or Opinion. But might not we (if we were so disposed) harangue of the pleasure the Clergy taketh in their way, in contemplation of the fat Rectories, Prebendaries, Deaneries, and Bishopricks that they daily have in view? but such ways of Reasoning, I reckon fitter for the vulgar, whom he so much despiseth, than for Scholars. He telleth of a mighty Interest they got among the people, and compareth this prevalency with that of the Anabaptists in Germany. What if we should compare the prevalescency of Episcopacy among the Clergy and others, with that of Popery in Rome, and elsewhere, Arguments one as strong as another? That others would refine on us, as we refine on the Church, is a Plea against us, that would well suit, and hath been often used by Papists, against our deserting them. If others do that which is wrong, because we do what is right, we are not accountable for that. If he can make it appear, that our Principles lead to other mens evil practices, we shall disown such Principles. I know not what Name to give his Assertion, that the consequence (to wit, the Brownist Separation) seemed so unnatural from their own (the Presbyterian's) Principles; for nothing can be more rashly or falsly spoken. It behoved the Dr. to attempt the proof of this, not barely to assert what is so injurious to his Brethren, and that he might well know that they would be far from owning. All that we have from him as a Colour of Proof, is a most unfair representation of what the Non-conformists had said, That the Church had neither right Ministry, nor right Government, nor right Sacraments, nor right Discipline. One would think that they had asserted the Nullity of all these; whereas they had never d…sowned the Ministry nor Sacraments, but found some faults adhering to them, as the Office of Bishops, and way of calling all the Clergy; and as to the Ceremonies that were annexed to the Sacraments, which faults do not inferr a necessity of Separation, further than the owning of them is made the Terms of Communion with the Church: And it is known that Separatists went on other Principles, even such as will divide any Church, the most moderate and indulgent, that is not of their way▪ Of which after.