r ^ U^ S^U i^^ u.,^. y Z/ ^ ANS'WER T O T H E DifTenters Pleas FOR SEPARATION; O R, A N ABRIDGMENT O F T H E LONDON CASES; WHEREIN ne Subjlance of thofe Books is digeftedinto one Short and Tlain T>ifcourfe. The Sixth Edition, LO KT> O N: Printed for James and John Knapton, at the Crown, and Richard Wilkin, at the King's Head, in St, Paul's Church- Yard. 1728. _ X^ Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from Duke University Libraries httpV/www.archive.org/details/answertodissenteOObenn * .$?^ih^ '^ '^ 4' 4^ ^ '% '% ^f^ -s •% ^t^ ^^ '$3 '% -t- '$^ -S 'S^ r* 'f' ':^^ %' %■' %' **■ •■$' V %' %' '#• ---r %■' ''f ' ■^i:-' 'i" •^' "# %' %' V ^ THE PREFACE. THAT Colledion of Cafes and o- ther Difcourfes, which was lately written by the mojl Eminent of the Conforming Clergy^ to recover Diffcnters to the Communion of the Church of England, has met with fuch an Univerfal Approbation-, that 1 need not fpeak any thing in commendation of it. Therefore I (ball wave ainyifcoiirfe of that nature^ and only give a fhort Account of this Abridgment. The CoUedion it f elf being large and deary it was thought convenient to reduce it to a. lefs Bulk and fmaller ^rice ; that thoje Ter- fonSy who have not either Money to buy, or Time to perufe fo big a Volufne, may reap the benefit of it upon eafier Terms, This, I prefume, will juftify my T^efign, if I have not fail din the profecution of it. * z X have 557634 The PREFACE. / have usd my beft Endevors to avoid Obscurity, and all thofe other Faults -sshich are often chared upon Abridgments : and I hope I may venture to fay, 1 have omitted nothing that is Material, tho the Number of thefe Sheets is not the Sixth part of thofe that contain the Original. For the Learned Authors of the Collection do frequently glance , and fometimes T)ifcourfe largely , upon the fame Subject : fo that by avoiding Repetitions, and blending all the Subflance together, I have much lefjm'd the Exfence of Money and Time, This and fome other advantages arife from the T>igeflion into Chapters } vi'hich coitd not have been gaindy if I had made a diflin5i Abridgment of every jingle T>ifcourfe, I hope, I have fairly Reprefented the Senfe of my Authors j but if I have mif taken or injur d it in any particular y I am for ry for it^ and do heartily beg Tar don of Them and the Reader The 1 1 til and i z^h Chapters^ I am fure^ are exa£t i for they have receivd the A. Bp. of YorkV own Corrections, for which I am obligd to return his Grace my hum- blefl Thanks. Other parts 1 have fubmitted te the Cenfure of other worthy TerfonSy to whofe Judgment I f\:all ever pay the greatefl Reference: but 1 have reafon to fufpe6t my felf for what I have receivd no AJfiflance in I The PREFACE. in s und therefore I defire the Reader to cor- reB me^, when he finds Qccafion, I have follow' d not only my own Opinion, but the T)ireBions of federal very judicious Terfons, inthe omiffion of A. Bijhop Tillot- fonj T)ifcourfe of Frequent Communion 5 which is wholly foreign to the T^efign of the CoUcdlion. The Rotations in the London Edit, 1698. which I follow, are very badly Printed s and therefore, if any Mi flakes of that Nature have crept into this Book, I hope they will not be chargd upon me. Many of them ap- pear d falfe at firfi View ; and many I knew not what to make of : but fome of them I have ventufdto Correct. God Almighty grant, that this weak En- devor may be of fome Service at leaft to- wards the Cure of thofe 'Divifions, which have endanger d the Ruin of vh^ Beft Church m the World, St. John'i Coll. in CambridgCs Q^ffi;, 2d, 1699, The, JScnuet. ^' % A A Catalogue of thofe Books, the Subjlance of '■jjbich IS contamd in this Abridgment. I ; A Kchbifhop Tcnnifon^s. Argument for Union, jt\ taken from the true Intcred of thofe Bij- fcuters in En^laud^ who profefs and call themfelves Protejiants. 2. Archbifhop5/:)^;'^*sDifcourfe concerning Con- fcience. In two parts. 3. Bifliop Grovels Perfuauve to Communion with the Church of England, 4. Bifhop Patrick's Difcourfe of Profiting by Sermons. 5. Biihop Fozvler's Refolution of this Cafe of Confcicncc, Whether the Church of England's Symi:- boJizing, fo far as it doth, with the Church of Rc?rie^ makes it unlav/fuj to hold Communion with the Church of England. 6. His Defence of the Refolution, &c. 7. Bifliop F/llliams's Cafe of Lay-Communion with the Church of England. 8. His Cafe of indifferent things ufed in the Worfliip of God. 9. His Vindication of the Cafe of Indifferent things, &c. 10. Dr. Elooper^s Church of England free from rhe Imputation of Popery, 11. Dr. 6V>r/or^'s Refolution of fome Cafes of Confcience, which refpc6l Church-Cornmunion. 12. His 1. titer to ylnonymns, in Anfwer to his Three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about Church-Com- ^lunicn. 13. Dr. Hick.i's Cafe of Infiint-Baptifm. 54. Dr. Vreenian'T^ Cafe of Mixt-Communion. i^. Dr. A CAT A LO GUE, &c. 15. Dr. Hafcard's Dlfcourfe about Edification. 1 6. Dr. Calamfs Difcourfe about a Scrupulous Confcience. 17. His Confiderations about the Cafe of Scan- dal, or giving offence to Weak Brethren. 18. Dr. Scon's Cafes of Confcience refolv'd, concerning the Lawfulnefs of joining with Forms of Prayer in Public Worlhip. In two parts. 19. Dr. Clagefs Anfwer to the Dijfciiters Obje- d:ions againfl the Common Prayers, ^c. 20. Dr. Reshury's Cafe of the Crofs in Baptifm, 2 I .> Dr. Cave's Serious Exhortation, with fome Important Advices relating to the late Cafes about Conformity. 22. Mr. ^'-jj/z^'s Cafe of Kneeling at the Holy gacrament. THE THE CONTENTS. TH E Introduftion, containing an Argu* ment for Union, taken from the true In- tereft of thofe T)i]fenters in England, who frofefs and call themj elves Protcftants, />^^. i. Chap. I. Of the Neceffity of living in con- ftant Communion with the eflabli^d Church ^England. 15 Chap. II. The ufe of indifferent things in the Worjhip of God^ no Obje^ion againji our Communion. 31 Chap. HI. Of the Lawfulnefs and Expe- diency of Forms of Trayer, 4S Chap. IV. Objections againji our Mor- ning 7 and Evening Service and Lit any ^ jlnjwerd. 90 Chaf. V. Of Infant- Bap tifm. los Chap. VI. Objettions againft our Form of Baptifmy and particularly that of the Sign of the Crojs, yinjwerd. 126 Chap. VII. Objcliions againji our Com- munioyi'Oifce, and particularly that of Kneel- ling at the Sacrament:, Anfwerd, 135 Chap. VllL The CONTENTS. Chap. VIII. The ObjeEiion of our Symbo- lizing or Agreeing with the Church of Rome, Anjwerd. 171 Chap. IX. The ObjeEiion of MixtCommU' nion, Anfovefd, 19^ Chap. X. The Vretenfes of "Purer Ordi^ nances and Better Edification among the Diffenters, Anfwefd. 210 Chap. XI. The Tret en fe of its being a^ gainfi ones Confidence to join with the Church ^England, Anfwerd, 228 Chap. XIL The Tretenfe ofi a doubting Confidence, Anfiwefd, 249 Chap. XIII. The Tretenfie ofi a Scrupulous Confcience, Anfiwerd, zjj Chap. XIV. The Tretenfie ofi Scandal, or giving Ofij^ence to Weak Brethren, An- fwefd, 292 The Conclufion, containing an earneft Per- fuafive to Communion with the EJiabliJb'd Church ^England. 309 ADVE%- AT>V ERT I S E MENT. TO prevent the Reprinting of a very faulty .Table of Texts of Scripture, which was added to the Fourth ImprelTion of this Book with- out my Knowledge * I have been ob- liged to draw up this which follows, and which (I hope) is tolerably exad. I have alfo endevored, by furnifhing the Printer with a correct Copy, to purge out the miftakes of the former Editions, efpecially the Third and Fourth, wherein there are fome grofs ones. Colcheftcr^ March 9th. 1 7t Tho. Bennet. A TA- «§ V^ -^jl'S^ r^ f^^^ 4^ J^«^ J^«9|^1f ^ ?^*^ J^ J-^ 5{^ & TABLE Of Texts of Scripture. CHAP. PAG. CHAP, PAG, GENESIS. 18.2,5—24. ij'^ 19. ip. .^ ,79 4. 10. — . 57 ,7.14. . 105 NUMBERS. EXODUS. 3.28. 105 6. 23. . 49 12. 14. 151 11.25. — — - 79 48,49. ■ 104 19.13,20. ■ 205 20.4. . -. 39 30. 9, 34. — . 37 DEUTERONOMY. LEVITICUS. 4.2. « 3g 7.6. • —^ 19c 6. 12. . . ihid. 2^, ^6. ■ ' 186 9 24. -, Ibid. 10. 16. » " ■ lOJ^ 10. I. . . . . 36 14. r. — » 179 iO. 12. > « . 37 17. 3» 4« ' — 37 2i. CHAP. 21. 7,8-- 26. 13. - 29. II, 12. 30. 6. The T PAG. ' 49 — Ihid. — * 105 — 104 ABLE. CHAP. PAG. EZECHIEL. 21. 16. '■ ■■ — 205 HOSEA. I. SAMUEL. 2. 16. 17. >79 2. 17,24- 10. ^. — 200 79 I. KINGS. ZECHARIAH. 12. 10. — 56, 80 MATTHEW. 18.39. — 19. 18. PSALMS. — 113, 136, 196 MARK. 5- 5- • 6.9. 28. 2. 86. 6. 66. 3, 4. ISAIAH. 120 57 Ibid. 38 4, 17. 6. 3. 9,23. — 10. 14. 13. II. — 14, 12, err. i6. 16 - JEREMIAH. 7.31. 37 8. ip. ■ ihid. 19. 5. , Ibid. 31.9. . . ^ 57 33. 35- — — - — 37 LUKE. 1.67. 2. 34. II. 2. 19- 40. 22. 17. 299 - Ibid, — 105 1^9 — 58 — 137 113, 11$ — 79| — 305;? — 50 — 57 34 J9t CHAP; The TABLE. PAG. CHAP. PAG. The T A B L £. CHAP. PAG. CHAP. PAG- 12.13. 126,135,198 II. THESSALONIANS. 14.2,6,19,23,26,28,40.-60 3.10. — i,^ fii ~ '.^ l\\ I.TIMOTHY. 2z. . 80 '• "*• ■ 45 ' '^- __: — ^''^5 silt. _ — L f 40. ^ . 32 II. TIMOTHY. II. CORINTHIANS. 1.6. ^3 5.17. — J25 3.7. — 217 6.17. ■ 25,205 4- 3- • — - — 215 10.8. 45,211 TlTUS. 12,16. . 21, J. j^^ . _ '^fo'''— '^^ 3.5. 12I GALATIANS. "' HEBREWS. 2.^ ..^ , 3-2. — 40 ^* 301 5. 14. ■'■ — 293 3.5,e^f. ,03 ^. ,: _ ,7. ^^^^ 213 "'' '»''*»• 10. 25. — 2C 27. ;26 JAMES 29. -^ ,0^ 5.4. -^ 58 4.1,2,3,4. — ^ ,06 I.PETER. ^ ^- • 57> 86 2. 2. 215 5-»- 47 5. - 45 EPHESIANS. 9. — 106 2.21. . 2n 5-21. ' 115' 125 4.3,4,5,6. 324 ^•'^- • ^^'^^ 4. 211, 198 n. PETER. ■ ^*- 24 3. 18. 213 \l' ^ 45, 211 I. JOHN. 13, i^. 211 ^ ,^ - 16. ^ 45,211 ^- °- 299 27. ,95 JUDE. PHILIPPIANS.. VI: "^ ' ^oS 2.0. * — 80 2.1 1. , 3,4 ^j_ _ ^g^ 3. i. 103 REVELATION. 1.THESSALONIANS. 2. ,^. __. .g^, ,g^ 2.9. " 294 20. • 185 5. II. 45,211 18.4.— 207c "The End of the lahk of TEXT S. BOOKS TVritten by the Reverend Thomas B E N N E T, 2). D. Vicar of St, Giles'i Cripple- gate *, Printed for a7td Sold by James and J o h isr K N A p T o N, at the Crown in St, PauPj ChurclvYard. AN Anfwer to the Diflenters Pleas for Separation, or an Abrit^gmentot the London C^(cz : Wherein the Subflance of thofe Books is digefted into one fliort and plain Dif- courie. The 6th 'Edition, A Confutation of Popery, in Three Parts. Wherein^ I. The Conrroverfy concerning the Rule of Faith is decermjn'd, II. The Particular Doftrines of the Church of Rome are confuted, III. The Popifli Objections againft the Church of England arc Anfwer'd. The Fifth Edition. A Difcourfe of Schifm, fiiewing, I. What is meant by Schifm. II. That Schifm is a Damnable Sin. IIJ. That there is a Schifm between the Eftablifli'd Church of England^ and the Diffcnters. IV. That this Schifm is to be charged on the Diflentcrs fide. V. That the Modern Pretences of Toleration, Agreement m Fundamentals, ^c. will not excufe the Diffenters from being guilty of Schifm. Written by way of Letter to three Diflcn'* ting Minifiers in EJfex, viz. Mr. Gilfon and Mr. Gledhil of Col- ehefier, and Mr. Shepherd ot Braintree. To which is annex'd. An Anfwcr to a Book intituled Thomas againft Bennef, or the Proteftant Diffenters Vindicated from the Charge of Schifm. The 4th Ed, A Defenfe of the Difcourfe of Schifm, in Anfwerto Mv.Shep- herd. The Fourth Edition. An Anfwer ro Mr. Shepherd's Confiderations on the Defenie of the Difcourfe of Schifm. The Fourth Edition. A Confutation of ^tiahcriftn-, or a plain Proof of the Falfliood of what the principal Quaker Writers (efpccially Mr. R. Barclay in his Apology and other Works; do teach concerning the Ne- ceffity of immediate Revelation in order to a faving Chriftian Faiths the Being, Nature and Operation of the pretended Uni- verfal Light within j its driving with Men» moving them to Prayer, and calling them to the Miniftry^ Regeneration, San- <^ification, Juftification, Salvation and Union wi:h Go^-, the Natureof a Church; the Rule of Faith; Water-Baptifm, and the Lord's Supper. Diverfc Queftions alfo concerning Perfec- tion, Chrifl*s Satisfaction, the Judge of Controverfies, ^c. are briefly ftated and refolved. The Second Edition. A brief Hif^ory of the joint Ufe of precompofed fet Forms of Prayer, fhewing, i. That the ancient J»?wj, our Savior, his Apoftles, BOOKS Prhited for J. and J. K^a^ to n*. A'^o^kSf and rhepnmit^ve Chriflians, never join'd in any Praters, bur prccompos'd Tet Forms only. 2. That rhoie precompos'd ftt Forms in which they joined, were fuch as the refpedlivc Con- gregation? were accuflomed to, and throughly acquainted with. 5. That their Piadtice warrants the Impoiinor* of a National precoippos'd Lirurgy. To which is annex'd, t Difcc^irfc of the Gift of Prayer, fhewing, that what the Diflentersmean by thcGift of Prayer, liz.. a Faculty of Conceiving Prayers extemfore^ is not promifedin Scriprure. The Second Edition. A Difcourfe of joint Prayer; fVcwing, I. V/hat is meant by joint Prayer. II. That the joint Uleof Prayers conceiv'd extern- pre hinders Devotion, and cnnfcquently dilpleafcs God : whereas the joint Ufe of fuch precompos'd fet Forms, as the Congr(?ga- tion is accuftom'd to, and throughly acquainted with, 6ots mod cffeduilly promote Devotion, and confequently is commanded by God. ill. That the Lay DilTenters are oblig'd, upon their own Principles, to abhor the Prayers ofier'd in their feparate Afllmb- Ifes, and to join in Communion with the Eftablifh'd Church. The Second Edition. A Paiaphrafe v/irh Annotations on the Book of Common-Vray- ir. Wherein the Text is <;xplained, Objecftions are anfwered, and Advice is hurr.bly offered, both to the Clergy and Laiety, for promotin;; true Devotion in the Ufe of it. The Second Edition, The Rights of t;he Clprgy of the Chriftian Church : Or a Dircourle j>ewing, that God has given and appropriated to the Ckrgy Authority to ordain, baptife, preach, prefide in Church- Prayer, and confecrare the Lord's. Supper: Wherein alfo the pretended Divine Right of the Laiety to ele(fl either the Perfons to be ordained, or their own particular Paftors, is examined and difprovrd. An EfTay on the Thirty nine Articles of Religion, agreed on in 15-62. and revifed in 15-71 j wherein (the Text being firft ex- hibited in Latin and Englijh, and the minuted Variations of 18 the moft Antient and Autht^ntic Copies carefully notedj an Ac- count is given of the Proceedings of Convocation in framing and Setlingthe Text o^ the Articles j The controverted claufe of the 20th Article isdemonflratcd to be genuin j And the cafe of Sub- fcription to the Articles is confider'd in Point of Law, Hiftory, and Confcience. V/iih a Prefatory Epiftle to Anthony Collins, Efq; Wherein the egregious Faliboods and Calumnies of the Au- thor of Prie/la-aft in Perfeclion, areexpofcd. The Nonjurors Separation from the Public Affemblys of the Church of £«^/^«, who profefs and call themfelves TROTESTA NTS. T' H ^ ^ ^ plain, that the fcady way to over- I throw a Church, is firft to divide it i H and that our Dijfentions are Divifiom wL properly fo call'd. How mortal thefe Breaches may at laft prove, any Man may eafily foretell , and therefore 'tis the bufinefsof every good Man to difluade from them. One way of doing this is to fhew Diffenters calmly and plainly, that their ends are not likely to be obtain'd ; and that by the means they ufe, they will bring upon them- felves thofe very evils, which they fear, and hope to remove. This Argument I defign to handle by way of Introduction to the following Difcourfe ; and in the Management of it I in1:end to fliew, Firjly what thofe ends are, which are propos'd by the Wifer and better Dtjfenters \ and Scmidl^^ that the A ends ^ The INtRO'DUCtlOlSt. ends whkh they propofe, can never be procured by the difiettlement of the Church of E)igla}id. The Dijfentcrs ends are two ; Firft^ the Efta- bhfhing of themfelves, either as a National Church, or as feveral diflindl Churches : Secondly^ and chiefly, the farther Advancement of the Reform'd Rehgion, by the removal of Popery^ and making the Proteftant Rehgion more pure and perfed, than it is or can be under the prefent Conilitution of the Church of England, Firft then, as for the Eflablifhing of themfelves as a National Church, 'tis impofiible that all of them fhould be United. For what Communion can the Presbyterians have with Brians, Socintans^ Anahaptifts^ Fifth-Monarchy-Men^ Senfual Millenaries ^ Behmeniftsy Familifts^ Seekers^ Antinofnians^ Ranters^ Sabbatarians^ ^lakers^ Muggletonians^ Sweet-Singers ? Such a medly of Religions cannot frame amongft them any common Scheme, in which their aflents can be United. Nor can any Prevalent Party hope to eftablifh themfelves as a National Church ; becaufe they Want Epifcopacy^ which hath obtain'd in England fince it's firft Converfion, and is fo agreeable to the Scheme of the Monarchy, and will not eafily be exchang'd for a new Model by the general confent of the Englifh, who are naturally tena- cious of their ancient Cuftoms. Again^ all the Parties amongft us have of late declared for mu- tual forbearance \ and therefore they cannot be confiftent with themfelves, if they frame fuch a National Conftitution, by which any Man who dilTents from it, ftiall be Otherwife dealt with, than by perfonal Conference ; which alfa he muft have liberty not to admit, if he be perfuaded ifis not lie or fafe for him. Now fuch a Body, without any The INTR0T>UCTI0N. ^ any other Nerves for it's Strength and Motion, for the encouragement of thofe who are Mem- bers of it, and the difcouragement of thofe who refufe it's Communion, will not long hold together *, nor hath it means in it fufficient for the ends to which it is defign'd. And indeed by this means the Spiritual Power of Excom-^ munication will be rendred of none effed. For what Punifhment, what Shame, what Check will it be to crofs and perverfe Men ; if being fhut out of the National Church, they may with open arms, and with an applaufe due to real Con- verts, be receiv'd into this or the other particu- lar Congregation, as it beft fuits with their good liking? Some Perfons Think, that fince they gather- ed Churches out of Churches, there are not many true and proper Prejhy.erians in England \ and if this be true, Independency is the preva- lent fide : but I know not how a National Church can be made up of feparate Independent Churches. For each Independent Congregation is a Church by it felf, and has, befides the gene- ral Covenant of Baptifm, a particular Church Covenant ; and therefore 'tis difficult to imagin, how all of them can be United into one intire Society. But be it fuppos'd, that the Frejhyterians are the moft numerous and prevalent Party ; yet ex- perience (hews, how hard a work it is for all of them to form themfelves into a Church of Eng-^ land. In the late times of public difquiet, tho' they had great power and fair opportunities, and feem'd nigh the gaining of their point, yet they widely mifs'd of it. There were in the Jjfe^nhl'^ cf Divines^ fome for an Independent^ others for an A 2 Erajtian 4 The INTROTiUCTION. Ergiftian Intereft. {a) There was a Party in the Nation, who were then calPd Dijfent'wg Brethren \ who hated the BireBory^ and Printed a Remon- iTrance againil Presbyter y^ and reproach'd the Pres- hyterians in the fame Phrafes, which they had us'd againil the Church Liturgy, (h) Some Prcjbyterians did openly confefs, that their hopes were not an- fwer'd, and that inftead of a Reformation they had a Befonnation in Rehgion. Thofe Independents^ who adher'd to that part of the Houfe which join'd with the Army, pre- vail'd for a feafon •, but they alfo were difturb'd by the Linburwfis, Levellers, and Agitators, (c) Then PFynftanly pubhfh'd the Principles of ^a- kerifm, and Enthiifiafm brake forth. Jofeph Sal- mon a Member of the Army publifh'd his Blafphe* mies, and defended his Immoralities ; and print- ed a Book in which he fet forth himfelf as the Chrid of God. Cromwell, favor'd Enthiifiajrn, and together with fix Souldiers Preach'd and Pray'd at IVhitehall ; and confefs'd to a Perfon of condi- tion ffrom whom I receiv'd it, as did others yet living ) that he Pray'd according to extraordinary impulfe ; and that not feeling fuch impulfe ("which he cali'd fupernaturalj he did forbear to Pray, oftentimes for feveral days together. At laft he and his Houfe of Cofnmons were publicly (d) di- ^m'b'dhY Ridkers, befpatter'd in their Books, his Preachers interrupted by them in his own Chapel (.») Vid. Hihhck's Memoirs, p. ii6. 8c 189. Harm. Confent. p. io. f^) Teftim. to the Truth of y.C.p.p.ji. ("f^ My ft. of Goillin. ^'jno 1649. WynftanL in Sts. Paradife, c. f. p. f4,, &c» H^KJtloik's Memoirs, p. 430. Satmvn's Rout, in Pref. & p. 10, 11^ &c. Hifl. of Indep. part 2. p. 1^3. View of the late Troubles, p. 566. (d) M^'hitlock's Memoirs, p. $^i, 6o5, 62^. Burroughs's Tj umpct of the Lord, p. 2. before The INTROT>UCTION. s before his face ; and himfelf confpir'd againfl: by thofe who call'd themfelves the free and well affe^ed People of England. Other Memorials might be pror duc'd relating to the hopeful Rife, mighty progrefs, and equal declenfion of the Prefhperian Party ; but in fliort, the longer the Church of England was dif- fccled, the greater daily grew the Confufion -, fo that thofe very diflradlions prepar'd the Way for the Reftitution of the King and the Church. Now ifDiJfrnters cou'd not fettle themfelves when they had fuch fair opportunities, much lefs can they do it now -, becaule Firfl^ the platform of Difcir- ;plin fo much applauded and contended for in the Reigns of Q^ Elizabeth and K. James, has been partly try'd, and loft fome of that Reverence which feveral had for it. Secondly, there is not now fuch an Union amongft Biffcnters, as appear'd at the beginning of the late Troubles, ^hirdly^ thofe who then favor'd the DifcipUn, do now incline to Independency and plead for H'oleration. Fourthly, the fincere Zeal and Power of maqy Pi- ous Men of Quality, who favor'd the Dijcipltn in the fimplicity of their hearts, cou'd not then fettle it •, much lefs will it now fucceed, fince thefe Men have feen fuch Revolutions, and difco- ver'd the Vile Interefts of many under pretenfe of Pure Religion, Thefe have feen their error, and will not be a fecond time engag'd. Laflly, by reafon of the grofs Hypocrifies, numberlefs Parties and Opinions, Irreligious Books, and Laxation of Difciplin in thofe Wars, Atheifm has much in- creas'd -, and they fiiy, that fome undifguifed Scep^ tics and Atheifls have, fince the King's return, been much us'd in the Caufe of our DiJJenters ; and fure- ly fuch hands cannot do, what well meaning zeal cou'd not effect. '^ A 3 Nor 6 The INTRODUCTION. Nor can they fettle themfelves as feveral diftinc^ Parties by a general Toleration. For Firft^ fome Dijfenters believe fome of the Parties to be inca- pable of forbearance, as maintaining Principles de- ftruftive of Chriftian Faith and Piety. This O- pinion they ftill have of Antinomians^ fakers and Muggletonians '-^ and they formerly declaim'd a- gainft the Toleration of Eroftians and Independents, (e) Nay, many Minifters declared a Toleration tp be an appointing a City of Refuge in Mens Confci- ences for the Devil to fly to — a Toleration of Soul- murder^ the greateft Murder of all others^ &c. Secondly^ there is no firmnefs in this Union ; for the Union that lafteth, is that of the Concord of Members in an Uniform Body. Thirdly^ Parties cannot be kept equal in number and intereft, but one will always prevail and be favour'd as the Reli- gion of the State. And it is natural for the ftrongeft to attempt to fubdue all the reft ; fo that they will not be at peace, but in perpetual difcord. Some indeed think, this inchnation to the fwal- lowing up of other Parties is to be found al- moft only in the Romifh Church : but there is fomething of it to be difcern'd (I will not fay in all Churches^ for our own fuffer'd Bonner himfelf to live, yet) in all FaUions and Parties -, tho' the inequality of Power makes it not feem to be alike in all of them. Parties, who are not (otherwifethan in ftiew) concerned for Religion, will perpetually covet after Power; and Parties that are confcien- tious in their way, will do the fame. For they withdraw from others, becaufe they think Com- munion with them to be unlawful ; and if they (t) Harmon. Confent. {>. 1 2 . think The INTR0T>UCT10N. 7 think thofe of another way (without Repentance) to be loft eternally. Charity will urge them to reduce them -, and they will think, that fuffering them to wander declares them to be contented with their condition. Befides, Experience fhews, that where there is power, there is little forbearance *, and the fame Men, as their conditions alter, fpeak of Mercy or Juftice. Thus did the {f) Bonatifts of old, and the (g) Heads of the Difciplin in the late Times, Thofe that rcmov'd to New England for Liberty of Confcience, when they had got footing there, refus'd Indulgence to y^nabaptijts -jind ^(akers, ancj ufe them to this day with great feverity. The (h) Commons in 47 gave Indulgence to all, but thofe that us'd the Com7non- Prayer, The Dutch fuffer none to fpeak againft thofe Dodbrins, which the State has Authoriz'd ; and the Re?no7iftrant Party contend for Seperiority> whenever they have any encouragement. The Popijh Orders mortally hate, and (were they not reftrain'd) would foon devour one another, And Gittichius his behavior towards (i) Ruarus a Socinian of better temper, fhews the fpirit of the Socintans^ thofe great aflerters of Liberty in Religion. The fakers themfelves, when form'd into a Society, began to Excommuni* cate and Domineer v and G. Fox (k) declared. He never lik*d the "word Liberty of Confcience, and wou\i have no Liberty given to Presbyterians, Papifts, Inde*. pendents and Baptjfts, (f) V\6. Augufl. Cont. Petil. Lib. i. (g) Mr. Calnmys great dang, of Gov. Ref. p. 3. (h") lVhitlock*s Memoirs, p. 276. ( i ). ^uari Epift, par. I. p. 41 J, 416. (k) Spirit cjf the Hata A 4 I s The INTRODUCTION. I proceed now to the Second and Chief end of the Dijjenters^ the removal o{ Poper-j^ and perfeding the ProteftantKtYi^xon. As for the removal of Po- fer^^ 'tis plain that the ruin of our Church, cal- led by Diodati the E^e of the reformed Churches^ will rather advantage it both at home and abroad. For fhe being more like the Primitive Pattern than fome others of the Reformation, can better anfwer the Papijls Objedions, than thofe that are cramp'd in a few Points ; and therefore, if Diflentions ruin her. Popery will the fooner fpread over Foreign Re- form'd Countries. And fince the Ro7nanifts are fo powerful, diligent and cunning ; have fo much Learning and Intereft i and pretend to Antiquity, Miracles, l^c. nothing can fecure us from them at home^ but the Chriftian conftitution and ilrong na- ture of the Primitive, Learned, Pure, Loyal and Pi- ous Church of England •, which is a National Body already form'd, that is able to deted: the Forgeries of Rome^ and hath not given advantage to her by running from her into any extreme. Monfieur Bailie^ who was not Jikely to be par- tial in this matter, and was at that time engaged in a Controverfy with one of our Divines, (I) fays, Js to the Church of England, purg'd from Foreign wicked fuperflitious Worjhips and Errors^ either impi^ ous or dangerous^ by the rules of the Divine Scriptures^ approved hy fo many and fuch illuflrious Martyrs, ^hounding with Piety towards God^ and Charity to- wards Men^ and with ?noJi frequent examples of good works ^ flourifbing with an Increafe of moft Learned and wife Men from the beginning of the Reformation at this time y I have always had it injuft efteemy and till J die I jhall continue in the fame due veneration of it ^ {t] )I> ConfefT. adv. Hammond^ c, 8. p. 5>7, 58, ♦^'"^ And The INTROT>UCTION. 9 And indeed it is ftrange, that any who know other Churches and States, ihou'd be difplcas'd at ours, which fo much excels them. Now is it probable, that fuch a Church lliou'd have lefs (Irength in it for the refifting of Popery^ than a number of divided Parties, the belt of which is not fo Primitive, Learned, Uni- ted, Numerous or Legal •, and is but of yeftcrday ? Thefe Parties have fcarce any form'dway of keep- ing out Popery •, for what hinders a crafty Jejmifrom gathering and modelling a particuhir Congregation? And what a gap do tliey leave open for Seducers, wlio take away all legal Tells, and admit Grangers to offi- ciate upon bare pretenfc of fpiritual Illumination ! The Ro7?iamfis have more powerful ways of draw- ing Men from the DiJJenliHg Parties, than from the Church of Ejigland. For Men feparate (^too fre- quently J thro' weaknefs of Imagination, for which the Church of Ro?ne has variety of gratifications. They will offer ftriftneiTes to the fevere^ and Me?i~ tal Prayer to thofe who condemn or fcruple Forms, They have Myftical Phrafes for fuch, who think' they have a new Notion, when they darken the Un- derflanding with words ; accordingly the third part of a very Myftical Book, written by Father Benet a Capuchin^ was reprinted in London in 46, with a (m) new Title, and without the Author's Name, and it pafs'd amongft" fome of the Parties for a Book of very fublime Evangelical Truths. They ufe much gefture and great fhew of Zeal in preaching. They have rough cords and mean garments, bare feet, and many other great fhews of Self denial. They have Proceffions and other Rites to humor the foppifhnefs of others. But our Church (m) A Bright Star centring in Chrifl our Perfedion. Printed for U. Overton^ in Pope's head Alley. is lo The INTROT>UCTION. is fufficient for this encounter. She defigns to make Men good by making them firft judicious i butfomc others defire to bring them to their fide by catching of their imaginations ; and fo fome new device Ihall, in time, bring them over to a new Parry. Diflfention it felf among Proteflants we3kcns their intereft-, and that which weakens one fide, ftrengthens another. Many that are wearied with end] efs wrang- ling, are too apt for quiet fake to run to Lifailibility. Some Dijpnters prepare the way for Popery by run- ning into another extreme ta avoid it. By decrying Epifcopacy, Liturgy^ Feftivals^ &c. as Pop'ijh^ they con- demn that as Popijh, which is decent and Chriftian, and fo bring Popery into reputation. For Men will be apt to fay, If fuch good things be Popif/o^ furely that which is Popijh, is alfo Primitive and Evangeli- cal. What we have examined is good, and probably the reft may be of the fame kind. It appears alfo from the Hiftory of our late Wars, that Popery gains ground by the ruin of our Church. For it made fuch a progrefs in thofe times, th^t the Diffente>'s charge the Jefuits with the King's mur- ther •, thereby tacitly owning, that they had fo great a power over fome of them, as to make them their In- ftruments in it. 'Tis evident to any Man, that Po- pery was not then rooted out •, (n) 'tis notorious, that many Priefts and other Papifts fought and aded for the Parliament againft the King : Nay, in 49, there was a defign to (0) fettle the Popijh Difciplin in England and Scotland. The Papifts generally fhel- tred themfelves under the Vizor of (p) Indepen- dency, A College of Jefuits was fetled at (q) Come («) Vid. Rob. Mentit de Sdmonet Hift. des troubles de la grand Brer. lib. 5. p. 165-. Short View of the troub. p.5'64. Arbir. gov. p. i8. Whttl. Mem. p. 179, zSo, i8i. Exa£l. Coll. p. 647. (0). IbSd. p. 405-. Cp) Edwanls's Gangr. par. 2. p. 10 (q) B. oi Heref» Kirrat. tothcLcrds, p. 7. in The INTRO'DUCTION. it in 52 ; and 155 were reconcil'd to Rome that yean CrojnwcU (r) fliid, that he had Tome proof, that 7UCTION. 15 and Manner. The War was preach'd up as the Chriftian Caufe j and many believ'd that God zvoii'd not Id'j the great eft villan'ies to the change of anekol Fer- fon. The inftances of their Extravagancies are end- lefs •, and the Lords and Commons^ as well as the Minifters^ were (u) highly fenfible of them. 'Thirdly^ If by Purity of Religion be meant fuch Do6lrin, Difciplin and Life, as the Gofpel teaches, and a removal of human Inventions j that Purity is in our Church already : and as for her Injundi- ons, they are (like thofe of the Pri?mtive Church) Rules of Ecclefiaftical Wifdom in purfuance of the general Canons in Holy Writ. But if by Purity of Religion be meant a/^'ze';/^/j of parts -, as the f-2l^akers believe their way is purer, becaufe they have taken away Sacraments and outward Forms •, by the fame reafon the Papifts may fay, that their Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is more pure than that of the Protcftants^ becaufe they have taken the Cup from it. But it muft be confider'd, that which makes a Pure Church, is like that v/hich makes a pure Medicine ; not the fewnefs of the in- gredients, but the goodnefs of them, how many fo- ever they be, and the aptnefs of them for the pro- curing of health. Therefore our Church being al- ready Pure^ the ruin of it will not tend to the purity and advancement of the Proteftant Religion. Fourthly^ I'he eftablifliing of contrary Parties by a Toleration is not the way to perfect Rehgion, any more than the fuffering of divers Errors wou'd be the means of reforming them. One Principle only can be true ; and a mixture of Sacred and Profane is the greateft impurity. Fifthly^ Many Bjffenters are not like to improve {h) Vid. Ord'm. Feb. 4. 16^6. Min. Teftim.p. 31, Chri- 14 The intro'duction:. Chriftianicy, becaufe they lay afide the Rules of dis- cretion, and rely not on God*s aiTiflance in the ufe of good means •, but depend wholly upon immediate illumination without the aids of prudence. Sixthly^ Our Church has already better means to promote Pure Religion, than any the Dijfenttvs have proposed. Any Church may be improved in fmall matters •, but 'twere very imprudent to change the prefent model for any that has yet been otfer'd. We have all the neceflaries to Faith and Godlinefs -, Primi- tive difciplin, decency and order are preferv'd -, We have as many truly pious Members as any Nation un- der Heaven, and fuch excellent Writers and Preachers as God ought to be prais*d for : whereas amongft the Parties, the folly and weaknefs of Preachers is delive- red folemnly as the diclate of God's Holy Spirit. I may add alfo, that the Bijfenters Dodrin of God's fecret Decrees, their Ordination by Presby- ters without aBifhop, their long unfludy'd effufions, their leaving the Creed out of the Di?'e^ory for public IForJhip, their fitting at the Lord's Supper (and that Ibmetimes with the Hat on) their alteration of the Form of giving the holy Elements, and their for- bidding the obfervation of Feftivals, were not fo conducive to the edifying of the Body of Chrift, as thofe things which were in the late Times illegally remov'd by them. It is eafy enough to alter a Conftitution -, but 'tis extreme difficult to make a true and lafting im- provement. ^0 conclude^ fince it appears, that Vijfenters are not like to obtain their ends of eftablilhing themfelves, of rooting out Popery^ and promoting pure Reli- gion, by overthrowing theChurch ofEngla?td', there- tore they ought both in Prudence and Charity to endevor aftei: Union with it. CHAP, 0/ Church Communion. t$ CHAP. I. Of the Neceffity of living in conftant Commu- nion with the EJiablijh'd Church of Eng- land* 1"^ H A T I may difcoiirfe with all pofiible clearnefs, it will be necefTary before I pro- ceed, to explain a few things. I. What is meant by a Chriftian Church. 2. What Church Co?n?numon is. 3. What is meant by Fixt Commu- nion, and by Occafional Communion, I. Then, A Church is a Body or Society of Men^ fepa- rated from the reft of the Worlds and united to God and to ihemfelves by a Diviiie Covenant. It is a Body or So- ciety^ in oppofition to particular Aden and to a confus\l Multitude, For tho' it do's confifl of particular Men, yet thofe Men are confider'd, not in a private capa- city, but as united into a regular Society. For God is not the Author of confufion. And if the meaneft Socie- ties cannot fubfift without order, much lefs the Church of God, which is a Society inllituted for the mod fpiritual and fupernatural ends. The Jewifl> Church had exa6l order ; and the Chriftian Church, with refpeft to the Union and Order of it's parts, is not only call'd a Body^ but a Spiritual Buildings an Holy-'Temple^ and the 'Temple of God. But then the Church is One Body in oppofition to many Bodies. The Jewijh Church was but One ; and therefore the Chriftian^ which is grafted into the Jewijh^ is hniOne, The Church is call'd the Temple of God, and the Temple was but 0?te by the com- mand of God. Chrifl alfo tels us, that there Ihou'd hth\xlone fold under one Jhepherd^ Joh. 10. 16. And indeed \6 .. Of Church Communion. indeed it is extremely abfurd to fay, that the Chri- flian Church, which has the fame Foundation, the fame Faith, the fame Promifes, the fame Privileges ; fhou*d be divided into Teparate Bodies of the lame kind. For certainly, where every thing is common, there is One Community. 'Tis true, di(lin6l Men, tho' of the fame common Nature, have diflin6tEf- fences, and this makes them diftinft Perfons •, but where the very Effence of a Body or Society confifts in having all things common, there can- be butO;/^ Body. And therefore if one hord^ one Faith^ one Bap- iij'ni^ oneGod and Father of all ^ be common to the whole Chriflian Church •, and if no Chriftian has any pe- culiar Privileges ; then there is but one Church. I add, that the Church is a Body or Society of yitnfepe rated from the reft of the World , upon which account Chriftians are call'd the Chofen or EleB Peo- ple of God, having a peculiar Faith, Laws, Rites, ^c» which are not common to the whole World. It is alfo a Society of Men united to God and themfelves by a Divine Covenant, It is united to God, becaufc it is a Religious Society -, and the Men are united to themfelves, becaufe they are o?2e Society. But the chief thing to be obferv'd is, that the Union is made by a Divine Covenant, Thus God made a Covenant with Abraham^ of which Circumcifion was the Seal ; and the Chriftian Church is nothing elfe, but fuch a Society of Men, as are in Covenant with God thro' Chrifl. I fuppofe all Men will grant, that God only can make a Church ; and that the only vifible way he has of forming a Church, is by granting a C/:)2/r^^- Covenant^ which is the Divine Charter whereon the Church is founded ; and by authorizing fome Per- fons to receive others into this Covenant by fuch a form of admiflion as he fhall inftitute, which form under the Gofpel is Baptifm. So that to be taken into Of Church Communion, f^ into Covenant with God, and to be rcceiv'd into the Church, are the fame thing \ and he is no Member of the Church, who is not vifibly admitted into God's Covenant. From what has been fliid it plainly follows, i . that a Covenant State and a Church State, are the fame thing. 2. That every profeft Chriftian, who isre- ceiv'd into Covenant, as fuch, is a Church Member. 3. That nothing clfeisneceflary to malleus Members of the Chriftian Church, but only Baptifm, which gives us right to all the privileges of the Covenant. 4. That no Church State can depend upon human Contradls and Covenants, and therefore the Ifrdepen- dent Church Covenant between Pador and People is no part of the Chriftian Church Covenant ; becaufe it is no part of the Baptifmal Vow, which is one and the fame for all Mankind, and the only Covenant which Chrift has made. And why then do the Inde- pendents exa6l fuch a Covenant of Baptiz'd perfons, before they admit them to their Communion ?.,- 5,. Thiit it is abfurd to gather Churche3 out of - Churches, which already confiil of Baptiz'd perfons. For there is but one Church, which is founded upon a Divine Covenant, and this we are made Members of by Baptifm •, if therefore an Independent Churclr Covenant be neceflary, then the Baptifmal Covenant is of no value, till it be confirm'd by entring into a particular Church Covenant. 6. That if the Church be founded on one Covenant, then the Church is but one. For thofe that have an interell in the fame. Co- venant, are Members of the fame Church 5 andtho* the Univerfal Church, for Man's conveniency, be divided into feveral Parts or Congregations, yet it cannot be divided into two or more Churches. So that two Churches which are not Members of pa ch other, cannot partake, in the fame Covenant^ B but \ i i Of Church Communion. but the divider forfeits his intereft in it. A Frincc indeed may grait the fame Charter to feveral Corpo- rations •, but if he confine his Charter to the Mem**' bers of one Corporation, thofe who fcparate from- the Corporation, forfeit their intereft in the Char- ter. Thus has God granted a Charter or Covenant, and declares that by this one Covenant he Unites all Chriftians into one Church, into which we are ad- mitted byBaptifm-, and therefore if we feparate from this one Church, we forfeit our intereft in it. God- has not made a particular Covenant with the Church of Geneva, France, or England, but with the one Catholic Church •, and therefore if we do not live- in Unity with the Catholic Church, we have no right to the Bleffings promised to it. II. By Church Communion I mean Church Socie* /)'. To be in Communion with the Churchy is to be a Member of it. And this is call'd Communion^ becaufe all Church Members have a common right to Church Privileges, and a common obligation to the Duties of Church Members. 'Tis true, this word Communion is commonly us'd to fignify -pray ing^ hearing, and receiving the Sacra?nent5 together 5 - but ftridly fpeaking thofe Offices are not Commu- nion, but an Exercife of Communion. Church Communion is Church Union •, for as a Member muft be united to the Body, before it can perform the natural adion of a Member : fo a Man muft be in Communion with the Church, before he has a right to Pray, &c. And therefore, tho'a Man that is not in Union or Communion with the Church, fliou'd perform thofe OfHccs \ yet the performance of them do's not make him a Member of the Church, but an Intruder. Such Offices are ads of Communion^ if-perform'd by Church Members ; but not other- yife. So that to be in Communion with the Church Of Church Communion , 19 IS to be a Member of it ; and by being a Member a Man has a right to the BlelTings promised to it, and an obligation to perform the Offices of Church So- ciely, viz. obedience to the Church's authority, joining in Prayers, ^c. and he that a6ls otherwife, renounces his Communion with it. From what has been iliid I obferve, i. That Church Communion principally refpefts not a par- ticular, but the Univerfal Church, v/liich is but one all the World over. For Memberfhip may extend to the remoteft parts of the World, ifthebody, where- of we are Members, reach fo far : and Baptifm makes us Members of the Univerfal Church, bccaufeit ad- mits us into the Covenant, which God made with the Univerfal Church. 2. That every a6t of Chriftian Communion, fuch as prayings &c. is ah a6t of Communion with the whole Catholic Church, tho' it muft be perform'd in a particular Congrega- tion, ■ becaufe all Chrifiians cannot meet ifi one place. Thus do we as Fellow Members pray to God the Common Father of Chrifbians, in the Name of Chriil the Common SaviOr of Chriftians, for the fame Common Bleffings, for our felves ahd all other Chriftians. Thus alfo the Supper of the Lord is not a private Supper, but the CommonY^^^ of Chriftians, and an a(ft of Catholic Communion. 3. That the only reafon, why I am bound to live in Communion with any particular Church, is becaufe I am a Member of the whole Chriftian Church. For I muft live in Communion with the whole Chriftian Church -, and this cannot be done without a(5lual Communion with fome part of it. So that I have nothing elfe to do, but to confider, whether that part of the Catholic Church wherein I live, be fo found, that I may law- fully live in Communion with it •, and if it be, I am bound to do fo under peril of Schifm from the Ca ■ B 2 tholic \ is Of Church Comnuinion, tholic Church. 4. That thofe Churches which arc not Members of each other, are feparate Churches *, becaufe the Cathohck Church being but one, all par- ticular Churches ought to be Members of it. To make this plain, I Ihall lay down fome few Rules, whereby we may certainly know, what Churches are in Communion with each other, and which are Schifmatical Conventicles. I. There muft be but one Church in one place ; becaufe private Chriftians ought to join with thofe Chriftians with whom they live ; and to withdraw our felves from ordinary Communion with the Church in which we live, into feparate Societies, is to renounce it's Communion •, and when there is not a necefTary caufe for it, is a Schifmatical feparation. Every particular Church muft have it's limits, as eve- ry Member in the Body has it's proper place : but when there is one Church within the Bowels of ano- ther, it is a notorious Schifm. This is the cafe of our Dijfenters^ who refufe to worfhip God in the fame ■ aflemblies with us. Diftind Churches at a diftance may be of the fame Communion : but diftindl Chur- ches in the fame place can never be of the fame Com- munion •, for then they would naturally unite. So that all feparation from a Church wherein we live, unlefs there be necelTary reafons for it, is Schifm. 'Tis true, a Nation may permit thofe Foreiners that are among them, to model their Congrega- tions according to the Rules of thofe Churches, to which they originally belong i and that with- out any danger of Schifm. For a bare variety of Ceremonies makes no Schifm between Churches, while they live in Communion with each other. Now every particular National Church has Au- ^thority over her own Members to prefcribe the rules of Worfhip •, but as fhe does not impofe upon other Of Church Communion. 2.1 other Churches, at a diftance •, fo flie may allow the fame Liberty to the Members of fuch Forein Churches, when they live within her Jurifdidion. For tho' all true Churches are Members of each other, yet each Church has a pecuHar jurifdiftion ; and therefore for the Church of Engknd to allow Fo-? reiners to obfervc their own Rules, is not to allow feparate Communions, but to leave rhem to the Go^ vcrment of the Church, to which they belong. So that diftindl Congregations of Foreiners, who own the Communion of our Church, tho' they obferve the cuftoms of their own, are not Schifmatical, as the feparate Conventicles of our Dijfenters are. 2. Thofe are feparate Churches, which divide from the Communion of any Church, from any dif- like of it's Dodlrin, Goverment or Worihip. For in this cafe they leave the Church, becaufs they think it unfafe to continue one body with it. Two Churches may be in Communion with each other, and yet not a<5lually Communicate together, becaufe dillance of place will not permit it : but it is impolTible that two Churches, which renounce each other's Com•^ munion, or at leaft withdraw ordinary Communion from each other, from a profefs'd dillike, fhou'd Hill continue in Communion with each other. Be- caufe they are oppofite Societies, founded upon con- trary Principles, and ailing by contrary Rules, and purfuing contrary Ends, to the ruin and fuj;>verfion of each other. 3. Thofe are feparate Churches, which do not own each others Members as their own. The Chriftian Church is but one Houfhold and Family , and whoe- ver makes two Families of it, is aSchifm.atic. IfChri Itians in the fame Kingdom hold ieparate Afiemblico under diftin(5l kinds of Goverment and different Go- yernors, and condemn each others conftitution and B 3 mode-; \ i 2 Of Church Communion' modes of Worfliip, and cndevor co draw away Members from each other •, they cannot be thought to be one Church. And indeed we may as well fay, that feveral forts of G overmen t in the fame Nation, with difl:in6l Governors, diflind: Subjeds and di- ftinct Laws, that are always at Enmity and War with each other, are but one Kingdom -, as we may fay, that fuch Congregations are but one Church. III. I am to explain what is meant by Fixt and by Occafional Communion. By fixt Communion the BiffenUrs underftand an adlual and conflant Com- municaring with fome one particular Church, as fixt Members of ir. By occafional Communion they mean praying, hearing and receiving the Sacrament at fome other Church fof which they do not own themfelves to be Members) as occafion ferves j that is either to gratify their own curiofity, or to ferve fome fecular end, or to avoid the imputation of Schifm. Now fixt Communion is the only true notion of Communion, for occafional Communion do's not deferve the name of Communion. For I have prov'd, that he who is not a Member, cannot perform an Acl of Communion -, and therefore it is as plain a contradiction to talk of an occafional ad: of Communion, as of an Occafional Memberfiiip. Since every a6l of Communion is an ad of Commu- nion with every found part of the Catholic Church, therefore the exercife of Chriflian Communion is e- qually fixt and conftant, or equally occafional with the whole Catholic Church. 'Tis true, in one fenfe we may be Members of a particular Church, that is, we may live under the Goverment of a particular Bifliop in a particular Na- tional Church ; but yet every acl: of Communion perform'd in this particular Church is an a6l of Com- i^iunicxi v/ich every found part of the Catholic Church- Of Church Communion. 2 } Church, So that whenever I communicate, whe- ther in that Church in which I ufually hve, or ii\ any other particular Church, where I am acciden- tally prefent, my Communion is of the fame nature. Now our ordinary Communion with thofe Churches where our conftant abode is, may be call'd fixt Communion; and our Communion with thofe Churches where we are accidentally prefent, may be call'd occafional Communion •, and all this may be done without Schifm, becaufe all thefe Churches are Members of each other : but we cannot lawful- ly join fometimes with the eilablifli'd Church, and fometimes with a feparate Congregation ; becaufe the cafe is vaftly different . For the eftablifh'd Church and the Diffentcrs Congregations are not Members of each other, but feparate Churches, Now 'tis impoffible for any Man to be a Member of two feparate Churches •, and whatever adls of worlhip we join in with other Churches, of which we are no Members, they are not properly ads of Communion. Having thus explained the T'bree foregoing Parti* culars, I proceed to the main bufinefs,' which was to fhew, that it is the indifpenfahle duty of all Eii?-^.^ I'ljh Men to live in conftant Communion with mc fftahltflfd Church of England, This I fhall do by fhewing, Firft^ That Communion with fome Church or other is a neceffary Duty. Secondly^ That conftant Communion with that Church, with which occafional Communion is law- ful, is a neceflary Duty 5 from whence I fliaJl rnak^ it appear. Thirdly^ That it is neceflary to continue in con* flant Communion with the cftablifh'd Church pf England^ B 4 I. Then, 24- Of Church Commnnim. I. Then, it is plain, that Communion wUhfoTfte: Church or other is a necejfar^ Duty. Becaufe tQ be in Communion is to be a Member of Chrift ; and he that is a Member, has a right to the Privileges and ar^ obligation to the duties of a Member •, and 'tis cert^iin that Communion in Prayers, [^c. is none of the lead Privileges of Chriftianity, and that 'tis the duty of a Member to Communicate in Religious Offices. But to put the matter out of all doubt, Ifhall offer five things, to prove that external and adtual Com- raunipn is a neceflary Duty. ' I. Baptifm makes us Members of the vifiblc Church of Chrifl ; but there can be no vifiblc Church without vifible Communion, and there- fore every vifible Member is bound to vifible Communion, when it may be had. 2. This is Efiential to the notion of a Church, as it is a So- ciety of Chriilians. For fince all Societies are in- llituted for the fake of fome common Duties and Ofnces, therefore fome duties and offices mufi: be perform' d by the Society of Chriftians ; efpecially fince the Church confifi:s of different Offices and Officers, as Paftors^ &c. Eph. 4. 1 1 . which are of no life, if private Chriftians are not bound to maintain Cpmmunion with them in all Religious Offices. 3 . The nature of Chriftian worffiip obliges us to Church Communion. For we are bound to wor^ (hip God according to Chrifl's Inffitution, that is, hy the hands of the Miniftry authoriz'd for that purpofe, Aofsi. 42. and therefore, tho' the private Prayers of Church Members are acceptable, yet fi one but public Prayers ofler'd up by the Miniilers, are properly the Prayers of the Church, and adis of Church Communion. Nay, the Lord's Supper, which js the principal part of God's worfiiip, is a commori Supper or Communion Feaff, and cannot poffibly ' -^ '' ' ~ ■ be of Church Communion, 25 be celebrated but in a6lual Communion. 4. The exerciie of Church Authority, which confifts in admitting Men to, or excluding them from, the ex- ternal adts of Communion, fuppofes that Church Members are obhged to vifible Communion. 5. If Separation from Religious Aflemblies be to break Communion, as it plainly appears to be from 2 Cor, 6. 17. I Joh. 2. 19. Heh. 10. 25. then to live in Communion with the Church, requires our aftual Communicating with the Church in all Re- ligious Duties. Accordingly, to have Communion with any, i$ to partake with them in their Religious Myfteries, i Cor. 10. 20, 21. So that tho' we mufl: firll be in a flate of Communion, before we have a right to Communicate-, yet we cannot prcferve our Church State without actual Communion. And a right to Communicate without ad:ual Communion, which is an exercife of that right, is worth nothing •, becaufe all the blefTings of the Gofpel are convey'd to us by adtual Communion. This is fufficient to prove the necefTity of a6lual Communion with the Church, when it may be had ; for when it can*t be had, we are not obliged to ic. put then the greater difficulty is, whether it be lawful to fufpeud Communion with all, becaufe the Church is divided into Parties. Now a Man may as well be of no Religion, becaufe tliere are dirferent Opinions in Religion \ as Communicate with no Church, becaufe the Church is divided into Parties. For 'tis pplTible to know which is a true and found part of the Catholic Church; and when we know that, we are bound to maintain Communion with it. Indeed if Divifions excufe from a7i, that there are 2i Of Church Communion. are no finful terms of Communion with it ; and fince he who feparates from that eftabhfh'd Church, where there are no finful terms of Communion, is guilty of Schifm ; therefore a Man is obliged to join conftantly with that Church, with which he owns it lawful to Communicate occafionally. • III. Now if thefe things be true, which I have fo plainly prov'd, then it will eafily be made ap- pear in the Third place, that it is neceffary to continue in conftant Communion with theeftahliflfd Church of Eng- lund. For fince a Man is obliged to join conftantly with that Church, with which he owns it lawful to join occafionally ; therefore it is plain, that all Eng- lijh Men are obliged to join conftantly with the efta- blifh'd Church of England^ becaufe they may law- fully Communicate with it Occafionally. But if any Man fay that 'tis not lawful to Communicate occa- fionally with the ejlahlifh^d Church of England^ I doubt not to make it appear in the following difcourfe, that he is greatly hniftaken. ^Tis not my prefent bufinefs to prove, that the Fajlors of Dilfenting Congregations ought to fub- fcribe to the Articles^ &c. For tho' that matter may be eafily made out, yet 'tis forein to my purpofe \ my dcfign being only tofatisfy Lay DiJJl'nters^ and to fhew that they may lawfully join with our Church, becaufe then it will appear to be their duty to do fo conftantly. And certainly, if the Cafe of L.'73;-Ci?;;;- munion were truly ftated and underftood, the Peo- ple wou'd not be far more averfe to Communi- on with the Parifti-Churches, than the Non Con- forming Minifters, who have often join-d v/ith us. And as the Minifters, by bringing their Cafe to the Peoples, may fee Communion then to be lawful, and find themfelves obliged to maintain it in a private capacity : fo the people by perceiving their Cafe not to Of Church Communion] 29 to be that of the MinLfters, but widely different from it, wou'd be induced to hold Communion with the Church. It appears therefore from what I have already faid, that if that part of the Church in which we live, be a true and found part of the Catholic Church, then we are obliged to maintain conftant Communion with it. And that the EftabliJ/fd Church of England isfuchatrue andfound part of the Cadiolick Church, even our Dijfcnters themfelves have fully prov'd. For all or moil of thofe, with whom I am to Treat, have join'd in our folemn Offices of Devotion ; which they cou'd not lawfully do, if our Church were not a true and found part of the Catholic Church of Chriil. But I Ihall not infifl upon that perfonal Argument *, becaufe I defign to defcend to particulars, and fhew Firjl^ that our Church is a true and found part of the Chriflian Church, and Secondly^ that thofe Pleas which the Diffenters make ufe of to excufe their feparation from her, are vain and frivolous. Firft^ Then, the EftahliJJfd Church of England is a true andfound part of the Catholick Church. That 'tis a true Church, appears from the ConfelTion of the moft Eminent and Sober (a) Non-Conformifls ; nay, the Old Non-Conformifis undertake to {h) prove it, and fo do's the (r) Author of Jeruhhaal\ and if I fliou'd proceed to particulars, I might fill a Volume {a) Bayly Si Difluafive, c. 2. p. 21. Corbet's Difcourfe of tYiC Religion of Encla??^!^ p. ^3;. Non Conformifts no Schifmatic?, p. J3. See B^//^s Friendly Trial, c. i^. p. ^06. Letters of Miniftera in Old EnglancUoM\T\\iiti5\n Neva England, p. 24. (^) A Grave and Sober Confut, p. i, 8cc.p. fj. (c) JemUaal, or the Pleader iiilr plcadcd, p. if8, SC27. With 30 Of Church Communion. with (d) Teflimonies. 'Tis true, they own her Cd' be a true Church upon different Grounds, becauld fome of the Bijjenting IVr iters are for a National, and others for a Congregational Church •, but they (e) all agree in this, that the Church of England is a true Church, tho' they fay fhe is a corrupted one. Nay (/) they do not only grant her to be a true Church, but alfo declare her to be one of the moft valuable, if not the very befl in the World. But I ihall fay nd more of this matter \ only I refer the Reader to Mr, Baxter's Cure of Ch, divif, dir. 56. p. 263. (d) Concerning her Doftrin, See the Opinion of the Presbyt. irf Corbet's, Difcourfe, §. 21. p. 43. Baxter's five Difp. Pref. p. 6. of the Independents in the Peace Offering, p. 12, See alfo Baxter's Def of his Cure, part i. p. 64. part 2,. p. 3. Wadfvporth's Separ. yet no Schifm, p. 60, 6i. Throu^hton's Apology, c. ^. p. io5. and of the Brownifls in their Apol. p. 7. Anno i5o4. Se^alfo Bayly's DilTuafive, c. 2. p. 20, 35. Stillingfleet's Unrealbnablenefs of Separ. part i.§. 9, p. 31. For Opinions concerning her Worfl.ip, StcHildtr- fham's Left. 2 licre us to reitrain the exereife of our Liberty, much more do's the Peace of the Church oblige us to the fame. Let every one pkafe bis neighbour^ for his good to Edification^ Rom. 15. 2. that is, to his improve- ment in Knowledge, Grace, or Piety, and the pro- moting of Concord and Charity. Now Edificatiort is chiefly fo with refpedt to the whole, as the Church is the Houfe of God, 1 Pet. 2. 5. and every Chti- flian is a Stone of it, and therefore ought to ftudy what may be for the Edification of the whole. And how is that, but by promoting Love, Peace and Order, and taking care to preferve it ? For fo wet {e) find Peace and Edifying, Comfort and Edificati^ on. Union and Edification join'd together, as the one promotes the other. And therefore as the good and Edification of the Church is to be always in our Eye; fo 'tis the Rule by which we ought to ad in all things lawful ; and to that end we Ihou'd comply with it's cuftoms, obferve it's diredlions, and obey it's orders, without reludancy and op- pofition. If any Man feem^ or have a mind to he conten- tious^ vje have no fuch ciiftom^ ?ieither the Churches of God', I Cor. II. 16. Whatever might be urg'd, the Apoftle concludes, we have no fuch cujlom^ &c. The Peace of the Church is to a peaceable mind fiifficient to put an end to all difputes about it ; and fince the Peace of the Church depends upon the obfervation of it's cuftoms, that is infinitely to be preferr'd before fcrupulofity and nicenefs, or a mere inclination to a contrary pradlice. There muft be fomewhat eftablifh'd j and the very change (e) I Cor. 14. 26. ^ Cor. lo. 8. i Tim. i. 4. Rom. 14. 19. t Thcfl'. s- li.Eph. 4. 12, 1(5. 4^ Of indifferent things. of a ciiftom^ thd" it may happen to profit^ yet doth dtfturb by it's Novelty^ fays St. Aujlin, Epiil. ii8. Infirmity in a Church is better than confufion v and in all things which neither we nor the worfliip are the worfe for, but the Church the better for obferving, Peace and Order are to be preferred far before niceties ; and certainly neither we nor the fervice of God can be the worfe for what God has concluded nothing in. In a word, what St. Auftiii and his Mother receiv'd from St. Amhrofe^ is worthy to be recommended to all •, T^hat in all things not contrary to Truth arid good Manners^ it becomes a good and pr'udent Chriftian to pra^ife ac- cording to the cuftom of the Church where he comes^ if he will not be a Scandal to them^ nor have them to be a Scandal to him, Epift. 1 1 8, & 86. And if the cuftom and pradice of a Church muft oblige a good Man ; much more ought it fo to do, when 'tis Eftablifli'd by Law, and back'd by Au- thority. For then to ftand in oppofition, is not only an Offence but an Affront •, 'tis to contend, whether we or our Superiors Ihall Govern •, and v/hat can be the iffue of fuch a temper, but diftra- (ftion ? 'Tis pleaded, that there fhou'd be a Liberty left to Chriftians in things tindetermin* d in Scripture j but there are things which they muft agree in, or f'Aiit there can be nothing but confufion. For in- ftance, what Order can there be, if Superiors may not determine, whether Prayers Ihall be long or ftiort, and the like .^ To conclude, when the Scrip- ture do's neither require nor forbid an action, we ought to obey the Orders of the Church in the performance or omiiTion of it. But 'tis faid. That if v/e be reftrain'd in the ufe of indifferent things, we are alfo reftrain'd in our Chriftian Liberty, which the Apoftle exhorts us to^ fiand Of indifferent things. ^^f fitind fajl vt. Gal. 5. i. Now tx) this I anfwcr ; 1. This is no argument to thofe that fay, there is nothing indifferent in the worfhip of God ; for then there is no matter of Chriflian Liberty in it. 2. A reftraint of our Libery, or receding from it, is of itfeJf no violation of it. The moil fcrupu- lous Perfons plead, that the llrong ought to bear with the weak, and give them no offence by indulging that Liberty, which others are afraid to take •, and why, I pray, is a Man's Liberty more damag'd, when re- llrain'd by Superiors, than when 'tis rcflrain'd \f^ another^ s Confcience ^ If it be fiid, that the Superior's command reftrainsit perpetually •, I anfwer, that the cafe is ftill the fame ; for the Apoflle who knew his own Liberty, fuppofes that it wou'd not be damni- fy'd, tho' it were reftrain'd for his whole life. For, faies he, if Meat mdke my Brother to offend^ I will eat no Flefh while the World ft andeth -, 1 Cor. 8. 13. and this he wou'd not have faid, had he not thought it confiftent with ftanding faft in that Liberty^ &c. 3. Chriftian Liberty is indeed nothing elfe, but free- dom from the reffraints, which the Jewijh Law laid upon Men. This is that Liberty which we are exhorted to ftand faft in ; and I think, that in obey- ing the orders of our Church, there is no danger of Judaif?n, But we muff note, that Chriftian Liberty confifls, not in our being freed from the a5f of ob- ferving the Jewiftj Law -, but in being freed from the neceffity of obferving it. For the Apollles and firll Chriffians did obferve it for fome time upon prudential confiderations ; but they did fo, not out of neceffity, but in condefcenfion to their weak Converts. And if they cou'd obferve fome Judai- cal Rites v/ithout infringing their Chriftian Liber- ty ; certainly we may fafcly ufe a few indifferent Ce- remonies. From 4S Of Forms of Trayer. FrOfm what has been faid it plainly appears, that the ufc of indifferent things is no objeAion againft living in Communion with Our Eftablifh'd Church ; and this is enough to fatisfy thofe Perfons, who up- on no other account, than that of a few harmlefs impofitions, are guilty of feparation from her. But becaufe they have fome particular objedlions a^ainfl fome particular things impos'd by her, therefore I ihall not fatisfy my felf with proving the lawfulnefs of ufing indifferent things in general •, but endeavor to fatisfy all their fcruples which relate to fihgle inilances, as I fhall have occafion to treat of them in the following Chapters. CHAP. III. Of the La'-^fiilnefs and Expediency of Forms of Trayer. THE next objetElion againft our Communion is the ufe of Forms of Prayer, This the Dif fenters judge to be unlawful, or at leaft not expe- dient ; and they think it a fufficient excufe for their feparation from us. I fliall therefore in this Chapter endeavor to redlify their miftakes; i. By fhewing that both Scripture and Antiquity do war- rant Forms of Prayer, 2. By anfwering. their ob- jedtions againft Forms of Prayer. And 3. by proving that the iinpofttion of Forms of Prayer may he lawfully complfd with. Firfl then, I ihall fhew, that holh Scripture and An- tiquity do warrant Forms of Prayer, The Biffenters indeed require us to produce fome pofitivc conv mand of Scripture for the ufe of Forms of Prayer ; but this is needlefs^ becaufe I have fliewn in the fore- Of Forms of Trayer^ 491 foregoing Chapter, that things not coniynanded maf be JawfuIJy us'd in Divine Worfhip. However, for their full fatisfadion, I fliall endeavor to prove thefe '^wo things ; 1 . That fome Forms of Fra^r are ebmmanded in Hol'j Scripture, 2. That tho' no Forms were commanded, yet Forms are as Lawful as e>.tempore Prayers. I. Then^ fome Forms of Prajer are commanded irt Holy Scripture, I do not fay that God's Word com- mands lis to ufe none but Forms ; but I affirm that feveral Forms of Prayer are injoin'din God*s Word. Thus Nu7nh, 6. 23, &:c. the Priefl is commanded to Pray for the People in this very Form of Words, ne Lordhlefs thee^ &c. AnABeut, 21.7, 8. the People are injoin'd to fay^ Be merciful^ O Lord^ &c. and 26. 13, &c. I have brought^ &c. Look down from thy Holy^ &c. David alfo by Divine infpiration appoint- ed the Book of Pfalms for the public fervice, as appears by the Titles of many of them. And tho* fome of them have no Titles at all, yet we find they were delivered by David into the hands of yJ^/)^ and his Brethren for Forms of Praife and Thankfgiving, i. Chron. 16. 7. and accordingly Hezekiah commanded the Levites to make ufe of them, 2 Cbro?L 29. 30. This Liturgy alfo wa-s re- newed by Ezraj Ezr, 3. 10, 11. Befides our Sa- vior faies, fFhen ye Pray^ fiy^ Our Father^ Sec. in which he do's as plainly prefcribe that very Form, as 'tis poffible. Nay, had he faid, ufe this For?n^ \t cou'd not have been more expreffive of his inten^ tion to impofe it as a Form. If it be faid, that the Lord's Prayer is not a f'orm^ but only a Pattern ox Directory of Prayer •, becaufe our Savior, Alatt. 6. 9. commanded his Difciples to Pray aft&r this manner^ Our Fatl^^r^ See. I an-* D fv/erj 56 Of Forms of Grayer, fwer, I. When the fame niatcer is mention*d am- biguoudy in one text, and plainly in another, then the doabtful or ambiguous Text muft be determin'd by the plain one. Now 'iroic, ^poa-iux,i^£. Matt. 6. 9. may be as well tranflated Pray in ibefe words, as Pray after this manner •, but I confefs, we cannot cer- tainly know from that Text, whether Cbrijl com- mands us to ufe that very Form, or one like it. But then the words, Luke 11.2. IFben ye pray, fay^ Our Father, &c. are fo exprefs a command to ufe that very Form, that nothing can be plainer j and therefore the other Text mufb be determin'd by them. 2. Our Savior gave this Prayer not after the manner of a Diredtory, but of a Form. Had he defign'd it for a Dire6tory, he w^ou'd have bid- den them to call upon God for fuch and fuch things : v/hereas he gives them a Form*d Prayer, and bids them fay it ; and v/e may reafonably fup- pofe^ that he intended we fhou'd ufe it as a Form, fince he gave it as fuch. 3. Tho' the words in St, ilf(^//.6r'ie; were only a Diredory, yet thofe in St. Luke are a Form of Prayer. For the former were deiiver'd in the Sermon upon the Mount in the fecond year after his Baptifm ; but the latter upon another quite different occafion in the third year after it. Therefore 'tis probable, that the Difciples underflood thofe in St. Matthew only as a Directo- ry ; and requefted our Savior afterwards to give them a Form. For, 4. the occafion of Chrift's giv- ing them this Prayer in St. Luke, was their requeft' ing him to Teach them to Pray, as John taught his Difilples. For 'twas the cufbom of the Jezvijh Do- ctors to Teach their Difciples a particular Form of Prayer ; .and St. John had done the fame, and the Difciples defire, that Chrifl wou'd do fo too. For neither St. john'-s nor our Savior^s Difciples cou'd be Of Forms of Trayer. 5 1 be ignorant how to Pray j but their requeft was, that Cbrifi wou'd give them his particular Form ac- cording to the JewiJJj cuftom *, and this Form he gave them, which we call the Lord's Prayer. But 'tis objeded, that fuppofing our Savior did prefcribe it as a Form, yet it was only for a timCy till they iliou'd be more fully inftrudled and enabled to Pray by the coming of the Holy Spirit. For, fay they, before Cbrijl's Afcenfion the Difciplcs had ask'd nothing in his Name, Job, i6. 24. but all Prayers after Cbrijl^s Afcenfion v/ere to be ofi'er'd in bis Na?7ie^ Joh. 14. 130 & 16. 23. Now this Prayer has nothing of his Name in it •, and there- fore was not defign'd to be us'd after his Afcen- fion, and accordingly, fay they, in all the New Teilament we have not the lafl intimation of the Difciples ufing this Form. But this objection is of no force, if we confider the following particulars. 1. That our Savior has not given us the leaft intimation, that he prefcrib'd this Form only for a time, and not for continual ufe. And if we may pronounce Cbriji's Inflitution to be null without his Authority, then Baptifm and the Lord's Sup- per may be temporary prefcriptions, as well as the Lord's Prayer. Whatever Cbrifi has inftituted with- out limitation of time, do's alwaies oblige. 2. That his not inferting his own Name into it, Is no Argument at all, that he never intended it fliou'd be us'd after his Afcenfion. For to Pray in Cbrijt's Name is to Pray in his Mediation, depending up- on his Merits and Intercelfion for the acceptance of our Prayers : and therefore Prayers may be of- fered up in Cbrifl's Name, tho' we do not name him. Thus without doubt the Difciples Pray'd in his Name, J^s 4. 24. tho' his Mediation is not mencion'd, 'Tis true, his Name is not expreQ D 2 fed 5 1 Of Forms of Ttayer, fed in the Lord's Prayer •, becaufe when he gav^ it, he was not yet Afcended, and his Difcipks were not to ask in his name, till after his Afcen- fion : but now that he is Afcended, we can as well offer it in his name, as if it had been exprefs*d in it. Nay 'tis fo fram'd, that now after his A- fcenfion, when the Do6lrine of his Mediation was to be more fully explained, we cannot offer it at all, but in and thro* his Mediation. For God is peculiarly our Father in and thro' Jefus Chrift. And therefore Chrift^s not inferring his own Name, do's by no means prove, that he did not defign it for a Handing Form. 3. That tho' the Scriptures do not mention the Apoftles and Difciples ufing the Lord's Prayer, yet this is no argument either that they did not ufe it, or that they did not believe themfelves obliged to ufe it. For we may as well conclude from the fi- lence of Scripture^ that they did not Baptize in the I^ame of the Father^ and of the Son^ and of the Holy Ghofty tho' Chriji had commanded them fo to do 5 as we may conclude, that they did not ufe the Lord's Prayer, tho' Chrifl commanded them to fay. Our Father^ &c. Efpecially if we confider, that thofe who liv'd neareft the Apoftolical Ages, and fo were the mod competent Judges of what was done in them, where the Scripture is filent, did al- waies ufe this Form in their public Prayers, and be- lieve themfelves obliged to do fo. Now that this Prayer was lookt upon as a Handing Form, to be perpetually us'd, appears from TertuiL de Orat. Sr. Cyprian de Orat. Dom. St. Cyril^ Cat. Myft. 5, St.Jeromy in Pelag. 1. 3. St. Juflin^ Hom. 42. 50. Epift. 59. St. Chryfoft. de Simult. St. Gregory Ep, lib. 7. cap. 6. And to be fure, they who believ'd the Inftitution of it to be perpetually obliging, cou'd Of Forms of Grayer. 5 j cou'd not doubt, but that it was conftantly us'd in the Apoftolic Age. And methinks 'tis very ftrange, that had the Inftitution been temporary, the Church of Chrift for Fifteen hundred Years, ihou'd never be wife enough to difcover it \ and it feenis to me a very high prefumtion for us to determin againlt the conftant behef and pra(5lice of the Church in all Ages, without the leaft warrant fo to do, either from our Savior or his Apoftles. But it is Objected yet farther, that tbo^ Forms of God's appointing may and ought to he us\i^ yet Forms of Man^s compofure ought not \ and that we may ai well appoint New Scripture for public inflruolion, be- caufe the infpir^d perfons did fo ; as we may appoint 7iew Forms for public worfJoip^ becaufe they did fo. But this objedion alfo will be of no force, if we confi- der Four things. I. That this Objedlion allows the prefcribing of Forms to be lawful in it's own nature •, for other- wife God mufl have done that which is unlawful in it's own nature. Nay, our Saviof% prefcribing his Form was a tacit approbation of other Forms, that were prefcrib'd before, and that not only by God, but by Men too. For the Jews us'd feveral Forms of human compofure in their Temple and Synagogues in our Savior^ time, yet he was i^ far from difapproving them, that he prefcrib'd a Form to his own Difciples, which Form, as Mr. Gregory has prov'd, he colledled out of the Jew^ ijh Forms, in whole Books the feveral Parts and Claufes of it are Extant almoft verbati?n to this day. And certainly had he difapprov'd their Forms as evil and finful, he wou'd never have CoJ- Ie6ted his own Prayer out of them. Since therefore our Savior's giving a Form in fuch circumftances llgnilies his approbation of other Forms, 'tis plain, P 3 either 54- Of Forms of Trayei. either that he approv'd what is evil, or that Forms are lawful. 2. That this Objednon muft allow the prefcribing of Public Forms to be not only lawful, butalfo ufe- ful. For othcrwife God, who alwaies A6ts fot wife Ends, and iifes moll proper Means, v/ou'd never have prefcrib'd any Forms. And certainly what was once ufeful, is ufeful Hill. For i. we are now dull and carnal enough to need Forms *, and 2. our iS^^'f^r has prefcrib'd one to be us'd in all Ages, which he wou'd not have done, had it not been ufeful for the Gofpel-fbate. 3. That this Objedtion muft alfo allow, that God's prefcribing Forms by Infpir'd Perfons may be lawfully imitated by us, provided we have the fame reafon for it. And therefore Governors may prefcribe Forms as long as Forms are ufeful. 4. That tho* Governors may prefcribe Forms after God's Example, yet they may not prefcribe them as Scripture^ or Divine Infpiration. For as Spiritual Governors muft take care to inftru6l the People after God's Example, but are not obliged to do it by Infpir'd Perfons : io they may prefcribe Forms of Prayer after God's Example, but can- not pretend to do it by Infpiration. They have God's Example for doing the A6uion ; but they cannot pretend to Infpi.ation in the doing of it v/ichout manifeft falftTood and prefumtion. And therefore, tlio' God's Example will warrant for the one ; yet it will not warrant them falfly to pre- tend to the other. Thus then it appears, that fome Forms of Prayer are commanded in Holy Scripture-, and that our Governors are Authoriz"d by God's Example to prefcribe others, when they judge tiiem ufeful. ■ XL Therefore, I am to prove, that tho' no Forms Of Forms of Trayef. 5 5 Forms were prefcrib'd, yet Forms are as lawful as conceiv'd or Extempore Prayers . Certainly there is no command of God to Pray Extempore \ and there- fore Forms have a better claim to Divine Autho- rity, than they. 'Tis faid indeed, that wherefoever we are commanded to pray Vocally, we are com- manded to Pray in our own Conceptions and words ^ but this is a great miftake. For certainly when God commanded Men to Pray by his own Forms, they did pray Vocally, tho' not in their own words. And here let me take notice, that BiJJenters appro- priate the Name of Prayer to Praying in their own words ; and call the ufing a Form (not Prayer^ but) Reading a Prayer. But lurely the Levites did really Pray^ when they us'd the words of David and /Ifapbj^ and fo did the Primitive Chriftians^ when they faid the Lord's Prayer •, and iffo, then a Form may be tru- ly call'd a Vocal Prayer. For Vocal Prayer confiils in the f peaking of our devout affections to God, whe- ther with, or without a Form. But they pretend, that whatfoever inftances there may be of Forms in Old times, God has de~ clar'd in the Ne-j:: Teftament^ that it is his Will^ we Ihou'd Pray by our own gift of utterance for the future. Now methinks, had it been the Vv^ill of God, that we fhou'd not Pray by Forms, 'tis; very ifrange that in ail the Nc-iv 'Teftamen.t there fliou'd be no exprefs prohibition of it. Efpecial- ly fince I have prov'd, that the Jews had Forms, and Philo de vidim. p. 4.8 3. and the Modern Rtibbius own the fame ; they were alfo a People moil te- nacious of their culloms, and therefore needed to. be forbidden the ule of Forms, had our Lord de*: fign'd to exclude them out of his Worlhip. Nay^ the Ejfen.es., who of all the Sedls of the jezz^Sy did moil readily embrace Chridianity, had cer-t. D 4. tain $ <^ Of Forms of Trayer. tain Forms of Prayer, as Jofcphus obferves, De Bell. Jiid. 1. 2. c. 7. p. 783. Now when thofe that were moft likely to receive the Chriftian Faith, were fo addidted to Forms, can we imagine, that had Chrijl intended they fhou'd ufe them no longer, he wou'd not have given them exprefs warning of them ? But when inftead of fo doing, he bids them fay. Our Father^ &c. how cou'd they think, but that he defign'd they fhou'd ftill ufe a Form, as they did before r Were not that his defign, 'tis ftrange, that he took no care to undeceive them. But that I may fully prove, that the Scripture does not command us to Pray without a Form •, I ihall examine the reafons for which the Diffenters think it do's. God, fay they, has promis'd us an ability to utter our minds in Vocal Prayer, and therefore to Pray by Forms of other Men's com- pofure is contrary to his intention. But I fhall af- terwards prove, that this ability, which they prcr tend is promis'd for the purpofe of Vocal Prayer, is a common gift, which God has no more ap- propriated to Prayer, than to any other end of ptterance and elocution •, and that therefore to omit the ufing it in Prayer, is no more contrary to the intention of God, than to omit the ufing it upon any other juil and lawful occafion. However, becaufe they urge fome places of Scripture to prove, that 'is defign'd merely forVocal Prayer, I fhall therefore confider them. i. They urge Zecb. 12. 10. I zvill pour out upon the b.oufe of David and phe inhabitants of Jerufalem, the Spirit cf grace and fupplications. The Hebrew word, ' tranflatcd fupplications^ do's alwaies ffay theyj flencte Vocal Prayer, and therefore pouring pwt the Spirit of fupplications muft imply com- fijuriicating an ability to pray Vocally. To this Of Forms of Prayers,, '57 I anfwer, that the word is no more reftrain'd to Vocal Prayer, than any other word that fignifies Pra-^erm Scripture, 'Tistruewe read, P/^/. 28. 2. Hear the voice of m^ fupplication^ when I cry unto thee ; but the voice of my Supplication do's not ne- cefTarily denote Vocal Prayer. For 'Tis a Hebraifm, and may fignify no more than my Supplication or Prayer. For fo Gen, 4, 10. 'tis faid, fhe voice of thy Brother^s blood cries, &c. Now the blood had no real voice to cry with, but cry'd juft as mental Prayer do's. In other places the word fignifies both mental and Vocal Prayer indifferently, Ffal. 86. 6, & 6. 9. or Prayer in general, Jer. 31.9. But fi^ip- pofe the word were alwaies us'd for Vocal Prayer, yet furely the Promife of pouring out the Spirit of fupplications intends a much greater good than the gift of extempore utterance in Prayer, of which bad Men may have a greater Ihare than the moil de- vout. And what is the greater good, but the gift of Heavenly afied:ions in Prayer ? If it be urg'd, that Gqd has fent forth the Spirit of his Son, crying, Abba Father, Gal. 4, 6. and that we have receiv'cf the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba Father, Rom. 8. 15. and that thefe Texts prove us to be en- abled to pray Vocally by the Spirit, and that there- fore we ought not to pray by Forms ; I anfwer, I. That if thefe v\^ords oblige us to cry Vocally to pod by our own gifts, then we are equally ob- liged in all our Vocal Prayers to cry to him in thefe words, Abba Father ', becaufe that is the cry which the Spirit enables us to make, and the Text is every whit as exprefs for one as for the other. 2. I de- ny that cryi?!g here do's iiecefiarily denote Vocal Prayer. For how often do we find the word ap- ply'd to things that have no Voice at all.? Thijs the Jioue^ 'ivon\l Imm^Viately cry ou^, ,Lukq 19, 40. 5 S Of Forms oj Trayer. and the Labourers hire is faid to cry to God, James 5. 4. And indeed crying to God has the fame la- titude with Prayer, which inchides both Vocal and Mental. 3. Suppofe that crying Abba Father by the Spirit, fignifies Vocal Prayer •, yet all that can be gather'd from it is only this, that when we Pray Vocally, we are enabled by the Holy Spirit to addrefs our felves to God with affurance, as to a merciful Father, and this we may as well do in a For?n as otherwife. For if we never cry Abba Father by the Spirit, but when we word our own Prayers, we can no more be faid to do it when we join with a public Extempore Prayer, than when we join with a public Form, becaufe we word our own Prayers in neither. 'Tis true, the Scripture fpeaks of a gift of ut- terance^ which, fay they, was given for Praying as well as Preaching ; but I anfwer, that the gift of utterance was miraculous and particular to the Primitive Ages. This gift, faies Saint Chryfofiom Horn. 24. ad Eph. c. 6. is that which Chriji pro- niis'd, Mark 13. 11. by which the Difciples fpake without premeditation, and what they fpake was the infpir'd Vv^ord of God ; and this Gift no fo- ber Dijfinter will pretend to. The Apojlles began to /peak with tongues, as the fpirit gave them utte^ ranee, Adi. 1. 4. and vhtDiffenters may as well pre- tend to the Gfift of Tong;ues, as that of Utterance^ tney being both extraordinary. But fay they, tho' all Men have not the Gift of Praying Extempore, yet fome have ; and there- fore God requires fuch to Pray by their gifts and not by a Form. For he requires them not to negle^ the gift, I. Tim. 4. 14. but to Jlir up the gift, 2 Tim. 1.6. and to Minifler the gift. ^ i Pet. 4. 10. and that having gifts^ &c, Rom. 12. 6. and if Men are obliged to Of Forms of Trayers. 59 jto excrcife their gifts in general, then they mull exercife their gift of Praying Extempore in parti- cular. Now to thefe things I anfwer, Firft^ That the gift beilow'd upon Timoth'j was the gift of E- pifcopa) power, v/hich he is exhorted to exercife diligently. For at the firil plantation of the Gofpcl, the Holj Gboft Pointed out the Men, that were to be Bifliops, as the (f) Fathers teftifie. For this reafon the gift is faid to be given him by Prophefj, 'Twas given alfo with laying on of the hands of the Presbytery • ajid thefe two circumilances prove, that the gift was not the gift of Prophefying^ but the gift of Epifcopal Authority beftow'd upon him by impofition of hands at God's particular Ap- pointment. And now I pray, how do's this Text prove, that we mult ufe a gift of Vocal Prayer in our own words ? As for I Pet. 4. 10. Ron. 12. 6. I anfwer, r. That there can be nothing in them againll Pray- ing by a Form •, for then they wou'd make as much againll ufing the Lord's Prayer, as any other f^orm. 2. That the dellgn of thofe Texts is to ftir Men up to deligence in the exercife of thofe feveral Of- fices, viz. The Office of a Bifliop, a Priefl, a Dea- con, and a Rich Man. For 'tis plain that the v/ord Gift do's oftentimes fignify an Office ; and tho' it may be faid, that the relief of the Poor is ra- ther the exercife of an Ability than an Offi.ce, yet I anfwer, that 'tis properly the exercife of an Of- fice, becaufe the very having Ability do's as much put a Man into the Office of ffiewing mercy to tho. Poor, as if God had appointed him to it by a folemn Ordination. ^. Suppofing that by thefe gifts were not meant Offices, but only abilities, yet (/) dm. I Epift. ad Corinth. Chryfoft. in Ad. 13.2. we 60 Of Forms of Trayer, we are obliged fo to exercife them, that all things may be done to Edification *, for fo the Apoftle de- clares that thofe extraordinary Gifts, that were pour'd out in the Primitive Times, were to be us'd, I Cor, 14. 2, 6, 19, 40. as 'tis particularly plain by the inflance of the gift of Tongues, verfe. 23, 26, 28. Now if we are not to exercife our gifts, but a§ they tend to Edification, then we muft not exer- cife the gift of praying Extempore any farther than It tends to Edification. And fince praying by a Form in pubHc Worfhip do's (as I fhall afterwards prove) tend more to Edification, than praying Ex- tempore -, therefore 'tis plain that we ought to fufpend the ufe of the gift of conceiv'd Prayer. Thus, I hope, I have made it appear, that fome Forms of Prayer are commanded in Scripture^ and that thofe Texts which are urg'd againft the ufe of F'orms of Prayer, do prove nothing againft them •, and therefore I think I may fafely afiirm, that the Scripture do's warrant Forms of Prayer. I proceed now to fhew, that Antiquity do's the fame. This I fhall do, i . by anfwering thofe Au- thorities, which are objected by the Dijfenters a- gainft the ufe of Forms in the Primitive Ages. 2. By proving that they were us'd in thofe Ages, by a fhort Hiftorical Accounj: of the matter of Fad, I. Then, '.tis objeded, Firft^ th^t J uftin Martyr faies, Apol. 2. p. 98, That the Minifter at the Com- munion pray'd, on ^muji<;u^i^^iv<^, hegtn- mngfrom the Father : which doubtlefs was the Lord's Prayer : and of a famous H^mn added to the end of their Service^ (x) which in all probability was the Hymn that Pliny fpeaks of. Since therefore the Primitive V/orfhip did in a great meafure confift of Hymns, which were Forms of Praife intermixt v/ith Prayer, and fome of thefe of human com- pofure *, this is an evident Teflimony of the Pri- mitive ufe of Forms. And doubtlefs, they who did not fcruple praying by Form in Verfe, cou'd not think it unlawful to pray by Form in Profe. Now that Praying in Meter or compos'd Hymns was a very early pradice in the Chriftian Church, is evi- dent from the Apoflolical Conftitutions, where it is injoin'd, Lei the People fing the verfe s which anfwer adver/Iy to one another (y) : which way of fmging was fo very ancient, that Eufebius (z) urges it as an Argument to prove the Effenes Chriftians, be- caufe they fung by turns, anfwering one another ; and how cou'd they thus anfwer to one another in their Hymns and Prayers, unlefs they had conftanc Forms of Prayer ? But that they had fueh Re- fponfals in Prayer, is evident, becaufe, when Julian tor the credit of Gentilifm wou'd needs drefs it up [x) Lucian. Philop. (y) Conftitut. Apoft. lib* %. cap. f. [z) ^ufeb. Hut. Eccler.iib. i. cap. 17. (a) after Of Forms of Trajer. 6f (a) after the Order of the Chriflian Worfljip ; one thing wherein he fought to imitate it, was in their conltituted Prayers ; that is, not in having con- fticLited Forms of Prayer, for that the Fieathen had before ; but in having fuch conflituted Forms as the Chriflians had ; that is, as Nazianzen ( b ) explains it, a Form of Prayer to be faid in parts \ for this way of Praying in parts Nicephorus (c) derives from Ignatius^ who was a Scholar of the Apoflles. All which to me is a plain demon- flration of the great Antiquity of Forms. And that in Conflantine^s time, the Church us'd public Forms of Prayer, is evident from that often-cited place of Eufebius^ (d) where he tells us of Cof7- Jlajitine^s compofing Godly Prayers for the ufe of his Soldiers ; and elfewhere tells us in particular what the Prayer was ; JVe acknowledge thee^ O God^ a- lone^ &c. (e) which is a plain evidence, that it was a fct Form of words. If it be faid, that this Form was compos'd only for the ufe of his Sol- diers, who were a great part of them Heathens ^ and that Conftantine^s compofing it, is a plain evi- dence, that at that time there Vv^ere no public Form.s in the Church •, for if there had, what need Con- Jiantine have compos'd one ? To this I anfwer^ That this Form indeed was compos'd only for his Heathen Soldiers -, for as for his Chriftian Soldiers, the llory tells us, that he gave them liberty to go to Church {f). And therefore all that can be ga- ther'd hence is, that the Chriftian Church had no Form of Prayers for Heatb.en Soldiers, which is no great wonder ; for if they had, it*s very unlikely (d) S^^x. Hift. 1. 5-. c. 15-. (^) N.izian. Orat. i. p. loT. (c) Niceph. lib. 15. cap. 8. (^i) EH[ei). dc Laud. Conjlant. (e) Id. dc vn.ConJiafit.Ci^. 20. (/) ibid cap. ly. E 2 tha: 6S Of Forms of Tra/er. that the Heathen Soldiers would have us'd It. But that they had h orms is evident, becaufe he calls the Prayers which Conftantlne us'd in his Court, ac^ cording to the 7nanner of the Church of God, C^) Au- thorized Prasers ; which is the fame Title which \i^ (h) gave to that Form which he made for his Heathen Soldiers. And therefore, if by i\\tAu' thoriz\i Praters which he prefcrib'd to his Soldiers, he meant a Form of Prayers, as 'tis evident he did •, then by the Authorized Prayers which he us'd in his Court after the manner of the Churchy he muft mean a Form of Prayer alfo. And fince he had a Form of Prayer in his Court after the manner of the Churchy the Church muft have a Form of Prayers too. 'Tis plain then, that the three firft Centuries had public Forms of Prayer, after which (not to infift upon the Liturgies of St. Bafil^ St. Chryfoftom and St. Amhrofe) we have undeniable teftimonies of the fame. See St. Chryfoft. 2. ad Corinth. Homil. 18. St, Aifjlin de Bapt. cont. Donat. lib. 6. and Concil. Carih. 3. c. 12. Concil. Milev. c. 12. Juftin. Novel. 137. Pref & I, 2, 6. Nazian. Orat. in Bajil. 20. faies, St. Bafil compos'd Orders and Forms of Prayer : and St. Bafil himfelf, Ei'ift. 6^, reciting the Man- ner of the public Service, that was us'd in the Mo- naftical Oratories of his Inftitution, faies, that no- thing was done therein, but what was confonant and agreeable to all the Churches of God. Nay, the Council of Lacdicea^ holden about the Year 364, ex- prcfly provides. That the fame Liturgy^ or Forin of Prayers^ f!iou'd be alwaies us'd both Morning and Evening, Can. 18. and this Canon is taken into the Collection of the Canons of the Catholic Church ; which Collection was eftablilh'd in the General (i) Ibid..c. 17. {h) Ibid. c. 18. Council Of Forms of Trayer. 69 Council of Chalcedon^ in the year 451. by which eftablifliment the whole Chriftian Church was ob- liged to the ufe of Liturgies, fofar as the Authority of the General Council extends. And then in the Year 541, thefe Canons were made Imperial Laws hy Juftmiiin^ Novel. 131. cap. i. -See Zonm\ and Balfam. on. Can 18. See 2\{oSmetl^7n. Anfw. to the Re?nonft. p. 7. Grand, deb. p. 1 1. and Concil. Laod. c. 15, 19. Thus for near 600 Years after Chrift we have fufiicicnt tefliimony of the public ufe of Forms of Prayer. And from henceforth, or a little after, down to Mr. Calvin's time, all are agreed, that no Prayers but eftabliHi'd Liturgies v/ere us'd. Nay Calvin^ who Pray'd Extempore after his Le6lure, alwaies us'd a Form before, Pref. ad Calv. Prcel. in Min. Proph. and he compos'd a Form for the Sunday- Service, which was afterwards eftablilli'd at Geneva. Nay, he faies, for as much as concerns the Forms of Prater., and Ecclefiaftical Rites^ I highly approve that it be determined fo^ as that it may not be lawful for the Minifters in their adminiftrations to vary from, it \ Ep.Sy. Nor is there any one Reform'd Church, but what has fome pubhc Form of Prayer ; nor was the lawfulnefs of Forms ever call'd in que- llion before. Nay Mr. Ball, Dr. 0-zven., Mr. Baxter, Mr. Norton and Mr. Thnbes do (f) exprefly own them to be lawful ; and this is faid (k) to be the tenent of all our CDiirenting) beft, and fuoft judici- ous Divines, It is very well known (faies (I) one) (i) See Ball's Tryal, Pvef. ^ c. 1,2,5,8. Baxter's Cure of Ch. Divif. p. 175. Owen's Work of the Spirit in Prayer, p. 220, iit, 23 f, Norton's Anfwer to Atollon, cap. 15. (h) Clark'.-; Lives of 10 Divines, p. i^^. (/} Bradjloars's Life in CUrk's Coll. in foL P-^7- E 3 that JO Of Forms of Trayer, that theflozver of our own Divines ivent on in this ivay^ U'hen they might have done other'xije, if they had pleased., in their Prayers before Serinon ; and we find Mr. HiU (ierfhajn's Prayer before Sermon (7n) Printed. This was fo nniverfally and conftantly practised, that Mr. Clark (n) tells us, that the firjl Man who hrought conceived Prayer into ufe in thofe parts where he liv^d^ was Mr. Sa?n. Cook^ who died but in the year 1649. Nay the chie^ Dijfen ting writers do not only afTert, but they alfo undertake to prove, the lawfulnefs of Forms (0) from the nature^ ufe and end of Prayer ; and charge the contrary o- pinion with Enthufiafm (p) and Novelty (q)o They grant alfo, i. That Forms are not only law- ful, but that there are Footfteps of this way of Worfhip both in the Old and New Teftament, as Mr. Tomhes and others have fliew'd (rj, and Mr. Ainfworth fchat did otherwife argue againft them) do's confefs (/). 2. That they are very ancient in tli£ Chriftian Church. I^Je Chriflian Churches vf ancient Times ^ for the fpace of this 1400 Years at leaf J if not from the /Ipoftles Time^ had their flint- ed Liturgies^ faith Mr. Ball ( t) : and ( u ) they anfwer Objcdions to the contrary. 3. That in the beU reformed, nay, in all reformed Churches, they are not only us'd and tolerated, but alfo {w) ufeful (m) See his Dodrine of Fading and Prayer, Jnno i^n» (»5' Cpllc<0:. of 10 Lives, 4to. p. 38. (0) See BaWs Trial, c. 2, Roger's Tr. 223. Bryan s Dwelling wi h God, p. 307. Egerton's iPradice of Chriflianiiy, c. 11. p. 691. Edi^ 5-. (p) Grave Con- ffit. Epift. to the Reader. Coniin. Morn, Fxerc. p. 1006. (q) r>:^Jty Serm. on 7.?/;. i. 16. (r) Theodulia, p. 221. B^xt, Cure, p. 17*$. £^;i's Tryal, p. 128, 129. Grave Confut. p. 12, i^. (f) Annqr. on r.r. 1 1. S. (t) Tryal, p. 9(5, ic6, 1 1 r, ^38. ^ p. 80. (u) T(5;7j^fj's Theodulia, p. 22?. frr) Ball's TryaJ, p. lo8, &c. ^if^f^-'s Trcatiies, p.22^.'li;w^i?j'sThc:Qd,p. 234. "■''-' ' . "' ■'■ ' • '- and Of Forms of Trayer. 7 1 and expedient. 4- That thofe amongft us, to whom the ufe of the Common-Prayer has been molt burthenfome, have from tunc to thne^ prof eft their liking and approbation of a ftinted Liturgy^ as Mr, Ball a/Tures us {x), 5. That they thought it altoge- ther unlawful to feparate from Churches for the fake of Hinted Forms and Liturgies, is not on^ ly frequently affirm'd by Mr. Ball (y), but lit- tle Jefs even by Mr. Norton^ (z) who faies, // is lawful to embrace Communion with Churches^ where fuch Forms in public Worfloip are in ufe ; neither do*s it lie as a Duty on a Believer^ that he disjoin and feparate hijnfclf from fuch a Church. And they give this reafon for it, that then they muft feparate from all Churches. So Mr. Baxter (a)^ Is it not a high degree of Pride^ to conclude^ that ah^oft all Chrift'j Churches i;/ the JVorld^ for thefe 13. hun- dredl'ears at leaft to this day, have offered fuch wor-* JJnp unto God, as that you are obliged to avoid it ? And that almoft all the Catholic Church on Earth this day, is below your Communion for ufing Forms ? And that even Calvin, and the Presbyterians, Cart- wright, Hilderfliam, and the Old Non-Conformifts were unworthy your Communion ? As for Praying Extempore, 'twas fet up in England m oppofition to oar Liturgy. For in the Ninth Year of Q^^ Eliz, to feduce the People from the Church, and to ferve the ends of Popery, one Friar Comin began to pray Ex ton pore with fuch fervor, that he deluded many, and was amply rewarded for it by the Pope, See Foxes and Firebrajids, p. 7, &c. After him Tho, Heath did the fame, p, Cx) Tryal, p. 96, to6, tio. (y) Refp. ad Apol. c. 13. (i) S;i- cril. defert. p. 102. {a) Defence, part. 2. p. 6/. See BaWs Tryal, p.i^i.K^Tjm'sTr. p, 22.J,. E 4 ^7' 7> Of Forms of Trayer. 17, See alfo Unrcnfon, of Sep. pref. 11, Zee, And I hope when the Diffenters have well con- fider'd, whom they join with, and whofe caufc they advance, by decrying our Liturgy and ex- tolhng Extempore Prayers, they will fee caufe to think better of Forms of Prayer. Secondl^^ I am now to anfwer the Diffenters Objedions againfb Forms of Prayer. I. I'hey pretend, that theUfe of public Forms do's deaden the Devotion of Prayer •, whereas I doubt not to make it appear, that they do quick- en Devotion much more than Extempore Prayers. 'Tis plain, that Forms of Prayer do fix the Minijler's attention more than Extempore Prayers. For his matter and words being ready before him, he has nothing dk to do, but to attend his in- ward Devotion, which is die life of Prayer : whereas Praying Extempore forces him to attend to the RecolleSion cf Matter, and invention of expreffions ; which muft more or lefs divert him, it being impolTible to attend to feveral things, as clofely as he may to one, 'Tis true, he that ufes a Form, may permit his thoughts to wander \ but then the fault is in the Man, and not in the Form ; for he converts that which in it felf helps Devotion, into an occafion of indevotion. He that Praies Extempore is more bound to attend to words ; but he that Praies by Form, has better opportuni- ties of attending to the proper bufinefs of Prayer, 'viz. Contrition, Senfe of our Wants and depen- dence upon God, &c. And by being an example of thefe in his Prayer, the Minifter do's very much excite the Devotion of the People. But 'tis ObjecSbed, that while his thoughts are imploy'd in inventing the matter and words of 4iis Prayer, they are well imploy'd j becaufe they Of For 7ns of Trayers. 7 1 are attending to the Duty of Prayer, tho' they be nor fo fixt upon the inward Devotion of it, as they might be in the ufe of a Form. To this I anfwer, that to invent the matter and words of Prayer, is not to pray, but to fVudy a Prayer -, which cannot be prov'd to be a part of our duty. But we bcheve, that when we pray devoutly by a Form, we difcharge the "u^bole duty of Prayer, tho' we do not invent the matter and Vv^ords our felves"-, and till we fee the contrary prov'd, we fliall alwaies think fo. If it be f-iid, that praying Extempore will not fuffer the Minifler's thoughts to wander ; I anfwer, that if the Minifler have Devout afPedcions, they will keep his thoughts from wandring, when he praies by Form, as much as when he praies Extempore ; but if he has not, he cannot utter his words from his affedions either way. But 'tis pretended, that praying Extempore do's heighten the Miniller's alfedlions more than a Form, Becaufe, fay they, in reading a Form his affedions follow his words, and are rais'd and excited by tliem ; whereas in praying Extempore his v/ords follow his affedions. But why may not a Man, who knows before-hand what he is to pray for, be Devoutly affed:ed with it, before he exprefies it in a Form, as well as before he expreiles it Extempore ? And why may not he that praies Extempore^ be as little affeded v/ith what he praies for, before he has exprefl it, as he that ufes a form ? May not a Man's Tongue run before his Heart either way ? But fuppofe it true, that in Extempore Prayer the words follow the affeflions, and that in a Form the affedions fol- low the words ; do's it follow that praying Ex- temj^orc Jieightens the affedtions more than a Form ? 74 Of Forms of Trayer, Form ? Why may not the afFedlions, viz, defire^ &c. which follow the words, be as great as thofe that go before ? efpecially fince our Diffenters fay, that expreflive words do naturally quicken affections. If it be faid, that the Minifler cannot fo well exprefs liis Devout afl^edions in other Mens words, as in his own ; I anfwer, that he is the Mouth of the Congregation, and that his bufinefs is, not to exprefs his own particular and extraordinary fervors, as the common cafe of the Congregation ; but fo to fpeak, as every honeft and ordinary Chriflian may join with him. For 'tis as bad for him to exprefs fuch heights of Devotion, as few or none of them are arriv'd to •, as to confefs in their names fuch fins, as few or none of them are guilty of Now the common fenfe of the Con- gregation may be as well exprefs'd in another Man's words as in his own *, unlefs we fuppofe that Extempre words can more fitly exprefs it, than thofe that are premeditated \ which no fober Dijjentcr will affirm. But, fay they, the Mini- fler's Soul is fo bufied in reading a Form, that it cannot be fo much affeCted, as when he praies Extempore. Now I leave the Reader to judge, whether being bufied about the Matter, Method and ExprelTions oi Prayer, do's not much more imploy the Minifrer's Soul than bare reading ; that h., whether he that can read a Prayer without the leaft trouble, cannot read a Prayer more eafily, than invent one. However, they tell us, that praying always in the fame words, do's cloy the Attention of the People ; whereas the newnefs and variety of conceiv'd Prayers do's naturally awaken their Minds, and keep them more fixt and intent. BuE I an- Of Forms of Trayers, 75 J anfwer, that the matter of public Prayer Is, and for the main will be, the fame -, and therefore if the matter fixt their Minds, 'twou'd as well do it in the fame, as in new exprefTions. But if it be the Phrafe, that their Minds are fixt on, there is nothing in it, but an amufement of their Fancies, which do's rather unfix them from the inward adls qf Prayer, and Diftra6l their Devotions. Form^ may be compos'd and pronounced as affedlionately as Extempore Prayers, and may as well excite the Peoples Devotion •, but novelty of method and exprelTion do's as much deaden the Devotion of thofe that are fixt upon it, as worldly Bufinefs. That feeming Devotion, that is rais'd by the jing- ling of words, is not Devotion, but Mechanifm $ for a Man may be ftrangely affedied with the words of Prayer, who has not the lead fpark of true Devotion to the matter of it: but if the Mind do's afied the matter of Prayer for it felf, and not for the fake of the words, I cannot ima- gin, how new words fhou'd any way advantage it's Devotion, unlefs they were to exprefs new matter . Thus it appears, that even what is urg'd in be- half of Exte77ipore Prayers, do's plead much more for Forms ; but then there are fundry advantages peculiar to Forms, which Extempore Prayers can- not pretend to. For i« People may confider the matter of a Form, and endeavor to affe6t their minds with it before-hand ; and fo they may Pray with greater preparation. 2. People may join in a Form with more underftanding, than in an Ex- tempore Prayer, wherein the Minifter is forced to life fuch expreflions as come firft to hand ; and fometimes he is forced to ufe a hard word, which half of the Congregation do not know, becaufe an 7^ Of Forms of Grayer. an eafier do's not come co his Mind \ befides many other inconveniences, which 'tis impoffible al- vvaies to avoid. Now in compofing pubhc Forms more care will be taken that the words may be intelligible, than there can be in Extempore Prayer. And truly, if the words be not intelligible, the People*s Prayer mufl be as much interrupted, as if the Minifler fpake in an unknown tongue. 3. Men may join in a Form with much more Faith, and Hope of being heard, than they can in Extern- fore Prayer. For they may be fatisfied before- hand, that the matter of a Form is good •, but they cannot be fo fatisfied of an Extevipore Prayer ; confidering that the Minifler is many times a Granger, and may be perhaps Erroneous, Rafh, Ignorant, i^c. And even thofe Miniflers whom they know, may fome times miflake their Paf- fion for their Zeal, and reake their Anger or their Fadion in their Prayers, or let drop an Er- ror, before they are aware, or exprefs themfelves fo, as an honeft mind may not be able to join. So that in joining with an Extempore Prayer a Man mufl judge what is faid, before he can con- fent to it : and if he meet with a rub, the Mi- nifler goes on in the mean time, and the Man is left behind at a lofs, and perhaps confounded, be- fore he can join again ; and no fooner perhaps is he v/ell lixt, but he is troubled again with the fame inconveniency : all which is eafily prevented by the ufe of Forms. 4. Forms do not divert the affedions of the People from the Matter of Prayer, as Extempore Prayers do, which dillurb Devotion, whenever the Minifler hefitates, or blunders, or expreffes himfelf improperly •, for then fome will be pitying, others contemning, others carping, ^c. And if he perform well, fome will ad- mire Of Forms of Grayer. 77 mire his Phrafe, Judgment, Readinefs, i^c. all which things do call off their minds from the Matter. 5. The Decency and folemnity of publick Worfliip, which things arc highly advantageous to the Devo- tion of the People,are better fecur'd by Forms,than by Extempore Prayers, where they depend wholly upon the Miniiler. For if he happens to be a Man of a bad memory, or apt to blunder, or be dull, ^c. then the Devotion of the Congregation may be turn'd into fcorn and laughter -, and of this I have feen too many fad experiments. But fuppofe him to be an able and pious perfon, yet he may be liable to indifpofitions of Body, dul- nefs, inadvertency, ^c. with outward cares and accidents -, and if he be, he muft many times pray confufedly, or with broken, indecent exprefTions, and omit a great deal of the matter. Sometimes he will be at a lofs, and be forced to ufe fulfome repetitions •, and how is it pofTible almoft, but that a great deal of flat and empty nonfenfe, undigefted conceptions and unadvifed cxpreflions, fhou'd efcape from his lips, before he is aware ? And this, if he has a grain of modefly, muft put him into greater confufion, and fo amaze him, that he will be hardly able to recover himfelf. Now is it not a hard cafe that the Devoti- ons of five hundred or a thoufand Perfons mufl be diiturb'd by one Man's diforders ? For they mufl either Pray after him, or not Pray at all. But all thefe evils are prevented by fet public Forms. 6. Thofe that join in a Form, may be better fecur'd of the reality and fincerity of their own Devotion. For they knowing before-hand' the exprefTions of the Form, are not fo much furpriz'd with the Phrafes ; and therefore if they find themfelves affeded, may more fafely con- clude. ^8 Of Forms of Trayer. elude, 'tis the Matter and not the words, that moves them. Whereas a Man that is tickled with the words of an Extempore Prayer, may fancy him- felf to be very devout, when he has nothing of true Devotion in him. I might add more ; but I think thefe things are enough to convince an unprejudiced Perfon, that Forms of Prayer are fo far from hindering, that they very much help Devotion. But if any Man lliall ftill objed, that he finds by experience, that Forms do adtually deaden his Devotions ; becaufe his affedlions are flat and hea- vy, when he ufes them, but he is almoft tranf- ported when he hears a Man Pray Extempore ; I befeech him t© confider, whether his experience be not founded in prejudice, and whether his' prejudice ought to prefcribe to the whole Churcho *Tis certain, other Men find by experience, that joining with a Form do's help their Devotion ; fo that here is experience againft experience. Now fince two contrary experiences cannot proceed from the nature of the thing, there- fore one mufl proceed from the temper of the Man. Now I have prov'd, and many Men find by experience, that Forms do help Devotion ; and therefore if he do's not find the fame, the fault mufl be in himfelf ; and I doubt not, but if he will confider the matter impartially, he will foon be of the fame opinion. For we have Scripture and Reafon on our fide ; but he is led by his paflions, which may be charm'd and flat- ter'd, and will betray him into ftrong delufions. 'Tis plain, 'tis not the matter of the Extempore Prayer, that affedts him j for that is the fame as in a Form : and if he be taken with the chi- ming of words, 'tis but a fenfirive delight ; and he Of Forms of Trayef. 79 he muft not make a Divifion in the Churchy only to gratify his fancy. Befides, I defire him flridlly to examine his Confcience, whether he has not often been as dull at a conceiv'd Prayer, as at the public Forms. If fo, then the perfon is to be blam'd, and not the Form ; and he is guilty of a double iniquity, who divides the Church without fufEcient caufc, and charges his own formality upon a good and wholefome con- Ititution. 2. They pretend, that Prating in a Form of JVords do^s Jlint and limit the Spirit of Pra^jer^ But before I anfwer this Objedlion, it will be necelTary to explain, i. What it is that the Scripture attributes to the Spirit in Prayer. 2. What is meant by ftinting or limiting the Spirit in Prayer. Firfl Then, what is it that the Scripture attri- butes to the Spirit in Prayer ? I anfwer. There are fome things attributed to him, which were Extraordinary and Temporary ; and others that Were Ordinary, fixt and flanding. The Extra- ordinary and Temporary were the immediate In- fpiration of the matter of Prayer, and an ability to exprefs it in known or unknown Languages. We read in the Old Teftament of Prayers and Praifes, which for the matter of them, were im- mediately infpir'd. Thus pray'd Hannah^ who as the 'Targum paraphrafes it, Prayed by the Sp:^ rit of Prophefy^ that is, by immediate Infpiration. For Praying and Praifing by immediate Infpira- tion are frequently call'd Frophefying •, i Sam, 10. 5, Numb, II. 25. I Chro72, 25. i. Luke i,6j. For the matter of all thofe Prayers and Praifes, tc- gether with thofe in the Book of Pfalms, and fundry others recorded in Scripture^ was imme- diately 80 Of Forms of Trayer, dicitely diflated by the Hol^ Ghoft, Bat aftef the deiccnt of the Holy Ghoft at Pentccojl^ where- in the gift of Tongues was communicated, 'tis certain, that not only the matter, but the very Language of their Prayers was immediately In- fpir'd. This gift was pecuhar to the Primitive Ages of Chrillianity ; becaufe the defjgn of it was, not only to enable the firft planters of the Gofpel to perform their office in the Languages of the feveraj Nations they were fent to : but al- fo to be a fign from God, as other Mira^ cles were, for the confirmation of the Gofpel. tongues IV ere for afign to them that believe not^ I Cor. 14. 22. and therefore fmce all Miracles Were extraordinary, and after a time to ceafe ; Certainly this Miraculous gift of Prayer was io too. However, becaufe many D'ljfenters think it (ilot art extraordinary, butj a Standing Gift, which the Spi- rit will communicate to all fuccefTive Ages of the World ; I defire them to confider, , i. That there is no promife of fuch a gift by virtue of the New Covenant, and therefore no reafon to expecSl the con- tinuance of it ; and 'tis prefumtion to promife our felves, what God has not promis'd us. For as for the Spirit of SuppUcations^Xcch, 12. 10. 'tis plain that 'tis the fame with the Spirit of Grace ^ or of inward Piety and devotion. But that there is no fuch pro- mife in the New Covenant, is evident from what is acknowledged on all hands •, viz. That there are many good Chriftians, who cou'd never pretend to any fjch Infpiration. For all good Chriftians have a Right to the bleffings of the New Covenant j and I am very confident, 'twould be look'd up- on by all fober Dijfenters, as a very rafh and un- juil: ceniiire, to affirm, that a man cannot be a good Of Forms of Tray er. Si good Chrift'ian^ who dr/s not fra^^ by immediate In- fpiration^ but is alwaies fain to depend either on his own invention^ or a h'orin. 2. That as there is no Promife, fo there is no need of any fuch immediate Infplration, 'Tis true, the Spirit will afTiil us in all ncccfiary things, wherein our du- ty and Spiritual Life are concern'd ; but 'tis an unwarrantable prefumtion to expedt an immedi- ate Infpiration in Prayer, becaufe there is no ne- cefTity of it. For, i. As for the Matter of our Prayers, the Holy Spirit has already fufficiently reveaPd it to us in the Gofpel, and as plainly inftrudbed us what we are to pray for, as he cart be fuppos'd to do by any immediate Infpiration. And therefore, to fuppofe after all, a neccOity of immediate Infpiration, is in eflecTt to fuppofe^ that We have neither reafon enough to under- Irand the fenfe of plain Words, nor memory enough to retain it. But fay the Bijjenters^ IVe know not what to Pray for as we ought^ but the Spirit it felf maketh intercejjlon for us with groan- ings which cannot be utter*d, Rom. 8. 26. and therefore we cannot in all cafes know the Mat- ter of our Prayers without immediate Infpira- tion. But 1 anfv/er, that thefe words relate noc to the Matter, but to the Manner of our Prayers. JVhat to Pray for as we ought, we know not ; that is, we know not how to pray with that fervency and refignation, which we ought, unlcfs the Spirit afTift us. 2. As for the Words of Prayer, there is no neceffity they fhou'd be im- mediately dicStated to us^ firice we maay ufe Forms j and thofe Forms (-^nxh fmall additions) may be adapted to all particular Cafes and Cir* cumdances. 3. If Prayers are Infpir'd, they are V equal to Scripture, and are infallible and the F Word s 2 Of Fprms of grayer. Word of God ; becaufe whatever God infpire^, mull needs be lo. Eut diis, I am fure, no fober Dijfenter will prefume to iliy. 4. There is no fign of this immediate Infpiration remaining a- mong us. Heretofore all Infpiration was atteiled by Miracles •, but the pretended Infpiration of Prayer has no Miracles to warrant it. Whereas if the Infpiration be continu'd, 'tis requifite that proper figns fhou'd be condnu'd, that jo v/e may be able to diftinguifli that v/hicli is Divine from that which is Natural or Dia- bolical. If it be faid. that the Scripture is fufficient to diilinguiih them ; I anfwer, that tho' the Scrip- ture may be fufficient to diilinguifh, whether the Matter of the Infpiration be true or flilfe :. yet 'tis not fufficient to diftinguifh the Infpira- tion it felf, whether k be Divine, or Natural ; or Diabolical. For, I . 'Tis certain, a Man may Pray agreeably t® ScrtpturchY Natural Infpiradon, that is, by a Na- tural or accidental fervency of temper, as might be prov'd by many indanccs. And in this cafe how iliall he know by Scripture^ whether his prefent Infpiration be Natural or Divine ? 'Tv/ill be faid perhaps, that God infpires good Men with fervency in Prayer, and yet this fervency fometimcs proceeds from temper of body •, and why do's nor the want of a fign to dilHnguilli, conclude againll the Infpiration ^of fervency, as well as againft the Infpiradon of the Matter and Words of Prayer ? I anfwer, that we have a Promife of the Spirit's alTiftance for the ferven- cy of our Prayers, but not for die Matter or Words of them. Befides, "we may eafily difliin- guiih, whether the Infpiradon of feivency be Na- tural Of Forms of Trayer. 1 3 tural or Divine, by our own fenfe. If it be ac- company'd with a fixt and conftant Devotion of* Soil), 'tis Divine •, but if it be only a fudden fit, and leaves us habitually indevout, we have juft reafon to think it Natural. But we cannot di- llinguifli by Scripture between one and the other ; for both may be agreeable to Scripture, And can it be imagin'd, that had God meant to con- tinue the gift of Infpiration to us, he wou'd have left us thus in the dark concerning it, \vith- out any certain fign to diftinguilh, whether it be from his Spirit, or from an ili-aftc6led fpleen, or a hv^r} 2. As for diabolical Infpirations, we have fundry inflances, fuch as IVicr^ Rackety D. George and John Bafilides Duke of Ruffia^ who had fuch gifts of Prayer, as ravilli'd the Audi- tors, and in the opinion of the mod impartial feem'd to exceed the power of Nature, and made many think them immediately Infpir'd by God. Now fince by fuch Infpirations the Devil may fometimcs ferve his one ends, by recommending falfe Teachers, ^c. we may reafonably fuppofe he do*s ufe that method. And fince he may In- fpire Men with fuch Matter of Prayer as is a~ greeable to Scripture^ we cannot by Scripture cer- tainly diftinguilli between his Infpiration and that of the Spirit. But furely 'tis blafphemy to think, that if God had continu'd this gift of Infpira- tion, he wou'd leave us without a fign to di- flinguifh it from that which is Diabolical. And fince there is no fign, we have all the reafon in the word to think the gift is ceas'd. But firther, wc have not only no certain fign of the Divine Infpiration of conceiv'd Prayers, but many very certain ones of the contrary. I will inftance in four, i. The great impertinence, F 2 non- ^4 Of Forms of Grayer, nonfence, and rudencfs (zo fi\y no worfej that are fomerimcs mingled with thcic Extempore Prayers, and which wc cannot attribute to the Hol^ Ghoft without blafphemy. 2. That they are fo gene- rally tindlur'd with the particular Opinions of thofe that offer them. Whether this be not fo, I appeal to all the World •, and if it be fo, then furciy they are not Inlpir'd. For either we mull fuppofe this gift of Infpiration to be confin'd to one party, which wou'd be to ftbit the Spirit with a witnefs ; or elfe we muft blalphemoufly fay, the Spirit Infpires contradidlions, and indites contrary Prayers to Men of oppofite Parties- 3. Another plain fign that conceiv'd Prayers are not infpir'd, is, that that which gives them the reputation of being fo, is not fo much the Mat- ter, as the manner of expreffing them. -As for the Matter, I fuppofe the Dijfenters will not de- ny, but our Forms may equal at leafb, if not excell their conceiv'd Prayers : and therefore all the diiierence muft be in the manner. But are conceiv'd Prayers the more Infpir'd,^, becaufe the words are Exteinpore ? Did God continue the gift for no other end, but that Men might ask thofe things Extempore^ which they might as well have asked in a Form ? Or are they more Infpi- red, becaufe they do generally more enlarge, and cxprefs the fame Matter over again m diiierent words ? Was the Spirit continu'd only to vary phrafcs ? Our Saviour forbids us to nfe "ccn repe- titiops (or as Alunjler^s Hebreiv reads it, to jnul- tiply ivords above what is ft and fcajonahlc) think- ing we Jhall he bjard for our much fpeaking *, and therefore thefe enlargements are fo far from being figns of their immediate Infpiration, that fuppofing the Spirit to be of the fam^ minU v/ith thrift ; they Of Forms of Tracer. 8 5 jlhey arc generally figns of the contrary. 4. That extraordinary manner and way of exprefllng them, for which they are thought to be Infpir'd, ordina- rily proceeds from natural caufes, viz Natural En- thufiafm or prefent fervour of temper. For, i. The Dijfenters confefs, it comes upon them much oft- ner in their public, than in tlicir private Devo- tions. And the reafon is plain, becaufe the paf- fions of the Congregation do fo excite their af- fedions, and the reverence of an auditory obli- ges them fo much to wreck their inventions, that their Spirits are many times tranfported into rap- tures. 2. They are not fo fluent in the begin- ning, as when they have Pray'd a while ; the realbn of which is this, becaufe the Spirits do not move fo briskly, till they are chafed and heated with Labour. Then do they naturally raife the fanfy, and render the invention more copious and eafy. And certainly 'tis unwarrantable to attribute that to Infpiration, which do's fo apparently pro- ceed from natural caufes. Thus I have fhewn, what the extraordinary o- perations of the Spirit are, and that they are not to be pretended to in thefe Times \ I proceed in the next place to fhew very briefly, what thofe or- dinary operations are, which he has promis'd,*^ to continue to the end of the World. They are therefore the proper graces and afiedions of Prayer, fuch as lliame, forrow, hope, i^c. But as for the exprefTions of Prayer, they are of no account with God, but as tliey fignify to him the graces and aA'cccions of it. Now can any Man imagin, that thofe afl^edlions will be the lefs ac- ceptable to God, becaufe they are prcfcnted in a For?n^ and not Extempore ? Will a Father deny Bread to his Child, becaufe he askt it to day F ^, in ^6 Of Forjns of Trayer, in the fame words, that he did yeflerday ? Is God more taken with words, than with affedi- ons ? Certainly his withdrawing the Infpiration of words, and continuing the Infpiration of affedli- ons, prove the contrary. Now that God do's continue the Infpiration of Devout affedlions in Prayer, is manifeft from Gal. 4. 6. Jude 20. and Ro7n. 8. 26, where the Spirit is faid to make intercejjion for us with groans^ lob'ich cannot he uttered., that is, with moft fla- grant affecflions. For thefe Words do not, as fome pcrfons wou'd perfwade us, prove the Infpira- tion of the Words of Prayer •, becaufe the Infpi- ration of thofe things, that are too big for V/ords^ nud cannot be utter' d., cannot mean the Infpira- tion of Words : but this Inrerceirion of the Spi- rit fignifies his exciting fuch afted:ions, as make our Prayers acceptable. For as Chrijf^ who is our Advocate in Heaven, enforces our Prayers with his own Interceffions : fo the Spirit, who is our Advocate upon Earth, begets thofs affections, which render our Prayers prevalent. And thefe are the Handing and ordinary operarions, which tlie Scripture attributes to the Spirit in Prayer, Secondly^ Stinting or limiting the Spirit is a p irafe, %that is never mentioned in Scripture or Antic/ licy •, and therefore 'tis a ver'y new Obje6tion againft Forms of Prayer, which I have fliewn to be war- ranted both by Scripture and Antiquity. How- ever, what the Dijfenters mean by it is this ; viz, that by confining our felves to a Form of Words, we (ftint or limit., that is, J reflrain the Spirit from giving us that affiftance, which he ordinarily vouchfafes in conceiv'd Prayer. And now having explain'd the 'Two foregoing particulars, ;he aniwer tp this Objedion will -be very Of Forms of Trayer. %y very eafy. For if the Spirit be dinted or re- flrain'd by Forms of Prayer, it miift be either from infpiring the words, or from exciting the aliedions of Prayer. But I have prov'd, that Forms are fo fir from reftraining the Devotion of Prayer, that they do very much promote and im- prove it ', and as for the Words, I have prov'd, thp.t fince the lirft propagation of the Gofpel the Spirit has withdrawn the immediate and Miracu- lous Infpiration of them. And fmce that cannot be {tinted which is not, therefore the Infpiration of the Words of Prayer is not ftinted by Fornls. 3. 'Tis Objedled, that pubhc Forms are a fin- ^ul negledt of the Miniilerial gift of Prayer. For, the Dijfenters fiy, the gift of Prayer is an ability to exprefs our minds in Prayer, which God has given to Minifters, as a means of pub- lic Devotion j and therefore they may not omit the exercife of it, by ufing Forms of other Mens Compofure. Now to this I anfwer, I. That fuppofmg that 'tis a fuik in Minifters to omit the exercife of their abihty, yet the People are not to be charged with it. God v/ill not rcjecft: the People's Devotion, becaufe the Minifter is to blame. He only is accountable for that ; for the People do not join with him in his omifiion, but in that which is acceptable to God. 2. This gift of Prayer is either natural or acquir'd. For ccr> tainly 'tis not Infpir'd at Ordination i becaufe the Scrip lure do's not promife any fuch thing, nor is there any experience of it. Nay, the Diifenting Minifters muft own, that juft before their Ordi- .nation they were as able to exprefs the Devotions of a Congregation, as they werejufi after -, which ihews that they had no new ability to Pray In- fpir'd in their Ordination. Nov/ fmce this gift F 4 or S 8 Of Forms of Trayer, or ability is nothing more than a quicknefs of in- vention and fpeech, which is either natural, or acquired by art and practice •, therefore 'tis no o- therwilc the gift of God, than our natural flrength, pv skill in Hiftory, or the like. All that God has promis'd his Minifters, is to concur with their honed endeavours, as far as is neceifary to the difcharge of their Office : and to fuppofc that this cannot be done without Praying Extern- fore^ is to take the Matter in queftion for granted. 3. This freedom of utterance is never call'd the gift cf Prayer in Scripture. Praying in unknown Languages is once call'd a gift^ but Praying in our own Language is never call'd fo. Therefore 'tis plain that the gift of readinefs of fpeech is not appropriated by God to Prayer, but left in com- mon to all other honeil ufes, that it can be ap- ply'd to ; and it may as well be call'd the Gift of Pleading at the Bar^ or of Difpnting^ or Converfa- tion^ as the gift of Prayr. Accordingly we find, that thofe who have this gift in Prayer, have it alfo upon other occafions \ which proves, that 'tis not appropriated to Prayer. 4. Since this gift of exprcfTing our minds is not appropriated to Prayer, it may be as lav/fully omitted in Prayer, as in any other purpofe which 'tis defign'd for. For if it be unlawful to omit x\\^ ufe of the gift of Elo- cution, then he who has the gift, may not law- fully ufe a Form in Petitioning his Prince, or in a Court of Juftice \ but if it be lawful to omit it in thefe cafes, as a Man fees occafion, then it is equally lawful to om.it it in Prayer. In fhort, if a Man has two gifts, he may ufe which he pleafes ; and fince we have other means of Prayer, none is obliged to ufe his ability to Pray Exte?npore, 5. Ufing a Form is as much a means of public De- votion Of Forms of Trayer, ' 89 votion as praying Extempore •, becaufe the end of public Prayer is at lead as elfe6lually ferv'd by a Form, as by a conceiv'd Prayer. Now fince there are two menns of Prayer, and both cannot be us'd at the fame time, therefore one may be lawfully omitted ; and confcquently the ufe of a Form, which is one means, is not a fmful negled of the other. 4. The lafb Objeftion is, that the Common Cafes and WMnts of Chriftians cannot be fo well exprefs'd in one conflant Form, as in conceiv'd Prayers ; becaufe the circumflances of Men are infinitely variable, and require futable Petitions and Thankfgivings, which the Minifter cannot o- therwifc provide than by Praying Extempore. To this I anfwer, i. That the Common Cafes and neceflities of Chriftians are for the Main alv/aics the fame, and therefore may be more fully com- prehended in a Form, than in an Extempore Prayer, For public Prayers, which are offered up in the Name of the whole Congregation, ought not to defcend to particular Cafes, but only to the Com- mon Cafes of all, and v/hat every one may truly and fmcerely join with. Now a Form will ex- prefs them much better than an Extempore Prayer, which is fubjedl to many omilTions. 2. Forms can make as good provifion for Extraordinary- cafes, as Extempore Prayer. For, as for thofe that can be forefeen, fuch as the want of rain, fair wxa- ther, i^c. there may be Forms composed for them afore-hand : and as for others that cannot ba forefeen. Forms may be provided, when they happen •, and this has ever bee-n done in our Church 0^. If Forms muft not be us'd, becaufe they do not alwaies reach Extraordinary Cafes, certainly Exte?npore Prayers ouglit not to .be us'd, becaufe 90 Of our Morn'mg and Evening by reafon of omifTions, they will not alwaies reach even Ordinary Cafes, In a word, it appears that all Extraordinary Cafes may be very well provided for by Forms •, but fuppoHng it otherwife, yet fince it has been prov'd at large, that the ufe of Forms is upon liindry accounts of great advantage to the pub- lic Devotion, 'tis unreafonable to fpoil the Church of them, and leave her to the mercy of Extempore effufions, only for the fake of a few contingencies, which may happen but very rarely, if at all, in a whole Age. III. I am now to prove in the lajft place, that the impofition of Forms ma'j be laivfully complfd with ; and for this a very few words will fuffice. For fmce the ufe of public Forms is lawful in it felf, therefore it may be lawfully comply'd with ; becaufe I have Ihewn in the Second Chapter,, that a Man may law- fully do a lawful thing, when 'tis injoin'd by Au- thority. And now I hope, it is evident to all im- partial Readers, that Forms of Prayer are not only LTJofiil^ but expedient alio. C H A P. IV. Objections againjl our Morning and Evening Service and Litany, Anfwefd. HAving juftified Forms of Prayer in ge- neral, my duty and method oblige me to juftify that of the Church of England in particular. I mufb confefs, I have alwaies thought the Litu'r'gj of the Church of England to be fuch, as wou'd rather have invited Proftetants to our Communion, than have kept them from it. And I believe, if the Diffenters wou'd ferioufly read over Ser^vice and Litany. 9 x over Dr. Bevcrege's Sermon concerning the Excel- lency and iifefulncfs of the Common- Prayr^ they wou'd go near to be of the fame mind. But alas ! this very Liturgy is that which many perlbns are incens'd againfb. It has been cry'd down as lilola- irons, Popiflo^ Supcrftitious^ Sec. 'Tis true, we do not now fo often hear thofc bitter exclamations of Rome and Babylofi^ Baal and Dagon •, for the Ccmmon-Prayer is not now cfteem'd fuch an abo- minable thing, as fome ignorant and heady Zea- lots were wont to count it : but yet fome Objc- <5tions are flill infilled upon, to which 1 hope to return a fair anfwcr. I. Then 'tis Objected, thac the Cor.fcl]io)n of fin in our Liturgy are too general ; and that there are many particular fins, which ought to have been diftincily confefs'd, of which there is no mention. But I defire the Objedors to confider, that there is hardly any thing in public worfhip, which re- quires more caution and prudence in the ordering of it, than that confefTion of fin, which is to be made by the whole Congregation. 'Tis hard to prevent it's being either too general or too parti- cular. The reafon is, becauie fuch different per- fons muft join in it, and the fins of fome are more numerous and grievous than the fins of o- tilers *, fo that all perlbns cannot polTibly make the fame particular confefTion. But I think our con- fefTions, viz, the daily one, and that in the Co?n- 7nitmon-0ffice^ are fo judicioufly fram'd, as to avoid both extremes : and I am perfuaded, all per- fons may profitably ufe them. However, the con- feflion of fin after the Minifter has recited each of the Ten Commandments^ is as particular, as can rea- fonably be defir'd •, and by this a Man may con- fefs all his known offences in thought, word or deed. 92 Of our Morning and Evening deed. If a Man muft not ufe a confefTion, that is pofTible to be mended, he muft never confefs at all : and if a Form of confeflion were composed by the wifcft DiffenterSy I fuppofe no more wou'd be pretended, but that it might be profitably us'd. Now this may be fiiid of our Form, and ought to end the difputc. Indeed there are examples of Jeremiah^ Nebe- miab, &c. confefiing fuch fins as they were not guilty of: but this was done upon folemn humi- liation for thofe known and public Idolatries of the Nation, which had brought God's heavy judg- ments upon them, or for common and fcandalous tranfgreffions afterv/ard. They confider'd them- felves as a part of the Community which had pro- vok'd God •, and they bare a part in the Calamity and in the confeiTion, as if they had offended as greatly as their Country-men. But I conceive tiiere is a great deal of difference between thofe confefTions upon fuch public humihations, and thofe that are fit for the Ordinary Service of the Church. I maay add, that particular confefTions are more properly the matter of private Devotion ; and if we did ferioufly practice ftricl examination and fecret contrition in our Clofets, we Ihou'd then find our affe6tions prcpar'd to comply v/ith thofe more ge- neral confefTions of fin, which v/e make with the v/hole Congregation. And we fhou'd tlien have lefs reafon to complain, that thofe confefTions are too general and not apt to move us ; becaufe this wou'd cure the deadnefs of our Hearls, which are commonly moft to blame, when v/e find fault with the Means, that God has provided for us. 2. The riext qbjedion is the (Jjortnefs of our CoUetJs, Service and Litany, ^ 3 CotkfJs^ by rcafon of which 'tis pretended, that the Prayer is often fuddenly broken off, and then begun again : and this is thought not fo agreeable to the gravity wherewith this duty ought to be perform'd, nor fo Hkely a means of exciting Re- verence and Devotion in the People, as one con- tinu'd Form of Prayer, that might be as long as all thofe put together. To this I anfwcr, i. Ihac the mere Ihortnefs of a Prayer is not to be blam'd ; fince that wou'd difparagc the Form, which Cbrifi: taught his Difciples. 2. That 'twill be hard to prove, that many of thefe fhort Prayers being of- fer'd up to God one immediately after another, is cither not fo grave or not fo edifying, as one con- tinu'd Form. For the work of Praying is as much continu'd all the while, as if there were but one continu'd Form *, becaufe we pafs from one Peti- tion to another, or from one matter of invocation to another, as immediately as if the diftind Forms were all brought into the compafs of one. Nay, the attention of the People is rather help'd by the frequency of faying /J^nen : and their Godl'j dif/o- Jjtion of 7mj2d^ which is the belt thing in Prayer, may be kept alive and more effedually fecur'd by calling upon the Name of God and pleading the Merits of Cbrift fo often as we do. Befidcs, the invocation of God fomcwhat often by his at- tributes, maintains in our Minds a reverent fenfe of his Majeftic Prefcnce *, which we all knov/, is needful to make us pray as we ought ; and the fre- quency of mentioning CbnjVs Merits and Medi- ation ilrengthens our faith and aiTurance that VvC fliall be heard. 'Tis alfo the peculiar Character of Chridian Devotion -, and dillinguilhcs us from the Papifts^ in declaring our deteftation of calling up- on God in the Name of Saints, or any orlicr but that 94 Of our Morning and Evening that of Chrifl. If it be fa id that we fay Amen^ and break off our Prayers too often ; I reply, that all wife and humble Men will fubmit them- felves in that cafe to the judgment of their Su* periors. 3. Some except againfl the repetition of the Lord's Prayer^ and of Glory be io the Father^ &c. and of Lord have mercy upon us^ and the like i bt'caufe they think our Saviour forbids it by fay- ing, ''johen ye -pra^;^ ii-fe not vain repetitions^ Matt. 6. 7. But it appears by our Saviour's caution againil vain repetitions, that fome repetitions are not vain, and confequently not forbidden. This muft be fup- pos'd, becaufe he himfelf, when in his Agony, pray'd thrice . in the fame words. Now Cbriji forbids the fault of the Heathens, whofe vain re- petitions proceeded from an aifectation of fpeaking much, or from a belief that God wou'd not help them, unlefs they repeated the fame thing over in a tedious manner : but the repetition of good Prayers is nothing like their practice. Repetitions are not vain, if two things be regarded j i. That tiie matter be very weighty, and apt to move thofe pious afTections, which God is m.ott pleas'd with in our Addrcfies to him ; and in this refpecl, I dare fay, our repetitions are fecur'd from vanity. 2. That they be fram'd with judgment, that they come in filly and in due place, ' and not too often. And thcfe rules are obferv'd in our Liturgy ; for as none did ever blame the difpofal of our repetitions, fo none can jidlly blame the frequency of them. For our repetitions are very few ; but if our number be too great, what fliall we think of the i36ch Ffalm^ v/hcre His mercy e'ndureth for ever, is re- peated 26 tim.es ? To conclude this matter, I defxre thofe, who do not yet approve our repetition Service and Litany. 9 5 repetition of the Lord's Prayer, &c. to confider, whether it be fo eafy to fpend the time it takes up more profitably, than by joining in good earneit with the Congregation in thefe Prayers. 4. Some Perfons diflike the Refponfals of the Congregation, and the People's fiiying the Confef- fions and the Lord's Prayer after the Miniiter, and their alternate recitwg the Pfalms and Hymns, and fome petitions in the daily Service. Now I beg thefe Men to confidcr, what has been of- ten faid, viz. that this way is apt to check a wan- dring Spirit, to help attention and quicken a live- ly zeal in God's Service, whilfh we invite and pro- voke one another to Pray and give thanks. They fay indeed, that the Minifler is appoint- ed to be the mouth of the People in God's pub- lic Service : but to this I anfwer, i . That grant- ing the Minifter to be appointed for the Mouth of the People, yet it mutt not be fo interpreted, as to make all Vocal Prayer and thank fgiving in Religious Aflemblies unlawful to the People. For then the People muft not fay Amen, which is a fliort refponfal to the Minifler ; nor muft they join in finging Pfalms, which oftentimes contain matter of Prayer. 2. The S.ripture do's not fay, that the Minifter is the mouth of the People to God, or that no Prayer muft be ofter'd up in Religious Aflemblies, otherwife than by the mouth of the Minifler. 'Tis true, the Minifter is the mouth t)f the People in all thofe Prayers which he utters for them ; and becaufe thefe are many more than what the People themfelves utter, he may be faid to be their mouth to God Comparatively, but not Abfohitely. 'Tis true alfo, that the Minifter is ap- pointed for the People in all publick Services ap- pertaining to God, if this be underftood for the moft p6 Of our Morning and Evening mod part, or of all with little exception. Some public Services are pronounc'd by him only : and as for the reft, 'tis fit he fliou'd ever ut- ter moft of them -, and that in thofe wherein the People have their part, he fliou'd ever go before and lead them, and guide the whole per- formance ; which is all taken care for in our Li- turgy. Nay, the Bi [[enters themfelves do not utterly de- bar the People from all Vocal Prayer and Thankf- giving of their own in God's folemn Worfliip. For they allow the People to fing Pfalms % and why then may they not bear a part in the Hymns and Pfiilms by alternate refponfes ? I cannot fee, why finging or not finging fliou'd make fuch a difference. 'Twere better, if they were every where fung •, becaufe it is more futable to the de- fign of them, than bare reciting is : but if they be not fung, the next ufe of them, that is moll agreeable to their nature and defign, is reciting them by anfwering in turns, as the Cuftom is with us ; for this is much nearer to finging, than the Minifter's reciting all himfelf. But, fay they, the Peoples verfe is in a man- ner loft to fome of the Congregation -, fince in the confus'd murmur of fo many voices nothing can be diftindly heard. To this I anfwer, that thofe who can read, may bring Books *, and thofe that cannot, may attend to thofe that arc near. Nay, I have been credibly inform'd, that fome de- vout People that cou'd never read, have attain'd to an ability of reciting moft of the Pfalms v/ith- out book, by often hearing them in thofe Churches where they are alternately recited. I fliall add, that for the moft part, the Pfalms are recited al- ternately in thofe Churches only, where it may be" Service and Litany 9? be reafonably prefum'd, that the whole Congrega- tion can read, very fe\V excepted. Now if the People may join in Vocal Praife, why may they not alio join in Vocal Prayer ? If it be faid, there is fome example or warrant in Scripture for the one, but not for the other ; it feems to be a good anfwer, that there is fuch a parity of reafon, as that the exprefs warrant of Scripture for the one, is an imply 'd warrant for the other. I have already fliewn, Chap, 3. that the People's joining in Vocal Prayer was very ancient- ly pra6lis'd and if this w^as the Primitive way* 'tis probable, that it was the way in the Apoftles times. I know, 'tis objedled, that the People's fpeaking to God in the Church is diforderly, and a breaking in upon the Minifter*s office. But will they fay, that the Children of Ifrael intrenched upon the Pricit, when thej all bowed themfelves upon the Favement^ and worfljipped the Lord^ and prais\i hi?n, faying, for he is good, for his mercy en^ dureth for ever \ 2 Chron. 7. 3 -^ Ecclefiaftical Or- der is iecur'd by the Minifter's prefiding in God's public Worfl'iip, and guiding the performance of it : but not to allow the People to make an Au'^ dihle confeffion of fin after the Minifler, nor to ut* ttx fome few affeBionate Petitions, and thofe very fhort, to which they are alfo invited and led by him, feems rather to Savour of an affedlation of undue fuperiority over the People, than to pro-* ceed from any fear of the Minifter's office being invaded. Some urge, that Women are forbidden to fpeak in the Church, 1 Cor. 14. 34. but this is ftrangely mifapply'd to the Matter in hand. For ^tis plain that the fpeaking mentioned by the A- • poftle, fignifies nothing but Prophefying, Inter- preting, Preaching and Inftruding j and that the G reafon^ S 0/ our Morning and Evening reafon, why he will not allow this to the Wo- man, is, becaufe Preaching implies Authority, whereas the Woman's part is obedience and fub- jedbion. They that will read the whole Chap- ter^ will find that this is the meaning of St. Paul, 5. I proceed in the next place to confider, whether there be any juft caufc to find fault with the reading of the Apocryphal Leffons in our Church. Now if Sennons and Catechizing be al- lowable, be fides the Word of God ; why may not fome Apocryphal Lejfons be read, which con- tain excellent Rules of life ? Efpecially fince thofe Writings were greatly efleem'd by the Church in it's pureft Ages, when they and other human wri- tings alfo were pubiickly read, as well as the Scrips tures : and. thofe Chapters of the Old Tleftament^ which are omitted, do either recite Genealogies^ or the Rules of the Levitical Service, or matters of fad: delivered in other Chapters that are read, or which are hard to be underfl:ood. If it be faid, that becaufe the Scripture is all of Divine Au- thority, 'tis more profitable to read any part of that, than any other good Lefibn ; I anfwer that then no place will be left for Sermons, which are no more of Divine Authority, than the Apocry- fhal Lejfons. There is no danger of any Perfons miftaking the Apocryphal Lejfons for Canonical Scripture^ becaufe the Church fpeaks fo plainly in hct^ Sixth Article : nor do we read them other- wife, than the ancient Church did. I fhall only add, that no Apocryphal Lejfun is read upon any Lord's Day in the Year ; and as for other excepti- ons, I refer the Reader to Dr. Falkner^s Libertas Ecclef p. 164, &c. 6, If any objed againft our Sta?iding at the Creed : Service and Litany, ^9 Creed', ISAw Baxter iiucz^ his judgment is for it ^ where it is requir'd^ and where not doing it wou'd be di- vifive and fcandaloiis. Nay clfewhere he lays, that ^tis a convenient priajing gejiure, &c. See his Chrijh Bire5l, p. 858. I proceed now to the Vindication of the IJ- tany, againft which 'tis pleaded, i. That the Peo- ple utter the IVords of invocation in the Litany for the moft part^ the M'nifter all the while fuggejl- ing the matter of it to them. But this objection is of no force, if what I have faid concerning the law- fulnefs of allowing the People an intereft in Vo- cal Prayer, be admitted. If it be laid, that the People bear too confiderable a part, to the difpa- ragemeht of the Minifler's Office ^ I anfwer, that ^tis a great millake ; For i. tho' the People fay Good Lord deliver us, and We befcech the to hear us Good Lord ; yet the Minifler faies the other^ and the far greater part of the Prayer. 2. They are but thefe two fliort and known Petitions which are excepted againft : and if the People may be allowed any part in Vocal Prayer, I know of nothing more proper than thefe ; nor are they repeated, but v/hen they are apply'd to new and diilind matter. Befides, they relieve our atten- tion, and cherifh our warm affections in Prayer : and I could almoil appeal to the keeneil of our Adverfaries, whether, if Good Lord Deliver us, were apply'd but once in grofs to that part of the Litany, we fhou'd not be more apt to Ian- guilh in the offering it up, than as it is now or- dered. But, 3. 'Tis plain, that in thole Prayers^ the Minifter has the principal and guiding part^ in that he utters all the dijlintl Matter of the Prayer, which the People do not -, whereas he utters words of invocation as well as they. And G 2 con- 100 0/ our Morning and E^vening confider, I pray, whether if the People were to utter that which is the MinifVer's part now, and the Miniller to fay that only which is theirs •, we fhou'cl not have more grievous complaints, that the Minifter's authority was flighted in the whole defign ; fince he feem'd only to learn from the People, what the Congregation was to pray for. 2. 'Tis Objedled, that we pray to be deliver'd from all deadly fin, which feems to imply, that there are fome fins which are not deadly. Now in anlwer to this, it is by fome truly enough faid, that thefe words do not neceffarily miply a diftinclion between fins that are, and flns that are fiol deadly. But admitting that fuch a di- flindion were intended, yet we muft obferve, that tho' all fin be in it's own nature deadly or dam- nable ; yet thro' the Mercy of God and the Me- rits of Chrift, fins of mere infirmity are not impu- ted, and therefore not deadly to us. But there are fome fins fo heinous, that he who commits them, is thereby put into a damnable {late : and 'tis of fuch fins as thefe that this pafl^age is to be underflood *, as appears by Deadly Sin being added to Fornication, from Fornication and all other Deadly Sin, Good Lord deliver us. 3. Some are difpleas'd at our praying againft Sudden Death. But why fhou'd we not by Sud- den Death underftand our being taken out of this World, when we are not fit to die ? For fometimes a thing is faid to be Sudden to us, when we are not prepar'd for it. And in this fenfe can any good Man find fault with the Petition ? But fuppofe that by Sudden Death we mean what is commonly underfiiood by it, that is, a Death of which a Man has not the leaft warning by Sick- nefs ; Service and Litany. i oi nefs •, are there not Reafons why even good Men may dcfire not to die fuddenly ? May they nor, when they find thenifelves drawing towards their end, by their good Inftruftions and Admonitions make Imprefiions upon their Friends, Acquain- tance, and Relations, to the bettering of them ? May not their Counllls be then more eliedual with them, than ever they were before ? And is it not reafonable to beheve they will be fo ? As for themfelves, may not the warning they have of approaching Death, be improved to make them more fit to die, than they were in their perfec^l Health ? In a word, he that thinks himfelf to have fufficiently pcrfcofed holinefs in the fear of God, and not to (land in need of thofe adls of Self-Exa- mination. Humiliation and Devotion, by which Good men improve the Warning of Death which great Sickncfs or extreme Age gives them -, lee him, if he pleafe, refufe to join with us, when we pray to God to deliver us from fudden death. 4. Some are offended, that we pray to be de- liver'd By the Myjlery of Chrijl's Holy Incarnati- on^ 8ic. By his Agony and bloody Sweaty by his Crofs and Pajfon, Sec. And by the coming of the Hdy Ghoft. Some fay this is Swearings others Conju- ring^ and I know not what. To thefe I anfwer, that w^hen we lay. By the Myftery of thy holy In- carnation^ and by thy Crofs and Pafjion^ Sec. Good Lord deliver us -, we implore ChriiV, who has al- ready fliew'd fuch an ineftimable goodnefs towards us, by taking our Nature into his Divinity, to Die upon the Crofs, to be Buried, to Rife again ^ to afcend into Heaven, and there to intercede with the Father for us, and by fending the Holy Ghoft to qua- lifie the Apoflles for their great Work of carrying G 3 the 101 Of our Morn. andE-ven. Service, 6cc. the Word of Salvation into the World : I fay, we implore him who hath already done fuch mighty things for our Salvation, and we plead with him by that goodncfs which he has already given us fuch great demonftrations of, by thofe Wonders of Mercy that he has wrought for us, that he wou'd now go on to deliver us by his powerful Grace from thofe Evils which we pray againft. And this is fo reafonable, fo devout and attedlionate, fo humble and thankful a way of praying, that I am forry that any who call themfelves Believers, fhou'd be fo ignorant as not to underfliand it, or fo profane and unlike what they pretend to be, as to deride it. To conclude, I muft confefs, that of all the Prayers in our Liturgy, that are of human Com- pofition, I fliou'd be moil unwilling to part with the Litany. It feems to be, what it was defign'd to be, A Form of Pra'jer apt to excite ourmojt in- tenfe and fervent defires of God^s Grace and Mercj, The v/hole Office is fram'd, with rcfpedt both to matter and contrivance, for the raifing of the ut- moft Devotion of good Chriftians, and for the v/arming of the coldeft hearts by the heat of the Congregation. And in fuch a difpofition it is moft fit to exprcfs our Charity, by praying for others, even all forts of Men, as diil:i^i6lly and particularly as public Prayer will bearo CHAP. Of Infant' Baptifm, i o 3 CHAP. V. Of Infant 'B apt ifm, BEfore I proceed to the Vindication of our Of- fice of Baptifri^ I think it is proper to juftify Infant-Baptifm, which is pra6lis'd by us, and dif- lik'd by fome of the Biffenters. And that my Difcourfe concerning Infant-Baptiffn may be the better underftood, I fhall take the hberty of pre- mifmg a few things. 1. That the Original of the Jewijb Church (con- fider'd purely as a Church) is to be dated from the Covenant which God made with Abraham -, but that of the Jcwi/Jj Common-wealth from the deli- very of the Law by Mofcs. For that the Jewijh Church and Common-wealth are diflind: things, is plain, becaufe the Apofllc makes this diftindlion, Ro?n. 4. i^. Gal. 3. 17. And therefore,. 2. The way to find out the Nature of the Je-uoifh Church is to confider the Nature of the Co- venant made with Abraham^ upon v/hich the Jew- ifJj Church was founded. Now 'tis plain from Ro7n, 4, 9th to the T7th5 and 9. 6, &c. GaL 3. 5. &Co that the Covenant made with Abraham was a Spiritual Covenant, made with him as the Father of Believers., nnd with his pofterityj not as pro- ceeding from him by Natural, but by Spiritual Generation, as Heirs of his Faith. Hence faies the Apoitle, in the name of the Chriflians, We are the Circumcifion^ which worjhip God in the Spi^ rity and have 710 confidence in the FleJJj^ Phil. 3. 3. and it is one God, which /hall jt/Jiify the Circum- cifion by Faith, and the Uncircu7ncifiou thro* Faith, G 4 Rom 1 04 Of Infant-Baptifm. Rom, 3. 30. and if "je he Cbrifl's, then are y A- hrahani's Seed, and heirs according to the Fromifey . Gal. 3. 29. Nay 'twill farther appear, that this Covenant was made, not with Abraham's Natural, but his Spiritual Orf-fpring, if we confider, 3. That the initiatory Sacrament into it was Circumcifion, For the Covenant is call'd the Co- venant of Circumcifion, Ads 7, S. and Circumcifion on the other hand is call'd the Seal of the Righte- cufnefs of faith, Rom. 4. 11. faith or faithful obe- dience being the condition of that Covenant, which God requir'd of the Children of Abraham, and which they promised to perform. It alfo figni- fy'd the Circumcifion of the heart, Deut. 10. 16. and 30, 6„ Rom. 2. 28, 29. 4. As to the Perfons to be admitted into the Covenant, we have a very plain account at the in- flitution of it, Gen, 17. from whence it appears, Tirft^ that the Children of Heathens were to be circumcis'd \ (See Excd, 12. 48, 49.) which alfo proves that the Promife w^as made, not to his Na- tural, but to his Spiritual Children. Hence in all Ages great numbers of Gentiles were admitted in- to the Jewijh Cliurch by CircumiCifion. Secondly, that perfons of all Ages were to be Circumcis'd, and that God was fo far from excluding Children from Circumcifjon, that he ordei'd that the Cir^ cumcifion of them Ihou'd not be deferr'd beyond the 8th Day. God was pleas'd to be fo gracious as to chufe the Children with their Parents, and look upcJi them as holy upon their account. This was ground enough for their AdmifTion into the Church, and for God to look upon them as Be- lievers^ tho' they cou'd not make open profefljon of their faith. The faith and confent of the Father or the God- r-, Of Infant-Baptifm. i o ^- God-father, and of the Congregation under which he was Circumcis'd, was behcv'd of Old by the J\ Epiil. i. ch. 2. v, 9. calls Chriftians by thofe Tides, which God gave to the Jews as to his peculiar People, viz a Chofen Gene- ration^ Royal Pricfihood, &c. and St. Paul compares the calling of them to the engrafting of the Wild Olive-tree into the Old Olive-tree's Stock, Rom. 11. 17. &:c. CbrijI and his apoftles introduced as much of Judaif?n into the Chriftian Church, as the nature of the Reformation wou'd bear : and adher'd as much as they cou'd to the 0/J, both in the Mat- ter and Form of the New Oeconomy. For the proof of this the Reader may confult Grot. Opufc. 'Tom. 3. p. 510, 520, &c. Ha?nmondo^ 'Q'^^ivnng Infants, Seldon de Jure, /. 2. c. 2. de Synedr. /. i. c. 3. Lightfoot's, Horre Heb. p. 42. Hainmond on Matth. 2. I. Alting, DilTert. Septima de Profelyt. Mede's I B. difc. 43. 2 B. Chriit. Sacrif. Qudworth on the Lord's Supper, Thorndike of Religious AfiembL Taylor's Great Example, Part, i . Dijc. of Baptifm^ Numb. IT. DodweW s One Altar and One Priefl- hood, Ligbtfoot on i Cor. 5. 4. Some things, I confefs, they laid afide ; but their Reafons for fo doing were, i. Becaufe very many of the Jewifh Rites were fulfilled in Chrifi *, and this is fo plain, that I need not prove it. 2. Be- caufe many of them were inconfiftent with the Na- ture of Chriftianity \ which was to be, i. Manly ^ in oppofition to the Lav/, which "iSjas hut a School- Mafter to bring them to Chrift.^ Gal. 3. 24. and the Jews were under it, as Children are under Tutors, Chap. 4. I, 2, 3, 4. for they had Childifli un- derfcandings, and were hke Children, to be in- ilrucfted by Symbolical LclTons, viz. Wafliing, &c, 2. _Frec\ in oppofition to the fervile Nature of the Jexuijb Church, which was loaded with number- lefs Of Infant'BaptiJm. 1 07 lefs obiervances, of which the Jews were grown weary, and with which they had been for a long time heavy laden, when Chrift call*d them to take his yoke upon them, which was to be fo eafy and light. 3. Univerfal^ God injoin'd the Jews many things, in oppofition to the neighbouring Idolatrous Nations ; that there might be a mutu- al llrangenefs between them, and that by Ceremo- nial Angularities they might be diilinguillit from the reft of the World : but then Chrift^ coming to break down the Middle-wall of Partition be- twixt the Jezvs and Gentiles^ and to abolifli the enmity of ordinances that was betwixt them, that he might make peace between them, and reconcile them both into one body ; it was requifite to this end, that he fliou'd aboliili thefe, and all other di- ftinguifhing characters betwixt them, which wou'd have hindred the progrefs of the Gofpel, becaufe they were become {o odious and ridiculous to the Gentile World. And this is the reafon, why the bloody Rite of Circumcifion is chang'd into the eafy Rite of Baptipn. 6. Circumcifion was a Sacrament of equal Sigiii- ficanc^^ Force and Perfeolion whhBaplifm •, and Bap- tiftn Succeeded in the room of it, not as an An- iitype fucceeds in the place of the '^ype^ but as one pofitive inftitution fucceeds in the place of ano- ther. For we muft note, that ftrif^Ljy and pro- perly fpeaking, there was the fame difference be- twixt the Type and the Antitype^ as betwixt the ihadow and the Subftance, or betwixt a Man and his pidlure in a Glafs ; infomuch that what was in the 'Type^ did only reprefent fomething which did in a more pcrfedl manner belong to the Anti- type, Thus the blood of Sacrifices reprefented the i. blood of Cbrijlj which do's truly purge the Con- fcience loS Of Infant-Baptijm, fcience from dead works ♦, and the healing virtue of the Brazen Serpent was a Symbol of the heal- ing virtue o'i Chrijl upon the Crofs. But the cafe is not fo betwixt Circumcifion and Baptifm •, be- caufe Circumcifion has no Symbolical likenefs with Bn.ptif7n^ nor any thing belonging to it common to Baptifm^ which doth not as fully belong unto it, as unto Ba])tif?n it fclf. For, I. Circumcifion was heretofore a real Sa- crament of Initiation into the Covenant of Grace, a Seal of the Righteoufnefs of Faith, and a Con- firmation of the Covenant betwixt God and Man, as much as Baptifm is now. Baptifm do's nothing under the Gofpel, v/hich Circumcifion did not as properly and effe6lually do under the Law ; and therefore it cou'd not be a 'Type of Baptifm, any more than the Broad-Seal of England :500 years ago was a Type of this. And accordingly 'tis never mentioned in the New Teftament as a Type of Baptifm^ nor Baptifm as the Antitype of it •, but fucceeded in the room of it, not as the An- titype did in the place of the Type^ but as one abfolute Ordinance or pofitive Inftitution do's in the place of another. 2. Circumcifion was not a ^ype -of Baptifm, becaufe a Type is an Exem- plar appointed under the Old Teftament to pre- figure lomcthing under the New : but Baptifm was it felf of Jewifh Inftitution under the Old Teftament ; and by confequence cou'd not be Ty- pify'd and prefigur'd by Circumcifion, becaufe it was us'd together v/ith it in the Jewifh Church. The Jewifh Church made it a Ceremony of Ini- tiating Profelytes under the Lav/ •, and our Saviour liking the Inftitution, continu'd the ufe of it, and made it the only Ceremony of Initiating Profelytes under the Gofpel \ fuperadding to it the compleat nature Of Infant -B apt ifm. 109 nature of an Initiatory Sacrament, or the full force of Circumcifion, as it was a fign of the Covenant, and a feal of the Righteoufnels of Faith. Having premised thefe Six things, I proceed to the main bufinefs, in treating of which I defign to fhew, I. That Infants are capable of Baptifn. 2. That T^hc'j are not excluded from Baptifen hj Cbrifl. 3. That Uis unlawful to fe par ate from a Churchy which appoints Infants to be baptized, 4. That ^tis the duty cf Chriflian Parents to bring their Children unto Baptifm. 5. That 'tis lawful to Communicate wich believers y who were Baptized in their Infancy, I. Then I fhall fhew, that Infants are capable cf Baptifm. God commanded Infants to be Cir- cumcis'd, as well as adult Perfons ; and furely, if they were capable of Circumcifion, then they are alfo capable of Baptifm. For the I'zvo Covenants, of Circumcifion and Baptifm, are for fubftance the fame, and the grace of thofe Covenants the very fame •, and therefore if the Initiation of Infants was then no abfurdity, it can be none now. Nay, if Infants were admitted into the Church, when the entrance was more grievous and not without Blood •, how unreafonable is it to afTert, that they are now uncapable of admiflion into it, when the entrance is made more eafy, and more agreeable to the weaknefs of a tender Child ? 'Tis faid indeed, that Infants are uncapable of Baptifm^ becaufe they cannot Anfwer the Ends of it i they cannot underftand the Gofpel, or Profefs their Faith and Repentance, or fubmit to Baptifm out of their own choice, nor can they have their Faith and Hope further flrengthen'd in the ufe of it. But this way of arguing is very weak and fal- lacious, and refleding upon the Wifdom of God. Firjl, 1 1 o Of Infayit-Bapttfm. Firft^ It is weak and fallacious, becaufe it makes no diftindtion btwixt a ftricl Injlitiition^ which is Infliituted by God for one, or a few ends, and pre- cifely for perfons of one fort •, and an Inftitution of Latitude^ which is Inllituted by him for feveral ends, and for different forts of Perfons, differently quahfy'd for thofe feveral ends. Of the firft fort was the Jewijh Ordinance of Fringes^ which cou'd only concern grown Perfons, becaufe they only were capable of anfwering the End, for which it was Inftituted, viz. To look upon them and rememher the Commandments of the Lord : and of the latter fort is the Holy Ordinance of Marriage, which was appointed for feveral ends, and for perfons dif- ferently qualify'd for thofe feveral ends •, infomuch that perfons who are incapacitated as to fome ends pf Marriage, may yet honeflly Marry, becaufe they ^re capable of the refb. For this reafon, thofe who are not capacitated for the Procreation of Children, may Marry, becaufe they are capable of anfwering another end, for which Marriage was Ordain'd. Now our Adverfai-ies cannot prove, that Baptifm is a firicl Lift it u lion, becaufe it fucceeded in the room o^Circumcifion, which was an Inftitution of La- titude ; and becaufe our Saviour was Baptiz'd, who was lefs capable of Baptifn, than Infants pofflbly can be. For John Baptiz*d with the Baptifm of Repentance, and thereby Seal'd unto the People the RemifTion of their Sins. Now our Saviour was without fin, and yet he was Baptiz'd ; which fhews, that a Man who is capable of fome ends of Baptifm^ may be Baptiz'd, tho' he is not capable of the red. Secondly, 'Tis refle6lingupon the Wifdom of God, becaufe God Commanded young Babes to be Cir- cumcis'd, tlx)' all the ends of Cincumcifion cou'd noc Of Infant- B apt ifni, i r i not be anfwer'd by them. For, fince there lies the fame objedion againil Infant-Circumcifion as againd Infaut-Baptifm^ therefore thofe Men who argue thus agaiuft Infant-Baptifin^ do reproach the Divine Wifdom, which injoin'd Infant-Circumcifion. Children are capable of all the ends of Baptifm, as it is a Sign to alTure us of God's fivor, and to confign to us the benefits of the Covenant of Grace. They may be made Members of a Church, and adopted Heirs of Eternal Life i as well as they may be made Members of a Family, and adopted Heirs of a Temporal Eftate. And if they are capable of the Benefits and Privileges of Chriftianicy, v/hy fhou'd not the fign of thole Benefits and Privileges be apply'd to them ? Suppofe a Prince fliou'd fend for an attainted Tray tor's Chihf and in the prefence of feveral Perfons Affembled for that piirpofe, fhou'd fay, Tou know the blood of this Child is at- tainted by his Father^ s 'T'reafon •, by Law he has for- feited all Right to his Anceflors Eflate and Titles ; and is quite undone^ thd* he be not fenfible of his wretched condition. My Bowels of co7npaJfion yern iipon him^ and here I reftore him to his Blood and In- heritance^ to which henceforward he fJmll have as much Rights as if the Family had never been attain- ted. I juflify him freely and declare my felf recon- ciled to him i and that no fpot or imputation may hereafter lye upon him.^ I here before you all wafh him with pure Water,, to fignify that he is cleansed from his original attainder and corruption of Bloody and that he is as fully reftor'd to his Birth-right^ as if he had never been attainted. Suppofe, I fiy, this were done for an attainted Infuu ; cou'd any Man fay, the a6lion was infignificanc and invalid, becaufe that Child knew nothing of it ? Or that he was incapable of the fign, when he was capable of be- in o; 112 Of Infant-Baptifm. ing wafli*d from the attainder, which was the chief* thing fignify'd thereby ? Bcfides, tho' /Voraham bellcv'd, and folemnly profefs'd his Faith, before he was Circumcis'd ; yet Ifaac was Circumcis'd, and cnter*d into the Co- venant with God, before he was able to undcr- fland what the condition of the Covenant was. And will any Man fliy he was Circumcis'd in vain ; or that God commanded a fooliih thing -, tho' he was under the very fime incapacity as to the ends of Circumcifion, that Infants now are as to the ends of Baptifm. If it be faid, that Circumcifion was more pro- per for Infants than Baptifm, becaufe it left a Mark in the Flelli, to infl:ru6i: them what was done in their Infancy, whicli Baptifm do's not -, I anfwer, i. That even the Mark of Circumxifion was as infignificant during the non-age of the Child, as Baptifm is to Chriilian Infants : neither afterwards cou'd he tell what the Meaning of that Character was, but by the inilrudlion of others. And therefore according to their v/ay of reafon- ing againft Infant-B.iptijhi^ it ought to have been deferr'd till the full years of difcretion, when the Circumcis'd perfon might have underflood the Spi- ritual fignification thereof 2. Allowing that Circumcifion v/as more proper for Infants than Baptifm^ yet we muft confider chat the Jews knew very v/ell, that Baptifn left no Mark upon the perfon. And therefore thofe who argue againfl Infant-Baptifm^ muft condemn the Jewijh Church, Vv^hich for many Ages Baptiz'd Infants and minor Prolelytes into the Covenant, as well as adual Be- lievers, and yet were never reprov'd for it by any Prophet •, which we may prefume they wou'd have been, had baptifmal initiation of Infants into the Covenant ^;> f!h^ Of Infant'Baptifm. 1 1 3 Covenant been fo abfurd, infignificant and aba- five a pradice, as the Profefibrs againft Infant- Baptifnt pretend it is. K' II. I am to fhew, that Infants are not excluded from Baptifm by Chrifi, That he never excluded them by an exprcfs prohibition, the Anaha;[>tijis themfelves do grant, becaufe there is no fuch pro- hibition to be found in the New Teflament : but then they pretend, that it was Cbriflh intention, that none but grown perfons Ihou'd be Baptiz'd, becaufe the Gofpel requires, that perfons to be ^ »^ Baptiz'd ihou'd, i. be "Taught, Matth. 28. 19, '^ -^^ 2. Believe^ Mark 16, 16. 3. Repent^ ^^i 2. 38. - But thofe and the like Texts do no more prove, ^ that none but grown perfons ought to be Baptiz'd^ than the Apoltles words, 2 I^hejf 3. 10. do prove, that none but grown perfons ought to eat. For he ^ . ^^^i^ requires that if any ivou'*d not work^ neither [Joou^d ^^i^t ^- he eat ; now none but grown perfons can work, and i«JI^«^ll" therefore by this way of arguing none but grown <<^//Jii^3fLi perfons ought to eat. Again, fuppofe there were a Plague in any Country, and God iliou'd miracu- loufly call 1 1 or 12 Men, and give them a Medi- cine againft this Plague, and fay ; Go into fuch a. Country^ and call the People of it together^ and i'each them the Virtues of this medicine, and affurg them, that he that helievetb and taketh it from you^ fhall live, hut he thai helievetb not fiall die. Now fince Children are capable of the Medicine, tho" they are ignorant of the Benefits of it j wou'd any Man conclude, that it was God's intention, that Hone but grown perfons lliou'd receive it, be- caufe they only cou^d he caWd together^ and he taught the Virtues of it^ and believe or disbelieve them that brought it ? No certainly. Wherefore, feeing Chil- dren, as I have prov'd, are capable of the Benen: s H ^f 114 Of Infant -Baptifm, of Baptifm ; and the Apoftles^ who were fent to Baptize all I^ations, knew them to be capable of it, and to have receiv'd both Circumc'tfion and Bwp- tfm in the Je^joifi Church : how fliou'd it be thought, but that it was Chrift's intention, that Children as well as grown Perfons fhou'd beBap- tiz'd ? Shou'd God, in the dales of Bavid^ have or- der'd fome Prophets to go and Preach the Law to every Creature, faying, He that believetb^ and is Circumcised and Baptiz'd, Jhall he fav^d, but he that helievetb not Jhall he damned ; wou'd thofe Prophets have Circumcis'd and Baptiz'd only grown perfons, contrary to the pradice of the Jcjoiflj Church? Or if in a fhort Hiftory of their MifTion we Ihou'd have read, that they Circumcis'd and Baptiz'd as many Profelytes, as gladly received their word ; wou'd this have prov'd, that they did not alfo Circumcife and Baptize the Infants of thofe belie- ving Profelytes, according to the Laws and Ufages of their Mother-Church ? Or fhou'd God bid 1 2 Men, of a Church that had always pradis'd Infant- Baptifm, go and Preach the Gofpel in the Indies^ faying, He that helieveth and is Baptiz'd, fJoall he fiv^d •, wou'd thofe Men, that were bred up to the practice of Infant-Baptifni, think it was God's -intention, that Baptifm fhou'd be deny'd to Infants? No certainly^ and therefore by parity of Reafon, the Apoftles cou'd not fo underftand their Com- miffion, as to exclude Infants from Baptifm, Now fince our Savior has not, either exprefly or otherwife, excluded Infants from Baptifm, cer- tainly his Command to Baptize all Nations do's comprehend Infants as well as Men. For the Apo- fcles liv'd under a difpenfation, where Infants were initiated both by Ci^f^cuincifion and Baptifm into the Church I Of Infant' B apt ifr£ i 1 5 Church j and unlefs they had been inflruded to the contrary, they mufl naturally underftand their Commiflion of Baptizing to have extended unio Infants, as well as adual Believers. Our Adverfaries indeed put the greateft fhrefs upon thefe words of our Savior, Mark 16. 16. He that helieveth and is Bapfiz'd^ Jhall befav'd: but if they wou'd well confider the next v/ords, they wou'd find, that Infants are not at all concern'd in them •, becaufe it follows, but he that hclicvcth riotj JJjall be da??in\L The fame want of Faith, which here excludes from Baptifm, excludes alfo from Sal- vation : and therefore it cannot be underllood of In- fants, unlefs they will fay. that the fame incapacity of believing which excludes them from Baptifmy excludes them from Salvation too. Wherefore *tis plain, that the believing or not believing in that Text, is only to be underllood of fuch as are in a capacity of hearing and believing the Gofpel, that is, of grown perfons •, juft as the wordsj Johno^. ^6, He that believe th on the Son of God, hath Ever- lafting Life ', and he that believe th not, JIo all not fee Life, but the wrath of God abideth on hi?n. But they urge alfo, that Baptifin is unprofitable for Infants, becaufe putting aijuay the filth of the Flefh, which is all that Infants are capable of, fig- nifies nothing ; but only the anfcoer of a good Con- fcience towards God, i Pet. 3. 21. of which, fay they, Infants are wholly uncapable. To this I an- fwer, that another Apoflle tells us, Ro?n. 2. 25, 29. that external Circuincifion, which is all that Infants are capable of, profiteth nothing without keeping the Law^ which Infants cou'd not keep : but that the inward Circu7?icifion ofi the Heart and in the Spirit^ was the true Circumcifion, and yet Infants are unca- fablc of it* So that their way of arguing proves H 2 no thing. 1 1 6 Of Infant -Baptifm. nothing, becaufe it fl retches the words of the A- poftles beyond their jufl meaning, which was to let both Jc-jjs and Cbrijliaus know (not that their In- fants were iinprofitably Circumcis'd or Baptiz'd, but j that there was no refting in external Circii?ncifi- on or Baptifm. But farther, had not the Church been alwaies in polTcfTlon of this pradice, or cou'd any time be fhew'd on this fide the Apoftles, when it be- gan •, nay, cou'd it be prov'd that any one Church in the World did not Baptize Infants^ or that any confiderable number of Men fotherwife Ortho- dox^ did decline the Baptizing of them upon the fame principles that thefe Men do now : then I fhou'd fufped:, that their arguments are better than they really are, and that Infant- Baptif7n might polTibly be a deviation from the Rule of Chrift. But fince it is fo Univerfal and Antient a pradlice, that there never was any Church, Ancient or Mo- dern, which did not pradlice it ; it can be nothing lefs than an Apoftolical pradlice and tradition. If it be faid, that F^//^ Apoftles and Falfe Teachers brought in Jnfant-Baptif?7i in the very firft Ages •, I wou'd fain know, how it came to pafs that the very Companions and Contemporaries of the A* poftles, and the Ancient Saints and Martyrs, who wrote againft other Herefies, pafs'd it over in fi- lence, tho' v/e are fure from IrencEUs and Tertidiian^ that it was (a) pra6lis'd in thofe early times. 'Tia impolTible, that they fliou'd all confent in fuch a dangerous Error, or that they fhou'd all peace- ably and tamely fubmit to it without oppofition, (a) See Stiicerus in the words ccvoty/r.yjcr.'s and TrxXtf^TjrUt IU7i^rr,orid on Matth. ig. 28. John 3. _f. Sel(le7} Dc Jure, Ith.z, c. 4. VcJJius'Dc Baptirmo, />. i8k or Of Infant - B apt ifm. 117 or that fuch an alteration fliou'd be made with- out obfervation, no body can tell how or when. Certainly thofe places of the Neiv ^eftament^ which require a profelTion of Faith and Repentance in grown Ferfons before Baptifm^ were underftood by the ancient Fathers : and yet they never conclu- ded from thence, that Infants ought not to be Baptiz'd. But if the Scriptures were doubtful in the cafe, I appeal to any Man, whether the har- monious praAice of the ancient Churches, and the undivided confent of the Apoftolical Fathers, be not the befl interpreters of them. Let any modelt Perfon judge, whether it be more likely, that fo many famous Saints and Martyrs, fo near the Apoftles times, fliou'd confpire in the pradife of Mock-Baptifm, and of making fo many Mil- lions of Mock-Chriilians ; or that a little Sedl fhou'd be in a grievous Error. The brevity which I defign, will not permit me to recite the Authorities of the ancients, and therefore I refer the Reader to Cajfander^ and Voffius De Baptifm, Difp. 14. only I defire him to confider the follow- ing particulars. I. That 'tis hard to imagine, that God fhou'd fuffer his Church to fall into fuch a dangerous pradice, as our Adverliiries think Infant- Baptif7n to be, ^which wou'd in time Unchurch it ; and that, even while Miracles were '^jet extant in the Church and he hare them witnefs with fighs and wonders and divers gifts of the Hol'j Ghoft. And yet 'tis plain, that Irencrus^ Tertnllian, Origen and Cyprian^ who are witnefTes of Infant-Bap- tifin in thofe daies, do afTure (h) us, that Mi^ {b) See Iren^us Adv.Hxr.l. i. c.f6, 5-7. Tertull. Apol.«»^ad Scapul. Qr/^fw. adv. Ceifum,Camb. p. 34.62,80, 114, 127, 334, 376. Cyprian JidDonat.g«ifp. 14. deDapt. '' muQ-l^ Of Infant-Baptijm, 1 1 9 much more offended, if the Apoltles had exclu- ded their Children from BapDlm, as the Chil- dren of Unbelievers, and refused to Initiate them under the l>^ew '^eftament^ as they had alv/aies been under the 0/r/ ? Wherefore, fince among their ma- ny complaints upon the alteration of the Je-ivijh Cuftoms, we never read tliat they complain'd of their Childrens being excluded from Baptifm : we may better argue, that the Apoflles Baptiz'd their Children ; than we may conclude from the want of an exprefs example of Infant-Baptifm^ that they did not Baptize them. III. I am to prove, that '//i unlawful to fepa- rate fr 0771 a Churchy which appoints htfant-Baptiftn. Now it appears from what I have already faid, that Lif ant- Baptifm is a lawful thing, and there- fore 'tis a fin to ieparatc from that Church which coxmmands it •, becaufe the Church has authority to Ordain that, which may be done without fin. But farther. Infant Baptifm is not only law- ful, but highly requifite alfo. For purgation by Water and the Spirit feem equally necella- ry, becaufe Except a Man he horn again of Wa- ter and of the Spirit^ he cannot enter into the King- do7n of God, John 3. 5. And 'tis reafonable to think, that Children are capable of entring into Covenant, becaufe they are declar'd capable of the Ki}igdoinof God, Mark 10. 14. Nay, wemayjuft- ly conclude, that Children were Baptiz'd upon the Converfion of their Parents, after the Cuilom of the Jezvijh Church, becaufe the Apoftles Baptiz'd whole houfliolds, Aois 16. 15, 33. i. Cor. i. 16. For 'tis probable, that the federal holinefs of Be- lievers Children makes them Candidates for Bap- tifm, and gives them a right to it j becaufe the H 4 Chil. I20 Of Infant'Baptifm. Cl^ildren of Believers are call'd Ho/)', i Cor,y. 14, To which I may add other Texts, Pfal. 5. 5. Rom. 3. 2:^, 24. John 3. 5, 6. which have been alledg'd "by the ancients, both before and after the Pelagian Controverfy, to prove the Baptijhi of Infants ne- cefiTary to v/afli away their original fin, which makes them obnoxious to eternal death. See VofiT. Hifi, Pelag. p. 1. nef 6. /. 2. /, 2. I fay, it may be fairly concluded from thefe Texts, that Infant-Baptifrn is requifite : but then thefe Texts in conjun6lion with the pradlice of the ancient Church do Demonftrate that 'tis requifite •, becaufe the Church in the next ^ge to the Apoftles pradlis'd Infant-Baptif?n^ as an ApofloHcal tradition, and by confequence, as an inftitution of Chrift. I do not fay, that Baptifm is indifpenfably necefla- ry to the Salvation of Infants, fo that a Child dying unbaptiz'd thro' the carelefnefsor fuperflitionof the Parents, or thro' their miilaken belief of theunlaw- fulnefs of Infant-Baptifrn^ is infallibly damn'd ; but I affirm, that Infant-Baptifrn is in any wife to be re- tain'd in the Church, as being moft agreeable to the Scripture^ and the Apoftohcal pradice, and the in- ilitution of Chrifr. And if Infant-Baptifrn be not only lawful but fo highly requifite, as it appears to be •, then certainly 'tis unlawful to feparate from that Church wliich injoins it. IV. In the next place I ihall fhew, that '//V the duty of Chriflian Parents to bring their Children to Baptifrn ^ and in doing this I muft proceed, as I did in the foregoing particular. Since Infants are not uncapable of Baptifm, nor excluded from it by Chrifl ^ nay fince there are good reafons to prefume, that Chrift at lead allow'd them Baptifm as well as grown Perfons : therefore the command ^)f the Church makes it the People's duty to bring dieir' % Of Infant -B apt ifm, ? 2 1 their Children to Baptifm, becaufc 'tis lawful fo to do. But farther, Infant-Bap tifrn is highly expedient alfo. For, i. it is very beneficial to the Infants, who are thereby folemnly confecrated to God, and made Members of Chrift's Myftical Body the Church. Befides, they being by Nature Children of Wrath, are by Baptifm made the Children of Grace, and receive a right to eternal Life. I can- not deny, but they may be fav'd without Baptifm by the uncovenanted Mercy of God : but then the hopes of God's mercy in extraordinary cafes, ought not to make us lefs regardful of his fure, ordinary, and covenanted Mercies, and the appoin- ted Means to which they are annex'd. Nay, In- fants do by Baptifm acquire a prefent right unto all the promifes of the Gofpel, and particularly to the promifes of the Spirit's afllilance, which they Ihall certainly receive, as foon and as fad, as their natural incapacity removes. Now, fmce thefe are the benefits of Baptifm, and fmce Infants are capable of them •, let any im- partial Man judge, whether it is more for their benefit, that they fhou'd receive them by being Baptiz'd in their infancy, or fVay for them till they come to years of difcredon. Is it better for a Child that has the Evil^ to be touch'd for it while he is a Child, or to wait till he is of fuf- ficient Age to be fenfible of the benefit ? Or is it befl for a Tray tor's Child to be prefently re- flor'd to his Blood and Eftate, and his Prince's Fa- vor ; or to be kept in a mere capacity of being re- Ilor'd, till he is a Man ? I mufl: add, that Baptifm kies fuch an early pre engagement upon Children, as without the higheft bafenefs and ingratitude they cannot after- wards iiz Of Infant'Baptiftn. wards retrad. For tliere is no perfon of com- mon Ingenuity, Honour or Confcicnce, but will think himieif bound to (land to the obhgation which he contra6led in his Infancy ; when he was ib gracioufly admitted to fo many bleffings and privileges, before he cou'd underftand his own good, or do any thing himfelf towards the ob- taining of them. And therefore the Wifdom of the Church is highly to be applauded, for bringing them under fuch a beneficial pre-engage- ment, and not leaving them to their own liberty at fuch years, wlien Flefh and Blood wouM be apt to find out fo many fhif ts and excufes, and make them regret to be Baptiz'd. 2. Infant-Baptlfm is very Expedient, becaufe it conduces much to the Well-being and Edification of the Church, in preventing thofe fcandalous and Hiamcful delays of Baptifm, which grown Perfons wou'd be apt to make in thefe, as they did in for- mer times, to the great prejudice of Chriftianity. , Since therefore Infant- Baptifm is not only Law- ful and commanded by the Church, but moil. Ex- pedient in it felf, and moil agreeable to the pra- ctice of the Apoilles and Primitive Chriflians, and to the Will of Chrift ; it mud needs be concluded, that there lies the fame obligation upon Parents to defire Baptifm for their Children, as there do's upon grown Perfons to defire it for themfelves. For what Authority foever exa6ls any thing con- cerning Children or Perfons under the years of dii- cretion, laies at leail an implicit obligation upon Parents to fee that it be perform'd. For, if in the time of a general contagion, the Supreme Power fhou'd Command, that all Men, Women and Chil- dren, fhou'd every Morning take fuch an Antidote ; that Command wou'd obhge Parents to give it to their Of Infant -B apt ifm. %^^ their Children, as well as to take it themfelves. Juft fo the Ordinance of Baptifm being intended for Children as well as grown perfons, it mult needs o- blige the Parents to bring them to it. What I have here laid about the obligation, which lies upon Parents to bring their Children to Baptifm^ concerns all Guardians^ &c. to whofe care Children are committed. And if any ask, at what time they are hound to bring them to Baptifm ? I anfwer, at any time \ for the Gofpel indulges a diferetional lati- tude, but forbids the wilful negle6t, and all unrea- fonable and ncedlcfs delays thereof V. As to Couanunion with Believers^ who were Baptized in their Infanc^^ 'tis certainly Lawful, and has ever been thought fo •, nay 'tis an exceed- ing great fin to refufe Communion with them, becaufe that wou'd be a difowning thofe to be Members of CbrijVs Body, whom he owns to be fuch. Nothing now remains, but that I take off two objedions. Fir/?, 'Tis faid that hf ant-Communion may be pradis'd, as well as Infant-Baptifm. But I anfwer, i. There- is not equal Evidence for the Pra6life of Infant-Communion ; becaufe St. Cyprian is the firfb Author which they can produce for it, and then the Author of the Ecclefiafiical Hierarchy^ and Cyril of Jerujalem^ mention it towards the latter end of the Fourth Century^ and St. Aujlin ia the Fifth : whereas for Infant-Baptifm we have the Authority of St, Cyprian and a whole Council of Fathers, over which he prefided ; of Origen, Ter-^ tulUan^ IreyicBUS^ St. Jerom^ St. Ambrofc^ ^t. Chry- foftom^ St. Athanafius^ Gregory Nazianzen^ and the 'Third Council of Carthage^ who all fpeak of it as n thing generally pradis'd, and moft of them, as of a thing wjiich ought to he praoiis'd in the Church, I may 1 2 4 Of Infant- Baptifm. I may add, that none of the Four Teftimonies for Infant-Commtinion fpeak of it, as of an Apolloli- cal Tradition, as Origen do*s of hifant'Baptif?n, 2. There is not equal Reafon for the pra6lice of it. For perfons of all Ages are capable of Baptifm : but the Hol^ Eucharifi is the Sacrament of Perfe^ion^ inftituted for the remembrance of Cbrijl's Death and Paflion ; which being an a6t of great Know^ ledge and iPiety, Children are not capable to per- form. Nor is there an equal concurrence of Tra- dition, or the Authority of fo many Texts of Scripture for Infant-Communion ; it being ground- ed only upon John 6. 53. Except "je eat the Flejh of the Son of Man, and drink his Blood, 'je have no life in 'jou. Now 'tis doubtful whether this be meant of the Eucharift or no, becaufe it was not as yet inftituted : but if it be fo to be undcrflood, yet the fence of it ought to be regulated by the chief end of it^s inftitution. Bo this in remembrance of me. Nay, the Wefbern Church, difcerning the Miftake upon which Infant -Communion was grounded, have long fince laid it afide, tho' they flill continue the practice of Infant-Bapiifm. But in truth, the practice of hif ant-Communion is fo far from prejudicing the Caufe of Infant-- Baptifm, that it mightily confirms it ; becaufe none were, or cou'd be admitted to partake of the Hojy Communion, till they were validly Baptiz'd. And therefore the pradlice of Infant-Communion fully proves, that all the Churches, wherein it ever was, or Hill (c. I Cor. ti. 23, ^c. 1 3 S Of Kneeling at the Sacrament, or fhadow of a command is there in all the Hi- flory for the ufe of any gefture in the a6t of re- ceiving ? Since then the lloh^ Scripture is altoge- ther filent as to this matter, it's filence is a full and clear demonftration, that kneeling is not repugnant to any cxprefs command of our Lord, becaufe no gefture was ever commanded at all. But the Scotch Minifters Aflembled at Perth af- firm, that when our Lord Commanded his Difci-r pies to do this, he did by thofe Words Command them to ufe that gefture, which he us'd at that time, as well as to take, eat, drink, ^c. To this I anfwer, i. That if our Lord did fit at the In- ftitution fwhich we will fuppofe at prefent) yet there is no reafon to think, that He intended by thefe v/ords, do this, to oblige us to obferve this Gefture only, and not feveral other circumftances, which he obferv'd at the flime time, as well as this. For example, if the words may be interpreted thus, 3j this, that is, fit as Chrijl did -, why not thus alfo, Do this, that is. Celebrate the Sacrament in an Upper-room, in a Private-houfe, late at night or in the evening, after a full Supper, in the Com- pany of Tivelve at moft, and they only Men, with their Heads cover'd according to the Cuftom of thofe Countries, and with unleavened Bread ? There lies as great an obligation upon us to ob- ferve all thofe circumftances in imitation of our Lord, as there do's to fit. 2. Even the tvv^o laft of thofe circumftances are generally allow'd, but all the reft are mention' d in Scripture, and were mcft certainly obferv'd by Chrlft : whereas the ge- fture us'd by them is not mention'd, and what it was is very difputablc, as I ftiall afterwards prove. How then can any Man think himfelf obliged in Confcience to do v/hat Chrifi is not expreily faid to Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. 135 to do •, and not obliged to do what the Scripture exprefly faies he did? 3. 'Tis clear from St. Paul^ I Cor, II. 23, &c. that do this^ refpe6ls only the Bread and Wine, which fignify the Body and Blood of Cbrijly and thofe other a6lions fpecify'd by him, which are efTential to the right Cele- bration of that Holy Feaft. For when 'tis faid. Do this in rememhrance of me^ and this do as oft as Y drink it in rememhrance of ine^ and as oft as 'je eat this Bread and drink this Cup^ ye do fljcw the Lord^s Death till he come ; 'tis plain, that do thisy muft be reftrain'd to the Sacramental adions there mention'd, and not extended to the gefture, of which the Apoille fpeaks not a word. Our Lord Inftituted the Sacrament in Remembrance of his Death and PafTion, and not in Remembrance of his gefture in Adminiftring it : and confequently, do this^ is a general Command, obliging us only to fuch particular a6lions and rites as he had infti- tuted, and made nccellary to be us'd in order to this great end, viz. to fignify and rcprcfent his Death, and that bloody Sacrifice Vv^hich he cffer'd upon the Crofs for us miferable Sinners. Nay, the Pradice of our Difjenters proves, that no particular gefture is commanded. I^or there are many ferious andfincere Perfons among them, who profefs that { were they left to their liberty ) they cou'd ufe kneeling as well as any other gefture : but they think that an indifferent thing becomes un- lawful, when 'tis injoin'd by Authority. " I have already confuted this opinion : but 'tis certain, that by granting they cou'd ufe the pofture of kneeling, were it not injoin'd, and confequently that 'tis in it's own nature indifferent ; they do thereby grant, that there is no Command for any particular po- fture. I muft 14-0 Of Kneeling at the Sacrament, I muft add, that the Reform'd Churches of France^ and thofe of Geneva and Helvetia ftand, the Dutch generally fit, but in feme places, { as in Wefl-Fricfland ) they ftand. The Churches of the Bohemian and Auguftan Confeffion , which fpread through the vaft Countries of Bohemia^ Denmark^ and Szveden, thro' Norzvay, the Duke- dom of Saxony^ Litbuania and Ducal Pruffia in Poland^ the Marquifate of Brandenburg in Ger- many^ and feveral other places and free Cities in that Empire , do for the mofl part, if not all of them, ufe the Gefture of Kneeling. The Bo- be??iian Churches were Reform'd by John Hujfe and Jerom of Prague^ who fuffer'd Martyrdom- at Canftance about the year 1416. long before JLuthef% time ; and thofe of the Ausbourg or Au- guftan Confeffion were founded and reform'd by Luther^ and were the firft Proteflants properly fo call'd. But thefe Churches fo early reform'd and of fo large extent, did not only ufe the kneeling Gefture at the Holy Sacrament ; but they, as well as thofe of the Helvetic ConfciTion, did in three {h) general Synods unanimoufly condemn the fitting Gefture f eho' they eftecm'd' it in it felf lawful ) as being fcandalous for this remarkable Reafon, viz. becaufe it was lis'd by the Arians ( as their Synods call the Socinians ) in contempt of our Savior's Divinity, who therefore placed themfelves as Fellows with their Lord at his Table. And thereupon they de- fire and exhort all Chriftians of their Communi- on to change fitting into kneeling or /landing, both which Ceremonies we indifferently leave free, ac- (b) 1. ^f Cracow, Anno Dom. ^Sll- -• Petricow or Peter kaw, rrjS. Wiadillavv, 1583. cording Of Kneeling at the Sacrament, 141 cording as the cuftom of any Church has obtained, and we approve of their ufe without fcandal and hlame. Moreover rhey affirm, That thefe Soci- v\\VL\%who deny Chrifl to be God, were thefirfl that introduced Sitting at the Sacrament ' in their Chur- ches^ contrary to the practice of all the Evangelical Churches in Europe. Among all thefe Foreign Re- formed Churches I can find but one which u- fes Sitting, and forbids Kneeling, for fear of Bread- worfliip ; but yet in that Synod where- in they condemn'd Kneeling, they left it to the choice of their Churches to ufe Standing. Sitting, or an Ambulatory Gefture (as the French {c) do ) and at laft conclude thus ; Thefe Articles are fo fetled by mutual confent^ that if the good of the Churches require it, they may and ought to be chan^d^ augmented or diminiflo* d. What now fhou'd be the Reafon of this great Variety both in Judgment and Pra6lice touching the Gefture to be us'd at the Lord's Supper ? We cannot ima- gin, that an Afiembly of Learned and Pious Divines, met together on purpofe to confult how to reform their Churches according to the pure Word of God, fhou'd thro' weaknefs and inadver- tency overlook an exprefs Command of Chrift for the perpetual ufe of any particular Gefture, if any fuch there had been. Or (hall we be fo unchari- table as to think, that all thefe famous Churches wilfully paft it by, and eftablilli'd what was moft agreeable to their own humours, contrary to the known Will of God ? Wou'd they have given liberty to all of their Communion to ufe feveral Geftures according to the Cuftom of their feveral Churches, if our Lord had tied them to obferve \c) Harmon. 4. Synods of Holl. 14^ Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. but one ? Wou'd they declare ( as the Dutch Sy- nod doth ) that their injundlion might be alter'd, if the good of the Church fo requir*d ; if fo be Sitting had been exprefly injoin'd by our Lord, to be perpetually us'd by all Chriftians ? No un- doubtedly, they wou'd not •, we cannot cither in Reafon or Charity fuppofe it. The true Principle upon which all thefe Re- form'd Churches built, and by which they are able to reconcile all this feeming difference in this matter, is the very fame with that which the Church of Eiigland go's by in her Synods ; viz. ( d ) That as to Rites and Ceremonies of an indifferent nature , every National Church has Authority to injoin , change and abolifh them, as they in Prudence and Charity fhall think moft convenient for the fetting forth God's Glory, the Edification of their People, and the Decent and Reverent Adminiflration of the Ho- ly Sacrament. V/hofoevcr therefore refufes to receive the Sacrament according to the Conffi- tution of the Church of England, purely be- caufe Kneeling is contrary to the exprefs Com- mand of Chrifl: , muft condemn the Judgment and Pradice of all the Reform'd Churches be- yond the Seas, who all agree in this. That the Gefture in the Adl of Receiving is to be efleem'd an Indifferent thing -, and that whether we fit, or kneel, or ftand, or P».eceive walking, we tranfgrefs (d) Vid. Art. 5.1. Obft-Tvar. of the Trench and T)Htch Divines! on the Harmony ot Confefliions. Edit. Genc'v^ i68r. Seft. 14. p. 120, In hoc etiain run (fpcaking of Kneeling at the Sacra- ment) fu(im fuip[u» Efclefi^ likeriatem falyum r els jqtie?: dura ar^ m Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. 14^ no law of God \ and confequently they prove my Aflertion true. That Kneeling is n6 more contrary to any exprefs Command than any other Gefture -, becaufe they allow of all, as lawful in themfelves, which cannot confill with an exprefs Command for the ufe of any other Geilure what foe ver. Upon the whole matter, I think we may cer- tainly conclude, that there is not a tittle of a Command in the whole New 'Teftament to oblige us to receive the Lord's Supper in any particular pofture : and if any be fo fcrupulous, as not to receive it in any other Gefbure, but what is ex- prefly commanded, they muft never receive it as long as they live. Secomii}\ I fhall prove, that Kneeling is not a de- viation from ChrijVs example. This will appear, if we confider, i. that 'tis doubtful what Gefture our Savior us'd at the Inftitution of the Sacramxnt. For the Scripmre do's not inform us what it was^ and the Jews us'd variety of Geftures at the PafTo- ver ; and therefore, fince our Lord's Example can- not certainly be knovvn in this Matter, our Church cannot be charg'd with deviation from it. 2. Thofe who Kneel at the Sacrament in compliance with the Orders of the Church, do manlfdUy follow the Example of Chrift. For our Savior comply 'd with that PalTover-gefture, which the Jews then us'd, tho' it was not the fame that Vv^as us'd at the In- ftitution in Eg^pt : and his compliance may teach us, not to be fcrupulous about Geftures, but to conform to the innocent and prevailing Cuftoms of the Church, whcrefoever we live. And if Chriflians did walk according to this rule, they wou'd greatly pro- mote the peace and welfare of the Church of Chrift, and in fo doing procure quiet and peace to them- fclvcs, with unfpeakable comfort and iatisfadtion. But 144 Of Kfieelivg at the Sacrament, But fuppoflng our Lord did fit, as the Bijfen^ ters will have it ; yet his bare example do's not oblige all Chriilians to a like practice, i. Becaufe naked examples, without fome rule or x\oi^ ad- ded to them, to fignify that 'tis God's Will to have them confcantly follow'd, have not the force of Laws perpetually obliging the Confcience. And therefore, in this cafe, becaufe no fuch note is to be found, we are not tied in Confcience to a ftridt imitation of Chriil's Example. Thus the Exam- ple of our Savior do's not oblige us to defer our Baptifm till the Age of 30 Years, or not to re- ceive the Sacrament till a little before death ; and, I pray, what reafon is there to follow his Example m fitting at the Sacrament, any more than in thofe particulars ? 2. We are bound to imitate Chrifl in thofe things only which he has commanded : but where there is no command^ there is no necef- Jltj. Indeed Vv^e muil follow Chriil and his A- pofcles •, but in v/hat ? Why, in ading according to the Gofpel-Rule. An example may help to in- terpret a Law, but of it felf it is no Law. A- gainft a rule no example is a competent warrant : and if the example be according to the rule, 'tis not the Example, but the Rule, that is the Meafure of our aclions. 3. The bare Example of Chrift is no warrant for us to go by, becaufe he was an Extraordinary Perfon, and did many things which we cannot, and many which we muft not do. He fafced 40 Dales and 40 Nights, VvTOught Miracles, (^c. which we are not to pretend to. They fay indeed, we are hound to imitate Chrift and the commendable Example of his Apoftles^ in all things wherein it is not evi- dent^ they had [pedal Reafons moving them thereun- to^ which do not concern us. But I wou'd wil- lingly Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. 145 lingly know, how we iliall be ever able to diglnftuifh, when they a6led upon fpecial Reafons, and whac they were *, that we may know our Duty, if a bare Example without any Rule obliges us. And if we guide our felves by Scripture or Reafon in this matter, then they are the Meafurcs of the Exam- ple. Befides, if we are not to imitate them in fuch things, as they were mov'd to do upon fpe- cial Reafons, which did not concern us *, then we are obliged to imitate their Examples in fuch things as they did upon general and common Reafons, which concern us as well as them, or we are not obliged at all by any Example •, and if fo, then thofe Reafons are to be our Rule, to which we are to reduce their Examples. Unlefs we find fome general or common Reafons, we have no War- rant ("according to their own Principle) to follow their Examples : and when fuch Reafons do appear, then it's not the Example alone that obliges us, but Reafon that approves the Example. To bring their own Rule to the cafe in hand, how do they know but that our Lord Sate at the Sacrament for Special Reafons drawn from that Time and Place, or the Feaft of the PafTover, to which that Geflure was peculiar ? How do they know, but that our Savior wou'd have us'd another Geflure if the Sacrament had been Inftituted apart from the Paffover ? The neceflity of the time made the Je^w^ eat the PafTover after one fafhion in Egypt^ which af- terward ceafing, gave an occafion to alter it in Ca- naan j and how do we know,but that our Lord com- ply'd with the prefent necefTity, and that his Ex- ample ( if he did Sit ) was only temporary, and not defign'd for a Standing Law, perpetually oblig- ing to a like Pradlice ? If Cbrifi a6ted upon fpecial K Reafons, 146 Of Kneeling at the Sacrament, Rcafons, then we are not obliged, by their own Rule : and if he did not, let them produce the •Rcafons if they can, which make this Example oif Chriji of general and perpetual ufe, and to oblige all Chriftians to follow it. 4. 'Tis abfurd to talk of Chrijl's Example apart from all Law and Rule, and to make that alone a principle of duty diftin6t from the Precepts of the Gofpel, becaufe Cbrift himfelf alwaies govern'd his anions by a Law. For if we confider him as a Man, he was obliged by the Natural Law, as a Jew by the Mofaic Law, as the Mejjias by the Go f pel-Law. He came to ful- fil all Righreoufnefs, and to Teach and Pradlife the whole Will of God. If therefore we look only to his Example, without confidering the various capacities and relations he bare, both towards God and towards us, and the feveral Laws by which he flood bound, v/hich were the Meafures of his A6lions •, we fhall miferably miflake our way, and adt like Fools, when we do fuch things as he did purfuant to infinite Wifdom. Thus if we fhou'd fiibjed; our felves to the Law of Mofes^ as he did, we fhou'd thereby fruflrate the great defign of the Gofpel : and yet even this we are obliged to do, if his Example alone be a fufficient warrant for our a6lions. Thus it appears that Chriji's bare Exam- ple do's not oblige us to do any thing, that is not commanded. I fhall only add, that they who urge the Ex- ample of Cb'rift againft Kneeling at the Sacrajnent^ do not follow it themfelves. For our Savior pro^ bably us'd a Leaning Geflure ; and by what Au- thority do they change it to Sitting ? Certainly, our changing the Gefture is as warrantable as theirs. Nor is it enough to fay, that Sitting comes "nearer our Savior's Gefture than Kneeling 5 for if they keep Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. 147 keep to their own Rule, they muft not vary at all. The Presbyterians ( if one may argue from their Pradices to their Principles ) lay very little lirefs on cliis Argument taken from the Example of Chrifi. For tho' they generally chufe to Sit, yet they do not condemn Standing as Sinful, or Un- lawful in it fcif -, and feveral are willing to receive it in that polture, in our Churches •, which furely is every whit as wide from the Pattern our Lord is fuppos'd to have fet us ( whether he lay along or fat upright ) as that which is injoin'd and prac^tis'd by the Church of England There is too a Con- felfed variation allow'd of and pra6i:is'd by the ge- nerality of Diffenters^ both Presbyterians and Inde- pendents^ from the Inllitution and Pradlice of Chrifi and his Apoftlcs, in the other Sacrament of Bap- tifm. For they have chang'd dipping into fprink- ling j and 'tis ftrange, that thofe who fcruple kneel- ing at the Lord's Supper, can allow of this greater change in Baptifm. Why fhou'd not the Peace and Unity of the Church, and Charity to the Pub- lic , prevail with them to kneel at the Lord's Supper ; as much as mercy and tendernefs to the Infant's Body, to fprinkle or pour water on the Face, contrary to the firft Inllitution ? 'Thirdly^ kneelifig is not therefore repugnant to the nature of the Lord's Supper^ becaufe 'tis no 'Tabk' Gefture, The Sacrament is a Supper ; and there- fore, fay they, the Gefture at the Lord's Table ought to be the fame which we ufe and obferve at our ordinary Tables, according to the cuftom and fafhion of our Native Country : and by con- fequence, we ought to Sit., and not to Kneel, be- caufe fitting is the ordinary Table-gefture, accord- ing to the mode and fafhion of England. Here, by the way, we may obferve, that this K 2 -^^g"^' 148 Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. Argument overthrows the two others drawn from the Ccmmafid and Example of Cbrift. For, i . Diffe- rent I'able-geflures are us'd in different Countries •, and therefore, tho' Chrijl did Sit, yet we are not ob- liged to Sit after his Exa??iple^un\ds fitting be in our Country the common Table-geflure. 2. If the Nature of the Sacrament require a 1 able-gefture, and that gcfture in particular which is cuflomary -, then God has not Commanded any particular geflure, becaufe different Countries have different Table-geftures. However, I Ihall fully Anfwer this Argument drawn from the Nature of the Sacrament, by fhew- ing, I . What is the 'Nature of it. 2. That it do's not ahfolutely require a common 1^ able-gefture, 3. That Kneeling is ver'j agreeable to the nature of the Lord's Supper., tho^ 'tis no I'ahle-gefture, I, Then, the Nature of the Sacrament is eafily underftood, if we confider that the Scripture calls it the Lord's 'Table and the Lord's Supper. The Greek Fathers call it a Feafland a Banquet, becaufe of that Provifion and Entertainment which our Lord has made for all worthy Receivers. 'Tis ftyl'd a Supper and a Feaft^ either becaufe 'twas In- ftituted by Chrift at Supper-time, or becaufe it re- prefents a Supper and a Feaft ; and fo it is not of the fame nature with a civil and ordinary Supper or Feaft, tho' it bear the fame name. Three things are elfential to a Feaft, Plenty^ Good Co7npafty and Mirth : but the Plenty of the Lord's Supper is a Plenty of Spiritual Dainties ; and the Company confifts of tlie Three Perfons of the Trinity^ and good Chriftians *, and the Mirth is wholly Spiritu- al. So that the Lord's Supper differs in it's nature from civil Banquets, as much as Heaven and Earth, Body and Spirit difters in theirs. Farther, the Lord's Supper i^ a Feaft upon a Sacrifice for Sin, where- Of Kneeling at the Sacrament.l 149 wherein we are particularly to commemorate the Death of Chrift. 'Twas alfo inftituted in honor of our Lord, and to preferve an Eternal Memory of his wondrous Works, and to Blefs and Praile our Great Benefador. 'Tis alfo a Covenanting Rite between God and all worthy Communicants, and fignifies that we are in a flate of Peace and Friendlhip with him ; that we own him to be our God, and fwear Fidelity to him : we take the Sa- crament upon it (as we ordinarily fay) that we will not henceforth live unto ourfelves, but to him alone that died for us. 'Tis alfo a means to con- vey to us the Merits of C/jr//?'s Death, and a Pledge to alTurc us thereof Laftly, 'twas inftituted to be a Bond of Union between Chriftians, to engage and difpofe us to love one another, as our Lord loved us, who thought not his Life too dear, nor his Blood too much to part with for our fakes. This therefore being the Nature of the Sacrament, it follows, 2. That it do^s not ahfoltiiely 7'equire a common Tahle-gcfture. For if the Nature of the Sacrament, confider'd as a Feaft, neceflarily requires a Table- gefture \ then the nature of the Sncrament,confider'd as a Feaft, do*s as well require all other Formalities that are eflfential, either to all civil Feafls whatfoever, or to all Feaflis as they obtain among us : and confe- quently we mufl carve and drink one to another,^^, at the Lord's Supper^ as we alwaiesdo at other Feafls. But this our Dijfenters will by no means allow ; nor do they think themfelves obliged to obferve all the other Formalities of a Feaft, tho' they are as agree- able to the Nature of a Feaft, as Sitting is. It's not agreeable to the Nature of a Feaft, that one of the Guefts, and the principal one too, lliould fill out 'the Wine, and break the Bread, and di- ftribute it to the reft of the Society -, but this the K 3 i^#^^^- 150 Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. Dtjfenters generally allow of, and pra6life at the Holy Communion. It's not agreeable to the na- ture of aFeaft to fit from the I'able, difpers'd up and down the Room. In all publick P'cafls there are feveral Tables provided, when one is not big enough to ferve the Guefbs •, and yet the B: ([enters generally receive in their Pews, fcatter'd up and down the Church, and think one Table is fuffici- cnt^ tho' not capable of receiving the twentieth part of the Communicants in fome large Parifhes and numerous AfTemblies. And where there are {o few Communicants, that they may fit at the Ta- ble, they generally are againft it fefpecially the Preshsterians) and think they are not obliged to obferve that formality, tho' conflandy praclis'd at common and civil Entertainments. It's by no means agreeable to the nature of a Feafb to be forrowful. To miOurn and grieve at a Feaft is as indecent and unfutable, as to laugh at a Fu- neral. But fure our Diffentrrs will not lay, that to come to the Sacrament with a broken and con- trite fpirit ; to come with a hearty forrcw for all our Sins, which caus'd fo much pain and tor- ment to our dcarefh and befl Friend, our ever blefied Jefus •, to reBed upon the Agonies of his Soul in the Garden , the Bittcrncfs of his deadly Cup, the Torture he cndur'd on the Crofs, with a deep Sympathy and Trouble for the occafion ; they will not furely, I fiiy, affirm, that fuch a difpofition of our Souls is improper and unfutable to the Nature of this Feaft, which we folemnize in Commemoration of his Death for our fakes. This Sacrament is alfo call'd the Lord's Supper ; and confequently the nature of it requires the Even- ing, as the proper feafon for it : and yet our Dtjfen- ters 0/ Kneeling at the Sacrament, 151 ter^ make no fcruple of Communicating at Noon. Again, the nature of the Lord's Supper do's not necellarily require a Table-gefture, becaufe 'tis not of the ilime nature with common and ordinary Feafts. For we cannot argue from Natural and Ci- vil things to Spiritual -, or conclude that, becaufe they agree in their name, they are of the fame nature. And therefore, tho' the Sacrament is a P'eaft ', yet becaufe 'tis a Spiritual Feall, and not of the fame nature with common and ordinary Feafts, we muft not think, that fuch a gefture as is neccffary to the one, is alfo necefliiry to the other. 1 muft add, that the nature of the Lord's Sup- per, confider'd as a Feaft, do's not neceflarily re- quire a common Table-gefture in order to right and worthy receiving ; becaufe the Biffenters grant, that it may be worthily received Standings tho* Standing is no common Table-gefture. If any ftiou'd yet urge, that no gefture befides Sitting is agreeable to the nature of the Sacrament, confider'd as a Feaft : and that to ufe any other ge- fture wou'd profane the Ordinance ; I anfwer, that God calls the Pafibver a Feaft, Exod. 12. 14. and yet he commanded the Ifraelites to celebrate it with their Loins girt^ their Shoes on their Feet^ and their Stajf in their Hands \ w^hich were all flgns of hafte, but no Table-geftures either among the Jews or the Egyptians, Now to fay that God injoin'd Gcftures unfutable to that Ordinance, is to call his VVifdom in queftion : and to fay, that the Feaft of the Paftbver did in it's nature admit of feveral Geftures, is to yield all that I defire : for then the Sacrament, confider'd as a Feaft, will ad- mit of feveral too, and confequently do's not ob- lige us to obferve only a Feaft-gefture for the due celebration of it. K 4 2. Knee^ 152 Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. 3, Kneeling is very agreeable to the nature of the Lord-s Sapper^ the' 'tis no 'Tahle-gefture, i. Be- caufe 'tis a very fit Gefture to cxprefs Reverence, Humility and Gratitude by ; which Holy affe- ctions are requifite to the Sacrament. 2. Since Chrift ought to be Ador'd at the Lord's Supper for his wonderful kindnefs to us, therefore what- foever is fit to exprefs our Veneration, is not un- futable to the Sacrament ; and confequently bowing the Knees is proper, becaufe 'tis an external fign of Reverence. 3. Since lifting up our Hands and Eyes, and imploying our Tongues in uttering God's Praifes, are agreeable to the Lord's Sup- per •, why fhou'd Kneeling be thought unfutable, which is only Glorifying God with another part of our Body ? 4. The Holy Sacrament was In- ftituted in remembrance of Chrift's Death and Suf- ferings -, and therefore I defire the JDiJfenters to confider his Gefture in the very extremity of his Paflion, and to obferve, that he then pray'd Knee- ling^ Luke 22. 41. And furcly no fpber Perfon will fay, that 'tis improper to Kneel at the Sacra- ment, where we Commemorate thofe Sufferings, part of which he endur'd upon his bended Knees. 5. If we confider the benefits of the Sacrament, we cannot think Kneeling an unbecoming Gefture at it. If a grateful fenfe of God's infinite Mer- cy thro' the Merits and Sufferings of his Son, and of the manifold Benefits which our Lor^ has purchas'd with his moft precious Blood •, If a Mind deeply humbled under the fenfe of it's own Guilt, and Unworthinefs to receive any Mer- cy at all from the hands of our Creator and So- veraign Lord, whom we have by numberlefs and heinous Crimes fo highly provok'd and incens'd ^gainft us s If fuch an inward temper and difpo- fi^on Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. 1 5 3 fitlon of Soul becomes us at this Holy Feaft, ( which I think no Man will deny ) then furely the moft humble and reverential Gefture of the Body will become us too. Why fliou'd not a fub- miflive lowly deportment of body fute with this folemnity, as well as an humble lowly Mind? And this is that which our Church {e) declares to be the end of her Injun6lion, in requiring all the Communicants to Kneel, viz, for a ftgmfication of an humble and grateful acknowledgment of the Bene- fits of Chrift therein given to all ivorihy Receivers. The Commemoration of the Death and Pafllon of the Son of God will ftrike a Man, almoft naturally, in- to the humbleft pofture of Adoration ; But if any reverence be due at fuch a time, I am fure Sitting is a very unfit pofture to exprefs it. In a word, whatfoever Gefture beft anfwers the Principal ends of this Holy Feaft, do's beft fute it's nature, and ought to be beft efteem'd of, if we will be guided by the nature of the thing : and that Kneeling do's beft anfwer the Nature and Ends of the Lord's Supper, I think, I have fully prov'd. I fhall crave Leave to obferve in the laft place, that the Primitive Church had no fuch Notion of the neceffity of a Table-gefture, as the Diffenters maintain. There is not the leaft mention made of the name Tabley in any of their Writings, for the fpace of 200 years after Chrifl, For they call the Place, on which the Confecrated Elements ftood, the Altar ; and the Eucharift they call an Oblation and Sacrifice: and what connexion, I pray, is there between an Altar or a Sacrifice., and a Table-gefture? The Plffenters indeed (/) lay, I II I M (e) See the Declaration at tlie end of the Communion-Service ia theB.of Com.P-rayer.(/)D//'j!'«/e figatnJlKneelmg,2iXg. i .p. 6, 26, Sec. that 154 Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. that Kneeling or an Jdoring-gefture is againjl the dignity of Guejls^ and debars us the Privileges and Prerogatives of the Lord*s Table, fuch as facial ad- mittance and facial entertainment \ that it is againfi the piirpofe of Chrift, "ivhofe intention was to dignify us hy fetting us at his Table ; and much more of this nature : but it's plain that the Fathers thought o- therwife, as the Phrafes they ufe, and the Titles they give the Sacrament, plainly demonftrate. They call it as St. Paul doth, the Lord's Supper, the Kingly, Royal, and mojl Divine Supper, which im- port Deference, Diftance , and Refpetft on our parts ; the Dreadful Sacrifice, the Venerable and Un- bloody Sacrifice, the ^Fondefful and Terrible Myfleries, the Royal, Spiritual, Holy, For?nidable, Tremendous Table. The Bread and Wine after Confecration, are in their Language call'd the moft Myfterious, mojl Holy Food and Nutriment, the mofi Holy Things •, and the place where the Table flood, the inoft Holy part of the Temple, in allufion to that of the Jewiflj Temple, to which the Jews paid the higheft Reverence. The Bread in particular they fly I'd the Bread of God •, the Cup, the Holy and My- fterious, the Royal and Dreadful Cup, They advife the Communicants to Reverence thefe Holy Myfle- ries, to come with Fear and Trembling, with Sorrow and Shame, with filence and down-caft Eyes, to keep their Joy within, and to approach the Table with all the Signs and Expreffions of Reverence and Humility imaginable. How can thefe Speeches confift with that Social, FamiHar carriage at the Sacrament, which the Patrons of the Table-geflure contend for, as the Privilege of Guefls, and the Preroga- tive of the Lord's Table ? Fourthly^ Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. 1 5 5 Fourthly^ I am to ihew, that Kneelwg at the Lord's Supper is not contrary to the general Pra- ciice of the Church in the firjl Ages, This I fhall do by proving, i. That it^s highly probable^ that the Primitive Church us^d to Kneel in the Atl of receiving the Holy Sacrament^ as our cujtom at pre- fent is^ 2, That it^s inoft certain they us*d an Ado- ring Pofture, Firjl xhcn^ ifs highly probable^ that the Primitive Church us\i to Kneel in the a^ of receiving the Ho- ly Sacrament, I have already fhewn, that the Scrip- ture do's not inform us, what Gellure was us'd at the Inftitution of the Lord's Supper : and I de- fire thofe, who contend for a common Table-ge- fture, and pi-rticularly Sitti?7g^ to obfervc, that the Primitive Church thought fitting to be a very ir- reverent Pofture in the Service of God. The La- odicean Synod, finding great inconvenicncies to arifc from the Lovc-Feajts^ which were kept at the fame time with the Lord's Supper^ forbad the faid F'eafts, and the lying upon Couches in the Church, as their manner was at thofe Feafts. The fame Pradice v/as forbidden by the Council of Carthage^ c. 28. and the Decree was Ratify 'd by the fixth 'Trullan Council, c. 74. and that under the pain of Excommunication. Now the Rtafons, upon which 'twas forbidden, were in all probability taken from the diforder and irreverence, the animofities and excefs, that accompany'd thofe Feafts. Juftin Martyr^ who liv'd in the Second Century, faies, IVe rife up together and fend up our Prayers^ Apol. 2. from whence 'tis clear, that they did not Sit : but in m^oft other places they were not permitted to fit at all, not fo much as at the Lef- ions or in Sermon time \ as appears plainly from what 1 5 <5 Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. what Philoftorgius (g) obferves of Theophilus an Indian Bifliop, That among feveral irregularities, which he corre6led in thofe Churches, he particu- larly Reforni'd this, That the People were wont to ^it, when the Leffbns out of the Go/pel were read ttnto them •, and Sozomen {h) notes it as a very unufual thing in the Birtiop of Alexandria^ that he did not rife up when the Gofpels were read. Optatus Bifhop of Milevis (i) cites a paflage out of the 50. Pfabn, and applies it home to Par- menianus the Donatlfl^ after this manner ; 'Thou fit- tejl and fpeakefl againft thy Brother^ &c. in which place God reproves him that fits and defames his Brother : and therefore fuch evil Teachers as you, faies he, are more particularly pointed at in the Text, For the People are not Licensed to fit in the Church. Now if it had not been the general Cuftom to Hand the whole time of Divine-Service, and particularly at the Leflbns and Sermons, Par- menianus might eafily have retorted this Argument upon Optatus., as concluding nothing againft him in particular, but what might be charg'd in com- mon upon all private Chriftians, who fate in the Church as well as he. {k) Tertullian reproves it as an ill cuftom, that fame were wont to fit at Prayers ; and a little further in the fame Chapter he has thefe words ; Add thereunto the Sin of irreverence^ which the very Hea- thens^ if they did perceive well and underftand what we did, wou'd take notice of. For if it be irreve- rent to fit in the pre fence of., and to confront, one whom you have a high refpeui and veneration for \ how much (g) Hift. Ecclef. /. 3. p. 19. (h) Hid. Ecclef. /. 7. f- '9' C i 3 De Schifm. Don^t. /. 4. See alfo M^afpm^ not. in Optat. (k) De Orat.f. 12. ' more^ Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. 1$'^ more irreligious is this gefture in the Jight of the livitig Gody the Angel of Prayer 'yet ftajuling hy ? Un- lefs we think fit to upbraid God that Prayer has tir\i us. Eufehius alfo (l) commends Conftantine^ be- caufe when he was prefent at a long Panegyric con- cerning Chrijl^s Sepulchre, and was foliciced to fit down, he refus'd to do fo, faying, it was unfit to attend upon any Difcourfe concerning God with eafe and foftnefsy and it was very Confonant to Piety and Religion^ that Difcourfe s about Divine things fhou'd be heard ftanding. Thus much may fuffice for fatisfa(51:ion, that the ancient Church did by no means approve of Sit- ting, or a common Table-gefture, as fitting to be us'd in Divine Service, except at the Reading of the LeflTons, and hearing of the Sermon ; which too was only pradlis'd in fome places •, for in others the People were not allow'd to fit at all in their Religious Afifemblies. Which Cuftom is ftill ob- ferv'd in mofl, if not all, the Eaflern Churches at this day, wherein there are no Seats ereded or al- low'd for the ufe of the People. Now if the Apoftles had Taught and Eflablilli'd Sitting ('not only as convenient, butj as neceflary to be us'd in order to worthy receiving the Lord's Supper i 'tis moll ftrange and unaccountable, i . That there fliou'd be iuch an early and univerfal revolt of the Primitive Church from the Dodlrin and Confiiitutions of theApofiles. 2. That fo many Churches in diftant Countries, being perfedly Free and Independent one upon another, fliou'd unani- moufly confpire together to introduce a novel-cu- ftom contrary to the Apoftolical Pradlice and Or- (l) Dc Vit. Cct^pw. 1 4. der ; 1 5 8 Of Kneeling at the Sacrament, der ; and not only fo, but that, 3. They fhou'd cenfure the pradice and injunctions of infpir'd Men, as Indecent and unfit to be followed and obferv'd in the pubh'c Worfhip of God •, and all this without any Pcrfon's taking notice, or com- plaining or oppofing, either then, or in the fuccee- ding generations. As for Standing in time of Divine Service, both 2t Prayers and at the Sacrament, it's fo evident t'»at the Ancient Church did ufe it, that I Ihiall not endevor to prove it : and as for Kneeling^ 'tis plain the Primitive Chriilians us'dthat geflure alfo. For tho' on Sundays and the Fifty daies between Rafter and IVhitfunchiy they obferv'd Standing-, yet at other times they us'd the gefture of Kneel- ing at their public Devotions, as appears from the authorities cited at the (m) bottom. Now fince they were wont, in the firll Ages of Chriilianity, to receive the Holy Sacrament every day -, and fince {n) it was deliver'd and received with a Form of Prayer, and that on thofe daies V7\\^n they confbantly Pray'd Kneeling ; and fince it is probable, that when they receiv'd the Sacra- ment, they did not alter the Praying-poflure of the day •, therefore I conclude, that they receiv'd the Sacrament Kneeling upon thofe daies, on which they Pray'd Kneeling. For, fince Sitting was ge- (m) Cone. I. Nice. lo. Rcfp. ^u^ifl. inter Opera JuJlM^rt, p. 468. Trtull, de Coron. Mi!, c. j; Epithan. Expol". fivl. Carh. p. iiof. Edt. Par. Sr. fer. Pro), com. in Epift. ad Eph. St. ylnfl. Epift. 119. ad Jan. c. if. Tenull. de Orar. c, 3. («) See Trtfill. Apol. c. 39. p.47.Sr.^«y/. EpilL 118. Conft.ApoJl. 1. 2. c, 5-7. St Crjryfojl. Horn, \.\nc. i. Ep. i. ad Zi-v?. Sc. Amhrof. de Sa- cram./.4.. r. 5-. C ix^t-'s Pmn. Chrill. c. 11. Sr. Cy>-il Caiech MvO^. f. Sr. Aujl. R.-fp. ad Oro/: Qirxil. 49 Tom. 4. p. 6^1, BfiL iffi, Ew^/Vi^. Hift. Ecclcf. 1.6. c, IS- nerally of Kneeling at the Sacrament, 1 5 9 nerally condemn'd as an indecent and irreverent ge- flure by the Primitive Church •, and fince no Man in his Wits will fay, that Proflration, or lying flat upon the ground, was ever us'd in the ad of receiving, or ever fit to be fo •, therefore the po- ll u re of receiving muft be either landing or kneel- ing. And from hence I gather, that on their com- mon and ordinary daies (when there was no pe- culiar reafon to invite or oblige them to Srand at the SacramentJ in all likelihood they us'd Knee- ling, that is, the ordinary pofture. They us'd one and the fame poflure (viz. Standing) both at their Prayers and at the Lord's Supper on Sundays, and for Fifty daies after Eaftcr^ contrary to what was ufual at other times ; and why then Hiou'd any Man think they did not obferve one and the fame poflure at all other times ? viz. that as at fuch times they did conilantly Kneel at their Prayers, fo they did alfo conflantly Kneel at the Sacrament, which was given and receiv'd in a Prayer. From the flrength of thefe Premifes I may pro- mife my felf thus much fuccefs ; that whofoever fliall duly confider them with a teachable and un- prejudiced mind, will be much more apt to believe that the ancient Chriflians us'd at fome times to Kneel ("as v/e do) in the Celebration of the Holy Communion, than that they never did Kneel at all, or that fuch a poflure was never us'd or heard of, but excluded from their Congregations, as fome great Advocates for Sitting have confidently pro- claim'd it to the World. But Secondly^ Suppofe they never did Kneel as we do, • yet this is mofl certain, that they xeceiv'd the Lord's Supper in an adoring poflure ; which i6o Of Kneeling at the Sacrament, which is die fame thing, and will fufficiendy ju- llify the prefent Pradice of the Church, as being agreeable to that of pure Andquity. For the proof of this, numerous Teftimonies both oi Greek and Latin Fathers might be alledg'd •, but I will content my felf fand, I hope, the Reader too^ with a few of each fort, which are fo plain and ex- prefs, that he who will except againft them, will alfo with equal confidence except againft the White- nefs of Snow, and the Light of the Sun at Noon- day. And firft for the Greek Fathers, let the Tefti- mony of (o) St. Cyril be heard, than which no- thing can be more plain and exprefs to our pur- pofe. This holy Father in a place before cited, inftru6ls the Communicants, how to behave them- felves when they approach the Lord's Table, and that in the a6t of receiving both the Bread and the Wine. At the receiving of the Cup he ad- vifes thus ; Approach ('faies he) not rudely ftretcbing forth thy hanch, but bowing thy felf^ and in a po- fture of Worfhip and Adoration^ f^f'^^1 Amen. In like manner ( p) St. Chryfofiom fpeaks in his Fourteenth Homily on the Firft Epiftle to the Corinthians, where he provokes and excites the Chriftians of his time to an awful and reverential carriage at the Table of the Lord, by the Exam- ple of the Wife Men, who ador'd our Savior in his Infancy, after this manner ; 'This Body the Wife Men reverenced even when it lay in the Manger^ and approaching thereunto worfhipp^d it with fear and great trembling. Let us therefore who are Citizens of Heaven, i?nitate at leafi thofe Barba-- {o) St. Cyril. Hierofol. My flag. Catech. y. verfus finem. Tarif, Edit. p. 244. (p) 24 Horn. Ep. ad Cor. p. ^38. Tom. 9. Partf. rians 0/ Kiieeling at tPje Sacrament, i6i rians. But thou feeft this Body^ not in a Manger^ hut on the Altar ; not held by a Woman^ hut by the Pricj}^ &c. Let us therefore ftir up our felves^ and he horribly afraid^ and mamfefi a much greater Reverence than thofe Barbarians, left coming Ughfly^ and at a venture^ we heap fire on our heads. The iame Father in another place exprcfly bids them to fall down and Communicate^ when the Table is made ready, and the King himfelf there : and in order to beget in their Minds great and awful Thoughts concerning that Holy and Myflerious Feaft, he further exhorts them, (p) That when they faw the Chancel doors open^ then they fnoit'd fuppofe Heaven it felf was unfolded from ahove^ and that the Angel defended^ to behold, I fuppofe he means, their carriage and behavior at the Table of the Lord, and by giving their atten- dance to grace that Solemnity. With the Tefti- mony of thefe Ancient Writers Theodorit agrees, who in a Dialogue between an Orthodox Chrilli- an and an Heretic, brings in Orthodoxus thus dif» courfing of the Supper of the Lord. The myfleri- ous Symbols or Signs m the Sacrament (viz. Bread and fFine) depart not from their proper Nature ; for they continue in their former Eilence, and keep their former Shape and Form, and approve them- felves both to our fight and touch to be as they were before : (q) hut they are confider^d for fuch as they are made f that is, in refped to their Spiritual fignification, and that Divine ufe to which they were confecrated ) and are believed and ador\l as thofe very things which they are believ\l to he. Which words plainly import thus much, that {p) St. Chryf. Horn. 3. in Bp. ad Eplief. in moral, p. iiyi, (^) Dialog. 1. To 4. p. Sj-. Parif. Edit. L the X6X Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. the confecrated Elements were receiv'd with a Gerture of Adoration •, and at the iame time afTure us, that fucii a Behaviour at the Lord's Supper Wiis not founded upon the Dodrine of lYanfubllantia- tion. For there is not a more manifeft inftance in all the Ancients againft that abfurd Dodrine, which the Roman Church fo obftinately believes at this very day, than what 'Tbeodorit gives us in the words abovemention'd. Laftly, (to alledge no more out of the Greek Fathers^ that Story which Gregory Nazianzen {r) relates concerning Gorgonia^ will much confirm what has been faid, viz. That being fick, and having ufed feveral Medicins in vain, at laft fhe relblv'd upon this courfe. She went in the ftilnefs of the Night to the public Church, and having with her fome of the confecrated Elements which flie had referv'd at home, /he fell dozvn on her knees before the Altar^ and with a loud voice pray'd to him whom fhe Ador^d^ and in conclufion was healed, I am not much concern'd, whether the Reader will believe or cenfure this Miracle •, but it's certain, that this famous Father has recorded it, and commends his Sifter for the way fne took for her Recovery. This is home to my pur- pofe *, and clearly difcovers that Gorgonia did Kneel, or at leaft us*d a Pofture of Adoration, when fhe ate the Sacramental Bread. And with- out doubt in Communication fhe obferv'd the fame Pofture that others generally did in publick : She did that in her ficknefs, which all others us'd to do in their health, when they came to the Sacrament •, that fj, She kneeled down. {y) Orat.ittlaud.Gor^ow.p, l87.Panr. Edit. For V. Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. \Ci For it can't be fiippos'd, that at this time, when ^■\^ came to beg lo great a BlefTing of Ahnighty God in the pubhck Cliurch, and at the Altar, call'd by the Ancients I'he Place of Prayer^ flie wou'd be guilty of any misbehavior, and make ufe of a finguiar Pollure, different from what was gene- rally us'd by Chriftians when they came to the fame place to communicate, and pray over the grent Propitiatory Sacrifice > which they lookt upon as the mod powerful and effedual way of praying, the moft likely to render God favourable to them, and to prevail with him above all other Prayers, which they offer'd at any other time, or in any other place. So mucli for the Authorities of the Greek Fathers, who were Men eminent for Learning and Piety in their Daies, and great Lights and Orhaments in the Primitive Church. With thefe tlie Latin Fathers fully agree in their Judgments concerning our prefent Cafe. And of thefe I wili only mention two' ftho' more might be pro- duc'd) and thofe very eminent and illuftrioUs Perfons, had in great veneration by the then pre- fent age wherein they flourilli'd, and by fuc- <^eeding Generations. The lirft is (f) St. Am- hrofe Bifhop of Milan, in a Book he wrote concerning the Holy Ghoft, where inquiring ^fter the meaning of the Pfalmift, when he ex- horts Men to exalt the Lord, and to worfliip his Footflool, he giVes us the fenfe in thefe words : That it feems to belong unto the my- ftery of our Lord's Incarnation \ and then goes on to fhew for what Reafon it may be accom- modated to that Myfbery, and at laft concludes thus i By the Footftcol therefore is the Earth to he (f) Ambr&f. deSp.Sana.l. 5. c. li. L 2 under-* 1 64 Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. ufiderjlood^ and by the Earth the hcdy of Chrifiy -ivhicb at this day too ive adore in the Sacra??tenty and ii-bich the Apoftles worjhipp'd in the Lord Je- fus^ dec. St. Ji/Jlin ( Bilhop of Hippo ) Com- ments on the very fame words, and to the fame purpofc. For thus he refolves that Queftion, How or in what Senfe the Earth his Footftool,. may be worOiipp'd without impiety ? Bccaiife he took earth of the earthy for flefjj is of the earth ; and he took flejh of the fiefh of Mary \ and lecaufe he conversed here in the fiefh^ and gave us his very fufjj to cat unto Salvation. Nozv there is none vi'ho eateth that fiejh^ hut frft worJJnppeth. V/e have found then how this Footflool may he a- do'r'd i fo that we are fo far from finning hy ado- ring., that we really fin if we do not adore. In the Judgment therefore of thefe Primitive Bilhops, we may lawfully adore at the Myfteries, tho' not the Myfteries themfelves •, at the Sacraments, tho' not the Sacraments themfelves ; the Crea- tor in the Creature which is fandlify'd, not the Creature it felf i as a late (/) Proteftant Writer of great Learning and Quality among the French^ diftinguifnes upon the forecited words of Saint Jmhrofe. I think it appears evident from thefe few Inftan- ces, that the Primitive Chriftians us'd a pofture of adoration at the Communion in the a6t of re- ceiving. It v/ere eafy to bring a cloud of other Witneffes, if it were nece0ary fo to do, either to prove or clear the caufe in hand : but fmce there is no need to clog the Difcourfe with nu- merous References and Appeals to Antiquity, it wou'd but obfcure the Argument, and tend in all {t) Phil. Mwmy dn flejjis de Miila, l.^.c.y. f.-jix. likeli- V. Of Kneeling at the Sacrament, \6$ likelihood rather to confound and diflafl, than conr vincc and gratify the Reader. By what has been already alleg'd, the pradlice of our Church in Kneeling at the Sacrament is fuffi- cicntly jufiify'd, as agreeable to the Cufloms and Pradlice of pure and Primitive Chriffianity. For if the Ancients did at the Sacrament ufe a PofLure of Worfliip and Adoration ("which 'tis very plain they didj then Kneeling is not repugnant to the Pra6tice of the Church in the iirft and pureft Ages ; no, tho' wc fliould fuppofe, that Kneeling was never pra6lis'd among them ; which will be plain, if we cafl; our Eyes a little upon that heavy Charge which fome of the fierceft, but lefs prudent, Adverfliries of Kneeling have exhibited againft it. They ob- ject againlt Kneeling, as being an adoring Ge- ihire *, for they affirm, {it) That to Kneel in the ail of Receivings before the confcc rated Bread and JVine^ is formal Idolatr^j, So alfo to Kneel before any Crea- ture as d ?nemorative obje^ of God, tho* there be no intention of giving Divine adoration to that Creature^ is Idolatry. Now if the Primitive Chriflians may be fuppos'd to proftrate themfelves before the Al- tar upon their firft approach thereto in order to Receive, or immediately after they had Receiv'd the Bread and the Cup from the Hand of the Mini Her i or if they bow'd their Heads and Bo- dies after a lowly manner, in the a6l of Receiv- ing ; or if they receiv'd it ftanding upright, and ate and drank at the Holy Table with their Hands and Eyes lifted up to Heaven ; then they incurr'd the Guilt of Idolatry, as well as vv'e who Kneel at the Lord's fupper, in the Judgment of thofe [u) Gillcfp.p. 16'), 172. Altar. Damaf. p. 801, Rutherf. Di- vine Right of Ch. Gov. c. I. Qu. 5-. Se^ft. i, 3. L 3 ScoUb 1 66 Of Kneeling at the Sacrament, Scotch Cafuifis j and by Confequence, Kneeling at the BlefTed Sacrameni; according to the Cuftom of our Church, is not contrary to the pradice of the Chriftian Church in the firft and pureft Ages. For all thofe Poilures before mention'd were poftures of Worfliip and Adoration, and us'd lis fuch by the Primitive Chriftians •, efpecially ilanding, which is allow'd by the [w) Patrons of fitting, to be anciently and generally us'd in time of Divine Worfliip, and particularly in the A eft of Receiving. To conclude all with an Inflance in their own Cafe about a common Table-geilure^ let us fup- pofe the Primitive Chriftians in fome places did re- ceive the Holy Sacrament fitting, or lying along upon Beds, according to the ancient Cullom in thofe Eailern Countries at their comjmon and or- dinary Tables i let us put the cafe that in other places they fate crofs-legg'd on Carpets at the Sa- crament, as the Perfiam and 'T'urks eat at this day j or that they rcceiv'd {landing in other places, after the common mode of FealHng -, which we wili fuppofeonly at prefent. Cou'd any Man now objed with reafon againfr the lawfulnefs of fitting upright at the Sacrament upon a Form or Chair ("according to the Cuftom of £//^/^//^,) as being contrary to the Pradice of all the Ancients, who never fate at all J Ko certainly. For tho' they dilTer from the An- cients as to the fite of their Bodies, and the par- ticular m.anner of Receiving ^ yet they all confent in this, that they receive in a common Table-Ge- Hure. They all obferve the fair^e Gefture at the Sa- crament, that they conilantly obferv'd at their Civil (vp) GiUffMff. againilE, Po. Cer.r. loic Difp. of Kneel, p. 9^. Feafl^ V. Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. 1 67 Feafts and ordinary Entertainments in the feveral places of their abode. And fo I fay in the pre- fent Cafe ; what tho' fome of the Primitive Chriftians flood upright at the Sacrament, and others bow'd their Heads and Bodies in the ad: of Receiving, and none of them ever us'd Kneeling ? Yet they and we do very well agree for all that, becaufe we all receive in an adoring or worfhip- ping Pofture. It is one and the fame thing vari- oufly expreft, according to the modes of the difie- rent Countries. Fifthl^^ and laftly, I am to Prove, that Kneeling is not therefore unlawful^ becaufe 'twas firft intro^ duced by Idolaters^ and is Jlill notorioujly abus'd by the Papifls to Idolatrous ends and purpofes. This will appear, if we confidcr, i. That it can never be prov'd, that Kneeling in the adl of receiving was brought in by Idolaters, as is pretended. 2. That 'tis not finful to ufe fuch things, as are or have been notoriously abus'd to Idolatry. 1. Then, it can never be prov'd, that Kneeling in the adl of receiving was brought in by Idola- ters. I have already made it very probable, that the Primitive Chriftians receiv'd the Sacrament Kneeling -, and I hope our Bijfenters will not charge them with Idolatry. I know, that they pretend the Kneeling- poftu re was brought in by Honor lus the 'Third ; but that which he brought in, was a reverent Bow to the Sacrament, when the Prieft elevates the Patten or Chalice, or when the Hoft is carry'd to any Sick Perfon, and not any Kneel- ing in the adl of receiving. For thefe are the very words of the Decree, {x) That the Priefis Jhou^d (x) Decret.Gr^j.l.j. tit.4.1. c. 10. L 4 .%- 168 Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. frequently inftruB their People to Bow them/elves re- verently at the Elevatmi of the Hoft^ what Mafs was celebrated^ and in like manner when the Prieft carrfd it abroad to the Sick. Nay, as Bifliop Sitillingfleet (y) faies, iho^ Kneeling at the Elevation of the Hoft he ftri^ly required by the Roman Churchy yet in the aii of receiving it is not ; as manifeflly appears by the ■ Pope's 7nanner of receivings which is not Kneeling^ hit either Sittings as it was in Bonaventure'j tiine \ cr after the fajloion of Sittings or a little Leaning upon his T^hrone^ as he doth at this day. If any fnou'd ask, when the Gefture o^ Kneeling came in, I confefs I cannot certainly tell : but this is no argument agarnft., but rather /^r, the ancient and univerfal ufe of it. Novel cuftoms are eafily traced to their Originals : but generally we cannot tell from whence the mioft ancient ufages of any Country are deriv'd. However, I am fo far from thinking fas our Dfj'enters do) that Kneeling owes it's birth to the Doclrine of Tranfibflantiaiion, that I verily be- lieve, that the Kneehng or Adoring Gefture us'd by the ancient Church in the Ad of receiving, did very much ('among other things) conduce to beget and cherifli in the minds of fuperftiti- ous and fanciful Men, a conceit, that Chrijl was really and corporally prefent at the Sacrament ; which conceit, by fubtil and inquifitive heads, was in a little time improved and explain'd after this manner : That after the Elements of Bread and Wine were confecrated, they were thereby changed into the fubftance of Chriji's natural Body ^nd Blood, However, 'tis plain that the Patrons (v) Unreafena^, of ^e far at, p. if. ^^ Of Kneeling at the Sacrament. 1 69 of Tranfuhftantiation did very early make ufe of this very Argument, to prove that they taught and bcHev'd no more than the Primitive Bifliops and Chriflians did. For what elfe cou'd they in- tend or mean ffay theyj by that extraordinary Re- verence and Devotion, which they manifefted when they receiv'd the Dreadful Myfteries ("as they call'd the Bread and WineJ if they were bare and empty Signs only, and not chang'd into the very Body and Blood of Chrift ? Which is in Effed: the very Argument us'd by (z) Algerus^ a flout Cham- pion for Tranfubftantiation. And (a) Cqfler^ an other Popi/h Writer, is fo far from faying, even af- ter- T^ranfuhftantiation took place, that the Fope in- troduced it, that he thinks it an ancient Cuftom continu'd from the times of the Apofblcs. But, II. Suppofe it were otherwife, yet 'tis not finful to ufe fuch things, that are or have been notorioufly abus'd to Idolatry, as I fhall fliew in the next Chap- ter. I fhall only obferve at prefent, that if it be fmful to Kneel at the Sacrament, becaufe that Ge- llure has been, and is notorioufly abus'd by Papifts to Idolatrous ends •, then Sitting is alfo fmful, which is contended for with fo much Zeal. For the Pope himfelf fits in the ad of receiving, as was before noted ; and that for the fame Reafon (faies a {h) Popijh AuthorJ which our Diffenters urge for Sitting, viz. becaufe the Apoftles fate at the firfb Inftitution of the Sacrament. And eve- ry Priefl, by the order of the Mafs Book, is to partake ftanding at the Altar, and not Kneeling there. Nay, if Kneeling be unlawful, becaufe it has been abus'd to Idolatry y then we mud ne- (x) Alger, de Sacramentis, 1. 2. c. 5. (a) Cojler. Enchirid p. ^5-3. Edit. 15-90. [L)Alex. H/i/^^deMifla, />. 2. ^«p/?. io.p.4. VCF 170 Of Kneeling at the Sacrament, ver receive the Holy Sacrament. For we mull re- ceive in ibme convenient pollure, ftich as Kneelingy Sittifig^ Difjuml'lng^ Standing ; and yet every one of thefe, either has been or is, notorioufly abus'd by Heathens and Papifts to Idolatrous ends. I hope, I need not add, that it would be very unjuft to fay, that our Kneeling is an a6l of Wor- fhip to the outward Elements i when the Church lias declar'd this to be Idolatry to he abhorred of all Faithful Chrifiians. I fhall conclude this Chapter with the opinions of the Diffenting Writers. Mr. 'Tombes has under- taken to fhew, that whatever the Gefture of our Savior was, yet we are not obliged to it, Theod^ p. r68. *'ris granted \yjy\x, Ba'ins^ Chriftian Lett. 24. and Mr. Bayl\\ DifTwaf. c, 2, 5. that the na- ture of the Ordinance do's not make Sitting necef- fary, or forbid Kneeling \ and Mr. Bains, ibid, grants that Kneeling is not Idolatrous ; and Mr. Cart^ Wright, who thought it inconvenient, yet did not think it unlawful, Harmon, on Luke ii, 14. Laftly, Mr. Baxter, Chriftian Dir. part 2. f, iii. ([ueft, 3 . fe^. 40. faies, For Kneeling, I never heard any ihing yet to prove it unlawful. If there be any thing, it mufi be either fome Word of God, or the nature of the- Ordinance which is fuppos^d to be contradiofed. But^ I , there is no word of God for a?iy Gejiiire, nor a^ gainft any. Chrift'j Example can never be proved to oblige us more in this, than in many ' circumftances^ that are confefs^d not obligatory -, as that he deli- ver^d but to Mimfiers, and but to a Family, to Twelve, and after Supper, and on <:? Thurfday-;//^^/, and in an upper-room, &c. and his Gefture was not fich a Sitting as ours. And, 2. for the yiature of the- Ordinance, it is mixt : and if it be lawful to take a Pardon from the King upo}$ our KnecSy I know not V. Of otir AgneingisoiththeCh.of Rome, 171 what can viake it unlawful to take a Seal'd Pardon from Chrift (by his Emhajfador) upon our Knees, CHAP. Vlll. The Objection of our Symbolizing or yjgree^ ing with the Church of Rome yinjwer d. BU T, fay the Dijfenters^ there is fo great an agreement between your Church and the Church of Rome^ that we cannot think com- munion with your Church to be Lawful. They tell us, that our lirft Reformers were indeed excel- lent and worthy Perfons for the times they liv'd in ; that what they did, was very commendable, and a good Beginning ^ but they were forc'd to comply with the neceffities of the Age, which wou'd not bear a compleat Reformation. They left a great deal of Popifh trafh in the Church, ho- ping by degrees to reconcile the Papifls to it, or at leaft, that they might not make the Breach too wide, and too much prejudice or enurange them from it : but we now live under better means, have greater Light and Knowledge, and fo a fur- ther and more perfecSl amendment is now neceflary. Now I cannot but inwardly reverence the judg- ment, as well as love the Temper of our firft Re- formers, who in their firft Separations from Ro7ne^ were not nice or fcrupulous beyond the jufl rea- fons of things, Doubtlefs they were in earnefl e- nough, as to all true Zeal againft the Corruptions of that Churchy when they Seal'd the well-grpunded of- fence they took at them, with their warmed Blood ; ^nd cheerfully \inderwent all the hardfhips that the 1 7 2 Of OUT Agreeing with the Primitive Chriflians fignaliz'd their Profefllon with, rather than they wou'd intermix with Rome^ in any iilage of Worlhip or Article of Faith, that had the lealt favour of Idolatry, Superftition, or falfe Religion at all in it. And yet thefe Good and Wife men, when they had the Power and Op- portunity of Reforming wholly in their hands, being equally jealous of Enthiijiafm^ as they were of Supeyflllion, wou'd not give themfelves up to fuch fantafiic Antipathies^ as to abolilh this or that Cuftom, merely becaufe it had been us'd a- mong the Papifis, if jbme other very fubftantial Reafon did not plead againfl it. And verily, had they not alwaies us*d thefe temperate and unbyafs'd methods of Reformation, they wou'd not fo eafily have juftify'd themfelves to their Adverfaries, or the World •, or have made it fo evident Cas by their prudent conduct they did) that v/hat was done by them, was from the mere urgencies of Confcknce and Reafon, and not the wantonnefs of Change and Innovation. So that, where any mean honeflly fas I doubt not but many of thofe do, that Diflent from us) they ought to have their Reafon very well awake, that the mere ch3.rgc of Popery upon any difputed point, may not fo prejudice them in their inquiries into things, as to leave no room for mature Confide- ration. However, that I may fully anfwerthis objedtion, drawn from our agreement with the Church of Rome^ I fhall endeavor to Ihew, i. That there is- a vaft diftance between ihe Churches of England and Rome. 2. Hvac a Churches Symbolizing or agree- ing in fonie things with the Church of V^omt^ is no "jjarrant for feparation from the Church fo agreeing. 3. That the agreement between the Churches of Eng- land the Church of Pvomc- 175 land and Rome is in no wifefiich^ as wilhnake Com??iU' 7iion with the Church of England unlawful, I. Then, I fhall fhew, that there is a vafl difiance between the Churches of England and Rome ; as ap- pears by our Church's having renounc'd all Com- munion with Rome^ and utterly caft off the Pope's Power. But I lliall deicend to particulars, and fliew the vail difrance between them, Firjl^ In all thofe Doofrines and Praolices^ where- h'j the Church of Rome deprives her Me?nhers of their due Liberty^ and miferablj enflaves them. For, i. She denies them all judgment of difcrction in mat- ters of Religion, and binds them all, under pain of damnation, to 5^/ot^ her infallible : but our Church permits us to prove all things^ that we may holdfafi that which is good •, fhe difclaims all pretence to in- fallibility^ and owns her felf to be obnoxious to er- ror in matters of Faith. 2. The Church of Ro7?ie impofes a moft fiavilli drudgery in the vaft multi- tudes of vain and childifli, odd and uncouth Rites and Ceremonies, which a Man wou'd wonder how they couM invent. The like may be faid of their cruel Penances, in impofing of which the Priefls are arbitrary. But our Rites are exceeding few^ plain, eafy, grave and manly \ founded on the Pra6lice of the Church, long before Popery ap-^ pear'd in the World. Our Sacraments are but two ; and confequently we are not burden'd with the fuperftitious Fopperies of the other five PopifJj ones. In fliort, our Rites are agreeable to the Rules of doing things decently^ and in order, and doing all ■ things to Edification. Nor do's our Church impofe them flike the Church of Rome) as necelTary, and as parts of Religion, but as merely indifferent. .and changeable things. As for our Penances, 'tis necdlefs tq Itiew that they are not cruel, like thofe of t74 Of our Agreeing -Ji^ith of Rome, 3. The Church of Rome fubje^ls her Members by feveral of her Do(51:rincs to enflaving palTions. For infiance, Purgatory fubjeds them to Jear^ and auricular confeffton to fljavu\ and the de- pendence of the efficacy of the Sacraments upon the Pncft-s intention expofes them to great ansiety. But our Church reje6ts the Dodrines of Purgatory, and the dependence of the efficacy of the Sacraments upon the Priejl^s intention \ and do's not oblige her Mem- bers to Confcfs their fms to Men, but when for the rehef of their Confciences, or making fatis- fadion, i^c. it is their duty fo to do. 4. The Church of Rome maintains Licentious Principles and Pradlices, which our Adverfaries cannot charge ujpon the Church of England. Secondly^ In all thofe Do5frines and Pra^ices^ ^ in which the Church of Rome is juftly charged with plainly contradicting the S'ripture, For inflance, our Church lejecrs and utterly abhors the Popifh Dodirines and Fradlices of hnage-worfhip, Livocation of Saints, Tran/ubftantiation, Pardons, Indulgences^ Sacrifice of the Mafs, denying the Bible to the Vulgar^ Prayers and Sacraments in an unknown 'tongue, rob- bing the Laity of the Cup in the Lord''s Supper, pro- hibiting Marriage to Priefis, Merit, Supererogation^ making funple For jilcation a mere venial fin ; damning all that are not of her Cojnmunion, &c. Nor is there any Church, that more feverely condemns all inftances of unrighteoufnefs and immorahty,- than the Church of England do's. thirdly. In their public Prayers and Offices. To Ihew this in all particulars wou'd be a tedious task ; therefore I lliall inftance only in the office of Infant'Baptifm, by v/hich the Reader may judge of the reft Before the Church) of Rome. if^ Before they go into the Church, after many- preparatory prelcriptions, the Priefi being dreft in a SurpUce and purple Robe, calls the Infant, faying, what askefi tbou^ &c. the Godfather anfwers. Faiths P. What JJjalt thou get by Faith ? G. Eternal Life. P. If thou therefore^ &c. Then the Priefi blows three gentle puffs upon the Infant's face, and faies. Go out of hiniy O unclean Spirit^ &c. Then Crofs- fing the Infant's Forehead and Bread, he faith. Receive the fign of the Crofs^ &c. Then he praies^ that God 'u.wuld alwaies, &c. And after a long Prayer ('the Priell laying his Hand on the Infant's Head) comes the idle and profane form of the Bcnedi5iion of Salt ', viz. / conjure thee^ O creature of Salt, iji the Name, &c. with many Croffings. Then he f>uts a little Salt into the Infant's mouth, faying, -^ake thou the Salt of Wifdoin ; fand adds mofl impiouilyj he it thy Propitiation unto Eternal Life^ Af;er the Pax tecum he praies, that this Infant, &c. Then the Devil is conjur'd again, and moft wofully be-caird. Then the Pried CrofTes the Infant's Forehead, faying, And this ftgn, dec. Then he puts his Hand on the Infant's Head, and put« up a very good Prayer. Then he puts part of his Robe upon the Irl- fant, and brings him within the Church, faying. Enter thou, &c. Then follow the Apojlles Creed and the Pater nofter. Then the Devil is conjur'd again -, and the Prieft takes fpittle out of his mouth, and therewith touches the Infant's Ears and Noflrils, faying, &c. Then he conjures the Devil again, faying, Repacking, O Devil, &c. Then he asks the Infant, whether he renounces the De- vil, &c. Then dipping his Thumb in Holy Oyl, and anointing the Infant with it in his Bread and betwixt his fhoulder.s, he faies, / anoint thee, &c. Then 17<5 Of our Agreeing "with Then he puts ofThis Purple Robe, and puts on ano- ther of JVbite colour, and having ask'd four more queflions, and rcceiv'd the Anfwers, he pours wa- ter thrice upon the Child's Head, as lie recites over it our Savior's Form of Baptifm. Then dipping his Thumb in the Chrifm or Holy Oirit- inenty he anoints the Infant upon the Crown of his Head in the figure of a Crofs, and praies, O God Omnipotent^ 6ic. Afterwards he takes a white linnen cloth, and putting it on the Child's Head, faies. Take the white Garme/it, &c. Laflly, he puts into the Child's or his Godfather's Hand, a lighted Candle, faying. Receive the burning Lamp^ &c. Be- fides thofe things which are in the Common Ri- tual^ there are divers others added in the F aft or ale ^ which I fhall not mention. And now, if any Man . will read our Ojfice of Baptifm^ he will acknowledge, that no two things can be more unlike, than thefe two Offices are. Our Litany indeed has been Condemn'd by Bijfenters^ as favoring of Popijh Superftition ; but nothing is more falfe, if a Man compares it with the FopiJJj one, the greater part of which confifts in invocation of Saints and Angels. But the Brevity I am confin'd to in this Difcourfe, will not permit me to abide any longer upon this Argument. Fourthly^ In the Books they receive for Canonical, For the church of Ro77ie takes all the Apocryphal Books into the Canon : but the Church of Eng- land takes only thofe, which the Primitive Church and all Proteftants acknowledge. 'Tis true, Ihe reads fome part of the Apocryphal Books for in- flruction of manners : but fiie do's not eftabliih any Dodtrine by theme Fifthly^ the Church of Rome. 177^ Fifthly and laft^^ in the Authorit'j on which they found their whole Religion. The Church of Rome founds the Authority of the Scriptures upon hcrowa infalhbility i and the Authority of many of her own Do6trines on unwritten traditions and the Decrees of her Councils, which flie will have to be no. Icfs infpir'd than the Prophets and Apoftles : but the. Church of England builds her whole Religion upon Scripture, which is her rule of Faith and Pradice. She Reverences ancient general Coun- cils : but do's not think them infallible. And as for that Authority, which our Church claims in Controverftes of Faith, by requiring fubfcription to 39 Articles, 'tis plain that fht means no more au- thority, than to oblige her Members to outward fubmiffion, when her decifions do not contradidfc any effentials of Faith or Manners ; but not an Authority to oblige Men to believe them infal- libly true ; and this is neceflary for the Peace of any Church, 'Tis true, fhe thinks it convenient, that none fliould receive Orders, be admitted to Benefices, &c. but fuch as do believe them, not all as Articles of our Faith, but many as inferior truths ; and fhe requires Subfcription as a Tefl of this belief: but the Church of Ro7ne requires all Perfons under pain of damnation to believe all her falfe and wicked Dodrines, as much as the moft undoubted Articles of Faith ; as may be k^n in the Creed of Pius the fourth. As to the Motives which our Church propofe« for our belief of the Dodrine of the Fioly Scrip-* tures, they are fuch as are found in the Scrips tures themfelves ; viz. the excellency of them, and the Miracles which confirm them : and as to the truth of the Matters of fa6t, fhe places it ("not in the teftimony of any particular Church, but; M ia 1 7 s Of our Agreeing with in the Universal tradition of Jews and Pagans^ as well as ail Chriftians, II. I am to fhew, that a Churches fymholiziftg or agreeing in jhne things with the Church of RomCj is no viarrant for feparation from the Church fi agreeing. The Dijfenters tell us, that thofe things which are indifferent in their own nature, do ceafe to be indifferent and become finful, if they have been us'd in the Church of Rome; For, fay they^ we read, Lev, i8. 2. After the doings of the Land of Egypt wherein ye dwell, Jhall ye not do, and af^ ter the doings of the Land of Canaan, whither I bring you, /hall ye not do, neither (hall ye walk in their Or^ dinances. Now, not to infift on the vaft difference of our Cifcumftances from thofe of the Ifraelites^ I anfwer, that it is an abfurd thing to iiiiagin, that the Jfraelites were fo bound up by God, as to be obliged to be unhke thofe People ill all their a61:ions. The things forbidden from verfe p^th. to 24^/6. are not indifferent j but In- ceftuous Copulations and a^s of uncleanefs ; and God do's exprefly enough reftrain that general Prohi- bition to thofe particulars, in faying, v. i\th^ Defile not your felves in any part of thefe things, for in all thefe the Nations are defiled, which I ca(i out lefore you. And they were therefore forbidden under the notion of things done after the doings of the Egyptians and the Canaanites, becaufe they were the doings of thofe People, whom they were exceedingly prone to imitate, even in their greatcfc immoralities. If it be faid, that in other places God forbids the Jfraelites to imitate the Heathens in things of an indifferent nature ; I anfwer, i. That fuppofing this were fo, it do's not from thence follow, that God intended to forbid fuch imitations in this place i I the Church oj Rome. 179 place ; the contrary being fo manifeft, as we have feen. But, 2. That God has any where pro- hibited the Ifraelites to fymbolize with Heathens^ in things of a mere indiiTerent and innocent nature -, I mean, that he has made it unlawful for them to obferve any fuch Cuftoms of the Heathdns^ mere- ly upon the account of their being like them^ is a very great miftake : Which will appear by confi- dering thofe places which are produced for it. On^ \sDeut. 14. i. Tou JJoall not ait your filves^ 7tor make any haldnefs between your Eyes for the dead. Now, as to the former of thefc prohibi- ted things, who fees not, that 'tis unnatural, and therefore not indifferent? And as to the lat- ter, viz. the disfiguring of themfelves by cut- ting off their Eye-brows, this was not merely in- different neither -, it being a Cuilorn at Funerals misbecoming the People of God, and whic4i wou'd make them look as if they forrow'd for the Dead as men without hope. Another place is Lev. 19. 19. ^hou floalt not let thy Cattle gender with a diver fe kind \ thou JJj alt not fow thy Ground with mingled Seed *, nor fhall a garment of linnen and woollen come upon thee. But I anfwer, that tho' thefe things are indeed indifferent in their own nature, yet they are forbidden ('not becaufe the Heathens us'd them, butj becaufe they were myflical inflruftions in moral duties. If it be objeded alfo, that God forbad the Jews^ Hof. 2. 16, 17. to call him by the Name of Baali^ which was a very good Name, and fig- nify'd only My Lord^ becaufe that word was a- bus'd in being the name of the Idol Baal \ I an- fwer, that God did not forbid the Name Baali^ becaufe an Idol was call'd by that name •, for he is call'd Baal in other places of the Hebrew Bihlr^ M 2 and 1 80 Of our Agreeing with and alfo y^h^ which the Heatbejts us'd for an Idol : but becaufc the word Baali fignifies an unkind husband or Lo?'d^ fuch as Baal was to his worfhip- pers ; whereas God Promifcs he wou'd be call'd JJhi^ that is, tenderly-loving husband •, for he de- fign'd to be kind to his People Ij'racl. I fhall add, that Baalim in the next verfe fignifies Idols^ which God there Promifes to defiroy. But fup- pofe that God forbad the Jezvs to call him Baal for the future, yet it might be becaufe of their vehement inchnation to the worlliip of Baal^ left by ufing it they fliould be tempted to worfliip him again : whereas our Ceremonies were us'd by the ancient Fathers without any Superftition or Ido- lalrv^ and we are not in dan^rer of returnino; to Po- ^>ery by retaining them. Weil ; but they fay, it appears from Scripture- precepts and examples^ that it is unlawful to fym- bolize Vv'ith the Church of Ro7ne in things that have been notorioujly ahus\l in Idolatrous and grojl^ Supcrfiitious Services. To this 1 anfwer, Firfi^ that it is not fmful to ufe thofe things which have been abus'd to Idolatry, as I iliall prove by thefe following Arguments. I. No abufe of any Gefture, tho' it be in the moft manifeft Idolatry, doth render that Gefture fimply evil, and for ever after unlawful to be us'd in the Worfliip of God upon that account. For the abufe of a thing fuppofes the lawful ufe of it ; and if any thing otherwife lawful becomes finful by an abufe of it, then 'tis plain that it is not in it's own nature finful, but by accident, and with refpedl to fomewhat elfe. This is clear from Scrip- ture ; for if Rites and Ceremonies, after they have been abus'd by idolaters, become abfolutely evil, and unlawful to be us'd at all i then the Jews finn'd the Church of Rome. 1 8 1 finn'd In offering Sacrifice^ ereding Jltars^ burning I)7CC}ifi to the God oi Heaven, bowing dozvn them- ielves before him, wearing ^Linnen Garment in the time of Divine Worfliip, and obferving other Things and Rites which the Heathens obferv'd in the worfhip of their falfe gods. If the JDiffenlcrs fliy, they except all fuch Rites as were commanded or approv'd of by God ; I re- ply, that fuch an exception avails nothing. For if the abufe of a thing to Idolatry makes it abfo- lutely finful, and unlawful to be us'd at all, then it's impolTible to dcllroy that Relation, and what has been once abus\i, muft ever remain fo ; that is, an infinite Power can't undo what has been done, and clear it from ever having been abus'd. And therefore I conclude from the Command and Approbation of God, that a bare conformity with Idolaters in ufing thofe Rites in the Wor- fliip of the true God, which they pradife in the worfliip of Idols, is not fimply finful, or formal Idolatry. For if it be ; God had obliged the Children of Ifrael by his exprefs Command to commit fin, and to do what he flri6llyand fevere- ly prohibited in other places. In truth, fuch a Pofi* tion wou'd plainly make God the Author of fin. 2. This principle intrenches upon Chriftian liberty^ ifSt-Pc-z/z/himfelf may judge, who tells us, i Cor. lo, 25, &c. that to the pure all things are pure ; and af- firms it lawful to eat of fuch things as had been of- fer'd up in Sacrifice to Idols, and to eat whatsoever was fold in the Shambles. And what reafon is there, why a Geflure fliou'd be more defiPd by Idolaters, than Meat which they had Offer'd up in Sacrifice to. Idols ? and why fhou'd one be finful and Idola- trous to ufc, and not the other ? Certainly St. Paul wou'd never have granted them fuch a privilege, M 3 if ^82 Of pur Agreeing with it he judg'd it Idolatrous to ufe what Idolaters had abus'd : efpecially confidering that he in the fame Chapter exhorts thern earneitly to /31 from Idolai-'-y. 3, This Principle fubjeds the Minds of Chrl- ftians to infinite fears, fcrgples and perplexities : whereas the true and great defign of the Gof- pel is to breed in Men a filial cheerful frame of heart, the fpiyit of love^ and of a found or quiet mind', to give us a free, eafy, comfortable ac- eefs to God as to our Father •, and to encourage every good Man to a diligent, conftant, and frequent attendance upon hfs Worfhip, by the delight that follows it. But now, if nothing may be us'd by us without highly offending God, that either has been, or is abus*d to I- dolatry ; who fees not what trouble and dif- tra6lion will arife in our Minds hereupon, when we meet together to worfhip God ? It's well known, that moft of our Churches were eredled by Idolatrous Papijls^ and as much defil'd by I- dolatry as any Geiture can be. They are dedi- cated to feveral Saints and Angels^ whofe Images were once fet up and ador'd. Our Bells^ Pews^ Fonts^ Desks^ Church yards, have been confecra- ted after a fuperftitious manner. Many Cups, Fla- gons, Dijbes, Communion-Tables, have been given and us'd by Idolaters. What now is to be done ? Perhaps all thefe things have been abus'd ; and if certain information cannot be had, we can't vvorfliip in public without great difquiet of Mind. 4. Thi§ Principle will deftroy all public Wor* fhip. For if nothing muft be us'd which has been, or is abus'd by Idolaters ; it will be in the power of" Idolaters, by ingroffmg all the outward marks and th0 Church of Rome. i s 5 And figns of that inward veneration i^nd efleem which we owe to God, to fmother our Devo- tions, fo as they Ihall never appear in the World ; and by that means fryftrate the very end and de- fign of Religious Aflemblies. And truly this work is already, by the ftrength of this Principle, very well effe(5led. For kneeling at Prayers, znd Jland- ing, ^nd fittmg, and lifting up the Hands and Eyes to Heaven, and bowing of the Body, together with Prayer and Praife and Singing, have been all notorioufly abus'd to Idolatry, and are fo CO this day. If the Bijfenters fay, they except fuch things as are necelTary to be usM in the Ser- vice of God, tho' they have been abus'd by I- dolaters ; I reply, that fo long as the reafon§ holcj to make any thing finful, fo long it is fo. If the life or abufe of any thing by Idolaters make it limply evil ; then it muft for ever remain fo, and no neceffity whatfoever can make it lawful. So that this Principle drives us into fuch ftrcights, that we mud fin one way or other. For either we mull not worlhip God in public, or we muft be guilty of Idolatr'j if we do: and tho' of two E- vils OF Calamities the leaft is to be chofen, yet of two Sins neither is. Chriftian Religion flows from infinite Wifdom ; and the Laws of God do not crofs one another, but are even and confiftent. We are never caft by God under a ncceility of finr ning, of tranfgreffing one Law by the obfervance of another : but thus it muft be, if we take up andlb'ck to this Principle, 5. The Dljfenters condemn themfelves in what they allow and pradife, by the fame Rule by which they condemn Kneeling at the Sacrament, and other Rites of our Church. For they them- felves did ufe, without fcruplc, fuch Places and M 4 l^hings iS4 Of our Agreeing with things and Poftures as had been defil'd and abus'd by Idolaters, They were wont to be bare-headed in time of God's Service, at Prayer and at the Sacrament ; and fo do Idolatrous Papifts, They never dcclar'd, that it was finful to kneel at our Prayers, both public and private ; yet this Ge- fture the Papifts ufe in their Prayers to the Virgin Mar)\ to the Crofs^ to Saints and Angels, They us'd our Churches, Church-yards and Bells, and never thought they finn'd againll God by fo do- ing •, tho they knew they had been abus'd. Nay the Bireolor^ {a ) declares, ^at fucb places are not fuhjc^ to an'j fuch Pollution by any Superftition formerly us^d^ and now laid afide^ as i?iay render them unlawful and inconvenient, Mr. Rutherford (b) faies of Bells grofly abus'd in time of Popery, 'That it is unreafonable and groundlefs^ that thereupon theyfhotCd be dijui'd. Upon which the Learned Dr. Falkner has this excellent Remaik j The pretence of their convenient ufefulnefs, wou'd be no bet-.- ter excufe on their belialf, than was the Plea for fparing the beil of the A?nalekites Cattle, that they might be a Sacrifice, v/hen God had devoted them to Deftrudion, For if God ( as they fay J had commanded, that all fuch Things and Rites fhou'd be utterly abolilli'd, as were of Man's devifing and had been abus'd to Ido- latry % then the convenient ufefulnefs of fuch places and things will never bear them out. 6, If this Principle were true, it would go nigh '(O throw a fcorn upon all or moft of the Refor-. macjons that have been made from the Church of (a) Direft. of the day and place of worfliip. (t?) Rutberf^ «f Spaodal, Q.r, 6„ Rm^\ the Church of Rome. 1 8 5 Rome ; for they do not ieem to have govern'd themfelves by this Rule. Some of them in their public Confeflions (c) declaring, that they might lawfully retain fuch Rites and Ceremonies as are of advantage to Faith, the worfhip of God, or Peace and Order in the Church, tbo^ they had heen introduced by any Synods or BiJJjop^ or Pope^ or any other, 7. Nay, this Principle v/ou'd render Chriftia- nity impradicable ; becaufe there is no Circum- ftance, no Inllrument, no Miniftry in worfhip, but may have been fome way or other abus'd by Pagan or Rom'ijh Idolatries. It would make e- very Garment, of what ihape, or of what colour foever, unlit for ufe in our Religious Service ; for not only the V/hite, but the Red, the Green, and the Black, have been us'd feven for the fig- nificancy of their refpedlive Colours) by the Gen- tile or Romanift^ to very fuperftitious purpofes in Divine Worfliip. Secondly, There is no cxprefs Precept of tliis nature, and the Texts alledg'd do not infer it. For, I. Tho' fome Churches are blam'd for fuffering fome to teach the People to eat things facrijic'd to Idols, Rev. 2. 14, 20. yet the inflance is imper* tinent, becaufe that v^as no better than Commu- nicating in Idol-worfhip, as the Gnojlics did. But St. P^^/ declares, i Cor, 8. 4, &c. and^^^^. 10. 27, 28, 29. that eating thijigs offer'* d to Idols with-* out any refpeEl to Idols in eating is unlawful up- on no other account, but that of Scandal. 2. St. yW^'j words, V. 23. hating even the gar?nent fpot^ ted by the fiejh, teach us indeed to be as cautious of temptations to fin, as of the Garments of infeded (0 Confcll'. Bohsm Art. is> Perfons ; iS5 Of OUT Agreeing with Perfons ; but there is no danger, when they are well cleans'd from infedion. 3. Tho' the Jewi were commanded to deftroy Idols and the appur- tenances of them, Deut, 7. 25, 26. becaufe they were fo prodigioufly inclin*d to Ido- latry ; yet furely the Diffenters will not fay, we muft deftroy all things that have been abus'd to fuperftitious ufes ; for then wc muft deftroy our Bells and Fonts and Churches, Therefore^ as Mr. Qilvin^ upon the Second Commandment, faies, Wd do not in the leaft fcruple, whether we may lawfuU ly ufe thofe Temples^ Fonts and other Materials^ which have been heretofore abused to Idolatrous and Superjlitious ufes, I acknowledge indeed^ that we ought to re7nove fuch things as feem to nourifh Idolatry ; upon fuppofition^ that we our felves in oppofing too rigoroufly things in their own nature indifferent^ he not fuperftitious. It is equally fuperftitious to con- demn things indifferent or unholy^ and to command them as if they were holy. As for the example of Hezehah^s breaking in pieces the Brazen Serpent, becaufe the Children of Ifrael burnt Incenfe to it, ^ Kings 18. 4. it will not prove, that whatfoever has been notofioufly defiPd in Idolatrous or grofly Superftitious Ser- vices, ought to be abolifti'd ; and much lefs, that the not abolifhing fome fuch things, is a good ground for feparation froni the Church that neg- Jeds fo to do. For, I. The Brazen Serpent was not only defiPd, but an Idol it felf., and that at the very time when it was deftroy'd. Nay, it was worfhipp'd by the generality of the People ; to thofe daies the ChiU dren of Ifrael did burn Incenfe unto it ; and there was little hope of their being reclaim'd, while the Idol ftood J and moreover, the ufe of it was ceas'd for the Church of Rome. i s 7 for which it was firft ereded. Now without doubt Governors ought to take away thofe in- different things which have been abus'd, when the People are incHn'd to abufe them again ; at leaft» if fuch abufe cannot probably be prevented by any other means : but then I deny, that our Rites have been or are any temptation to Idolatry^ or to the embracing of Popery, Had Hezeklah Suiier*d the Brazen Serpent ftill jtro Hand, no doubt private Perfons fwho have no Authority to make pubhck Reformation^ might lawfully have made ufe of it, to put them in mind of, and affedt them with, the wonderful mercy of God exprefs'd by it to their Forefa- thers j norwithflanding that many had formerly made an Idol of it, and did fo at that very time. And much more might they have lawfully con- tinued in the Communion of the Church, fo long as there was no conftraint laid upon them to jqin With them in their Idolatry ; nor do we read of any that feparated from the Church, while the Brazen Serpent was permitted to fband, as wofully abus'd as it was by the Generality. 2. If Example were a good way of Arguing, we find by Hezekiab's practice in other things, he did not think it an indifpenfable Duty, to a- bohlh every thing that had been made ufe of to Idolatry if it did not prove an immediate fnarc at that time. For as to the l^emples^ which Solo- mon had eredled for no other end but the Wor- jQiip oi falfe Gods, i Kings ir. 7. Hezekiah did not make it his bufmefs to deftroy the?7j^ as be- ing in this time forlorn and negleded things, of which no bad ufe was then made. . Altho' indeed King Joftah afterwards (probably upon the in- creafe of Idolatry, and renew 'd ufe of thofe pla- 1 8 8 Of our Agreeing with ces ) found it expedient to lay them wholly wafte, 2 Kings 23. 13. Let not an'j^ fays (d) Calvin, think me fo auftere or hound up, as to forbid a Chriflian ^without any exception, to accommodate himfelf to the Papiils in any Ceremony or Ohfervance •, for it is not my purpofe to condemn any thing, hut zvhat is clearly evifand openly vicious, III. I proceed now in the lad place to Hiew, that the Agreement between the Churches of England and Rome is in no wife fuch, as ijuill make Comm-union with the Church of England unlawful. This I Ihall evince in the chief particulars, which our Dijfentcrs take offence at. Firfl Then, Epifcopacy is fo far from being an unlawful fymbolizing with the Church of Ro?ne, that it is an Apoftolical Inftitution ; and fhall we allow the Pope fo much power, as to make that tinlawful by its ufe, which the Apofllcs and their Difciples have recommended to us by theirs ? Nay, ( '■■■■■'^'^.. * 1 . 'That an external profeffion ofthe Chriftian Faith is enough to qualify a perfon to he admitted a Member of Chrift* 5 Church. 2. That every fuch Member has a right to all the ex- ternal privileges of the Churchy till by the juft cenfure of the Church he he excluded from thofe privileges, 3. That fome corrupt Members remaining in the Church is no juft caufe of a feparation from her. Firft then ^, an external Profefton of the Chriftian Faith fmade either by himlelf or by his Sureties^ is enough to qualify a Perfon to be admitted a Mem- her of Chrift' s Church. For, i. This is the qua- N 2 lification 196 Of Mix t Communion. lification prcfcrib'd by our Lord, Go teach all K7- tions^ that is, make Dilciples of all Nations, Bap- tizing thetn., dec. Mat lb. 28. 19. Now the Paftors of the Church cannot know the fincerity of Mens hearts, but their Profelllon of Chriftianity entitles them to Bapcifm. By this Rule the Apoftles a6ted whilft Chriit was upon Earth, and Baptized more than were fincere ; for of fo many Perfons that were Baptiz'd, not above 120 continu'd with Chrill to the lall. 2. By the fame Rule they acted afterwards •, for St. Peter Baptiz'd about 3000 in one day upon their profefTing the Word, Jols 2. 41. tho' all wou'd not probably prove fineere ; and two of them, Ananias and 5^^- phira^ were grofs Hypocrites. St. Philip., A6ls 8. 12. Baptiz'd both Men and Women 2iX Samaria., and amongit them was Simon Magus ; whom th-e holy Deacon might juilly fufpedt for his former pra- ctices, and whofe Hypocrifie appear'd afterwards. Such other Members of the Church were Demas^ Hyjneneus and Alexander., whofe bare Profeflion En- titled them to that privilege. 3. Chrift fortels {a) that his Church fhou'd confift of Good and Bad, by comparing it to a Field of Wheat and Tares, a Net of all forts of Fifhes, a Floor of Corn and Chaff, &c. St. Paul faies, ( h ) they are not all Ifrael, thai are ^/Ifrael j and Chrift faies, that 7nan'j are call'd., but few chofen. 4. The ma- ny corrupt members (c) of the Churches of C. 18. 29, 5-4, fS, 66. Mcrherm:-neut. p. 71, 71,74.. Baxter's Cure, p. 35-9. his Defence, part i.p. 8f. /;;j Farewell-Sermon. Continuar. of Morn. Exer. Serm. 4. Jenkin on fiule, V. 19. Englnnd's Rememhraneer, Serm. j6. Burroughs's Irenic. c. 12, 23. Platform, Pref. p. 7. & c. 13. Ball's Tryal, c, 4. BrirjJJy's Arraignment, p. 4S. Caicdrfi Independ. a Schifm, p. 5-0. Vims on the Sacrament, p. 246. Tucknefs Serm. on Aiis 9. 31. jus Div. Min. Evangel, p. n, 12. Letter of the Minift. in old-En^, to the Brethren'in N^w-E«;^^ p. 13. Nye's Cafe of great ufe, p. 3.2j-.Tf Mens adipns j whether declar'd by Nature., or iievclation. By the Law of Nature I mean thofe Principle^ to join with the Church of England. 231 Principles of Good and Evil , juft and unjuft , which God has written in our minds, and which every Man is natiirall'^ convinc'd of. Some things are eternally Good, as to TVorJJoip God^ &c. and wc know them to be our Duty ; others are eternally Evil, and we know them to be Sins, by the light of Reafon ; and the Apollle faies, the Gentiles had this Law written in their hearts. But Chriflians have the Law of Revelation too contain'd in the Scriptures •, by which God do's not make void the Law of Nature, but declares it's Precepts more certainly and accurately, with greater ftrength, and greater rewards and punifliments, than before. By this alio he hath perfcdled the Law of Nature, and obliged us to higher inftances of Virtue, and added fome pofitive Laws ; as for inftancc, to believe in Chrill, to pray to God in Chrift's I Name, to be Baptiz'd, and partake of the Lord*s Supper. Thus then the Natural and Reveal'd Law of God is the great Rule of Confcience. Only we muft remember, that by the Law of Nature is to be underltood, not only the chief and general heads of it, but alfo the necelTary dedudions from thefe heads *, and by the Reveal'd Law is to be underftood, not only exprefs Commands and Pro- hibitions, but alfo the neceflary confequences of thofe commands and prohibitions. So that what- ever is by direct inference or parity of reafon com- manded or forbidden, is a Duty or a Sin ; tho' \% be not commanded or forbidden in the Letter of the Law. And if it be neither commanded nor forbidden by the Letter of the Law, nor yet by inference or parity of reafon ; the thing is indif- ferent, and we may do it, or let it alone, with a fofc Confcience. P 4 in. In 23 2 Of it's being againji one's Confcience III. In the third place I muft confider the power of Human Laws to oblige the Confcience •, for in a fecojtdar-j fenle they are a part of the Rule of Con- fcie7Ke^ by virtue of, and in fubordination to the Laws of God. This I fhall explain in four pro- pofitions. Firft^ It is moft certain, that God's Law Com- mands us to obey the Laws of Men. For all So- ciety is founded in this Principal Law of Nature^ that we muft obey our Governors in all honeft and juft things. Otherwife no State, City or Fa- mily can fubfift happily. i\nd 'tis moft evident, that God Con^.mands us in Scripture to Ohe'^ the?n, that have the Rule over ta, and to be Subje5l not onh for TVrath^ hut alfa for Cojtfcience fake. So that a Man is bound in duty to obey Human Laws, and confequently they are a part of the Rule of Con- fcience. Secondly^ Human Laws do not bind the Con- fcience by any Virtue in themfelves, but merely by Virtue of God's Law, who has commanded us both by Nature and Scripture., to obey our Su- periors. Confcience is our judgfnent of our aSfi- ons according to God^s Law, and has no Superior but God alone : but yet we arc bound in Con- fcience to obey Men, bccaufe therein we obey God. Thirdly, Human Laws do no farther bind the Confcience, than as they are agreeable to the Laws of God j fothat when Men command any thing finful, we m.uft not obey. For God has not gi- ven any Man pov/cr to alter his Laws, or impofe any thing inconfiftent with them. fourthly, Tho' Human Laws,generally fpeaking, bind the Confcience ; yet I do not fay, that every Human Law ( tho' confiftent with God's Law ) do's to join isjith the Church ^/England. 1 3 3 fdo's at all times and in all cafes, oblige every Man's Confcience to aflive obedience to it, fo as that he fins againft God, if he tranfgrefs it. For then who cou'd be innocent ? But Fzr/?, where the Public or fome private Perfon fhall fuffer damage or inconvenience by our not obferving the Law : or Secondljy where the Manner of our not obey- ing it argues contempt of Authority, or fets an ill example, there the tranfgreffion of a Human Law is finful ', and not in other cafes. So that there are many cafes in which a Man may tranfgrefs a purely Human Law, and yet not be a fniner be- fore God ; provided, I fiy, there be no contcm.pt of Authority, or ill example in it ; for either of thefe makes ir ay?;/. For this I infill: upon, that God's Law and the public good require, that An- thority be held facred ; and therefore when Gover- nors infill upon a thing, tho' it be trifling or in- convenient, yet we muft not even fee?;: to conteft the matter wich them, provided it be not finfuL For to affront their Authority, or to encourage others by our example to do it, is a greater evil to the public, than our obedience to an inconve- nient Law can eafily be. IV. I fhall now confider the power of Human Laws to oblige the Confcience in the inftance of Church-Communion. And here I afRrm, that c- very Man is bound in Confcience to join with the Church eflablijh'd by Law in the place where he lives ^ fo long as that Church is a true found part of ihj Catholic Churchy and iiothing finful is required as a condition of Co?nmunion with it. For I have alrea- dy fliewn, that Men are bound to obey Human Laws, that are not contrary to the I^ws of God *, and therefore they mull obey in Church-Matters •, ynlefs it can be fl:iew'd, that God has forbid- den 2 34 Of ifs being again]} one's Confcience den Men to make Laws about Religion ; which can never be done. But farther, I earneftly defire it may be well confider'd by Biffenters^ that we are all really bound by the Laws of Jefus Chrift and the Na- ture of his Religion, to preferve as much as in ua lies, the Unity of the Church, which confifts not only in profefTing the fame faith, but joining to- gether in the fame woriliip. And therefore who- ever breaks the Unity, doth really tranfgrefs the Laws of Jefus Chriji^ and is guilty of Schifniy which is fo much cautioned againft, and fo highly condemned in Scripture. Thofe therefore, who think they are no more bound to co?7id to Churchy than to obey any com- mon Adl of Parliament, are greatly millaken ; be- caufe they break not only the Law of Man, but the Law^ of God. For tho' all the circumftances of Worfliip are Human hiftitutions^ yet the Public Worfhip it felf, under Public Lawful Governors, is of Divine appointment , and no Man can re- nounce it without finning againfl Chrift as well as Hiifnan Laws. A Divine Lazv cloath'd Vv^ith circumflanaes of Man's appointment, creates another kind of ob- ligation, than a Law that commands a thing per- fectly indifferent. In the former cafe we mull obey, becaufe 'tis God's own Law -, in the other we only obey Man, becaufe God has obliged us in general to obey our Superiors. God commands every Subje61: to pay tribute to whom tribute is due : but Human Authority deter- mines, out of what goods, and in what proportion hemuftpay. Now, becaufe Human Authority in- terpofes, if a Man can by fraud detain the King's right, do's he incur no other guilt, than breaking to join with the Church of England . 235 an A61 of Parliament, and being liable to penal- ties, if he be deteded ? Yes certainly •, for tribute being injoin'd by God's Law, the Man is unjuft, and breaks God's Law ; and his willingnefs to fuf- fer the penalties do's not lefTen his guilt. The Cafe is the fame as to Church-Unit'j, For tho' Hu- man Laws prefcribe particular circumftanccs and Forms of Worfhip : yet God's Laws oblige us to keep the Unity of the Church, as much as to pay the King his due. And that Man, that paies his juit debts by fuch a method, as the Law of the Land declares to be unjufl:, may as well acquit himfelf from knavery before God ; as that Man, that chufes a way of public worfliip in oppofition to the Church-Laws, can acquit himfelf of Schifm before God. Nay, feparation from the Church is fo much againft the Law of God, that fhou'd Hu- man Laws grant a Toleration^ and call no Man to an account for feparation from the eftabliHied Church •, yet fuch a feparation wou'd ftill be a Schifm, and a Sin againft God. For no Human Law can make that Lawful, which God's Law has forbidden. V. It remains, that I fpeak of the Authority of Confcience^ or how far a Man is obliged to he gui^ ded by bis Confcience in his actions \ that is, how far we are obliged to a6t or not aft, when we are convinc'd in our judgment, that the adlion is com- manded or forbidden by God. Now our judg- ment concerning what God has commanded, or for- bidden, or left indifferent, is either right or wrong. If right, we are faid to have a right Confcience % if wrong, we have an erroneous Confcience, There is alfo a doubting Confcience^ when we know not well how to make any judgment at all ; but of this I fhall Treat in another Chapter, N®w i$6 Of if s being againjl ones Confcience Now if our Confcience or judgment be rights that is, according to God's Law, without doubt we are for ever bound to a6l according to it ; nor can we fin in doing fo, whatever the confequcnce be. But the great queftion is, what we mud do, when our Confcience is errojieous and miftaken \ and to anfwer this, I lay down three Rules, which I think, may give any Man fatisfadlion. Firfl, Where a Man is miflaken in his judgment^ even in that cafe it is alwaies a fin to aul againjl it, Tho' we take a fin for a duty, or a duty for a fin : yet fo long as we are thus perfuaded, it will be a great crime to a6l againfl this pefuafion. Becaufe by fo doing we adl againfl the beft light we have at prefent ; and therefore our will is as wicked, as if it had a6led againfl a tr?4e light. Nothing but Confcience can gwide our adlions ; and tho' an erroneous Confcience is a very bad and unfafe guide •, yet flill 'tis the only guide we have : and if we may lawfully refufe to be guided by it in one inilance, we may with as much reafon reje(5l it's guidance in all. What is a wilful fin, or a fm againfl knowledge, but ading otherwife, than we were convinc'd to be our duty ? Is not that Man thought fincere, that aijfenters \ for then I am perfuaded, our fcandalous divifions wou'd prefently be at an end. But alas ! we fear rhey have not done their duty in this Matter ; that they have not heartily endeavor'd to fatisfy themfelves. If rhey had ; furely they fhou'd, before they pronounc'd Con- fonnit'j to be unlawful, be able to produce fomc one plain Text to prove it fo. P'or the Texts they produce are fuch, as had they in the lead examin'd them, cou'd fcarce have been wrefted to fuch a fcnfe. Nay, the generality of Bijfenters do not feem to have much confulted their own Tea- chers in this affair. If they had, they wou'd think better of our way than they do. For the mofl eminent of their own Minifters are ready to declare, that tho' fome things may be incon- venient, yet a LayPerfon may lawfully join with us in all things ; nay, they themfelves are ready upon occafion to join in all the inftances of Lay- Com?numon. In fhort, moft of our DiJ/enters havQ taken up their opinions hand over head, and fcarce think it poffible for them to be in the wrong, Shew us a Man, that has no end to fcrve by Religion, but only to go to heaven, and in the choice of his way is only concern'd, that it be the way that leads him thithe^ i that is wonderfully follicitous about his duty, and will refufe no pains to undcrftand it ; that in the midft of Church-di- yifions is modeft, humble and docible, and be* CL3 lieved 2 4<5 0/ ifs being againfl ones Confcience lieves that he and his friends may be miftaken \ jj that thinks his Governors may be wifer than him- \ felf, and that every opinion, that he has inconfide- rately taken up, ought not to be maintain'd ^- gainit Authority •, a Man, that where his duty to God feems to thwart his duty to Man, endea- vors to be truly inform'd ; and to that end begs God's afliftance, and ufes the beft helps and guides he can, hears and reads the arguments on both fides, and is byafied neither way j I fay, fhew us fuch a Man, and we readily grant, he has done his bed to fatisfy himfelf. But then we muft add, that we believe, fuch a Man will foon think it, not only lawful, but his Duty alfo to Conr form. Secondly^ If a Man has really done his beft to fatisfy his Confcience, and yet thinks it a fm tp Conform j tho' his feparation ht materially 2iSchifmy yet he is not fonnally guilty of it. For all thofe that commit Schifm^ are not equally guilty of it. Thofe that feparate to ferve a turn, are horribly and inexcufably guilty of Schijm s and thofe that feparate thro' fuch miflakes, as they might have avoided if they had been careful, are very blam- able, and are bound, as they love their fouls, to rake more care of informing their Confciences, that fo they may leave their fin : but when God, •who fe arches the hearts^ knows that a Man did his beft, and had not means or opportunities of underftanding better -, then tho' the Man commit Schifm, yet he is innocent of it. And God, who judge th of Men by their inward fincerity, will impute it to his ignorance,' and forgive it at the laft day ; efpecially if this innocently miftaken Man be careful in the following points. " Fird^ That he be not obftinate, but ready to re- ceive to join with the Church of England. 247 ceive Convi6tion. Secondly, That he feparate no more, than he needs mult ; but comply in all thofe inftances, where he is fatisfy'd he may do it with a fafe Confcience. 1'hirdly, That where he cannot comply, he patiently fubmit to the pe- nalty of the Law ; neither exclaiming at his Go- vernors or the Magiflrates, nor ufing illegal means to get more liberty, but living as a quiet and peaceable Subjedb. Fourthly, That he do not cen- fure thofe of another perfuafion, but ilicw himielf a good Neighbor and friendly to them. Whoe're obferves thefe things, tho' he difient from us, I ihallbeloth to cenfure him as an i// Man, ill Sub- je^, or /// Chriftian. But then all that I have faid, do's no more juftify or lelTen the fin of Schifm, than the fin of Idolatry , for the cafe is the fame in both, whe- ther a Man be a deluded Dijfenter, or a deluded Papift, And therefore, notwithftanding all that may be faid concerning the innocence or excufa- blenefs of fome Mens Miftakes about thefe mat- ters *, yet neverthelefs it infinitely concerns every Perfon, to have a care how he be engaged either in the one or the other. To conclude ; I have fl:ewn how abfolutely ne- ceflary 'tis, that every Man lliou'd endeavor to inform himfelf aright, before he difobey his Go- vernors or feparate from the Church ; and that tho' fomething in our worfhip be really againft his Confcience, yet feparation may be a great fin, if a Man fhou'd prove to be miflaken in his Notions. And therefore every Dijfenter ought prcfently to fet about the true informing of his judgment, for fear he live in a grievous fin. Let him not fatisfy himfelf with frivolous pre- tences. For tho' we agree in the rule o^ faith and 0^4 mannen ; 2^% Of ifs being againft one* $ Confcience, 6cc. 7nanners ; yet Schifvi is a dreadful fin, and a Man may be damn'd for thac as certainly, as for heref'j or drunkenefs. Sure I am, the antient Fathers thought fo. What if the points of Confonnity be matters of difpute ? Who made them fo ? The Church of England wou'd have been well pleas'd, ifthefe Controverfieshad never been, We think a Man may be a very good Chriftian and go to heaven, that is not able to defend our Ceremo- nies, i^c. but he that feparates upon the account of them, is bound at the peril of his own Salvation, to ufe the befl means he c^n to be fatisfy'd about them. To thofe that pretend, that thefe are fubtil points above their capacity, I anfwer, that fince they have underflanding enough to find fault and feparate, they ought to have honefty enough to feek fartisfadtion ; which is all that we defire of them : otherwife they will never be able to an- fwer to God or Man for the Mifchiefs of Se- J)aration. We are bound, efpecially in this cafe, to prove all things^ and hold faft that which is good. For no Man can difobey his Superiors without fin, unlefs, after he has us'd his bell endeavors, he finds their commands inconfiftent with his duty tp God. For a Man to difobey, till he has done this, is an unwarrantable thing •, and in this Cafe J now fpeak of, it is no lefs than the fin of Formal frjminal Schifm-, CHAP 349 CHAP. Xll. J'he pretence of a T>oubtmg Confcience An-^ fwerd. I Come now to the Cafe of thofe, who feparate, becaufe they douht^ whether they may law- fully Communicate with us or no ; and who fear they fhou'd fin in doing any thing with a doubting Confcience. To this I mi^ht anfwer from the for- mer Chapter -, that if Communion with our Church be a Duty, no Man's doubts concerning the law- fulnefs of it, will juftify his feparation from it. For if ^ Man's fetled perfuafion^ that an adion is unlawful, v/ill not juftify his omiflion of it, fup- pofing that God commands it -, much lefs will his bare doubt excufe him. But becaufe this anfwer feems rather to cut the knot, than to unty it, I ihall particularly examine this Plea of a doubting Confcience^ by giving an account, Firjl^ Of the riature pf a doubting Con- fcknce. Secondly, Of the Rule of it. Thirdly^ Of the Power that Human Laws have over it. Fourthly^ Of it's Authority, i. e. whether at all, or how far, ^ Man is obliged by it. I. In fpeaking of the Nature of a doubting Con- fcience I fhall Treat, i . Of doubling in GencraL 2. Of fuch doubts as affeft the Confcie?2ce, 3, Of the difference between the doubting and the fcrupu- lous Confcience. Firfl Then, A Man is faid to doubt, when he cannot determine, whether the thing he is confi- dering, be fo, or be not fo -, he thinks the queftion probable on both fides> but cannot fix upon either. So 2 50 Of a doubting Confcience. So that his mind is like a ballance, when by rea- fon of equal weight in both Scales, neither Scale comes to the bottom. 'Tis true, a Man may lean more to one fide of the quefiion^ than the other ; and yet be doubtful ftill : juft as one Scale may have more weight than the other, while yet that Weight is not able to carry it perfedbly down : but when there is fo much more evidence on one fide, that the mind can determine it felf, then the Man doubts no longer, but is faid to be Perfuaded ; as the Ballance is faid to be fixt, when there is Weight enough to carry it down on either fide. 'Tis true, a Man has not alwaies the fame degree o^ Perfuafion. Sometimes the evidence is fo ftrong, that he intire- ly afi^ents without the leaft doubtfulnefs. This is Ajfiirance or full Perfuafion. At other times the evidence may gain an afifent, but not fuch as ex- cludes all doubts of the contrary. This kind of Affent is call'd Opinion or probable Perjuafion, So a greater or alefs Weight carries down the Scale with greater or lefs force and brisknefs. But ftill, in both thefe Cafes, the Mind is determined, the Bal- lance is turned, and the doubt is ended ; tho' per- haps the Man is not perfeiflly free from all fcruplc about the thing. v Secojidly then, I fliall treat of fuch doubts as affe6l the Confcience. A Man may doubt of any thing, which he has to confider : but every doubt do's not aite6l the Confcience. As a Man's Con- fcience is affedled with nothing but his own a6tions, fo his doubts do not affed his Confcience any far- ther, than they concern his own aftions. And as his Confcience is not affeded with his own adions any otherwife, than as they are commanded pr forbidden by God's Laws ; fo his doubts con- cerning them afFed his Confcience no otherwife^ than Of a doubting Confcience. 251 than as God's Law may be tranfgrefled in them. So char, where a Man apprehends no danger of tranf- greffing God's Law, his doubts about anadliondo not concern his Confcience. 'Thirdl'j^ From what has been faid 'tis eafie to perceive the difference between the doubting and the Scrupulous Confcience. Every body knows, that when we fpeak of a Refolved Confciencey we mean, that the Man is fatisfy'd, whether the adion be a Duty or a Sin, or indifferent. Now the Scrupulous Confcience is a Confcience in foine meafure Refolved^ hut yet accompanied with a fear of aUing according to that refolution. The Perfon is convinced, that the thing is fit to be done, and has nothing confide- rable to objed, nor any new reafons to unlettle him ; but yet when he comes to ad, he is troubled with unaccountable fears. But the doubting Confcience is quite different, and is nothing elfe but the fuf- pence of a Man^s judgment in a queflion about the Duty or the Sin of an A5iion^ occafion^d by the equal (or near equal) probabilities on both fides. The re- folv'd Confcience a6ls chearfully *, the fcrupulous Confcience a6bs fearfully : but the doubtful Con- fcience is not fatisfy'd at all, becaufe of the equal appearances of reafon on both fides. The Man that has either a refolv'd or a fcrupulous Confcience, pafTes a judgment on the thing : but a doubting Confcience pafTes no judgment at all •, for then it wou'd no longer be a doubting Confcience. After all it muft be acknowledged, that truly and ftridlly fpeaking, a doubting Confcience is no Con- fcience at all. For Confcience^ as we have often faid, is a Man's mind making a judgment about the mora- lity of his anions: but a doubting Confcience wavers, and is^ Man^s mind 7naking no judgment : and there- fore it is not properly a Confcience, And we may as 2 5 i Of a doubting Conference. as well fay an unrefoh^d refolution^ as a Dmhting Confcience. However, to comply with Cuflom, I follow the Common way of fpeaking. II. I proceed now to the Rule of a doubting Cott'- fcience •, in fpeaking of which J fhall fhew, Firfi, what kind of Rule Confcience needs in a doubtful cafe. Sc?condiv, what that Rule is. Firfi then, by the Rule of a doubting Confcience I mean, not a Rule by which a Man may refolve all doubts concerning every point, fo as to doubt no longer about it ; but a Rule, by which he may determine in every doubtful cafe, fo as to a6b with ii fafe Confcience, whether he can get rid of his doubts or not. A Rule, that determines, not whe- ther a thing in general be lawful, or no ; but what I am to do, where I doubt of the Lawful- nefs of the thing. For inftance, the Rule of a doubting Confcience is not to determine, whether it be Lawful to play at Cards i but what I mull do, if I doubt of the Lawfulnefs of playing at Cards. Before a Man a6ts, he ought to be fatisfy'd, thafi that fide of the adlion, he determines himfelf to, is, all things confider'd, the more fit and reafon- able to be chofcn : but it is abfurd to fay, that no Man mufl ad:, till he is able to unty all the diffi- culties, and refolve all the doubts, that may have been ftarted about the A6lion. For this in many cafes is utterly impoffible ; the Perfon may not have fufficient time or means for the doing it. And in fuch a cafe, a Man cannot pofTibly do better, than to get fatisfy'd by reafon and advice, what is fit- teft for him to do in the prefent circumftances, and to proceed accordingly. And this is certainly the ufual way of proceeding among the mofl con • fcientious Men. Thus have I fhewn what kind of Of a doubting Confcience, 253 of Rule Confcience needs in a doubtful cafe. Secondly therefore, I fliall Ihew what that Rule is^ firft^ by giving an account of the general Rule it felf *, and then fecondly, by applying it to the feve- ral Heads of doubtful cafes. I. Firjt then, fince a Man never doubts but upon equal appearances of Reafon on both fides, it is plain, that nothing ought to turn the Ballance, bun greater weight of Reafon ; and therefore the Rule of a doubting Confcience is, I'bat in all douhtful cafes^ that fide which^ all things conftder'd^ doth ap- -pear more reafonahle^ is to he chofen. Some indeed fay, that in doubtful cafes the faf^r fide is to be chofen : but I do purpofely avoid the exprefling it fo, becaufe the Rule is true or falfc, according as the ^oxd fafer fide is expounded. For Firft^ if by faferfide we mean that fide which is more free from danger of finning, I think the Rule will prove rather a Snare, than a Guide to a Man's mind. For if this Rule be true, mod: Per- fons do tranfgrefs it every day •, nay, the belt of Men do frequently expofe themfelves to fuch dangers of finning, as they might have avoided •, and this with- out any reproach from their own Confcience, or any cenfure from other Men. He that avoids all entertainments, is certainly more free from the dan- ger of intemperance, than others are \ and yet when occalion ferves, no Man makes any great fcruple of going to them. We are not commanded to avoid all poflible danger of finning *, but only to avoid all fin, when we are in danger. For otheiwife, he that wou'd be Religious, mull foifake all wordly bufinefs, and retire to a Cloyller. But to come more ftridly to the point -, there are many cafes, in which tlie moft honefl Perfon do's not think he is obliged to dcccrinine hinifelt 10 i45 Of a doubting Conjcience. to that fide of the action, on which he appi'ehends there is leaft danger of finning. For Firft^ greater prohahilit-y will often turn the BalJance againft the greater///c'/)'. Thus if a Man fcruple eating Bloody and afterwards by difcourfing with a Learned Per- fon be flitisfy'd, that it is far more probable that he may Lawfully eat it, than that he is forbidden to eat it-, I believe moft Men will think, that he may eat it with a quiet Confcience. And yet it is certainly more fafe not to eat it ; becaufe many do queflion whether it be Lawful to do fo, but all Men grant it may be Lawfully forborn. Se- co?idiy, greater temporal advantages will have weight enough with a very honefl Man to over-ballancc the greater fafety. Thus if after the fl:ri(5lefl in- quiry a Man be not fatisfy'd, that he owes a fum of Money, which another demands confidently and with great appearances of Reafon ; there are equal p'ohabilities on both fides. If he pay the Money, perhaps his circumflances are fuch, that he wrongs his Wife and Children ; and if he refufe to pay it, perhaps he detains another Man's right from him. In this cafe, fince it is as probable that the de- mand is unjufi^ as that it is jiift j I believe moft Men v/ill fiy, that he ought not to prejudice him- felf and his family, till it be either by Law ad"- judg'd, or he have more convincing proofs, that he ought to pay it. It appears therefore, that any Man (who is v/ife as well as good) may in many cafes wave the fafer for the more Prudent fide ; and confequently it is not alwaies a Rule to a doubting Confcience to chufe the fafer fide, or the fide which is more free from danger of finning. But Secondly^ if by fafer fide we mean that which is freefl from all dangers and inconveniences of all kind wbatfoever, and do's beft ferve all the Spiritual and Of a doubting Confcience. 255 and Temporal interefts that a wife and good Man can propofe ; I freely grant, that it is the onlj Rule to a doubting Confcience to follow the fafer fide. For then the fafer fide is the more reafonahle fide, which, as I faid before, is in all dotibtfiil cafes to be chofen. Having given an account of the general Rule of a doubting Confcience, I come now in the5de injure them, if we do not pay it : but avoidjpg Scandal is a duty of Charity *, which ia- deed wc are obliged to, as far as we can, but not till we have given to every one his due. It is therefore^ faies Bifhop Sanderfo?!^ no more lawful for ine to- difohey the lawful command of a Superior^ to p-even! thereby the Offence of one or few Brethren •, than it is ^lawful for me to do one Man wrongs to do another Mat a courtefy withal \ or than it is lawful for me to roh the Exchequer to relieve an Hofpital. If it be reply'd, that tho' the care of not giving Offence be in refpedl of our Brother but a debt of Charity, yet in regard of God it is a legal debt, fince he may, and do's require it as due, and we do him wrong if we difobey him -, I grant in- deed, that we are requir'd both to be obedient to Superiors, and to be charitable to our Bro- ther : but then, I fay, this is not the Charity which God requires, when I give what is none of my own. A Servant muft be Charitable to the Poor according to his ability : but he muft not rob his Mafter to relieve them. Our Superiors only muft confider the danger of Scandal ; but we muft confider the duty we owe them *, this being a mat- ter wherein we cannot fhew our Charity without violating the right of our Superiors. Thus then it is plain, that they are things merely indifferent^ not only in their own Nature, but alfo in refpe6t to us, in the ufe of which we are obliged to confider the JVeaknefs of our Bre- thren. What is our duty, muft be done, tho' Scandal follow it : but in matters, wherein our praftife is not determined by any command, we ought fo to exercife our Liberty, as to avoid ("if polTiblc) giving any Offence. 'Tis an undoubted part of Chriftian Charity, to endevor by admo- nitition, to Weak Brethren, 307 nition, infirudion, good example, and by the forbearance of things lawful, at which we fore- fee our Neighbor our of weaknefs will be apt to be Scandaliz'd^ to prevent his falling into any fin or mifchief After this manner do we profefs our felves ready to do or forbear any thing in our own power, to gain DiJIfenters to the Church : but we muft not omit our duty for it. I fhall only add, that this very rule of yield- ing to our Brother in things indiiferent, ought to have fome reilridions ; but I think there are no unalterable Rules to be laid down in this af- fair. For it being an exercife of Charity, muft be determin'd by the meafure of Prudence ac- cording to Circumftances : and we may as well go about to give certain Rules for Mens Charity in other Cafes, and fix the proportion which e- very Man ought to give of his Ellnte towards the Relief of the Poor •, as pofitively to tell, how far a Man muft deny himfelf in the ufe of indif- ferent things, and forego his own Liberty for the fake of his Brother, ^his whole matte?' ("faies Dr. Hanunond^ difc. of Scand.) is to be referred to the Chnftian''s Pious Difcretion or Prudence ; it be- ing free to him either to abftain^ or not to abftain^ from any indifferent aclion (remaining fuch) accor- ding as that Piety and that Prudence ftjall rep-efent it to be 7noft Charitable and Beneficial to other Mens Souls, Secondly^ To avoid a lefs Scandal being taken by a few, we muft not give a greater Offence^ and of vaftly more pernicious confequence, to a much bigger number of Perfons. And if this matter were rightly confidei 'd ; wc fhou'd foon find our felves much more obliged, upon this account of Scandal, to join with our Church, than to fe- U 2 parate 3 OS Of giving Offence^ Sec. parate from it. For, i. Our Separation hardens o- ther Biffenters in their perfuafion of the unlawfulnefs of Conformity. For they will think we feparate upon the fame reafon with themfelves ; and this is true Scandalizing them, or confirming them in an evil Courfe. 2. Whatever Sedt we join with, we Offend all the other Parties ; who fometimes fpeak as hardly of one another, as of the Conformifls. 3 . Hereby great Offence is given to the Conformifls. For this Separation is a public condemning of the Church, and is apt to breed Scruples, diflafl and prejudices, in the well-meaning, but leafl-knowing Members of it. 4. Scandal is thereby given to Su* periors, by bringing their Laws and Authority in- to contempt. And if it be fo finful to Offend a little one •, v/hat fhail we think of Offending a Prince, a Parliament, ^c I No Scandal taken at an indifferent thing can be fo great, as both the Sin and Scandal of confufion, and contempt of Autho- rity. 5. Hereby Scandal is given to the Papifts^ who are harden'd in their own way, becaufe they only have Peace and Unity •, and this is a mighty temp- tation to many wavering Chriflians to turn Papfts. The Papifts alwaies hit us in the Teeth with our Divifions : whereas by our hearty Uniting with the Church of England^ we may certainly wrefl this Weapon out of their hands. 6. Separation is Scan- dal to Religion in general. It prejudices Men a- gainfl it as an uncertain thing, and matter of end- lefs difpute i when they fee what dangerous Quar- rels commence from our Religious diftercnces : and all the diforders they have caus'd, fhall hy fome be charg'd upon Chriflianity it felf Thus our cauf§- lefs Separations open a wide door to Atheifm, and all kind of Profanenefs and Irreligion. 3 op The CO NCLU SION. Containing an earnefl Terfuafive io Commu- nion with the eftabli^d Church of Eng- land. AN D now, having jflaewh the Neceflity of main- taining conflant Communion with the Church of England^ and anfwer'd thofe Pleas, by which the Dijf enters endevor to excufe their Separation from her •, nothing remains, but that I add an earneft Per- fuafive to the pradife of that, which J have prov'd to be a Chriftian Duty. I befeech you therefore with all the Earneftnefs that becomes a Matter of fo great Importance, and with all the Kindnefs and Tender- nefs that becomes a Chriftian, to fuffer the tFord of Exhortation, and duly confider what I offer to you. I have fhewn you in the firfi Chap, of this Dif- courfc, that Isothing but finful "Terms of Communion can juftif'j a Separation j and therefore you muft charge our Church with finful Terms of Commu- nion, or elfe you cannot poffibly defend your pra- ftife. Suppofe that there were fome things in our Conftitution, that might be contriv'd better -, yet every defeat or fuppos'd Corruption in a Church is not warrant enough to tear the Church in pieces. The quefbion is not, whether there be any thing in our Conftitution, which a Man cou'd wilTi to be alter'd : but whether any thing unlawful be ap» pointed, which will make an alteration not only defirable, but neceflary *, and whether you are bound to withdraw, till fuch alteration be made. We feparate from the Church of Ronie^ becaufe She has corrupted the main Principles of Religion,, and requires her Members to join in thofe Cor- U 3 ruptions: 3IO The CONLLUSIO N, ruptions : but this charge cannot be faflen'd upoa the Church of Enqland^ and therefore Separation from her muft be unlawful. Mr. Cahin (a) faies that wherever the V/ord of God is duly preach'd, and reverently attended to, and the true nfe of we Sacraments kept up, there is the plain appearance of a true Church, whofe Authority no Man may fafely dcfpife, or reje^i its Admonilions or refifi its Counfels, or fet at nought its Difciplm •, much Hefs feparate from it, and violate its Unity, For that our Lord has fo great regard to the Com- 77iunion of his Church, that he accounts him an Apo- Jlate frotn his Religion, who ohjiinately feparates from any Chr'iflihn Society, which keeps up the true Mini- fry of the Word and Sacraments •, that fuch a fepara- tion TJ a denial of God and Chrifi ; and that it is a dangerous and pernicious ^Temptation, fo much as to think of fe par a ting from fuch a Church, the Com- mimon whereof is never to he rc'ie^ed^ fo long as it continues in the true life of the Word and Sacraments. This is as plain and full a Determination of the Cafe, as if he had particularly defign'd it againft your own pra6life. Nay, the Minifters of New England tell you, that to feparate from a Church for fome Evil only conceived, or indeed in the Church, which might and fhou^d he tolerated^ and healed with a Spirit of Meeknefs, and of which the Church is not yet convinc-d, tho^ perhaps your felf he-, for this or the like Reafons to withdraw from puhlic Communion in V/ord, Seals or Cenfures, is unlawful andfinfuL If you fay, that the Governors may as well come down to you, by forbearing what you dif- iike, as you come up to the Law, by doing what it; Requires -, I befeech you to confider, whether our {a) Inpt'^t. lib. 4. Scd:. lo^ 11, 12. Cafe The CONCLUSION. 311 Cafe will bear this Wantonefs, and whetl^^r fuch Expreflions be conftant with your duty. I do not think it hard, I confefs, to make out the pru- dence of their Determinations : but I think it hard, that a Puhltck Rule ihou'd not be thought Reafon enough to juflify things of this foit, and to oblige the People to Complyance without more ado. Certainly there is no Profped of Union, till Men learn Humility and Modelly, and are con- tented to be Govern'd. What is the duty of Su- periors in our Cafe, I cannot determin : but lure I am, that a Change (^tho' in things perfedly indifferent) is no indifferent thing ; and 'tis infinite odds, but if once they begin to change without ne- ceffity, there will never be an end of changing. But farther, I defire you to confider, that the mod eminent even of your own Writers, do flatly condemn your Separation from the Church of Eng- land, For they acknowledge her to be a true Church, and {!?) hold, that Tou are not to feparate farther jrom a true Churchy than the things 'jou feparate for^ are . unlawful^ cr cortceiv\i fo to he\ that is, they hold that you ought to go as far as you can, and do what you lawfully may, towards Communion with it. They (c) hold alfo, that Tou are not to feparate from a Church for unlawful things^ if the things ac-* counted unlawful^ are not of fo heinous a Nature {Jj) See Burroughs'^ Ircn. p. 184. VincJ. of Fresh. Gov. BnnHy's Arraignm. p. 16, 51. Corbet's P leu for Lzy Com. Newcomen'j Iren. Epift. to the Read. BulVs Trya!, c. 7. Jerubbaal, p. iS, 30, Throu^hton'i Apol. p. 107. Robinfon of the Lawful, of Hear. p.ult. (c) See Tombes'^ Theod. Anfwer to Pref. Se6t. 13. Blake's Vind. c. 31. Brinlly'j Arrmignm. p. fo. NoyesV Temple Meaf, p. 78. Owen's Evangel. Love, p. 76. Cotton on the i Epift. of John, p. 15-6. Baxter's Cme, dir. 5-, Vines on the Sacram. p. a39. CorbctV 4cc. of Sep. p. J03. Jerubbaal, p. 12. U 4 0S / BIZ The CO N L LU S 10 N, as to unchurch a Churchy or are not imposed as ne- cejfar'j 'Terms of Communion. Nay, they (ij pro- duce fcveral arguments to prove, that Defers in IVor/bip^ if noj ejfential^ are no jufi reafon for with- drawing frc7n it. I. Becaufe to break off Com- munion for luch Defe6ls, wou'd be to look after a greater Perfe6lion, than this prefent ftate will admit of. 2, Our Savior and his Apoftles did not feparate from defedive Churches. 3. Chrift doth ftill hold Communion with defective Chur- ches, and fo ought we. 4. To feparate from fuch defsdive Churches, wou'd deftroy all Communion, Nor, 5. Is it at all warranted in Scripture. Nor, 6. Is it neceflary -, becaufe a Perfon may commu- nicate in the Worfhip, without partaking in thofe Corruptions. Nay, 7. They urge, that 'tis a duty to join with a defedive Worfhip, where we can have no better. {d) See Brov/nifts ConfefT. art. 36. Jenkin on Judet v. ip. ^llens's Life, p. 5. Engl. Remembrancer, Serm. 4. 14, 16. Ball's Tryai,-p 74, &c. i^i, ^-c. 15-9, c^f. ?o8. Platform of Difcipl. c. 14. Seci. 8. Hilderfham en John, Le^. 55*, 38. Brian'j Dwell, tpith Cod, p. 295, 294. BradJJ?aT»'s Unreafon. of Sep. p. 105, 104. ]. 47. Sapart 2. p. 171. Bunoughs'j Jren. c. 25 Morton'^ Memorial, p. 78, Sec. Blake's Vind. c. 51. Tombes'^'T\\G.od\i\. anfroer to Tref. .Seft. 25". Conf. Savoy, p. 12, f^. Calamy's Door of truth open'd, p. 7. Corbet's N. C. Plea, ^. 6. Robinfon'^ Larcful. of Hear, p. 19, 23. Nye's Cafe of great ^•c pref. Ufa, f . 10, 16, 18. And The CONCLUSION. 513 And as for our Injundtions in particular, they (e) own them to be tolerable •, and what no Church is without, more or lefs ; that they are not luf- ficient t.o hinder Communion ; and that they are but few. Nay farther, feveral of the old Non- Conformifts zealoufly oppos'd Separation from the Church of England^ and join'd with it to their dy- ing Day, tho' they cou'd not conform as Minijlers : and feveral of the Modern Non-Confonnifts have written for Communion with it, and have in print (f) declared it to be their Duty and Pradife. But befides the Sentiments of your own Teach- ers, there is greater Authority to be urged againft you. For in thofe things^ wherein you differ from ns, you are condemned by the FratJife of the Whole Catholic Church for fifteen hundred Tears together-^ and furely this confideration ought to prevail with modeft and peaceable Men. This might afford a large field for Difcourfe : but I Ihall only hint at 2, few Particulars. I . We defire you to produce an Inftance of any fetled Church, that was without Epifcopacy^ till Calvin''^ time. The greateft Oppofers of Epifco- pacy have been forced to grant, that it obtain'd in the Church within a few Years after the Apofiolic Age *, and we are fure we can carry it higher, even to the Apoflles themfelves. There are but two Paflages, and both of them not till the latter end of the fourth Century, that may feem to queftion (e) Sec Lett. Min. of Old Engl. p. 12, 15. Bryants Dwell. with God, p. 311, Throughton's A^oi.c.y.p. 68, Owen's Peacc- OfF. /. 17. Mifch. of Impof. Epjl. Ded. (/j See Baxters Sacrif. Defert. f. jf.Uv. J. Allen's Life, p. iii. CoWns's Dear, of Schifm, p. 6^. Lye's Reaf. Account, 6cc. Hickman's Bonaf. Vap, p II V B/J^t/^r's Pica for Peace, p. 240. Epifcopal / 314 The CONCLUSION. Epifcopfl Authority. That of (g) St. y^rom, when iihprov'd to the utmofl that it is capable of,' only intimates Epif:ovacy not to be Apoftolicd Inftitution. And very clear it is to thofe that are acquainted with St. Jerom's Writings, that he often wrote in hafle, and did not always weio-h things exaflly, and forgot at one time' what he had faid at another ; that many ExprefTions fell from him in the heat of Difputation, according to the warmth and eager nefs of his Temper ; and that he was particularly chafed into this AfTer- tionby the fierce oppofition of the Beacons at Rome^ who began to Ufurp upon, and overtop the Presh-jters -, which tempted him to magnify and extol their Place and Dignity, as anciently equal to the Epifcopal Office, and as containing in it the cofcmon Rights and Privileges of Priefthood. For at other times, when he wrote with cooler thoughts about him, he do's plainly and frequently enough aiTert the Authority of Bifhops over Pref- byters ; and did himfelf conflantly live in Com- munion with, and Subje6i:ion to Bifhops. The other paffage is that of Aerius^ who held indeed that a Bifnop and a Presbyter differ'd nothing in Order, Dignity, or Power. But he embrac'd this falfe opinion merely thro' Envy, being vext to fee that his Companion Euftathius had got- ten the Bifhoprick of Schaftia^ which himfelf had aim'd at. This made him furious, and talk extravagantly : but the Church immediately bran- ded him for an Heretic^ and drove him and his Followers out of all Churches, and from all Ci- ties and Villages. And Epiphanius^ who was his Contemporary, reprefents him as very little better (^; In Epift. ad Ti;. cap. i. The CONCLUSION. 315 than a Mad-man. 2. We defire you to name any Church, chat did not confVantly ufe /or;;zj of Prayer in public Worfliip j but of this I have difcours'dat large in the T/jirJ Chapter. 3. Shew us any Church, that did not alwaies obferve Fefti- vals in Commemoration of Chrifl and his Saints. 4. Name any one Church fince the Apoflles times, that had not its Rites and Ceremonies, as many fif not morej in number, and as hable to Ex- ception, as thofe that we ufe. Nay, there are few things (if any at allj requir'd by us, which were not in ufe in the beft Ages of Chriftianity. Nay farther, I cou'd eafily (b) fhew, that moft (if not all) the Ufages of our Church, are either pra- <5lis'd in Foreign Churches, or at leaft allow'd of by the mod Eminent and Learned Divines of the Reformation. Confider alfo, that Separation is the ready way to bring in Popery^ as Mr. Baxter (i) has prov'd. The Church of England is the great Bulv/ark againft Popery, and therefore the Papifts have us'd all poiTible Means to deftroy it, and particularly by Divifions. They have attempted to pull it down by pretended Protejlant hands *, and have made ufe of you to bring about their own defigns. In order hereunto they have upon all Occafions flrenuoufly promoted the Separation, and mixt themfelves with you ; they have put on e very- Shape, that they might the better follow the common Outcry againft the Church as Popifi' and Antichriftian ; fpurring you on to call for a more pure and fpiritual way of WorOiip, and to clamor for Liberty and Toleration , as forefceing, {h) See Durel'^ View of the Goverm. &:c. and Sprint's Caf- fand, Anglic, p. 123, &c. (i) Defence, p. i;,;-!. that / BT6 7he CONC LUSION. that when they had fubverted all Order, and bea- ten you out of all fober Principles, you muft be necefTitated at lafl to center in the Communion of the Romyh Church. This trade they began almoft in the very infancy of the Reformation -, as appearg by the (k) ftories of Comin and Heath : and no doubt they held on the fame in fucceeding Times ; as appears (befides all other Inflances^ by (1) Bellami's Letter concerning the beft Way of managing the Popijb Interefl in England upon the Refloration of King Charles the II. For therein it was advis'd to foment Fears and Jealoufies of the King and Bifhops ; to afperfe the Bifhops and Minifters of the Church of England^ and to reprefent its Dodrin and Worfhip as coming too near the Church of Rome -, to fecond the fadious in promoting an Indulgence, and to endevor, that the Trade and Treafure of the Nation might be engrofs'd betv/een themfelves and other difcon^ tented Parties. We know how refllefs and induftrious the Ro- mijh Fadion has ever been ; and the only vifible fecurity we have againft the prevailing of it, lies in the iirm Union of Proteftants, And therefore I conjure you by all the kindnefs, which you pre- tend for the Proteftant Religion, heartily to join in Communion with us. For the Common Enemy waits all Opportunities, and ftands ready to enter at thofe Breaches, which you are Making. You might condemn the Raflmefs of your own Coun- sels, and lament it, it may be, when it wou'd be too late •, if you jfhou'd fee Popery erected upon the ruins of that Church, which you your felves [k) Foxes and Firebrands. (/) See Stillmgfleet'& Unreafona- blcaefs of Separation, ?ref. p, 20, &c. had The CONCLUSION, ^17 had overthrown. It wou'd be a fad addition to your Miferies, if the Guilt and Shame of them too might be laid to your charge. With what remorfe wou'd you refle(51: upon it ('when the heat of your PafTion was over} if the Froteftnnt Profeflion jfhou'd be farther endanger'd, and the Agents of Rome get greater advantages daily by thofe Diftraftions, which have been fecretly mana- ged by them, but openly carried on and maintain'd by your felves ? With what face wou'd you look, to fee the Papifts^ not only triumphing over you, but mocking and deriding you, for being fo far impos'd upon by their Cunning, as to be made the immediate inftruments of your own Ruin ? Therefore I befeech you not to a(fi:, as it you were profecuting the Defigns of the Conclave ^ and proceed juft as if you were govern'd by the Decrees of the pretended Infallible Chair. You may be afham'd to look fo much like Tools in the hands of the Jefuits ; when you fuffer your felves to be guided by thofe Meafures which they had taken, and talk and do as they wou'd have you, as if you were immediately infpir'd from Rome. To thefe arguments I muft add another, which I hope will prevail with you ; viz. I cannot fee, how you can avoid being felf-condemn'd, if you continue in your Separation. For certain it is, that moft of you have been at our Churches, and received the Sacrament there -, and I am not wil- ling to think, that you aded againil your Con- fciences, or did it merely to fecure a gainful Of- fice, or a place of Trull, or to efcape die Lalh and Penalty of the Law. Thefe are Ends fo very Vile and Sordid i this is fo horrible a Proflitution of the Holy Sacrament, the moll venerable My- ilcr/ 318 The CONC LUSIO N, Hery of our Religion ; fo deliberate a Way of finning, even in the moft folemn adl of Wor- Ihip •, that I can hardly fufpedt any fhou'd be guilty of it, but Men of Profligate and Atheifti- cal Minds. But then, why do's not the fame Principle, that brings you at one Time, bring you at another ? Why can we never have your Com- pany, but when Punifhment or Advantage prompts you to it? We blame the Papijh for difpenfing with Oaths, and receiving the Sacrament to ferve a turn, and to advance the Intereft of their Caufe ; but God forbid, that fo heavy a Charge fliou'd ever lie at the Doors of Prcteftants ; and efpe- cially thofe who wou'd be thought moil to ab- hor PopJJj pradlices ; and who wou'd take it ill to be accounted not to make as much, if not more, Confcience of their Waies, than other Men. Now I befeech you to reafon a httle •, If our Communion be finful, why did you enter into it ? If it be lawful, why do you forfake it ? Is it not that which the Commands of Authority have ty'd upon you ; which Commands you are bound to fubmit to, not only for JVrath hut alfo for Confci- ence fake ? Are not the Peace and Unity of the Church, things that ought greatly to fway with all Sober, Humble and Confidering Chriftians ? If it he pojfihle^ faies the Apoftle, aiid as fjiiich as lies in you, live peaceahly with all Men, Rom. 12. 18. And fhall Peace be broken only in the Church, where it ought to be kept moft intire ? and that by thofe who acknowledge it to be poffthle, and within their Power ? Are you fatisfy'd in your Confcience to join in Communion with us ; and will you not do it for the fake of the Church of God ? Will you refufe to do what is lawful, and ("as the Cafe ftands) The CONCLUSION. 319 Hands) neceflary in order to Peace -, only becauie Authority Commands, and has made it your Duty ? Let me intrecit you, as you love your dear Redeemer, to do as much for the Peace of Ilis Churchy as for a Vote or Office •, and to come to the Sacrament of his Body and Blood as ChrifiianSy and not as Politicians. Let thefe great truths fmk into your hearts •, and confider, I befeech you, v/hat you are doing. Be well advis'd, before you venture upon that, v/hich makes you guilty of a fm of the blackeft Nature, Be not blinded by Prejudice or Paffion, nor take Opinions upon truft : but fearch and examin into the truth. Confciences truly tender are willing and defirous to embrace all Opportunities of Re- folution ; and are ready to kifs the hand, ihat wou'd bring them better Information. They will not negled, much lefs thruft from them, the means that might eafe them of their Doubts and Scru- ples. But it looks very odly, that fo many of you are no more concern'd to underfland the true State of the Church of England^ and the Nature and Reafons of her Conflitutions ; that fo few of you care to confer with thole that are able to in- ftrud you : but cry out. You are llitisfy'd already •, nay, fome of you, to my knowledge, when de- fir'd to propofe your Scruples, in order to the giving you Satisfadlion, have plainly and abfo- lutely refusM to do it. There is little reafcn to believe, that fuch Perfons have ever read and ex- amin'd, what the Church of England has to fay for her felf. Are there not many, that not only Scruple, but rail at the Book of Common Prajer^ that yet never heard it, nor perhaps ever read it, in all their Lives ? And if this be not to fpeak e^ 1 of what they know not, I cannot tell what is. You 320 The COKCLUSIOK. You generally forbear our Public Worihip, up- on no other ground, but becaufe you prefer youf own arbitrary way before it : whereas I niay take the confidence to affirm, that our Liturgy was made and revis'd with that Prudence and Mode- ration, that Care and Circumfpedlion, that there is nothing now extant in that kind, that has been compos'd with greater Wifdom and Piety. If I fhou'd compare it with the Performances in the other way (not to mention the many indecent, incoherent, irreverent Expreffions, tofaynoworfc that might be colledled) let any Extempore Prayer, made by the ableli: of thofe, that magnify that way and defpife ours, be taken in writing and publilhi'd to the World •, and I am confident, that one Man, without any great pains, may find more things really exceptionable in that fingle Prayer, in a iliort time j than the feveral Parties of Dijffen- Urs, with all the Diligence they have hitherto us'd, have been able to difcover in the whole Service of our Church, in more than an hundred Years. And yet fome of you, that feek induftri- oufly for Scruples in the Co??imon Prayer, will readily join in Extempore Prayers without any Scru- ple. This is fuch Partiality and unequal Dealing, as cannot eafily be excus'd. 'Tis true, the early Prepofleflion of a contrary Opinion, the powerful Prejudices of Education, and implicit and unexamin'd belief of what their Guides and Leaders teach them, have a llrange force upon the minds of Men •, fo that in ehed; they no more doubt of the truth and goodnefs of the Caufe they are engag'd in, than they queftion the Articles of their Creed. Thefe and the like are very dangerous and ufual Miilakes, that do frequently proceed from the Prevalence of our * Pa*flions. The CONC LVSIO N. 321 Paflions. Now the iirft ftep towards Concord in Opinion and AfFedions, is to difpofe your Minds to a calm and Teachable Temper ; to be alwaies ready to acknowledge the force of an Argument, tho' it contradid your perfuafions never fo much. Wherefore I do once and again intreat you, that laying afide all Pride, Partiality and Self conceit^ you wou'd not think more highly of your fehes^ and of your own way, than you ought to think. Truth makes the eafieft entrance into Modcft and Humble Minds. 'The Meek will he guide in Judgment^ the Meek will he teach his f-Fay, The Spirit of God never refts upon the proud Man. But efpecially you muft be very careful, that Secular Interejl did not cither engage you in the Separation at the beginning, or provoke you to continue in it. And there is the morereafonto put you upon this Inquiiy, not only becaufe ^e-r cular Ends are very apt to mix with, and fhelter themfelves under the fliadow of Religion ; but becaufe this has been an old Artifice, made ufe of to promote Separation. Thus the Bonatip upheld their Separation, and kept their Party fall: together, by trading only within themfelves, and employing none but thofe that wou'd be of their fide ; nay, and fometimes hiring Pcrfons to be Baptiz'd into their Party, as Crifpm did the People of Mappalia, And how evident the fame Policy is among our modern ^lakers^ is too notorious to need either Proof or Obfervation. Whoever looks into the Nation, muft needs take notice how In- terefts are form'd, and by what methods Parties and Fadions are kept up ; how many thoufands of the poorer fort of you depend upon this or that Man for your Work and Livelyhood \ how many of you depend upon others for your Trade, X v/hom 5 22 ^f g^^'^'^g Offence^ 6cc= whom accordingly thofe Men can readily Com- mand, and do produce to give Votes and increafc Parties on all Public Occafions ; and what little encouragement any Man finds from you, that de- ferts you, and comes over to the Church of Eng- land. Let me befeech you therefore impartially to examin your felves ; and to fearch, whether a worldly fpirit be not at the bottom of your Zeal and Stifnefs. Thefe, I confefs, are Defigns too bafe and fordid to be own'd above-board : but Be not deceived, God is not mocked •, Man looks to the outward Appearance^ hit God looks to the Heart. If you hope to gain and grow rich by your Se- paration \ n you are afham'd or fcorn to retradb your Opinions •, if you imagin you have more Light than the firft Reformers, v/hen indeed you are very ignorant •, if you cannot endure to be opposed in any thing ; if you murmur and re- pine at your Governors when they require your Obedience, where you are unwilling to pay it ; thefe are Signs, that your affedlions are turbulent and unruly. And while you are thus difpos'd, you ch. never be afTur'd, but that Covetoufnefs, Pride, aid Impatience, might be the greateil Motives, tlat induc'd you to make a Separation, and the ft-ongeft Arguments that you have to maintain j But above all things, I befeech you for the jfeke of yoLir precious Souls, to confider the Heinous Nature and Guilt cf Schifin ; which is nothing fife but the feparating your felves from a true Z^hurch, without any juil occafion given. I doubt, rou are not fufBciently fenfible, how much you Dppofe that Spirit of Peace and Brotherly Love, ivhich fhou'd difiufe it k\^ thro' the whole Body >f Chriftian People 5 when you fuppofe every (lender The CONCLUSION. 323 flcnder Pretence enough to juilify your departing from us, and fetting up a Qiurch againft a Church. The Old Non-Conformifts charg'd the People to be as tender of Church-Divifion, as they were of Drunkenefs, Whoredom, or any other enormous Crimes ; whereas you feem to think it a matter almoll indifferent, and that you are left to your own choice to join with what Society of Chri- flians you pleafe. Which giddy principle, if it fliou'd prevail, wou'd certainly throw us into an abfolute Confufion ; and introduce all the Errors and Mifchiefs, that can be imagin'd. But our Blefled Lord founded but one Univerfal Church *, and when he was ready to be crucify'd for us, and pray'd not for the ApoiVles alone, bat for them alfo that Jhou'd believe in him thro" their Word\ one of, the lad Petitions which he then put up, amongfl diverfe others to the fame Purpofe, was ^hat they all 7nay he one^ as thou Father art k me, and I in thee ; that they alfo 7nay he one in us^ that the World may believe that thouhafi fent7?ie^ John 17. 21. 'Tis plain, this was to be a vifible Unity^ that might be taken notice of in the World, and fo become an Inducement to move Men to embrace the Chriftian Faith. Peace and Amity, and a good Correfpondence betwixt the feveral Members of which they confift, is the only Beauty, Strength and Security of all Societies j and on the con* trary, the nouriihing of Animofities, and run- ning into oppofite Parties and Fadlions, do's mightily weaken, and by degrees almoft una- voidably draw on the Ruin and DiiTolution ^f any Community, whether Civil or Sacred. Coi- cord and Union therefore will be as neceflary for the Prefervation of the Church, as of the State. It has been known by too fad an Experience, 11 X 2 wdl S24. The CO NC LU S 10 N. well in ours, as other Ages, what a pernicious In^. fluence the Inteftine Broils and Quarrels among Chriuians have had. They have been the great ftumbhng-biock to Jews^ I'urks, and Heathens^ and the*fnain hindrance of their Converfion -, they have rfiade fome among our felves to become Doubtful and Sceptical in their Rehgion j they have 1^ others into many dangerous Errors, that fhake 'the very Foundations of our Faith -, and fome they have tempted to cafl off the Natural fenfe they had of the Deity, and embolden'd them to a profefs'd Atheifm. Therefore as you wou'l avoid the hardening of Men in Atheifm and Infidfflity, and making the Prayer of our dying Savi|r (as much as in you liesj wholly inefiedlu- al : you ought to be exceeding cautious, that you do not wilfully Divide his Holy Catholick Churchy You are often warn'd of this , and how many Arguments do's St. Paul heap together to perfuade yo'j to keep the Unit'j of the Spirit in the Bond cf Peace ? One Body and one Spirit^ even as you are ealfd in one Hope of your Callings one Lord, one Faith, cniBaptifin^ one God and Father of all \ Eph. 4. 3, 4, [5, 6. And how pathetically do's the fame A- pdftle exhort you again to the fame thing, by all tti mutual Endearments that Chriftianity affords? In there he therefore any Confolation in Chrift^ if any (Afnfort of Love^ if any Fellow fhip of the Spirit^ if a y Bowels and Mercies •, fulfil ye my Joy^ that ye h like minded^ havi?ig the fame Love^ being of one jccord^ of one Mind-, Phil. 2. i, 2. Thefe ve- h 'ment Exhortations to Peace and Concord, do f riclly oblige you to hold Communion with that ( hurch, which requires nothing but what is lawful you„ They that have the fame Articles of Faith, and The CONCLUSION, 325 ^nd hope to meet in the fame Heaven, thro* the Merits of the fame Lord -, fhou'd not be afraid to come into the fame AffembUes, and join ferioufly in fending up the fame Prayers, and participating of the fame Sacraments. Befides the many ilritt Precepts and other ftrong Obhgations which you have to this Duty, our -Savior dy'd, that he might gather together in One, the Children of God that were fcatter^d abroad-, John ii. 52. And do you not then contradid this end of his Death, in letting thofe at variance, whom he intended to Unite ? Nay, may you not be faid to Crucify the Son of God afrefh^ by ma?ngling and dividing a found and healthful part of that Body, of whch he owns himfelf to be the Head ? If indeed oar Church did require you to profefs any falfe D). 6brin, or to do any thing contrary to any ci- vine Command ; you were bound in fuch inftancs to withdraw from her : but fince her Doftrii, Difciplin and Worfhip are good and lawful ; yoi are indifpenfably engaged to join in Communion with her. For as I faid before, and it cannot bi inculcated too* often^ Nothing hut the Unlawful nefs of joining with us can make a Separation haw- ful. Let it pity you at leail to fee the ghaftly wounds, that are ftill renew'd by the continuance of our Divifions. Be perfuaded to have fome Compaflion on a Bleeding Church, that is ready to faint, and in imminent danger of being made a prey to her Enemies, by the unnatural Heats and Animofities of thofe, that fhou'd Support and De- fend her. Why fhou'd you leave her thus De- folate and Forlorn, when her prefent Exigencies require your moft Cordial Afliftance ? If the con- dition ®f h^r Communion were fuch as God's Laws 325 T^e CONCLUSION. Laws did not allow ; you might forfake her that had forfaken him : but fince this cannot be Ob- jeded againft her; fince fhe cxz&is no forbidden thing of you, you ought to flrengthen her Hands by an unanimous Agreement. Since the Subftan- tials of Religion are the fame, let not the Cir- cumftances of External Order and Difciplin be any longer an Occafion of Difference amongft us. And fo fhall we bring Glory to God, a happy Peace to a Divided Church, a confiderable Se- curity to the Proteftant Religion ; and probably defeat the fubtil Pra6tifes of Rome^ which now flands gaping after All, and hopes by our Diftra- ^tibns to repair the LofTes fhe has fuffer'd by the ^^ormation. [ay the Wifdom of Heaven make all wick- Purpofes unfuccefsful ; and the BlefTed Spi- of Love heal all our Breaches, and profper the laritable Endeavors of thofe that follow after E A C E. Amen, ^ U E END. BOOKS mitten by Edward Wells, D. D. Re^or of Cotesbach in Leicellerfhire •, Printed for^ and Sold by James and John Knapton, at the Crown ;;/ St. Paul'i-Church-Yard. AN Hiftorical Geography of the Old and New Teftamcnt-, be- ing a Geographical and Hifl-orical Aecount of all the Places and Countries, mentioned or referred to, in the Books of the Old and NewTeftament, very ufefulforthe underftandingtheHllory of the faid Books, and of feveral particular Texts. Throughouc is inferted the prelent State of fuch places, as have been lately \ifit- cd by perfonsot our own Nation and of unqueftionable Fidcity: Whereby the Work is render'd very ulcful and entertaining. II- luflrated and adorned with feveral Maps, Cutts, andChronologcal Tables, in 4, Vols ^vo. The id Edition. The Young Gentleman*sCourfe oi Mathematicks in 5 Vols S(7» Containing fuch Elements as arc mod ufeful and eafy tobeknowim Arithmetick and Geometry. Volume the ift. Trigonometry, MechanicksandOpticks. Vol. 2d. Aftronomy, Chronology and Dialing. Vol. 3d. lUuftrated with feveral Copper-plates. The Second Edition, N.B. Any of the Volumes may be had feparately. An Help for the more eafy and clear underftaading of the Hoi Scriptures, being all the Books of the New Teftament explainci after the following Method, viz.. i. The Original or Gret^ Texi according to thebeftand moft ancient Readings. 2. The common Z«:^///7?Tranflation render'd more agreeable to the Original. 3. A Paraphrafe, in which the difficult Exprefliions and PafTagcs areex- plain'd, ^c. 4. Annotations relating to the feveral Particulars. To which is added, A Treatife of the Harmony of the Four Gofpelsj alfo Chronological Tables, ^c. In 2 Vols, in /!^to. A Paraphrafe, ^r. on the Book of Daniel, in the fame Method. Controverfial Trcatilcs againjl the Vtjfcnters. The 6th Edit. pr. 3 s. 6d. An Expofition on the Church Catechifm. price 6d. Pravers on Common Occaficns, appertaining to the foremcnti- oned Expolition of the Church Catechifm. pr 6. d. Hartnonti* Gra?nc.ticalis, or a View of the Agreement between ib.QLatin and Greek Tongues, as to the declining of Words, 5cc. pr, I s. 6d, A Letter to a Friend concerning the great Sin of taking Cad*s JSiame in vain, price i u. or 100 for 6 s. U/nvorthinefs no E.xcufe for not coming to the Sacrament, pr. i^. ©r 100 for 6 s* BOOKS printed for Richard Wilkin, at the King'j-Head in St. Vz-uVs- Church-Tar d. THE Chriftian's Defence againft the Fears of Death, with Seafonable Diredions how to die Weil : By the Eminent Charles D'relincourt. The 8th Edit. An Epitome of Dr. Comber's Companion to the Temple. The 3d Edit. Th( Catechifm of the Church of InglanJ, with Proofs from the r*wTeftament, and feme additional Qucftionsand Anfwers; dividf into ii Sedlions. The loth Edition. By Z, IJham,\l.D^ PricfThree Pence i or 10s. .per Hundred. )aily Office for the Sick, compil'd out of the H. Scripture and the Jturgy of our Church; with occalional Prayers, Meditations, >iredlions, and an Office of Thankfgiving for Recovery. The Edition. By Z. Ijham, D. D. le Church Catechifm, with Explanations and Scripture-Proofs. Fcihe Ufe of a private Parifli. The j-ih Edition Correded. Price 3Jor 10 s. per Hundred. Difcourfe fent home to the Abfenters from the Church of \land. In two Parts. The Firft plainly (hewing them that is more efpecially Prefent, and more efpecially to be Wor- 'd in his own Houfe. The Second is Written unto them. It they may know how they ought to behave themfelves in the Hife of God which is theChurch. By Tho. Hewerdine. Vicar of Iffingbourn in Cambridge- fhire. [The Countrey-Curate to the Countrey-People, Endeavouring tin account of the Crofs in Baptifm, Kneeling at the Holy Com* )uniont the Wedding King, and the Surplice. With a brief Intro- idion. Shewing the True State ot the Toleration, fitted to lemeaneft Capacities, ^y Tho. Hewerdine, r/V«r o/Baffingbourn, Cambridge-fliire. The Neceffity of conftant Attendance on the Publick Worfhip »f God, and of Chriftian Communion. In a Dialogue between a Country Gentleman and a Farmer. The Second Edition. Price d. or io ;. an Hundred. A Paraphrafe on the Ten Commandments. Firft composM for [the Ufeof a Private Family, and now made Publick for the be- nefit pf others. Price a Pennv. J All a ^ cL i