An Apology for the Non-Conformists, Part 1 · Chapter 3

An Apology for the Non-Conformists · Part 1 · Chapter 3

p. 25CHAP. III. The general Reaſons of the Non-conformiſts for their Diſſent from the Church of England, ever ſince the Reformation.

BEfore we come to apply the foregoing Rules concerning Churches, their Communion and Separation, to our particular caſe; it is convenient to give the World a true Character of Non-conformiſts, with the grounds of their Non-conformity, that it may be the better judged whether they are guilty of ſinful Separation or not? and this I ſhall do.

Firſt, In general, ſhewing what were the reaſons whereupon all that have gone under the name of Non-conformiſts ſince K. Edw. 6th Reformation, have diſſented from the eſtabliſhed way of the Church of England.

Secondly, more particularly, what is the caſe of the preſent Non-conformiſts, and the Reaſons of their Diſſent and Suffering.

Of the Firſt in this Chapter.

When Pious K. Edw. 6th, by the advice of the Council and ſome Biſhops, about the Year of our Lord 1549 and 1550, renounced Popery, and inſtituted a new Liturgy, as a form of publick Prayers, Adminiſtration of Sacraments, with other Rites and Ceremonies, as alſo of ordaining Biſhops, Prieſts and Deacons in and for the Church of England, immediately many good and learned men, eſpecially ſuch as had Travelled in Germany and Switzerland among the Firſt reformed Churches, were diſſatisfied with p. 26this Model of reformation as imperfect and ſhort of what the Scriptures required, and moſt other reformed Churches had attained to, and alſo as ſymbolizing too much with Rome, in the manner of publick Prayers, in Ceremonies and Church Government: they gladly embraced the good beginnings of reformation, and heartily joyned in the endeavour of cleanſing God's Houſe; but they were ſorry the work ſtopped almoſt in the beginning, and that ſome out of ignorance of the Truth and too much reſpect to the Romiſh Religion in which they were bred, did ſtrive to recede from it as little as might be, with whom others joyned, ſome for fear of Tumults, thinking they had gone as far as the people at that time would bear; others for reaſons of State, being willing to keep the publick Order and Government of the Church, as much as might be, under the command of the Civil Magiſtrate; and ſome as it fares in all caſes, being Popiſh in Heart, yet ſeemingly joyned with the Reformers in framing their Liturgy, only that they might undermine and hinder them in making a through reformation.

The number of theſe who were diſſatisfied with the preſent eſtabliſhment, dayly increaſed as the Proteſtants multiplyed; ſo that in Q. Mary's Reign, but ſeven years after, there was a number of theſe at Franckford only, enough to make up a Congregation, and to have Miniſters of their own, and to keep publick Aſſemblies in a Church allowed them by the Magiſtrates; who thinking themſelves to be now at their own Liberty, laid aſide the Liturgy of the Church of England, and compoſed a new ſhort one for themſelves, after the manner of other reformed Churches. In the Reign of Q. Elizabeth, the Diſſenters increaſed, and were called Non-conformiſts and Puritans; and now the Eccleſiaſtical State began to take notice of them, to remove ſome of them from their preferments and imployments, and to encenſe the Civil Magiſtrate againſt them; nevertheleſs they increaſed in number and reverence with the People; the Divinity-Profeſſours of both Univerſities, and many others eminent for piety and learning were then reckoned Puritanes, and ſome ſuffered as ſuch.

King James ſhewed himſelf more diſpleaſed with them, and reſolved to have Rooted them out of the Church; yet in his time 750 Miniſters ſubſcribed a Petition to him for reformation of things yet amiſs in the Church. In his Sons Reign, the Papiſts, who were now got to Court, and had both Favour and Power, joyned their intereſts with the Biſhops to Root out theſe Non-conformiſts, as p. 27thoſe that were moſt contrary to them, ſeeing they diſliked the Biſhops and their Liturgy for coming ſo near to them; and how many worthy Miniſters and thouſands of the beſt people were driven into Forreign Countries, and thoſe that ſtayed at home were ſeverely treated for the ſpace of 16 years; and yet like Iſrael in Egypt, the more they were oppreſſed the more they increaſed. Nor have their numbers been diminiſhed, or their cauſe diſparaged ever ſince, notwithſtanding the great endeavours to caſt odium upon the one, and ſuppreſs the other. Dr Fuller wittily ſums up this Hiſtory thus, Non-conformity was conceived and bred in King Edward s Day…, it was born at Franckford in the Reign of Q. Mary; under Q. Elizabeth it was in its Child-hood; in K. James s time it grew to be a good tall ſtripling, and under Charles 1ſt. it grew to be ſo ſtrong a man as to unhorſe its oppoſite prelacy, and to get into the Saddle. thus He and I add, that the turning ont of 2000 Non-conformiſts out of the Miniſtry and Ʋniverſities in 1662 was no argument, that this man was paſt his full Strength, or declining to deerepid age.

Now the reaſons of the diſſent of ſo many for ſerveral Generations, have been principally theſe.

Rea. 1. The Firſt taken from their diſſatisfactions with, and objections againſt the Liturgy: they diſallow not a Liturgy, or Directory rather, viz, a preſcribed order and rule for the exerciſe of publick worſhip, in which all might agree, and generally conform to prevent confuſion; yea, and to ſatisfy their Epiſcopal Brethren, they could be content with a ſhort Liturgy, preſcribing the Form of Prayer and Adminiſtration of Sacraments, and other publick offices; provided, nothing but an queſtionable doctrine and duty, and neceſſary order, might be thruſt into it; and Miniſters, eſpecially after they come to ſome years and experience, might be left to uſe it at their diſcretion; ſo that the Liturgy may be a Rule of Concord, a Teſtimony of the conſent and agreement of the Churches, in Doctrine and Worſhip, and a Guide to young men entring into the Miniſtry, but not a Snare to any; much leſs to hinder the exerciſe of the gifts of the Spirit, which are given to the Miniſtry on purpoſe to edify the Church with, Eph. 4.11, 12. &c. And ſuch as theſe are the Liturgies of moſt reformed Churches, and to this purpoſe only. But againſt our Liturgy they excepted.

1. That it obliged all Miniſters, without limitation all the days of their lives, to the ſame form of words, in all publick worſhip, p. 28whether it would ſuit with the condition of the people, or the circumſtances of providence, or not; alſo that it was ſo large as that it did moſtly prevent the uſe of Miniſters own Gifts, or made them ſeem but ſuperfluous additions; this they conceived to be directly contrary to the inſtitution and office of the Miniſtry, which was appointed by Chriſt, and furniſhed by him with his Spirit, that they might to the worlds end adminiſter all his Ordinances to his Church, viva voce, as the Spirit ſhould give every man ability, and particularly fit him for the people he was to take charge of: they are indeed by their office obliged to the Holy Scriptures, the words as well as ſenſe, as being the divinely inſpired Law of the Church, which they are to interpret and apply; but ſeeing interpretation and application of the Scriptures is their work, and every ordinance doth imply this more or leſs, they ought not to be tyed generally and ſtrictly to certain forms of words wherein to expreſs themſelves, unleſs they were of divine inſpiration; and if all that Miniſters were to ſay to the people, was preſcribed them, as it might be in all, as well as in thoſe things wherein the Liturgy doth preſcribe to them, then the Miniſtry might be a calling as others are, that men might in a common way take up to read all divine ſervice, but certainly there would need no ſolemn ordination or conſecration to this office with Faſting, Prayer and impoſition of hands, more then to any other calling.

2. They object againſt our Liturgy, that the matter of it and words alſo are generally taken out of the Service Books of Rome, viz, the Maſs-book, & Ceremoniale, & Pontificale Romanum; and that the form of it, viz. the manner and order of the ſervice is too much conformed to, yea little different from the Popiſh Maſs or Service: now they ſay God in the Law refuſed to be ſerved with any of the Forms, Modes, Ceremonies, Cuſtoms, Veſſels or Utenſils wherewith Idols had been ſerved; yea though the things were ſome indifferent Rites and Cuſtoms, and which the idolatrous thought founded upon reaſon and nature, and the veſſels were of Materials of his own making. It is true, what is Scripture, and from Scripture muſt be uſed though it was abuſed by Papiſts; whatſoever is founded-upon divine inſtitution comes from the word, not from the Church of Rome; but to keep to their Words, Order, Method, &c. ſeems too great reſpect to that Church, and that ſervice: They knew very well, there was no legal pollution upon the Words or Ceremonies, becauſe they had p. 29been uſed by the Papiſts, as there was upon the Idols Utenſils under the Law, wherefore they might not be converted to mens private uſe, but muſt be deſtroyed; but to tranſlate their ſervice into our Church in things wherein we have the ſame liberty of compoſing forms and methods for our ſelves, as any others have, this ſeems too great a reſpect to that idolatrous Church, from whence they came, too eaſy a paſſing by all the Pollutions and Tyranny, with which they had defiled and tormented the Church of Chriſt; too great an acknowledgement of her, as a worthy or eminent Church, from whom we ſhould take a pattern of our worſhip; all which were certainly diſpleaſing to God; and by this ſymbolizing with Rome in our worſhip, we harden the Papiſts, as if we differed from them but in circumſtantial things; we keep in mind there ways and worſhip, and ſo continually expoſe the people to the danger of returning to Popery; and alſo reflect upon the reformed Churches, chuſing Rome for our Pattern, keeping ſo near to her, whereas they have all utterly caſt her of, and compoſed new forms of worſhip for themſelves, out of the Scripture: nor can there be any other reaſon given, why England above all other reformed Churches, is ſo much ſollicited to, and in danger of relapſing into Popery; from age to age, but that her publick ſervice and Church Government is ſo much like to that of Rome, that the Papiſts think they may eaſily perſwade us to receive all the reſt, ſeeing we are ſo zealous to retain ſo much of their Religion.

3. They thought our Liturgy very defective in the publick Prayers; partly in that there are very few things mentioned in them, and thoſe very generally; either in the confeſſions of ſinsor petitions for Mercies, eſpecially Spiritual; and the Letany, which is ſomething more large and particular, (yet comes not near the ſecret wants of mens Souls,) mentioneth things ſo briefly, and ſuddenly paſſeth over to others of a different nature, that there is no time for mens thoughts to reflect on them, or their Hearts to be affected with them, which is one ſpecial end of Prayer; and partly becauſe of the abrupt breaking off, and dividing one Petition from another into ſeveral Prayers; moſt of the Collects containing but one ſingle Petition, or two at moſt; this breaks off intention and affection: neither is there any order among the Prayers, or coherence of Petitions, and ſome Petitions are repeated often in the ſame ſervice; yea ſome whole Prayers; eſpecially when the Letany is read, there is a very needleſs repetition of almoſt all the Prayers; p. 30for if that be comprehenſive of all neceſſary things, what need other Prayers be uſed at that time? theſe defects viz confuſedneſs, incoherence, tautologies in words or ſence, going backwards and forwards &c. are objected as intolerable in the Prayers of particular Miniſters, who yet may out-grow ſuch weakneſs and pray with better method, and to better edification; they are not then to be excuſed in the Church Liturgy, where no man hath power to correct, or alter any thing, and Rulers are very unwilling to yield to amendments, for fear of confeſſing ſomething to have been amiſs before.

4. They were not ſatisfied with the Reſponſes, that the people ſhould audibly ſpeak after the Miniſter, or alternately with him; this leſſeneth the gravity and ſeriouſneſs of the Service; hindreth the exerciſe of Thoughts and Affections in the people; and makes the worſhip more like a Dramatick Action, (wherein every one acts their part and muſt wait for their Q., or time of ſpeaking and ſilence,) rather then like the ſolemn ſervice of God.

5. They diſlike the frequent repetitions of the Lord's Prayer, which in every Morning and Evening ſervice is twice uſed, and once for every office that is added to them; as when the Letany is read or the Communion Service, or a woman Churched, or a Child Baptized, or a Marriage Solemnized, or a Perſon buryed; ſo that it is not unuſual to rehearſe the Lords Prayer five or ſix times before the Liturgy ſervice be finiſhed; and yet the Miniſter muſt uſe it in the Pulpit after all. They could not conceive any reaſon or excuſe to be given for this cuſtome; but a ſuperſtitious conceit of that form of words, almoſt turning them into the Nature of a Charm; as if they could not be uſed too often, and the very uſe of them made all other ſervice the more acceptable.

6. The corrupt Tranſlations of the Scripture uſed in the Liturgy: that there may and ever will be imperſections in, and doubts about Tranſlation of Scripture, whilſt mens Knowledge is imperperfect and their Judgments diverſe, is granted by all, but the Tranſlations in the Liturgy in the Pſalms, Epiſtles and Goſpels are groſly corrupt, ſome contrary to the ſence of the Text, and in ſome places whole Verſes omitted, and the Titles of all Pſalms are left out, which in the Hebrew are the firſt verſe of the Pſalms, and very neceſſary for the underſtanding of them: therefore to oblige men to read theſe Tranſlations only in the Church Service, even when we have a better, and publickly authorized Tranſlation, p. 31they judg'd it a matter of no ſmall Offence.

7. The Reading of the Apochryphal Scriptures as parts of the publick worſhip, and that without any diſtinction from the Canonical: They accounted it an intolerable thing, that Fables and Fictions ſhould be ſolemnly Read to the People, with the ſame Reverence as the Word of God; and ſuch are many of the Apocryphal Books; and the reſt being only of Humane Authority, the reading of them ought not to be made a Solemn part of Divine Worſhip. The Conformiſts ſay that Reading the Scripture is Preaching, and the Non-conformiſts ſay, it is not fit, meer Humane or Fabulous writings ſhould be preached to God's People, when they meet to Worſhip him by hearing his word. Above all they were offended that a great deal of the Holy Scriptures is left out of the Liturgy, and ſo never to be Read in the Congregation, and Apocryphal Chapters put in their Room.

8. Holy-days or Feſtivals in the honour of Saints. They would not deny, but if the Church thought fit, they might obſerve the days of Our Saviours Nativity, Paſſion, Reſurrection, Aſcenſion and ſending the Holy Ghoſt, as other Proteſtant Churches do; provided they might be kept ſeriouſly, and not made of the ſame neceſſity with the Sabbath; but when all divine worſhip of the Creatures is Idolatrous, and the keeping of days in Honour of them, as well as Building Temples to them, was ever reckoned a part of Divine Honour (and to be ſure is more Honour then ever God commanded or allowed to any of his Servants,) They knew not how to excuſe this practice, that it ſhould be a part of a Churches Liturgy.

9. Nor could they approve the Doctrines of the certain Regeneration of all in Baptiſm, and that Infants dying after Baptiſm before the Commiſſion of actual ſin, are undoubtedly ſaved; which are laid down in the Liturgies, as undoubted Articles of Faith; whereas there is no Scripture that clearly proveth either of them; and at beſt they are points diſputed on by Learned men on both ſides. Nor could they excuſe the practice of refuſing Parents to promiſe for their own Children in Baptiſm, ſeeing it is upon their Account only, and Gods Covenant with them, that the Children are admitted to be Baptized; and they are thereby engaged to breed them up in Faith and Obedience; much leſs that Strangers ſhould receive the charge of the Baptized, who have no authority over them, who neither care what they promiſe, nor are ever called p. 32to account, how they perform their promiſe, for if they ſhould, few would undertake the charge, and ſo this cuſtom would fall to the ground.

10. They excepted againſt the Ordination of Deacons to read Divine Service, Baptize and Bury, and to preach with ſpecial Licenſe; this they ſay was to create a new fort of office in the Church, which Chriſt never appointed, nor gave his Miniſters Authority to appoint it: Deacons were to look after the poor, and that was all their work; and though the Primitive Chriſtians ſometimes uſed them to read the Scriptures in the Congregation, yet they never ordained them to this, as an office; yea though they ſhould be admitted to read Prayers, to Marry or Bury, yet this is no ſacred office appointed by Chriſt, that ſhould conſtitute a diſtinct order of Miniſters; and if, as grave and prudent perſons, they might be admitted to do theſe offices, either for want of Miniſters or to aſſiſt them; yet may they by no means be ſuffered to Baptize, it being as peculiar to the Miniſtry, as to adminiſter the Lords Supper; and the admiſſion of Members into the Church, as ſacred and ſolemn a work, as to confirm and Build up the Members of it.

Theſe were the principal objections of the Non-conformiſts againſt the Liturgy, which were, ſome of them at leaſt, exemplified and confirmed by many particulars, of leſſer moment in themſelves, but all tending to make their deſire of a Reformation of the Service Book to ſeem reaſonable, and the work neceſſary.

Rea. 2. The Second thing the Old Non-conformiſts diſliked in the Church of England was, the Government of it by Prelates, i. e. Biſhops, with ſole power of Juriſdiction. Many of the Old Non-conformiſts thought Epiſcopacy utterly unlawfull, and an uſurpation not to be born; but the reſt, who looking upon it as a humane conſtitution (as our Law doth) thought it Lawfull, and that it might be ſubmitted to, did yet diſlike our Epiſcopacy; partly becauſe of the ſecular grandure, power, and imployments our Biſhops were inveſted with; which made them unable and unwilling to diſcharge the office of a Paſtour in the Church, partly becauſe the Church hath nothing to do in their election, except an empty ſhew, and therefore perſons were moſt commonly prefer'd not for true Epiſcopal Qualifications, but becauſe they could make intereſt with Superiours, but principally becauſe the Biſhops arrogated to p. 33themſelves the whole power of governing the Church, and excluded all the Miniſters from any ſhare therein, a thing moſt unexcuſable in them, who acknowledge themſelves to be of the ſame order with the Presbyters, and only in a degree of honour above them, and that by the Authority of the Civil Magiſtrate. Whereas even thoſe that with any probability or ſobriety maintain the Divine Right of Epiſcopacy, do nevertheleſs acknowledge that he may neither ordain, nor govern without the advice and conſent of his Presbyters. This was look'd upon as intollerable, that the power of governing the Church which was committed by Chriſt to all his Miniſters, ſhould be wreſted from them generally by a few of their Brethren. And that they who are thought fit to diſpenſe the Word and Sacraments, the cheif keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, whereby men are brought to the Faith, admitted into the Church and bnilt up in it, ſhould not have power to cenſure offenders, and to receive the Penitent again to Communion; which are things of leſſer moment and depending on the former, and yet without which, the former could not be managed in a fit manner for Edification. By this means Miniſters are deprived of one half of their Office and Power; and are both diſcouraged and hindered in the other half For who will regard their Preaching, who have not Liberty to judge what perſons are fit to be admitted into the Church, or who in it deſerves cenſure, or to be caſt out of it. And the Biſhops themſelves in undertaking the whole work of Governing the Church, took that upon them which they never could, nor did manage for the Churches Edification.

R. 3d. The Non-Conformiſts, were much diſſatisfied about the Diſcipline of the Church, both in reſpect of the Rule of it, and the Officers that manage it. The Rule they ſay is not taken out of the Scripture, which is the only Rule and Law of Chriſt's Church; but it is the Roman Civil and Canon Law, which at beſt were ſuited to their own times, and People, in many things very defective, and in others, erroneous and ſuperſtitious.

There were indeed ſome appointed by K. Edward, to collect a body of good and uſeful Rules out of the Canon Law, to be the Rule of Diſcipline for this Church, but he dying that work was never finiſhed, ſo that the Rule now is the whole Canon-Law, or ſo much as every Biſhop pleaſeth to uſe in his own Dioceſs. The Biſhops made a few Canons of their own 1603. but they are ſuch as only ſtrengthen their own power in impoſing and enforcing thoſe things, p. 34which the Non-Conformiſts had long deſired might be amended. As to the Officers that Adminiſter the Diſcipline, They are Chancellors, and Commiſſaries and Civilians by Profeſſion; no Eccleſiaſtical Officers, yet theſe Rule over the Miniſters of Chriſt, Admoniſh, Suſpend, Deprive them of their places, and Excommunicate both them and the People when they pleaſe. This they have no power to do, nor can the Biſhop delegate his pewer of Governing to them any more, then his power to Preach the Word, and Adminiſter the Sacraments both being parts of the Miniſterial Office: This they thought was to change the Conſtitution of Chriſts Church at pleaſure. They were alſo offended at the Adminiſtration or uſe of the Diſcipline, (That, being ſuch as the Officers were) becauſe the Church in its Conſtitution and frame kept ſo near the Roman model. Therefore the Biſhops have ever found it neceſſary to exerciſe Church Diſcipline moſtly againſt thoſe that diſliked or diſſented from the Liturgy, and Government, and to connive at the looſe and prophane, to hold them in ſome external obedience to them: Hence it came to paſs, where one Miniſter hath been admoniſhed, ſuſpended, deprived for Hereſie in Doctrine, or Un-godlineſs of Life, ten have been ſo dealt with for Non-Conformity; and where one of the People have been cenſured for ſcandalous ſins, an hundred have been troubled and puniſhed for going to hear a good Miniſter out of their own Pariſh, when they had an ignorant drunkard at home, for not having their Children Croſſed in Baptiſm, for ſcrupling to kneel at the Sacrament, and ſuch other great Crimes againſt the Liturgy. What was this but to alienate the Church of Chriſt to the Governours, and to make it to ſerve them more then him, and only to uſe his Name and Authority to preſs their own Laws, and maintain their own power.

R. 4. They were diſſatisfied at the Ceremonies impoſed in the Liturgy. In the general they acknowledge, that it was lawful for any Church to conſent to, and lay upon her ſelf neceſſary Rites and Cuſtoms, ſuch as Circumſtances of time, and place, and other emergencies might make neceſſary for the preſent time; but that ſuch Ceremonies ſhould be ſuch whoſe neceſſity was apparent to all, and whoſe lawfulneſs might be ſcrupled juſtly by none of common underſtanding, and that ſhould be taken up by the general Conſent of the People as well as commanded by Rulers, as the Feaſt of Purim was by the Jews, Eſther 9.23.27. And thoſe neceſſary things enjoyned, Acts 15, 23.25.28. And that when the neceſſity p. 35ceaſeth, thoſe Cuſtomes ſhould ceaſe alſo. But they thought it utterly unlawful to deviſe Rites or Ceremonies for which there was neither apparent neceſſity, nor uſefulneſs, or to impoſe thoſe upon the people, which from the beginning were doubtful and offenſive, eſpecially to make them parts of Divine Worſhip, or additions to it, as it were to render it more edifying; beyond the natural and common Civil circumſtances of Order, Method, or Decorum, and ſuch they thought it manifeſt our impoſed Ceremonies were, which are declared to be retained, ſome, becauſe they ſerved for decent order in the Church (for which they were at firſt deviſed) others for edification.Pref. to the Common Prayer Book. And again that the impoſers were content with thoſe Ceremonies which do ſerve to a decent order, and Godly Diſcipline, and ſuch as be apt to ſtir up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his duty to God by ſome notable and ſpecial ſignification, whereby he might be edified.

Three Ceremonies were at firſt impoſed. The Croſs in Baptiſm. The Surplice in Reading the Service. And Kneeling in Receiving the Lords Supper. Againſt theſe they excepted ſeverally.

1. Againſt the Croſſe, that it was abuſed to great ſuperſtition and Idolatry in the Church of Rome, and particularly when it was uſed in Baptiſm, having Divine power aſcribed to it, of driving away the Devils, giving grace, &c. Therefore being neither commanded of God, nor uſed in this manner in the primitive Church, viz. To admit Members into the Church by it, it ought to be rejected.

Alſo that it did reflect very diſhonourably on Baptiſm it ſelf, as if that were not full and plain enough to ſet forth the blood of Chriſt, and Remiſſion of ſins by it, or our engagement to Chriſt, and therefore it was needful to adde a more plain and direct ſign of his death, and ſuffering for us, and of what we muſt be willing to ſuffer for him, above all that the Croſs was made, and here uſed as a Sacrament, being declared to be a token of the Childrens owning the Faith of Chriſt, Obedience to him, and perſeverance to the end: Is not this the nature and end of Receiving Baptiſm it ſelf? Why is not that ſufficient, but the Croſs is preſently added without any note of diſtinction, as it were to ſignifie the ſame things more plainly and fully, and to lay a greater obligation on the Child, then what was laid on it in Baptiſm, and this is a Sacrament as much as man can make. Indeed it wanteth the p. 36promiſe of Divine Grace, but this alſo is preſumed upon, foraſmuch as this ſeems cheifly to be intended in thoſe words [of ſome of the Ceremonies being apt to ſtir up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his duty, by ſome notable and ſpecial ſignification whereby hemight be edified.

2. Againſt the Surplice they object, that was a Ceremony on purpoſe deviſed to add decency and ſplendour to the Worſhip of God, and therefore it muſt be uſed in that Worſhip only, and ſuch Ceremonies are unlawful additions to Gods Worſhip. And thoſe circumſtances or accidents of the Service in their abſolute nature, yet relatively, in as much as they better the Worſhip and increaſe Edification, they are made moral parts of Worſhip, even as it was a part of Worſhip for the Preiſts of old to put on their Sacred veſtments to ſacrifice in, though the veſtments themſelves abſolutely and naturally conſidered were but circumſtances of the Worſhip. Alſo that the Surplice ſeemed to be taken from the Ceremonial-Law, and to be at leaſt an imitation of thoſe Preiſts Garments. As many other Ceremonies uſed in the ancient Church, were either taken from the Jews, or deviſed to imitate and be like them. Now our Saviour having aboliſhed the old Ceremonies gave no leave to his Church to deviſe new ones, neither did he aboliſh them, as Types and Shadows of himſelf only, but alſo as Yokes and Burthens, as carnal Ordinances and ſervile Cuſtoms, wherein his People were kept in great Bondage till his coming in the fleſh, Gal. 5.1. Acts 15.10. Gal. 4.1, 2, 3. John 1.17. Therefore eſuch Ceremonies were utterly unneceſſary ſince the full diſcovery of the Goſpel, yea, they diſparage the Goſpel, as if that was not plain and ſufficiently apt to teach Faith or Holineſs without their help. And beſides they take off mens minds from the Worſhip of God, partly by pleaſing their eyes, and fancies, with an external ſhew, and partly by buſying their thoughts about the meaning of them, and how to improve them, if they be ſerious in the uſe of them: They alſo bring the People again into bondage, and fill the Church with carnal Ordinances and beggarly inſtitutions, and men are ſenſibly taught to content themſelves with outward forms and modes of Service, and to think God is content with them alſo; and further the uſe of the Surplice in Divine Service, kept up too much reſemblance betwixt our Miniſters and the Prieſts of Rome, and the ignorant might be tempted to think there was very little difference betwixt our Church and Rome, ſeeing we came ſo near them in their Service, p. 37and in the manner and circumſtances of the Service alſo. Nevertheleſs they accounted it not unlawful to have continued the uſe of the Surplice till the People were weaned from it, and accordingly many did uſe it, it being not in it ſelf unlawful, as the uſe of the Croſſe was.

3. Againſt Kneeling at the Lords Supper, they pleaded that it ſhould by no means have been retained in our Church being brought into the Church at firſt, only upon the opinion of Tranſubſtantiation and worſhiping the Sacrament, and very apt to continue the ſame opinion in the People: It is alſo certain our Saviour neither uſed, nor appointed that geſture, nor gave his Church Authority to enjoyn any other, then what he uſed, as a ſtanding precept, for thereby, he, and his practice ſhould be taxed as not uſing the moſt fit geſture, nor is this geſture at all proper to this Ordinance, but thwarteth the two main ends of it, viz. Free Communion with Chriſt in the participation of his benefits; and the Renewing of Love, and Strengthning Communion among the People, for it is a geſture of great awe, reverence, and diſtance, not fit for Meditation on the promiſes, or conſideration of the death of Chriſt, or the incomprehenſible love that he manifeſted theerein. Alſo by Kneeling the People were ſevered from each other, and could not be at the Table many together, very unlike to a feaſt of Love, nay, the preſence of many would be an hindrance, and not a furtherance of Affection and Devotion. Both theſe inconveniencies were greatly increaſed, when the People were forced to come up to the Table at the upper end of the Chancel, and there to kneel before the rails a few at a time (for they muſt come to but one ſide of the Table) for this was much more unlike a Supper of Love betwixt Chriſt and his Spouſe, and betwixt fellow Members of the ſame body; yet they accounted not this geſture in it ſelf unlawful, but that they who would might uſe it and it might be retained in the Church, till the People could freely leave it off, but that it was unfit to be impoſed and purpoſely kept up, much more to be enforced with the higheſt penalty upon thoſe that were diſſatisfied with it.

The Non-conformiſts were much ſtrengthened in their diſſatisfaction with the Eſtabliſhed Church way, becauſe inſtead of obtaining any redreſs and reformation, all the impoſitions were continued and things made worſe, and the impoſers went backward, rather then forward, notwithſtanding the Non-conformiſts increaſed in number both in Miniſters and People, and at length became a very p. 38conſiderable part of the Church, whoſe complaints ought therefore to have been conſidered and redreſſed. There is a paſſage in the 20th Aritic. to be ſubſcribed by all Miniſters, that the Church hath power in matters of Faith.

This the Non-Conformiſts diſliked unleſs more explained: Therefore the Parliament in the 13 Eliz. which eſtabliſhed thoſe Articles by Law cauſed that paſſage to be left out. Biſhop Laud confeſſeth that it was not to be found in the Original of the Articles of that year,B. Laud's Speech in the Star Chamber. viz 1570 yet the Biſhop continued the paſſage in the Articles, and required ſubſcription to it. Alſo that Parliament ennacted that if any Miniſter was admitted into our Church, having other Ordination than what was eſtabliſhed amongſt us, he ſhould declare his Aſſent, and ſubſcribe to all the Articles of Religion which only concern the Confeſſion of the True Chriſtian Faith,13 Eliz. Cap. 12. and the Doctrine of the Sacraments. By this they gave indulgence to thoſe that were not ſatisfied with the Epiſcopal Ordination, and could not ſubſcribe to the 39 Artic. abſolutely, becauſe the approbation of the Homilies and Book of Conſecration with the fore-mentioned paſſage were included in them, being content that they ſubſcribed to the Doctrine of Faith,Artic. 35.36. and of the Sacraments contained in the Articles, but the Biſhops would not allow this indulgence, at leaſt not long, nor generally, but urged abſolute ſubſcription to the great trouble of many Non-conformiſts. Nor could any amendment of the Liturgy ever be procured, but on the contrary, ſome paſſages left out that reflected much on the Papiſts, as that Petition in the Letany, from the Tyranny of the Biſhop of Rome, good Lord deliver us, and a whole Prayer in the office for Gun-powder Treaſon expung'd by B. Laud, wherein it was ſaid, that the Religion of Papiſts is Rebellion, their Faith faction, and their practice the Murthering of Souls, and Bodies.

Nor were any of the Ceremonies taken away, or their impoſition remitted, but rather more added to them by the Biſhops Cannons, though not by Parliament. The Croſs in Baptiſm was confirmed and inforced, Can. 30. Under K. James, and the explication there given, increaſed the ſuſpition of the unlawfulneſs of it, they alſo brought in bowing at the name of Jeſus, Can. 18. And their dipping of Children in Baptiſm, turning the Communion Tables p. 39into Altars, bowing towards them, or towards the Eaſt, (for they agree not what it was they bowed toward,) were brought in by B. Laud, and preſſed with great Rigour, though never eſtabliſhed by Law. In Q. Eliz. Reign they were content that Miniſters Read the Service Book, without declaring their judgment concerning it, only it was ſaid in the 39 Articles, viz, Artic. 36. That the Book of Conſecration contained nothing that was in it ſelf ſuperſtitious or ungodly. But Arch Biſhop Whitgift deviſed a ſubſcription of his own, and impoſed it upon all to be ordained after that time which was at length turned into a Cannon, Can. 36. Artic. 2. In theſe words, that the Book of Common Prayer, and of Ordaining Biſhops, Prieſts and Deacons, containeth nothing in it, contrary to the Word of God, and that it may Lawfully be uſed, and that he himſelf will uſe the form in the ſaid Book preſcribed, in publick Prayers, and Adminiſtration of the Sacraments, and no other. The Biſhop knew that the Non-Conformiſts thought the Croſs in Baptiſm (preſcribed in the Common Prayer Book,) unlawfull and againſt the Word of God, and that ſome of them thought the order of Biſhops unlawfull alſo, and all of them the order of Deacons as preſcribed by that Book, and yet here they muſt ſubſcribe not only that they will uſe the book, and no other form in publick; but that it contains nothing contrary to the Word of God.

This ſubſcription was not only impoſed on thoſe that ſhould hereafter be ordained, but it is alſo decreed that no man ſhall be ſuffered to Preach or Catechize, or be a Lecturer, or read any Lecture in Divinity in the Univerſities, Cathedral, or Colligiate Churches, or in City, Market, Town, Church or Chappel whatſoever within this Realm, unleſs he firſt ſubſcribed to this Article; with two others contained in this Cannon, and by means hereof many worthy Miniſters were quickly turned out of their Livings, though the Lawyers generally declared that it was againſt the Laws of the Land, that any man ſhould be turned out of his Free-hold, (ſuch as Miniſters Livings are,) without an Act of Parliament, and to make all ſure, they ordained Cannon 55, that Preachers before all Sermons, Lectures or Homilies, ſhould only invite the people to pray, naming a few heads of Prayer, which reſpect the publick only, and none concerning the people in particular, ſo that now no other Prayer muſt be uſed in publick, but thoſe in the Service Book, which made the Burthen more intolerable. Moreover in this Book of Canons they ordain that Miniſters ſhall admit none to the Lords p. 40Supper that will not kneel, or that come not to the Prayers, or that ſpeak againſt the Book of Common Prayer or Ceremonies, or the book of Conſecration of Biſhops,Can. 27. &c. Till they acknowledge their Fault in word or writing if they can. That Fathers ſhall not be God-Fathers to their own Children, nor ſo much as urged to be preſent at their Baptiſm. In a word all that the Biſhops knew, that the Non-Conformiſts were diſſatisfied with,Can. 29. in the Service Book were eſtabliſhed by theſe Cannons, and they rigorouſly proſecuted upon them from that time, viz, 1603 to 1640.

For the Government of the Church by Biſhops, and adminiſtration of that Government by Lay-Chancellours Commiſſaries, &c. in Q. Eliz. time the Governours were contented with a peaceable ſubmiſſion from the Non-Conformiſts, but under K. James the Cannons fore-named enjoyned all Miniſters to ſubſcribe, that there was nothing in the Book of Conſecration of Biſhops, Prieſts and Deacons contrary to the Word of God. And now B. Billſon and B. Andrews pleaded for the Divine Right of Epiſcopacy, and B. Laud impoſed an Oath (commonly called the Oath & Caetera,) upon the Clergy, whereby they ſhould promiſe, not to endeavour to alter the Government of the Church as it was eſtabliſhed by Arch-biſhops, Biſhops, Deans, &c. And thus all the moderation that had been uſed by the former Biſhops in preſſing things ſcrupled, was turned into the moſt rigorious impoſition of them, yea and of additions to them alſo, as if Rohoboam's ſucceſs ſhould terrify no man from acting according to his anſwer to the People, that he would add to their burthens, and change their Whips into Scorpions, and this leads to the next reaſon of the Diſſent of thoſe former Non-Conformiſts.

Rea. 6. The Tyrannical Impoſition of the Lyturgy, and all that belonged to it, was a great means to increaſe their diſſatisfaction. There had been a paſſage in the Preface of the Common Prayer book, that the firſt Reformers had gone as farr as they could, in reforming the Church, conſidering the times they lived in, and they hoped thoſe that came after them would, as they better might do more. And indeed this was the Ground of the ſubmiſſion and patience of the Non-Conformiſts, viz, a perſwaſion that the firſt Reformers at leaſt the beſt of them did not intend their moddle as a ne plus ultra, and therefore they ſtill hoped, that by Patience and peaceable p. 41endeavours, things might by begrees be brought to a better paſs; accordingly they preſented an admonition to the Parliament; Anno 1570. And again a Petition to K. James called the Millinary Petition for eaſe and redreſs; but alas! as that paſſage of the Reformers is left out of the Preface to the ſervice book, ſo the expungers of it fixed a juſt contrary mark to themſelves, which they aim at to this day in all their proceedings; viz, that there was no neceſſity of any farther Reformation, then what was eſtabliſhed by Q. Eliz. and that all muſt be compelled to approve of that as ſufficient, and to ſubmit to the Rules of it.

The better to proſecute this deſign, they have ever laboured to ſet the Princes againſt the Non-conformiſts, and themſelves have uſed the Spiritual Sword chiefly againſt them, they did what they could to prejudice that Excellent Princeſs Q. Eliz. againſt them ſo that in her Reign eſpecially when Whitgift, was Arch-Biſhop, the Non-Conformiſts were turned out of Univerſities, as Dr Sampſon Dean of Chriſts-Church in Oxford, Mr Cartwright Margarite Profeſſour at Cambridge, and many others, many were turned out of Livings, ſome worthy men impriſoned, and Mr John Ʋdall Miniſter of Kingſton upon Thames was ſentenced to dye for high Treaſon againſt the Queen, in Defaming her Government, which ſaith Dr Fuller was ſomewhat hard, being but a remote conſequence, for all that was alledged againſt him was, that in a Preface to a certain book; he had ſharply taxed the Remiſſneſs of the Biſhops Government. And now ſuch was the Rigour of Proſecutions againſt the Non-Conformiſts, and the remiſneſs of Diſcipline toward the ignorant and ſcandalous, both Miniſters and People, that it gave occaſion to many to ſeparate from, and renounce the Church of England as no true Church, who were then called Browniſts, when K. James came to the Crown, the Biſhops ſo quickly incenſed him againſt the Diſſenters, that in the conference at Hampton-Court appointed on purpoſe to hear their exceptions, he would ſcarce give them leave to ſpeak, he ſent them away with taunts and threats, and often declared that were men never ſo able and pious, yet the Church had better want their labours, then have her Orders broken by their Non-Conformity, which maxime I am ſorry to find Dr Stillingfleet to eſpouſe, Under K. Charles the 1ſt, the Biſhops had ſo wholly engaged the civil power in their cauſe, that it was almoſt the only concern of the Government how to bring all the Non-Conformiſts in England to ſubmit, or to leave the Land, p. 42and to bring Ireland to the ſame plat-form with England, and to ſet up Biſhops, Lyturgies and Ceremonies, in Scotland, and now Miniſters and People were driven many thouſands into New-England, Holland, and other Forreign Parts, they were ſuſpended, ſilenced, deprived of their Livings, impriſoned, fined, ſet in the Pillory ſtigmatized, had their ears cut off, baniſhed into remote Iſlands, and many other ſuch preſſures were laid upon them, which many living yet remember.

Nor were the Biſhops ever aſhamed to uſe their own power, and to appear in perſon againſt theſe men, in what danger ſoever Church or State was, Conformity muſt be urged, and Non-Conformiſts ſuppreſſ'd. In the very beginning of Reformation Mr Hooper was impriſoned by B. Cranmer, and Ridley, for refuſing the uſe of ſome Ceremonies, when he was to be conſecrated Biſhop, and though the King by his Letter under his own hand commanded them to diſpenſe with him, yet they would not condeſcend: when a Congregation of Exiles for Religion, were ſetled at Franckford, under Q. Mary, becauſe they had laid aſide the Engliſh Liturgy and Ceremonies; B. Cox of Ely, and his Company coming afterwards to the ſame City, firſt quarrelled with them, and diſturbed them in the Church, and then incenſed the Magiſtrates againſt them, ſo that they were forced to leave the City to find other refuge. The Mouths of all the Cannons almoſt are Levelled againſt the Non-Conformiſts, none almoſt but they felt the Rigour of the High Commiſſion, and Star-Chamber Courts, few were ſuſpended, ſileneeed, or fined, or excommunicated, but for not uſing the Croſs, not wearing the Surplice, following Sermons abroad, for not kneeling at the Sacrament, &c. Mr. Hilderſham was ſuſpended from preaching and benefice 12 years together, and fined two thouſand pound to the King, only for giving the Lords Supper unto two of his Pariſh without kneeling, and the Communicants Mr. Holt and Mr. Ditton were fined each of them 1000 pounds for receiving without kneeling. And how Arch-Biſhop Laud exceeded all before him in proſecuting the Non-Conformiſts, is freſh in Memory.

Now the uſage of them, beſides that it might exaſperate the Spirits of men, and alienate them from the things impoſed, which is incident to all men, it did alſo add weight to their Reaſons againſt Conformity; becauſe they ſaw that the Biſhops preſſed their own Laws and Conſtitutions more then the Laws of Chriſt. That they uſurped authority without, and againſt the conſent of the Church, p. 43not only to enjoyn things on their practiſe, but alſo to impoſe the approbation of them upon their judgments, and conſciences which they knew before hand were diſſatisfied in thoſe things, and alſo that they were now become declared enemies to further reformation, and thought they ſhould rather abate of the Firſt Reformation, and go nearer to Rome then ſtir one Hairs breadth further from her. This made Conformity juſtly more ſcrupled, when after 90 years endeavours for reformation, they had Pharoahs Anſwer, and were beaten to their burthens, and not ought of the tale of their brick to be diminiſhed.

And now the caſe between the Conformiſts and Non-Conformiſts is quite altered, viz: after the making of the Cannons 1603. before the queſtion was, whether the things impoſed as Liturgy, Ceremonies, &c. might not be born with, eſpecially with help of ſome connivances of moderate Biſhops in thoſe things that they moſt ſcrupled, becauſe it was but the beginning of reformation, and the Governours both Civil and Eccleſiaſtical, were not yet weaned from the old Diſcipline and cuſtoms of their Fathers, nor were the people likely to bear more purity, and to part with all their old cuſtoms at once, and upon theſe grounds the Non-Conformiſts kept the Communion of the Church of England, and generally ſubmitted to the practiſe of moſt things impoſed: but now ſince all things before complained of, were turned into Cannons, and ſtanding Laws and muſt not only be practiſed, but approved alſo under their hands, to ſtand upon record in the Regiſters of the Biſhops Courts, and all that would not ſubſcribe muſt be caſt out, or kept out of the Miniſtry, and the People likewiſe were generally weary of the impoſitions, as well as the Miniſters, and diſliked them as too much ſymbolizing with Rome, and therefore all the Church Cenſures muſt be bent againſt them whom the Cannons called Schiſmaticks for this cauſe only. Now I ſay the queſtion was whether the firſt reformation was not compleat?Can: 27. and we ought not to go any further from Rome, in Liturgy, Ceremonies, Government and Diſcipline, but take up with them as a perfect Church Moddle, at leaſt ſuch as had no other imperfections in it, then all Conſtitutions in this world are ſubject to?

This alteration of the ſtate of the Queſtion was much increaſed, when the Court and our Princes took up new meaſures of Marrying with Popiſh Princes abroad, and mixing intereſt with them, p. 44whereby they were neceſſitated to deſert the protection and aſſiſtance which they had hitherto given to Proteſtants abroad, (which the German and French Proteſtants in their wars quickly felt the effects of,) but alſo to remit their zeal againſt the Papiſts at home viz: to ſuſpend the execution of Laws againſt them, to entertain them at Court, to receive them into offices, to ſuffer their Prieſts and Jeſuits to come over in multitudes, and quickly to ſeduce the people: and that which was a neceſſary conſequence of all this to diſcountenance and puniſh Zealous Miniſters and People, who found fault with theſe proceedings, as Puritanes, overhot, indiſcreet factious, and enemies to the State; for this practiſe of the Court drew the Church along with it, as it uſually doth: and all men that had a mind to riſe muſt plead for the Lawfulneſs of Proteſtants Marrying with Papiſts, and allowing them their worſhip, and of conniving at Papiſts amongſt us, and at laſt to ſtudy to gratifie and meet the Papiſts as farr as they could, and to bring back more of their Doctrines and Ceremonies, till at length it was become an indifferent thing, whether a man was a Papiſt or a Proteſtant, ſo he were not a Puritane, and continued in that Church he was born and baptized in. Vid Ruſhw. Col. Part 1. p. 213, The Parliaments Cenſure of Mr. Mountagues Papers. This temper did the Church men fall into immediately upon the publick attempt for the Spaniſh match, and it ſpread more amongſt them, till Arch-Biſhop Laud being made head of the party, had almoſt made a ſecond ſort of Non-Conformiſts, viz, Puritane Conformiſts, as they called them, i. e. Thoſe that conformed to the Liturgy and Diſcipline eſtabliſhed by Law, but could not approve of the new deſign of moderation toward, and Union with the Papiſts, which the Arch-Biſhop and all his followers profeſſed and owned.

And now the caſe was altered to purpoſe, for it was now Puritaniſm and Faction to be an Anti-Arminian, to be zealous againſt Popery, to preach twice a Sabbath, to pray before or after Sermon, to keep the Sabbath Holy, and in a word to be ſeriouſly religious, in the people? and for the Miniſters to preach for it, this was Puritaniſm; and our Reformers were thought too nice and ſtrait-laced, our Articles and Homilies too ſtrict, and fit to be qualified, and our Martyrs Fools and Rebels. The Non-Conformiſts now thought they had great reaſon to ſtand off from Conformity, ſeeing all their fears were verified before their eyes; that our nearneſs to Rome would endanger our returning to her again, and ſeeing p. 45Conformity it ſelf, to Law and Canons would ſignify little, unleſs a man would go beyond both, in obedience to his Superiours, to promote the new deſign. This was the caſe of the old Non-Conformiſts till the long Parliament ſtopped the ſtream: upon the whole we may obſerve, the caſe betwixt our former Non-Conformiſts and the Church of England was the ſame in ſubſtance, as betwixt the Brethren of Bohemiah and the Calixtines, the Calviniſts and Lutherans in Germany, the Bohemian Calextines, if the Pope would grant them the Cup, in the Sacrament, and three or four more reformations of abuſes in the Roman Church, they thought it reformation enough, and that they need go no farther, and they would compell the brethren who were for a total deſertion of Rome, to be of the ſame mind and practiſe with them, and that by force of Arms. The Lutherans in Germany having only reformed the Doctrine of the Church, and the Idolatry of the Maſs, and caſt off the Popes Tyranny and ſome other corruptions of Rome, yet retained Adoration of the Sacrament, kneeling to it, Surplices, Images, Holy days, and could not be content to do this themſelves, unleſs they could perſwade and inforce all Proteſtants to do ſo likewiſe. Hence they will not own the Calviniſts as brethren, nor hold any Communion with them, nor receed from any thing they had taken up, but rather proceed to take in more of the Popiſh Doctrines, as thoſe we call Arminianiſm, and have often treated, ſeriouſly ſome of them, about reconciliation with the Papiſts; but always fruſtrated, yea deteſted any endeavours of it with the Calviniſts: Thus the Conformiſts of England have contended ſo much for their Liturgy and Service, and Government, &c. That they would compell all to be content with the ſame moddle with themſelves, and would not ſuffer any to be Miniſters or Members of the Church, that would deſire any further reformation: and at laſt come to this pitch, that they would rather take in more of Rome, yea reconcile with her upon ſome terms, than abate any thing to their brethren. Nor were theſe the actions of a few particular men, but of all the Heads of the Church, Arch-Biſhops and Biſhops generally age after age. The worſt of their principle and practiſes were never condemned by the Church, but made the way to the higheſt preferments; ſo that the moderation of a few amongſt them will no more excuſe the Church of England, then a few ſober Papiſts may excuſe the Church of Rome.