The Unreasonableness of Separation, Part 3 · Section 38
The only remaining pretence for the present Separation, §. 38.is, that there is a parity of reason, as to their Separating from us, and our Separating from the Church of Rome. For so Mr. A. urgeth the argument, we Separate from them because they impose doubtful things for certain, Mischief of ….false for true, new for old, absurd for reasonable; then this will hold for themselves because they think so; and that was all I opposed to T. G. But is it possible for any man that pretends to be a Protestant Divine to think the case alike? When (1.) They confess our Doctrine in the 39 Articles to be true, we reject all their additional Articles, in Pius 4. his Creed, not only as false, but some of them as absurd and unreasonable, as men can invent, viz. that of Transubstantiation; which is made by them the great trying and burning point. But what is there, which the most inveterate enemies of our Church can charge in her doctrine, as new, as false, as absurd? nay, they all yield to the Antiquity, to the Truth, to the Reasonableness of our Doctrine; and yet is not Mr. A. ashamed to make the case seem parallel. But what new and strong Reason doth he bring for it? You may be sure it is some mighty thing; for, he saith, presently after it, that my Importunity hath drawn them out of their reservedness, and they have hitherto been modest to their prejudice. Alas for him, that his modesty should ever hurt him! But what is this dangerous Secret, that they have hitherto kept in, out of meer veneration to the Church of England? Let us prepare our selves for this unusual, this killing charge. Why, saith Mr. A. In the Catechism of the Church, this Doctrine is contained (It is matter of Doctrine then, I see; although we are confessed to be agreed in the 39 Articles, as far as they concern▪ Doctrine. But what is this notorious doctrine?) It is, saith he, that Infants perform Faith and Repentance by their Sureties. Did I not fear, it was some dreadful thing; some notorious heresie, condemned by one or two at least of the four General Councils? But is it said so, in plain words? or is it wire-drawn by far-fetched Consequences? No, it is plain enough; for the Question is, What is required of Persons to be baptized. Answ. Repentance whereby they forsake sin; and faith, whereby they stedfastly believe the promises of God made to them in that Sacrament. Quest. Why then are Infants baptized, when by reason of their tender age, they cannot perform them? Answ. Because they promise them both by their Sureties; which promise when they come to age themselves are bound to perform. But I pray doth it hence follow, that Infants do perform Faith and Repentance by their Sureties? Are not the words express, that they promise both by their Sureties? And is promising and performance all one? I do not find it so by this Instance. For here was a great matter promised, and nothing performed. It is true the Catechism saith, Faith and Repentance are required of them that are to be baptized: which supposeth the persons to be baptized capable of performing these things themselves. And then comes a Question, by way of objection; why then are Infants baptized, &c. to which the sense of the Answer is, that although by reason of their Age they are uncapable of performing the Acts of Repentance and Believing; yet the Church doth allow Sureties to enter into Covenant for them; which doth imply a Promise on their parts for the Children, and an obligation lying on them to perform what was then promised. And now let the Reader judge, since this horrible Secret is come out, whether this ought to be ranked in an equal degree as to the justifying Separation with the monstrous, absurd and unreasonable doctrines of the Roman Church. And I know nothing can do them greater Service, than such Parallels as these.
(2.) We charge them with those Reasons for Separation, which the Scripture allows; such as Idolatry, perverting the Gospel and Institutions of Christ, and Tyranny over the Consciences of men, in making those things necessary to salvation, which Christ never made so: But not one of these, can with any appearance of Reason be charged on the Church of England, since we profess to give Religious Worship only to God; we worship no Images; we invocate no Sains; we adore no Host; we creep to no Crucifix; we kiss no Relicks. We equal no traditions with the Gospel; we lock it not up from the People in an unknown language; we preach no other terms of salvation than Christ and his Apostles did; we set up no Monarchy in the Church to undermine Christs, and to dispence with his Laws and Institutions. We mangle no Sacraments, nor pretend to know what makes more for the honour of his Blood than he did himself. We pretend to no skill in expiating mens sins when they are dead; nor in turning the bottomless pit into the Pains of Purgatory by a charm of words and a quick motion of the hand. We do not cheat mens souls with false bills of exchange, called Indulgences; nor give out that we have the Treasure of the Church in our keeping, which we can apply as we see occasion. We use no pious frauds to delude the People, nor pretend to be infallible, as they do when they have a mind to deceive. These are things which the Divines of our Church have with great clearness and strength of Reason made good against the Church of Rome; and since they cannot be objected against our Church, with what face, can men suppose the cases of those who separate from each of them to be parallel?
(3.) As to the Ceremonies in the Roman Church and ours, there are these considerable differences,
(1.) They have a mighty number, as appears by their Rituals and Ceremonials, and the great volums, written in explication of them; we, very few, and those so very easie and plain; that it requires as great skill not to understand ours, as it doth to understand theirs. (2.) They place great holiness in theirs, as appears by the Forms of consecration of their Water, Oyle, Salt, Wax, Vestments, &c. but we allow none of these, but only the use of certain ceremonies, without any preceding Act of the Church importing any peculiar holiness attributed to them. (3.) They suppose great vertue and efficacy to be in them, for the purging away some sorts of sins; we utterly deny any such thing to belong to our ceremonies, but declare, that they are appointed only for Order and Deceny. (4.) They make their ceremonies being appointed by the Church to become necessary parts of Divine Worship; as I have already proved; but our Church looks upon them, even when determined as things in their own nature indifferent, but only required by vertue of that general obedience which we owe to lawful Authority. So that as to ceremonies themselves there is a vast disparity between the Roman Church and ours; and no man can pretend otherwise, that is not either grosly ignorant, or doth not wilfully misunderstand the state of the Controversie between them and us.
Thus I have gone through all the Pleas for the present Separation I could meet with, in the Books of my Answerers: and I have not concealed the force or strength I saw in any of them. And however Mr. A. reproaches me with having a notable talent of misrepresenting my Adversaries, Mischief o… Impo…. …. ….(a thing which I have alwayes abhorred, and never did it wilfully in my life, it appearing to me an act of injustice as well as disingenuity) yet I do assure him, I have endeavoured to understand them truly, and to represent them fairly, and to judge impartially. And although I make no such appeals to the day of Iudgement as others do; yet I cannot but declare to the world, as one that believes a day of Judgement to come, that upon the most diligent search, and careful Inquiry I could make into this matter, I cannot find any Plea sufficient to justifie in point of conscience, the present Separation from the Church of England.