A Trial of the New Church Way in New England, Position 2 – Position 3 & 4
II. POSITION.
That it is not lawfull to joyne in prayer, or receive the Sacraments where a ſtinted Liturgie is uſed, or as we conceive your meaning to be in this, as in the former queſtion, viz. where, and when that ſtinted Liturgie is uſed.
Anſwer.
IT ſeemeth by this your letter, the ground of this Poſition hath beene the ſeparation of divers from your aſſemblies, becauſe of a ſtinted Liturgie: and we are not ignorant of the rigid ſeparation of divers people, who withdraw themſelves from an able faithfull miniſtry, as no miniſtry of Chriſt, and from their godly congregations as no Churches of Chriſt; becauſe of ſome corruptions from which (through want of light, not love of the truth) they are not throughly cleanſed. Againſt which practiſe we have ever witneſſed.
As for our Judgement concerning the Poſition it ſelfe, we would promiſe two things; Firſt concerning the perſons reading this Liturgie, which may be either an ungodly or unable Miniſter, or an able and a godly.
Secondly, concerning the Liturgie it ſelfe, which may be either of the whole or ſome ſelect prayers, which may be conceived to be the leaſt offenſive.
Now if the queſtion be of joyning in prayer with, and when that whole Liturgie is uſed, or where that which is uſed, is read by an unable and ungodly Miniſter, we then ſee not how it can be lawfull to joyne in prayer in ſuch caſes; For
1 The prayers of the Miniſter are not his private prayers, but the publike prayers of the whole aſſembly, whoſe mouth he is to God. And when the prayers offered up by the Miniſter, as a living holy, and acceptable ſervice to God, are not through humane frailty, but otherwiſe for matter and manner corrupt, wee ſee not what warrant any one hath to joyne with ſuch prayers, Mal. 1. 13, 14.
2 When men ioyne therein with an inſufficient Miniſtry, they doe not only countenance them in their place and office, whom the Lord hath rejected from being his Prieſts. Hoſ. 4. 6. but alſo ſet up thoſe Idolls and means of worſhip to edifie themſelves by, which God never appointed in his holy word Ezeck. 11. 17.
But if the queſtion be of joyning in ſome few ſelect prayers read by an able and painfull Miniſter out of that booke as on the one ſide wee are very tender of imputing ſin to the men that ſo joyne: ſo on the other ſide, we are not without feare, leaſt that ſuch joyning may be found to be unlawfull: unleſſe it may appeare that the Miniſters with whom the people have communion in reading thoſe prayers doe neither give any ſcandall by reading of them nor give unlawfull honour to a thing abuſed to Idolatry, and ſuperſtition, nor doe ſuffer themſelves to be ſinfully limited in the reading of them.
Reply.
SUfficient hath been ſpoken of the meaning of the poſition and the grounds thereof and if we have not miſtaken your judgment & practice both, you have born witneſſe againſt both that you call the rigid ſeperation, and this more moderate alſo; And we humbly wiſh, the moderate doe not degenerate into the rigid ere long. It is very ſtrange, if they take not great incouragement upon your grounds. The truth of our miniſtery, Churches, Ordinances, and calling is queſtioned, and where men will ſtay the Lord knoweth, and what more common then that our Liturgie is unlawfull, becauſe it is the deviſe of man; The Author (or publiſher at leaſt) of a letter againſt our Service booke beginneth with ſuch like diſtinction.
Againſt this Prayer-booke (ſaith he) divers have pleaded in a different manner. Firſt ſome arguments are proper to the Separatiſts qua tales, viz. that it is offered in a falſe Church; 2. By a falſe miniſter; 3. In the behalfe of the ſubjects of the Kingdome of Antichriſt. Theſe are properly theirs, being the grounds whereupon they make a totall ſeparation from all the Churches in this Land, as no Churches of Chriſt. Theſe I approve not, yet note them that yee may ſee upon what different grounds, the ſame Poſition is maintained by ſeverall perſons, and that yee may be delivered from the prejudice, which hinders many from receiving thoſe truths, becauſe they feare the reproach of Browniſme.
Secondly, there are other grounds which are common to all that plead for the the puritie of Chriſts ordinances, and which doe not neceſſarily inferre ſuch ſeparation, but only ſerve to ſhew the unlawfulneſſe of that practiſe, and our communicating therein.
Thus the Epiſtle wherein the ſame diſtinction of ſeparation is noted: but how truly, let the indifferent judge. If none muſt be counted Separatiſts, but ſuch as have pleaded againſt the booke of Common prayer as unlawfull, becauſe offered up in a falſe Church, &c. then are there none ſuch in the world, that we have knowne or heard of: for it is apparent they caſt us off as no Churches of Chriſt, becauſe our Service is a humane deviſe, will-worſhip, Idolatry; And not on the contrary, that our Service is will-worſhip, or Idolatry, becauſe our Churches are falſe Churches. Againſt all Communion with us they plead, becauſe we are a falſe Church, but againſt our ſtinted Liturgie they argue not in that manner.
The grounds on which that Authour builds (which he ſaith are common to all, that plead for the purity of Gods ordinances) are one and the ſame with the grounds of the Separatiſts, ſhafts taken out of the ſame quiver and peculiar to them, ſome few brethren onelyonly excepted, who of late have looked towards that opinion. See how affection will tranſport. Thoſe reaſons ſhall be common to all that plead for the purity of Chriſts Ordinances, which were never taken to be ſound and true, either by the reformed Churches abroad, or by the godly Brethren at home, whether now at reſt with the Lord, or for the preſent living, or yet by the moſt of the brethren among whom they live, and with whom they hold ſocietie, or by any miniſter or Societie which did hold the unitie of the ſpirit in the bond of peace for the ſpace of this 1400 yeares and upwards, by your owne confeſſion, unleſſe within theſe few dayes, and that by a few onelyonly. If this be not to ſtrengthen the hands of the Separatiſts, or at leaſt, to lay blocks of offence in their way, what is? As yet we thinke moſt of them that have ſeparated, are not ſo farre gone, as to condemne all our Aſſemblies as no Churches of Chriſt, but we judge they have proceeded further then Chriſt the Lord and Saviour of his Church hath given them commiſſion or allowance, that the grounds whereon they build are unſound, and ſuch as make way for further danger, if the Lord prevent not. And that the reaſons mentioned in the letters are the proper grounds of Separatiſts, and not common to all them that ſeeke the purity of religion, for they are not approved by your ſelves: and if all this tend not to turne them who halt, out of the right way, wee heartily intreate you to conſider.
Your judgement concerning the Poſition, you deliver in three propoſitions (for ſo many they be for ſubſtance) In reſpect of the perſons reading the Liturgie, or the thing it ſelfe that is read. As if any part of the Liturgie bee read, (put caſe ſome few ſelected prayers onelyonly, by an unable and ungodly miniſter: it is unlawfull (ſay you) for the people to joyne in that caſe. But if it be unlawfull for the people to joyne, when an ungodly miniſter readeth ſome few ſelect prayers, it is either in reſpect of the Miniſter,We may not Communicate at all in that miniſtery, which is exerciſed by an unlawfull perſon or in an unlawful. place Robinſon againſt Bern. Counſell debated p 17 Ibid pag 79. or the prayers themſelves. Not of the prayers themſelves, for they be ſelect and choyce, faultleſſe both in reſpect of matter and manner, as it is taken for granted, unleſſe this diſtribution be to no purpoſe; if in reſpect of the Miniſter, then it is not lawfull to joyne with ſuch a one in any ordinance of God whatſoever. For if the Miniſter make it unlawfull, then all communion in any part of Gods worſhip, with ſuch Miniſters is unlawfull, and ſo the Church in all ages of the world, the Prophets, our Saviour Chriſt, the Apoſtles, and the faithfull in the primitive Churches ſinned, in holding Communion with ſuch, when the Prieſts were dumbe dogges that could not barke,Eſa. 56. 10. Ezech 41. 7, 8. Mic. 3. 11, 12. Ier. 5. 31. Eſa. 9. 15, 6. Ioh. 2. 16. Math 5. 20, 21. & 15. 4, 5. & 23 1— 3▪ 14. and greedy dogges that could never have enough; when the Prophets prophefied lies, and the Prieſts bare rule by their meanes; when the Prieſts bought and ſold Doves in the Temple, and tooke upon them to provide ſuch things for them that were to offer; when the Phariſees corrupted the Law by falſe gloſſes, taught for doctrines mens precepts, made the commandements of God of none effect through their traditions, under pretence of long prayer devoured widowes houſes, taught the Law, but practiſed it not; when they were ſuch, and did ſuch things, they were ungodly Miniſters; But we never find that the Prophets, our Saviour, the Apoſtles, did either forbeare themſelves, or warne the faithfull not to communicate with ſuch in the ordinance of worſhip.Math. 16 6. 12. & 15. 14. We reade our Saviour charged his Diſciples, to beware of the leaven of the Scribes and Phariſees, to let them alone, becauſe they were the blind leaders of the blind, but he never forbade to communicate with them in the ordinance of God. It is not then for private Chriſtians to withdraw themſelves from the ordinance of worſhip,See Whitak de pontif. q. 4. f 10. pag. 557. Phil. 1. 15. and communion of the Church, becauſe ſuch are permitted to deale in the holy things of God, whom they judge or know unfit: when men joyne in the worſhip of God with unworthy Miniſters, they doe not countenance them in their place and office, but obey the commandement of God, who requires their attendance upon his highneſſe in that way and meanes.
To goe no further then the text you quote,H…ſ. 4 6, 7. Becauſe thou haſt deſpiſed knowledge, I will alſo reject thee, &c. Properly the text is ſpoken of the ten tribes called Iſrael, and the Prieſts among them who worſhipped the Calves which Ieroboam had ſet up, whom the Lord threatneth to reject, becauſe they had rejected knowledge being either wilfully ignorant, or withholding the truth in unrighteouſneſſe. Whether they were for the preſent abſolutely rejected, or the Lord threatens only to reject them we will not diſpute.
This may ſuffice that it is not to be found either in this or any other Text of Scripture, that the people joyning in the true Worſhip of God, with unworthy Miniſters, do countenance them in their place thereby. On the contrary, if you will extend this Text to all unworthy Miniſters of what ſort ſoever, whom the word of truth doth condemne as not approved Miniſters of God, the Scripture teacheth evidently not onelyonly that the people by joyning do not countenance them in their place and office, but that they muſt and ought to joyne with them in the worſhip of God,1 Sam. 2. 12, 13, 14, 17, 24. Ier 8. 8, 9. Mic 3. 11, 12. Phil. 1. 15. and in ſeparating from the Ordinance they ſhall ſinne againſt God, much leſſe then do they in ſuch joyning ſet thoſe Idols and meanes of worſhip, which God never appointed in his Word. For the worſhip is of God, and the Miniſtery is of God, the perſon unworthily executing his place, is neither ſet up by ſome few private Chriſtians, nor can by them be removed. And warrant to withdraw themſelves from the worſhip of God, becauſe ſuch as ought not, are ſuffered to entermeddle in the holy things of God, they have none from God. Dumbe Dogs, greedy Dogs, Idol-ſheepheards, falſe Prophets, Strangers, are unworthy Miniſters, but they that communicate with ſuch in the ordinance of worſhip, are never ſaid to ſet up Idols or means of worſhip which God never appointed. The ſheep of Chriſt will not heare ſtrangers in the Lords ſenſe, but outwardly they heard thoſe ſtrangers preach (if the Scribes and Phariſees were ſuch) and by hearing them diſcovered them to be ſtrangers, i. e. falſe Prophets; Some ſtrangers at leaſt, of whom our Saviour ſpeaks, were of the true Church, and of Iſrael, but brought falſe doctrine tending to kill the ſoule, ſuch ſtrangers none ſhould heare, that is, believe and follow: but as they be tolerated in the Church, ſo they may hear them, ſo long as they bring the truth. Unworthy Miniſters are no Miniſters for themſelves, but they are Miniſters for the people of God, that is, ſo long as they be in the place of Miniſters, the acts of their adminiſtrations are of force to the faithfull, if they obſerve the forme of adminiſtration preſcribed by Chriſt; for Chriſts Ordinances have their efficacy from him, not from them that ſerve about them, and evill Miniſters miniſter not in their own name, but in Chriſts and by his Commiſſion.
It hath evermore bin held for a truth in the Church of God, that although ſomtimes the evill have chiefe authority in the miniſtration of the Word and Sacraments,Helv conſ. cap. 18 § 11. & 19 §. 9, Gal. conf. art. 28. Arg. conf. Art. 13 Saxon. conf. Art. 12 Zep de Sa… l. 2. c. 6. Art. of Religion, Hybern. Art. 70 Carlton praelect de Eccleſia, cap. 20. yet for as much as they doe not the ſame in their own name but in Chriſts, and miniſter by his Commiſſion and Authority, wee may uſe their Miniſtery both in hearing the Word, and receiving the Sacraments; neither is the effect of Chriſts Ordinance taken away, by their wickedneſſe, nor the grace of Gods gifts diminiſhed from ſuch as by faith, and rightly doe receive the Sacraments adminiſtred to them which are effectuall; becauſe of Chriſts inſtitution and promiſe, although they be miniſtred by evill men.
The reaſons whereby the ancient Churches condemned the Donatiſts and Cathariſts for their voluntary and ſeditious ſeparation,Beza de Presbyt. et excōmunicat. p. 25 26. Iſta vero, quia nonnulli à ſacris caetib. & ſacrament. uſu propter aliorum vitia ultro abstinent i. e. ſeipſos excommunicant magnam reprehenſionem merentur. and the moderne Churches condemne the Anabaptiſts for their unwarrantable departure from, and ſo renting of the body of Chriſt, will hold againſt ſeparation from the prayers of the congregation, becauſe they are read by an ungodly miniſter.
The ſecond propoſition. Where the whole Liturgie is uſed, though by an able and godly Miniſter, it is not lawfull to joyne in prayer in that caſe. Herein wee cannot be of your judgement; for in the times of the Prophets, and our Saviour Chriſt, as great abuſes, no queſtion, were found in the Church of the Jews in the adminiſtration of holy things of God as can be imagined in our Liturgie or forme of prayer: but the Prophets and our Saviour who taught the people to keepe themſelves pure and undefiled, never taught them to ſeparate from the adminiſtration of the holy things of God. And if the preſence at our forms of prayer be not lawful by reaſon of the corruptions alleaged, there can be no viſible ſociety named throughout the world ſince 200. yeeres after Chriſt or thereabouts, wherein a Chriſtian might lawfully joyne in Prayer, reading the Scripture, hearing the word or participation of the Sacraments. For compare the doctrines, prayers, rites at thoſe times in uſe in the Churches with ours, and in all theſe, (bleſſed be the name of the Lord) wee are more pure then they. But no man will be ſo bold (we hope) as to affirme the ſtate of the Churches within 200. yeeres after Chriſt, to be ſo miſerably decayed that the faithfull could not without ſin hold communion with them in the aforeſaid ordinances. The prayers of the Miniſter, whether conceived or ſtinted in a ſet forme, be not his private prayers, but the publike prayers of the whole aſſembly, whoſe mouth he is to God both in the one and the other. But you will not ſay, the people ought not to joyne with their Paſtor in the publique aſſembly, if ought bee amiſſe in his prayer for matter, or manner, or both. It is all one to the people in this caſe, whether the fault be perſonall (as ſome diſtinguiſh) or otherwiſe knowne beforehand or not knowne: For if ſimple preſence defile, whether it was knowne beforehand or not, all preſence is faulty. And if ſimple preſence defile not, our preſence is not condemned, by reaſon of the corruptions knowne, whereof we ſtand not guilty, whether the corruption, be through humane frailty or not, it is not in us to enquire, but rather whether we be called to come, and the faults ſuch as one Chriſtian cannot or muſt not tolerate in another without breach of charity. For if the errour be ſuch as may be tolerated, and I am called to be preſent; by ſuch fault I am not defiled though knowne before. If the error be ſuch as in conſcience may not be tolerated, though not knowne before hand, I am bound, if preſent ſome way to profeſſe againſt it. This diſtinction of perſonall and miniſteriall faults in this caſe untill it be cleared by ſome Text of Scripture or ſound reaſon from the word, muſt goe for the diviſe of man.
A Church, a Miniſter, or a Chriſtian may be ſtiffe in an error (being miſperſwaded it is a truth) after many meanes long uſed to convince them, with whom yet we muſt hold communion in the ordinances of Religion: and the error may be ſuch as we cannot without hypocriſy or denyall of the truth hold communion, though ſuch meanes of conviction have not gone before. But the corruptions alleadged againſt our forme of prayer for matter or manner, are ſuch as one Chriſtian may and muſt tolerate in another where he hath no power to redreſſe them.
Hath not Chriſtian wiſdome and experience of humane frailties leſſoned you (deere brethren) to beare one with another in matters of greater conſequence then any have or can be objected truly againſt the form of prayer in uſe among us? And why ſuch corruptions ſhould not be aſcribed to humane frailty; we ſee not: For if a godly Miniſter make uſe of a book in things which he judgeth lawfull for matter and manner, the corruption in him that uſeth it according to his judgement, from what cauſe can it ſpring but humane ignorance and frailty? We reſt aſſured you queſtion not the integrity of many, who make much more uſe of the booke then onelyonly in a few ſelect prayers. From the bottome of our hearts we deſire and pray that God would remove out of his Church and worſhip whatſoever offendeth for matter or manner, and that all things may be ſo done, not onelyonly that they may be tolerated but that they might be approved in the conſcience of all men. But we are perſwaded that not onelyonly ſome few ſelect prayers but many prayers & other exhortations may lawfully be uſed,We ſee no warrant why for every particular act, that in a larger ſence is Idolatrous, adjoyned to Gods true worſhip, we ſhould forbeare our preſence at the true worſhip it ſelf. Unreaſon. of ſeperation. anſw to 6. argument. with fruit and edification to Gods people.
To aggravate faults eſpecially when it tends to draw away people from the Ordinances of God, is no leſſe fault then to excuſe them, it may be greater, and therefore we dare not eſteeme the prayers read by a godly and faithfull Miniſter according to the booke in uſe among us, a corrupt ſacrifice whether in ſuch as read them, or them that be preſent. In them that join according to Chriſts command (and liberty of abſence from Chriſt hath not beene ſhewed) notwithſtanding the corruptions, we hold the prayers to be an holy and acceptable ſacrifice to God, and pleaſing to Jeſus Chriſt. The corrupt ſacrifice is that, which the deceiver bringeth voluntarily, and out of neglect, having a male in his flock: but the faithfull bringeth himſelf and his godly deſires according to the will of God, and as for corruptions, whether reſpecting matter or forme, they are none of his, they cleave not to his Sacrifice to ſtaine or pollute it. As for the Text of the Prophet Mal. 1. 13, 14. it is cited by many in this buſineſſe, and to many purpoſes applyed, but we cannot finde that in the Prophet for which it is here brought, The deceiver is accurſed that offereth a corrupt thing to the Lord. This we reade and beleeve, but that a godly man, being preſent at this forme of prayer among us, read by a godly and faithfull Miniſter, is the deceiver, who offereth a corrupt thing unto the Lord, that is not proved. No argument can be brought from this place to the purpoſe, but by analogy, which is a kinde of arguing of all other moſt ready at hand, but lyable to moſt exceptions, and apt to draw aſide, if great care be not had, (which in this place we finde not) to take the proportion in every materiall point juſt and right. And we deſire ſuch as alleadge this paſſage of Scripture againſt ſimple preſence at the prayers of our Liturgy, adviſedly to conſider whether God allow them to make ſuch application of his truth which wee much doubt of, to ſay no more.
Your third propoſition. That as you are very tender of imputing ſinne to thoſe men that joyne in ſome ſelect prayers read by an able and godly Miniſter: ſo on the other ſide you are not without feare, leaſt ſuch joyning may be found unlawfull, unleſſe it may appeare that the Miniſters with whom the people have communion in reading thoſe Prayers, neither give any ſcandall by reading them, nor give unlawfull honour to a thing abuſed to Idolatry and Superſtition, nor doe ſuffer themſelves to be ſinfully limited in the reading of them.
1 We cannot conceive how you ſhould imagine the practice of a godly Miniſter in reading ſome few ſelect prayers to be ſcandalous or offenſive in their congregations when the people generally, not in their aſſemblies onelyonly, but throughout the whole land, were perſwaded of the lawfulneſſe of that courſe till now of late ſome have beene drawne away to ſeparate, who yet by warrant of Scripture produce nothing of weight to countenance that practice.
2 If the booke ſhould be as you take it an idolathite, latent offence doth not oblige. If any man ſay unto thee, this is ſacrificed to Idols, eat it not, ſo that if it doe not manifeſtly appeare that this practice is ſcandalous; it is not lawfull for the people to withdraw themſelves.
3 The book (we ſpeake of the Liturgie ſo far as it is ſound and good) by your confeſſion is no Idolathite, neither was it taken out of the Maſſe-book in ſuch ſenſe as you object, but rather the maſſe & other Idolatrous prayers were added to it, for popery is as a ſcab or leproſie cleaving to the Church; and many truths belonging to the Church as her proper legacie were ſtolen and heaped together in that denne. And why the true man may not challenge his goods where ever he finds thē, or the thiefe plead title to the true mans goods by preſcription, we know not? It is no hard taske to ſhew that our Service-booke was reformed in moſt things according to the pureſt Liturgies which were in uſe in the Church long before the maſſe was heard of in the world. And if that could not be ſhewed, yet formes of ſpeech generally taken (we ſpeak not of this or that ſpeciall word or phraſe) is no more defiled by Idolatry then the light aire, or place where Idolatry is committed. It is not unlawfull to pray, Lord helpe, or Lord have mercy, or to give thankes, praiſed bee God, becauſe the Papiſts ſay, Lady helpe, or, praiſed be God and the Virgin Mary.
Fourthly, Put caſe the Miniſter in reading ſuch prayers gives offence, or attributes unlawfull honour to a thing abuſed to Idolatry and Superſtition, or ſuffer himſelf to be ſinfully limited in the reading of them, what is that to the faithfull? This can be no juſt ground of the peoples not joyning with them in the worſhip of God, for that offence is perſonall onelyonly, and not the ſin of them that be preſent, they joyn in prayer onelyonly, and not in his reading or limiting himſelf. Not to ſay that every particular perſon muſt be herein both accuſer and Judge. If he give offence muſt they ſtumble at the ſtone, and ſeparate from the ordinance of grace? wee ſhould rather think it is their duty to look unto their feet, that they goe not awry. Let it be ſhewed out of the Word of God, that either the Miniſter is guilty of giving unlawfull honour, or that the people may lawfully withdraw themſelves in caſe he ſhould do ſo, and we will then ſay as you do, but untill that be proved, (being preſſed and called to proffer our judgements) we believe that ſeparation is ſcandalous and ſinfull, never taught of God, nor confirmed by the approved example of the godly in any age or time of the Church:Compare what Maſter I. D. hath written in defence or excuſe in reſorting to the Aſſemb. of the Separatiſts, called Browniſts. Apol. Sect. 5. exam. p. 61. & Apol. Sect. 28 exam. pag. 246. yea, againſt the poſitive Law of God, injurious to the Churches diſtracting Chriſtians, bringing contempt upon the Ordinances of God, and defrauding believers of the ſpirituall food of their ſouls, which is indeed to infringe their Chriſtian liberty, and what ever may be thought of it now, in former times it hath been accounted no ſmall offence.
Fiſtly, if this and ſuch like ſcruples make it unlawfull to joyn in the ordenance of worſhip, we muſt hold communion with no ſociety under heaven. For may not the brethren which hold all ſtinted, Liturgies, and ſet forms unlawfull ſay with like ſtrength of reaſon, It is unlawfull to joyn in conceived prayer with others, if either they give too little honour to it, as deeming the other lawfull, or ſinfully limiting, or ſuffering themſelves to be limited to one ſtinted forme, though conceived at firſt by them ſelves? And may not the brethren who hold a ſtinted forme lawfull in like manner object? It is unlawfull to joyn in prayer with them becauſe they attribute too much honour to conceived prayer, as making their device and method the worſhip of God? And may not the Brethren which hold it lawfull to uſe ſome ſelected prayers according to the forms among us, upon the ſame grounds condemne communion with both ſorts? and all of them one with another, becauſe they either limit themſelves too much, or too little? You ſay in the expoſition of the firſt poſition, many Preachers conſtantly uſe a ſet form of prayer of their own making before their Sermons, muſt you not ſay upon this ground, that it is unlawfull to joyn with them, becauſe they ſinfully ſtint themſelves? In probability a Chriſtian may preſume, that in the publike worſhip of God, there will be through humane ignorance & infirmity ſomwhat amiſs for matter, or manner, or both, & that upon this ground, he muſt joyn with no ſociety in any part of Gods worſhipat all.
The advancing of every ſmall difference to this height, is that which will bring all to confuſion, if men walk uniforme to their own principles. It is well obſerved by Maſter I. Da. that unleſſe men will yield ſo much favour each to other in ſome difference of opinions, a diſſolving not onelyonly of Churches, but of humane ſocieties alſo muſt neceſſarily follow, & not onelyonly not two Miniſters, but not two men ſhould live together, which were to put off even humanity it ſelfe.
Sixtly, wee have credibly heard that you hold fellowſhip with profeſſed, rigid Separatiſts without any acknowledgment of their errour, and receive them as members, or communicate with them in the priviledges of the Church, though you profeſſe you approve not their opinion or practice. And if in godly wiſdome, you can ſee grounds to joyn with them, we marvell you ſhould be ſo timorous in this particular.
Seventhly, if you judge the practice of ſuch godly Miniſters, ſcandalous to them that ſeparate from the ordinance, becauſe it is not adminiſtred in this, or that, but in a ſtinted form. It is a ſcandall taken, and not given; and by forbearing, if to confirme men in errour, be to ſcandalize them, they ſhould offend them the more: yea, they ſhould prejudice the truth, and it might be an occaſion to beget needleſſe ſcruples in others, and draw them ignorantly from the fellowſhip of the Saints in the holy ordinances of God, and ſtrengthen them who by your owne confeſſion, are run too far into Schiſme already.
III POSITION.
That the children of godly and approved Chriſtmas, are not to be baptized untill their parents be ſet members of ſome particular Congregation
IV POSITION.
That the Parents themſelves, though of approved piety, are not to be received to the Lords Supper, untill they be admitted as ſet Members.