A RESOLUTION OF THIS CASE, VIZ.  
Whether it be Lawful to separate from the public Worship of God in the PAROCHIAL Assemblies of England, upon that New Pretence, which some Men make, Of the Case being much Altered now from what it was, when the Puritans wrote against the Brownists and the Presbyterians against the Independent.  
LONDON, Printed by A. Grover, for Walter Kettilby at the Bishop's-Head in St. Paul's Church-yard. 1683.   

The more Modern Objections, which are now pretended by our Dissenters, to alter the Case, are these which follow; being Particularly answered,( mostly out of the Nonconforming Ministers own Writings) in these Papers.  

1. IT looks more like compliance with Carnal Interest than Conscience, for Men to hold Communion with Parish-Assemblies at this time.  
2. There are many more Corruptions and Impositions in the Church now, which hinder our Communion with it.  
3. I could go to the public Assemblies if I were left to my own Liberty of Conscience, but I cannot do it being compelled.  
4. We have now more Experience and Light than was formerly, to direct us.  
5. If we should now join in Communion with the Church of England, we should seem guilty of apostasy, in building up the things we ourselves once destroyed.  
6. We are entered now into a Solemn League and Covenant to endeavour greater Reformation in the Church.  
7. If I comply with the Liturgy at this Time, I should gratify the Papists, and weaken the Protestant Interest.  
8. I cannot hold Communion with Railers and Persecutors, and such Scandalous Persons, as are most, Ministers and People in the public Assemblies now adays▪  
9. The way of Preaching is now quiter altered, and the Doctrines that are generally taught are very corrupt; either mere Morality or else thorow-paced Arminianism and contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England.  
10. Our Nonconforming Ministers themselves( who doubtless well know what they do) will not go to Church now, whereas formerly they did.  
11. If we should not attend the Ministry of the Nonconformists still, They must starve for want of Maintenance, they being Poor and Indigent, having lost their Livings.  
12. There have been so many Books written of late in Defence of Nonconformity, that I cannot be satisfied, but still remain in Doubt, Whether it be lawful to hold Communion with the Parochial Assemblies: I vehemently suspect it to be sinful, and whatsoever is not of Faith is Sin, and therefore there's an end of the Controversy.    

A RESOLUTION OF THIS CASE, &c.  
PEACE and Unity, as they are the great design of the Christian Doctrine, so is the want of them no where more fatal, and more to be lamented than in the Christian Church. Our later Ages have sufficiently demonstrated the sad effects of our dissensions; I wish the sense of them might unite all Christians; but especially such of us, as separate upon small pretences, if not less Reason. For 'tis Pitty that any[ little] matter should be the occasion of so great an Evil amongst such. 'tis enough sad, that Protestants( after all their peaceable Endeavours) cannot gain Unity with others: 'tis too much so, that any Breach should be maintained and widen'd among themselves. Here, Friends ought not sure to fall out with, and separate from one another upon light occasions; which, to be sure, can effectually advantage none but their Enemies, and afflict none more than themselves.  
The sense of this hath, not only here of late forced many seasonable Persuasives from several of our Eminent London-Ministers of the Church of England,( in those excellent Resolutions of many Cases of Conscience) tending to Unite us; but likewise hath ever rendered separation from the public Worship of God in the Parochial Assemblies, so unbeseeming, so unnatural even to the Old Nonconforming Divines themselves, That there is nothing can be more evident to the Intelligent part of Mankind who have red Men and Books, than that themselves have Writ strenuously against it( as hath been sufficiently already shown in that late excellent Piece, called, The Case of Lay-Communion, justified from the Testimony of above an hundred Nonconformists) and in their own Writings have answered all the Objections that are usually made. And therefore our present Separatists, to vindicate themselves in this Point, and that they may not be thought Apostates from their Principles, have endeavoured to find out a vast Difference between the state of the Parish Churches now, and what they were in those days.  
The Design of this Paper is( with the greatest Candour and Charity) to help them likewise off this Rock, against which they seem so willing to shipwreck the Peace and Unity of the Church, and to consider those Differences which are pretended, and to answer them( for their stronger Convincement) mostly out of their own Writings( not meddling with any that have been collected into that late Piece above-named) against that New set of Objections, lately started up; when the old one's like so many lying Oracles are struck Dumb by the force of Ancient and Modern Arguments of those several eminent Divines in London.  
First of all, They now Object and tell us, That it looks more like Compliance with Carnal Interest than Conscience for Men to hold Communion with Parish-Assemblies at this time.  
An Objection than which none is more common( amongst the Vulgar of them especially) when Communion is urged. But why must a Regular Obedience to Laws be called a Compliance with Carnal Interest? Why may it not be more Charitably presumed that the Reason why some Men alter their former Principles and Practices, is, because they have now taken more pains than ordinary in studying, reading, and discoursing the Point of Lay-Communion, and so discover themselves to have been in the wrong all this while, having been imposed upon by the subtle Insinuations of their Guides, whose wrested Interpretations of Scripture and Misapplications of Texts have lead them into Paths of Separation in order to the promoting a Private Interest. No one Principle hath proved a greater friend to Separation than Men's Pride, in thinking it a Disgrace to change their Minds tho' upon the clearest Convictions and most apparent Reason. Hath it not been the practise of the Wisest Men that ever were, to alter their Judgments upon more mature and solid thoughts? Must a Man always be of this Mind because he once was so? St. Austin himself wrote his Retractions. Days teach Knowledge, and every Man is, or ought to be, Wiser as he is Older, and more experienced. We ought not, therefore, to censure any Man, as guided by Carnal Interest, when he can give a better Reason for his Action in attending the public Worship of God in the Parochial Assemblies, than we who Censure him can give against it; and perhaps he hath taken ten times the pains rightly to inform his Understanding, than one that scruples it hath done. So that what one Man may think a Sin to do, he may think it a Sin to forbear. The uncharitable Censorious Person hath lost half the Religion of a Christian; and hath exchanged one of the fairest Graces of a Saint, for one of the Blackest Characters of a Devil.  
By the same Rule that I censure another Man for differing from me, he may censure me for differing from him; and then if Almighty God should Damn us all, for such things which straight-laced, narrow-soul'd Christians Damn one another for, very few would be saved. It's better to give an account to a Merciful God for too much Charity, than for too great Censoriousness.  
The Reverend Mr. How methinks( would they consider him) hath spoken enough to convince them of this fault, and to answer this their Objection, in his Sermon at the Morning Exercise, in that last Volume lately published.  
This Objection( says he) smells strong in a very high Degree of Uncharitableness, very unbecoming a true Christian temper; which would make us abstain from Censuring of one another as Insincere, upon the account of Religious Differences. Where Love remains and bears rule, it cannot be that they, who are unsatisfied with the way of Worship that Generally obtains, should censure them that are satisfied, as if they were Insincere, merely because of this Difference.  
Why should we think that nothing but corrupt Inclinations must govern some Christians, who think it their Duty to attend the public Forms, thereby to testify their Union with other sincere Christians under those Forms, especially in a time when the Contest is so high in the World, between them who prosess the Substance of reformed Christianity, and them that have so much deformed it? Why may not some Christians think it becomes them at any time to express their Unconfinedness to a Party, and to use that Christian Liberty, which they think should not be judged by another Man's Conscience which yet they would have regard unto, were there not greater reasons to preponderate?  
True Christian Love, and Compassion of human frailty, and an humble sense of a man's own weakness should oblige him to think, that Conscience towards God may have a greater Hand in guiding Men the different ways they take, than is commonly thought. We ought to consider that tho' such and such reasons seem not weighty to us, they may to some others, who are as much afraid of sinning against God as we; and perhaps their Understandings are as good in other matters as ours. Men's Apprehensions are of a different size, and consequently their conscientious Determinations: And they have various relishes of things which we ought to consider with Equanimity to make us resrain hard Censures. The Martyrs in Queen Mary's Days found great Spiritual refreshing by the Common Prayer: And so some in our Days profess that their Hearts have been much warmed, and their Affections raised by it. It would be uncharitable, more to suspect their sincerity than our own. It's a difficult thing to sit in judgement upon another Man; especially in a matter of so high a nature as the Posture of his heart towards God. If some have more Latitude than I, and think what they may do in present Circumstances; so far as they may, they must. Would it not be the Dictate of Love, patiently to admit it, especially when it comes to suffering? Thus he.  
And what can be more close, then such reasoning, to their Objection? And not much behind him is Mr. Gifford, the old Nonconformist, who was so far from looking upon Communion with the Church, as a mere compliance with Carnal Interest, that he tells you Some Separatists are proceeded so far, that they will not hear the Prayers of the Book; which I take to be a greater Sin than many do suppose. Nay, says he, some are gone so far as to fall into a Damnable Schism, and yet take themselves for the most godly Christians. See his Preface to his second Treatise against the Donatist's of England( for so he calls the Separatist'.)  
Thus you see what sense your own Leaders profess, concerning this first Objection, which is fond suffered to retain you from our public Assemblies. It is, certainly, a very Antichristian temper, and hath in it a very high Degree of paroxysm, to censure Men for their Obedience to the Laws of God and the King. I'm sure it's contrary to an Apostolical Cannon, 
Rom. 14. 3.  for him that eateth not, to judge him that eateth: As well as for him that eateth, to judge him that eateth not.  
I but( still Object our Lay-Separatists) The case is now much altered, by the many corrupt Impositions, and therefore we cannot Communicate with your Parochial Assemblies.  
To this I answer. The moderate Nonconformists themselves do( as they cannot, indeed, in Reason, do otherwise) with one consent declare, that Separation from the public Worship of God, when it is merely upon the account of some Corruptions and Defects in the Circumstantial Modes of Administration, where the Substance of Religion is sound and good( maintaining neither Heresy in Doctrine, nor Idolatry in Worship) is to be absolutely condemned. But the Parish Churches of England, where the Substance of Religion is sound and good, are( confessedly) true Churches of Christ: Erg: They are not to be separated from, upon this pretence, that there are some supposed Corruptions and Defects in the Circumstantial Modes of Administration. Where the Ground is sound and good, we may safely venture to raise our Building, the Quagmires should be round about us. Shall men( says Mr. Ben. Bruning, in his Sermon preached at Ipswitch, at the Election of Parliament Men, 1660) chop off the Head of Religion itself, only because they find a Bauble upon its Sleeve? Nothing can justify Separation from the Church, but that Churches apostasy into down right Idolatry or some Damnable heresy. By all that I can learn from my Bible, we can be assured of nothing else: for Persons willingly to separate and refuse Communion with a Church, so long as God vouchsafe's Communion; how can this be levied, or how will it be answered? I know not. Those Words 
2 Cor. 6. 17.  come out from among them, and be ye separate, have been much abused for the encouragement of Separation from the public Assemblies of England. For who is it, but such as are forlornly voided of all Christian Charity, that dare say concerning the hundred Years past, that the Assemblies of the Church of England have had nothing of the Lord's gracious presence with them? Or that Ordinances have been empty things? He that affirms this, bears false witness against thousands of glorified Saints in Heaven, and Gracious Souls on Earth, who have found to their everlasting comfort the Presence of God in his Ordinances among us. Suppose there are Miscarriages in the Management of God's Worship and Ordinances amongst us, yet if they be not such as drive God away, I see no reason they have to drive us away. If the Lord had ever intended to sand any going whilst he afforded his own presence, [ some] from among them would be improper Language in such a case; It must have been[ go] from among them, not come. Suppose our Lot be cast in a Church that hath Corruptions and Miscarrages whilst it holds the Substantials of true Doctrine and Worship; do any think in this Case, they cannot hold Communion with such a Church without being accessary to its Miscarriages, and incurring the guilt of its Corruptions? I must profess I am clearly of another Opinion and judgement, and am confirmed in it from the practise of our Lord and Master: Who was a member of the Jewish Church, whilst it was corrupt in Doctrine, Worship and Conversation. 'tis true, he was far from owning its Corruptions: He lamented and reproved them, and laboured a Redress; but still held Communion with it as a Member of it. He sharply reproves the seven Churches for what was amiss; and severely threatens them, if they amend not. But all this while, there is not the least blame laid upon any Member of those Churches, for not withdrawing or suspending their Communion. Did their Communion with the Church of Sardis make them accessary to the defilements of it? How then could our Saviour have truly said of them, that they had not defiled their Garments? 
Rev. 3, 4.  Would any man take it well to have a Plague-mark clapped upon his Door because of some Uncleanness in his House? This is the usage that Christ meets withal, when any separate from a Church as Antichristian upon any Grounds short of gross apostasy. Let all the World see that Principles of Loyalty, Legality and Civil Order, are no Inconsistencies with the most attainable heigth's of Heavenly-minded Christianity.  
These are the very Words of this excellent Man; which let any Separatists impartially consider, and then tell me, if imposed Corruptions in a true Church, be sufficient to excuse their Separation from it.  
But the Question is, what are Corruptions and Impositions in the Worship of God. Suppose an hot headed Man, who in the late times of Rebellion and Confusion took upon him the Liberty to call such and such things Corruptions; doth this warrant them to be truly such?  
Let us consider what the more cool and temperate Writers before the Wars called corrupt Impositions.  
Mr. Byfeild, in his Commentary upon St. Peter, and 
1 Pet. 2. 13.  particularly upon this Text, Submit to every Ordinance of Man for the Lords sake, saith; That in Church Matters, the Magistrate may command, and the Subject must obey. And he sets down a Catalogue of many things called Inventions of Man, used in the Worship of God, without any Commandment of God, both before the Law, under the Law, and after the Law, that might lawfully be used. Nay( saith he) Inconvenient Ceremonies in the Worship of God may be used, to prevent worse Inconveniencies. And then he goes on mentioning the particulars, page. 435. In Ceremonial and Circumstantial things, it is not always a Sin to swerve from Examples in Scripture. It does not follow that if Christ did sit at the Supper, therefore it's unlawful to kneel. Sitting at the Sacrament was manifestly a human Invention; which shows that the Commandments of God about Circumstantial things might in some cases be transgressed without Sin, and were never intended to bind the Conscience absolutely as Moral Precepts in Substantials did. As for Example. The Command of God was that every Man-Child should be Circumcised the eighth Day; Yet the Children of Israel were not Circumcised in the Wilderness for forty years together, &c. Nay,( saith he) some significant Ceremonies were lawful: As the Altar by Jordan, the Cup at the Passover, the covering on the Heads of Women, and the Love Feast, with the Holy Kiss. red the Author, and you will receive more Satisfaction.  
Mr. Sprint, the Eminent old Conformist, who wrote that learned and Pious Book called the Necessity of Conformity in Case of Deprivation, will likewise sufficiently satisfy any unprejudiced Reader, who is willing to red the Arguments on both sides.  
Mr. Perkins, likewise, in his Exposition upon the Epistle of judas, hath this passage. If( says he) the Church err in matter of Religion, then must we consider whether the error be in a more weighty and substantial Point, or in matter of less importance. If it be in smaller points,( the Foundation being kept) we may not separate ourselves. If it be in Substance of Doctrine, or in the Foundation, then we must consider whether it err of human Frailty, ●or of Obstinacy: If of Frailty, we may not separate. The Church of Galatia was through Frailty quickly turned to another Gospel, and erred in the Foundation, holding Justification by Works; yet Paul writeth unto it as unto a Church of God. So likewise the Church of Corinth erred grievously, and overthrew the Article of the Resurrection; and yet Paul behaved himself accordingly unto it. But if the Church err in the Substance of Religion obstinately, then with good Conscience Separation may be made. Whence we see( as he afterwards concludes) that no man may with good Conscience separate himself from the Church of England; seeing it teacheth, believeth, and obeyeth the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles.  
The Reverend Mr. Gurnal, in his Book called the Christian in complete armor, doth exceedingly condemn the scrupulous Separatists, who turn their Backs upon the public Worship of God, because of some faults in the Administration. We find, indeed, saith he, Formality forbidden, but not Forms of Prayer: And we are commanded to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, but we are not forbidden to hear their Doctrine.  
Mr. Hudson, in his Vindication of the Essence and Unity of the catholic Church, greatly Laments Separation from the public Assemblies; and condemns those, who call their own Mother Whore, by naming our Church, Babylon, Egypt, Rome, &c. That they may scum the Cream off our Assemblies, Division, saith he, is the Devil's music, that which makes him laugh, should make us weep.  
This Passage of Mr. Gataker's, is likewise very observable, that it's the Work of Angels, not men; at the end of the World, not now, to gather out of Christ's Kingdom all things that offend.  
By what then hath been alleged, this Argument for Separation must necessary fall to the Ground: And tho there were really those Corruptions which the Dissenters do pretend( as I'm sure there is not) in the public Worship of our Parochial Assemblies; yet since all are satisfied that the Substance of it is found and good, no man can, with a good Conscience, actuated by Christian Principles, absent himself upon that account.  
Well then( replies the Separatist) I would go to the public Assemblies if I were left to my own Liberty of Conscience, but I cannot do it being compelled by Penalties, and so imposed upon.  
Why did you not do it then, when you were left to your liberty by Indulgence? What Compulsion absented you, when his Majesty granted you Liberty of Conscience? Then you would not come, because Authority did not compel you to it; and now you refuse, because it does. What a strange, irrational way is this, of humouring your Arguments? What a querulous unchristian temper does such an Objection discover? I 'm sure it would be judged a surly temper, and an high Act of Disobedience in any of your own Children, to tell you, he will not do such or such a thing because you impose your Commands, and require him to do it, and do not leave him to his own Liberty. But( to convince you fairly of this) pray consider the force of this plain Argument seriously with yourselves, viz. Whatever is commanded by the Government, under which we live, and is no Sin against the sovereignty of Almighty God, is a Christian's Duty. But to attend the public Worship of God, is commanded by the Government under which we live, and is no Sin against Almighty God. Erg. It is an indispensible undoubted Duty.  
The mayor Proposition in this Argument is plain from Scripture, Rom. 13. 1 Tit. 3, 1. 1 Pet. 2. 13. The Minor consists of two parts. First, the Government requires it, and secondly, It's no Sin against God. The first part is proved by the Law of the Land: The second is proved by the subsequent Arguments.  
That which satisfieth the Government under which we live, being sin, is a subjects Duty. But such Attendance upon public Worship suits and satisfies the Government. Erg. It's our Duty.  
For if we ought to Pray for Magistrates that we may 
1 Tim. 2. 1, 2.  led a quiet and peaceable Life under them, it's no less our duty to do all lawful actions in order to the same end.  
If it be our duty to follow Peace with all men, the Magistrate 
Heb. 12. 14.  is undoubtedly comprehended, and may justly claim a pre-eminence. If it be our Duty to serve all 
Gal. 5. 13.  Men in all lawful and honest things, why must the Magistrate be excluded? Shall places of Power be shut out of this common privilege? The great example of our blessed Saviour would hereby be thwarted, who conformed to an human Edict, because the Power commanded, and least he should give offence.  
And St. Paul became all things to all men; and we 
1 Cor. 9. 22.  have an Apostolical Canon for Obedience which we ought to follow, if we profess ourselves Christians.  
Men must not imagine they can free themselves from Subjection to lawful Authority by wrested Interpretations and perverse Applications of Holy Scripture; as one lately, who  told his Minister, That Christ had commanded him to stand fast in the Liberty wherewith he had made him free. It's very frequent to hear Christians called upon to come out of Babylon, who were never in it; and to apply those Scriptures which call upon men to come out from amongst Idolaters and Heathens, as if spoken to Christians to separate from Religious Assemblies, because( perhaps) of some Corruptions. For shane let us not cry out against Papists for making the Scriptures a Nose of Wax, and do the same ourselves.  
Some Men( saith Mr. Baxter) who pled for Liberty of Conscience, denied his Majesty( the late Royal Martyr) the use of His own Chaplains, and of the Form prescribed in the Liturgy.  
Do but consider the Judgments of your own Teachers about this matter; and you shall find most of them agreeing in this, That the Imposition of things( not oppugning the Divine Law) by Lawful Authority, ought rather to be an Argument for Obedience, than against it. And this is acknowledged by divers Nonconformists, at the very Savoy-Conference; That an Inconvenient Mode of Worship may be a Sin in the Imposer and in the Chooser and Voluntary User, who may offer God better and will not. And yet it may be, not only Lawful, but a Duty to him, who is necessitated to offer up that or none.  
Nay, The Independents themselves aclowledge, That a Man is obliged in Conscience to hold Communion but with the Purest Church they can.  
Now, if our Constitutions are such, that the Parochial Assemblies are the Purest Church we are permitted to hold Communion with, then we ought to hold Communion with them by their own Argument, or else to go into other Countries where we may enjoy our Liberty in this Particular without breaking the Laws or disturbing the public Peace.  
Mr. Knewstubs( the old Nonconformist) had so great a Reverence for the Laws, That he tells his Readers in his Epistle before his Sermons, That he would not have his Book keep them at home to red on the Lord's Days, but would have them attend the public Worship of God notwithstanding.  
And Mr. Sheffield, in his Discourse of Excuses, saith, It may be lawful to red a good Book at home on a Sabbath Day; but if nothing hinder, it is both scandalous and sinful to forbeast coming to the public Worship of God. Christian Liberty free's us not from Subjection to the Laws of God, nor from obedience to the Laws of human Authority.  
The Laws made to compel men to attend the public Worship of God, were excellently designed in their Original and Piously intended. Men ought to prefer a public Good before a Private Humour. For( as is well observed in Mr. Duty's Epistolatory Discourses) It would lay the Foundation for Strifes and Divisions in a Kingdom to have two ways of Church Government. It may agree with Machiavillian, but with no Christian Policy. Therefore to keep Unity entire, the Few must yield to the mayor Votes.  
There's no man in his right reason( says a Reverend Nonconforming Divine) but will say there is a necessity of Government, and if of a Government, then of Uniformity; for Schism in the Church threatens ruin in the State. The sceptre can never be carried steady, where the Winds of contrary Doctrines blow.  
Mr. strong, in his Sermons called, Two Sticks made one, saith, that The way to Peace and Unity is for men to condescend and yield to Government as far as they lawfully can, even against their own Rights.  
Thus, Instead of murmuring against Moses and Aaron, every Wise and Good man thinks it his Duty to give Thanks for Kings, and for all that are in Authority, 
1 Tim. 2. 1.  that God does incline their Hearts to make Laws to compel men to attend his public Worship. True Loyalty being a part of their Religion, they had rather the Civil Magistrate should drive them out of the Private Conventicle into the public Assemblies, than out of the public Assembly, into the Private Conventicles.  
But we have now more Light than formerly, and the Case( say they) is altered upon that account.  
Suppose we have; if the light we pretend to be Darkness, How great is that Darkness? If our too much Light hath so scattered our sight( as Mr. Reynor in his Apology for Learning, notably observes) That we cannot see our Duty, we have more cause to mourn than to boast. If we are struck blind with Revelations, and become not able to see for Visions, let us beg pity rather than slight Counsel.  
red Mr. Edwards's Epistle to his Gangrena, and he tells you what effects our greater Light hath produced, viz. Our Reformation hath produced Deformation. The Parliament put down Common-Prayer, and the Sectaries Cry down the Scriptures. They laid aside the across in Baptism, and these Baptism itself. The one pulled down the Picture of the Trinity, and the other deny the Doctrine of it. The former were against Pluralities, and the others against Ministers Maintenance.  
And Mr. Case, in his Sermon before the Parliament, tells the World, That the Errors in the Bishop's days were but Tolerabiles Ineptiae compared with the Doctrines of Devils, taught afterwards.  
And, in the Epistle to Mr. Pool's Book against Beedle, we are  told, That Errors formerly walked in the dark, but now they appeared( Cum Privilegio) at Noonday; such is the effect of our new and clearer Light.  
Mr. Baxter in The Defence of his Cure, &c. tells us, That the old Nonconformists were neither Blind nor Temporizers. They saw the danger on both sides as well as we. Our Light is not clearer but less than theirs. We see not further into that Cause than they did. Change of time doth not change the Truth, nor will warrant us to change our Religion unless we resolve to change as often as the Times change. If we red over the Old Nonconformists Books against Separation, we shall find the same Objections answered. Then judge whether their Case and ours was not the same. Indeed the Case of Ministers Conformity is much altered by a new Act, which requires subscribing new things; but that part of the Liturgy, which the People are to join in, is made better and easier, it being amended by change of the Translation, and by some things explained, and some longer Prayers. And thirty years ago there were many bare Reading, no Preaching Ministers for one that there is now. Therefore our Case of Separation being the same with what it was of Old, it pities me to hear many say, we are grown wiser now, and have more Light than they; whereas our Writings show upon the same Subject, that we are far below them. The World knows that the Turn of the Times put most of us into the sudden possession of our Opinions without one half of the Study which Ames, Cartwright, Parker, and others bestowed upon these Points. As for them that say, If Mr. Dod, Hildersham, and Rogers were now alive, they would have been of their Minds, I desire them to prove it, or not affirm it. Did the Old Nonconformists want Light and Heat that could burn at a Stake for their Religion? Thus closely to the Point is Mr. Baxter.  
And Mr. Calamy, likewise, expostulating with Mr. Burton the Independent; Desires to know of him, Whether the old Nonconformists did not understand the Pattern of God's House as well as he; and yet they were against Separation.  
Mr. Paul Baines denied, before the King and Council, his keeping any Conventicle. And  told them. It was only some Private Christians came one Day to his House to be resolved in a Case of Conscience. See his Life.  
Mr. Cotton( on the Canticles pag. 44.) observes, That it's no Impeachment to Christian Liberty to submit to Christian Laws. It's Rebellion makes men say, Let us break their Bands in sunder, and cast away 
●al. 2, 3.  their Cords from us.  
Mr. Ball, I imagine, may charitably be supposed to have had the Spirit of God in as great a measure as any of our Dissenters; yet he declares that He did not approve of the practise of our Modern Independents, who at one Jump, leaped both out of the Surplice and out of the public Assemblies also. See Mr. Newcomen's Irenicum, in the Preface.  
Mr. Greenham( as you may red in his Life) made it his Business to do good and to prevent Schisms, to persuade to Peaceableness and Obedience; and  told Dr. burgess, that He durst not Discourage any from attending upon the public Worship of God to avoid the Ceremonies.  
Mr. Dod, on the Commandements, persuades People to come to Church at the beginning of the public Prayers, performed by the Liturgy; And not the Husband come when the Prayers are half ended, and the Wife when the Prayers are quiter ended. And he advised his own Daughter to take the Sacrament kneeling. As may be seen in the Epistle to Bishop Morton's Book of Episcopacy, written by Sir Henry Telverton.  
But not to give you one Passage for all( further to convince you, that it is not strength of Grace, but Weakness, which is now the Cause of Separation) take this Remarkable one of Mr. Baxter's, which he himself gives you, in his Character of a weak Christian.  
It's certainly( says he) a sign of a Weak Infirm Christian, who is not arrived to a confirmed State of Grace, to cause Discord and Divisions in the Church, and to run into unwarrantable Separations upon every Modal Imperfection; and because his Charity is small he is apt to censure the strong Christian who hath more experience, and to think him unworthy his Communion. He is apt to be unreasonably confident of his own Apprehensions, as if all his Conceptions were certain truth, and thinks all men Ignorant or Ungodly that differ from him, because he hath not impartially and thoroughly studied all that may be said on the other side. The Authority of his chosen Teacher of Sect is greater with him than the Authority of all the Wise and Holy Persons in the World beside. If Discipline be neglected, if Godliness be not promoted, and profaneness be not discouraged, the weak Christian thinks such a Church to be no Church. God hath taught him by Repentance to see the mischiefs of ungodliness, but he wants experience to know the Mischiefs of Church-Divisions. He knows the Evil of Sin, but not the Evil of Schism. Sometimes the Weak Christian will be Orthodox overmuch, and then none will be fit for his Communion that be not of his Opinions in Controverted Droctrinals; such as Predestination, Free-will, The Manner of the Work of Grace, Perseverance, and such like. Sometimes the Weak Christian will be Superstitious over-much, and then none are fit for his Communion that Worship not God in the Method for Circumstantials that he judgeth best; and oftentimes by his peevishness and ignorance he proves a greater hindrance to the Churches Unity, than the Enemies to the Church▪ themselves. He doth not love those healing Books and Sermons, which narrow Differences▪ and tend to Reconcile; but rather such as call aloud for Zeal for this or that controverted Point of Doctrine, or against some Circumstance of Worship or Discipline; and censureth many a Wiser Christian than himself, for many a supposed Sin, which is no Sin, but a Duty. If he hears a hard Name against any Opinion or Way of Worship, he presently takes a Prejudice against it; which prevails more with him than Reason could have done. If a Zealous Preacher do but call an Opinion or practise Antichristian, it's a more effectual terror, than clearer proof. In the Litigious Titles of Pretenders to Supremacy, he is too hasty to interess himself in their Contentions, when the controversy is only amongst States-Men and Lawyers, and belongs not to Religion, yet the Odium shall be cast upon Christianity and Piety.  
The Weak Christian having too little Pat●●nce and too much Passion is easily tempted to break his Bounds, and like Peter to run to his Unauthorized 
Mat. 26. 51,& 52.  Sword, when he should submit to Suffering: So that he is apt to think that lawful which may be necessary to his Preservation; and presently thinks the Church is falling, when human Power is turned against it; and therefore with Uzzah he must put forth his hand to save the Ark, though it cost him his Life.  
Now I cannot imagine( from what this Reverend Man hath here said) How Men, of this Crazy Constitution of Soul and low Stature in Christianity, can pretend to greater Light and more clear Discoveries; as if they were gotten into the Upper Form in the School of Christ, when they know not enough to discover their own Ignorance. So that by this Character of a Weak Christian we may judge of the Vanity of this Objection, in pleading for Separation more now than formerly upon pretence of more Experience, Knowledge, or Light. Such as think they have more Light, let them more diligently make use of it to see their Mistakes, and avoid them by it; and endeavour to walk as Children of that Light, which serves principally 
Eph. 5. 8.  for this very end, to guide our Feet into the Way of Peace. 
Luk. 1. 79.   
Another Objection, here of late, made use of to excuse Separation from the public Worship of God in our Parish Assemblies, is this.  
If( say they) we should now join in Communion with the Church of England, we should seem guilty of apostasy, in building up the things we ourselves once destroyed.  
An Objection this, how contrary to the Opinion and practise of many of your own Teachers, I leave you to judge from the serious perusal of the following Instances. Mr. Baxter in his Defence of his Cure, &c. hath this passage.  
It is not( saith he) here convenient to inquire who hath destroyed Reformation, tho' it be easy to discern it. But this is certain, God hath set up the Government, that is over us, and our Governours take down, by their Laws, that which perhaps we accounted Reformation. This is not our Work, but theirs: They permit us not otherwise publicly to Worship God. And a Man in Goal doth ordinarily join in no public Worship at all: And where Men are in forbidden Assemblies, the fears of some, the passionate Discontents of others, and the disturbance by Soldiers, and Officers do take off much of the Edification, and hinder us from such a frame of Mind as is mnst desirable. To Worship God no where, is to go farther from Reformation, than to Worship him by the liturgy. To do it of choice is one thing, and to do it as a Duty put upon us by God's Providence, and our Governours is another. It is God that hath pulled down our Liberty to serve him otherwise, and we must obey him. It's no faulty Mutability to change our practise, when God by changing our Condition doth change our Duty; no more than it was in Saint Paul, who to the Jews became a Jew, and Circumcised Timothy, and shaved his Head, and became all things to all men. And no more than it was to St. Augustin, who professeth that he would Worship God, as to Forms and Ceremonies, according as the Church did with which he joined wherever he came. It is sinful Pride and Tenderness of our own Honour that makes some men avoid their Duty, because those that are against them take occasion to reproach them, and call them Apostates and Time-Servers. Can these Men suffer Death for their Religion, that cannot bear a little Reproach for it? We must not make such carnal Policies our Guide, as to forbear that which God doth make our Duty.  
This is Mr. Baxter's Sentiment of your Scruple, which his practise seems to countenance as little; when writing his Retractions in these following Words, he declared how little he feared being branded with apostasy, in doing what his Duty obliged him to.  
I repent( saith he) of all that ever I said, wrote, or did since I was born, against the Peace of Church or State; against the King, His Person, or Authority, as supreme in himself, or as Derivative in any of his Officers, or any commissioned by him. I repent that I no more discouraged the Spirit of peevish quarreling with Superiors, and Church-Orders; but rather too much encouraged such, by speaking too sharply against those things which I thought to be Church-Corruptions. I repent that I did not more impartially consult with the best Lawyers that were against the Parliaments Cause— See his Admonition to Bagshaw.  
Mr. Bruning of Ipswich, in that( already quoted) Sermon of his, at the Election of Parliament Men in 1660, was so honest as to aclowledge That the time past had been a time of exquisite Temptation; so that some that belonged to God, and were dear to him, had sadly miscarried in the Simplicity of their hearts, by others more crafty than themselves.  
And Mr. Newcome, in that Loyal Sermon of his, called Usurpation Defeated, and David Restored( preached by him on the public Solemn Day of Thanksgiving, May 24. 1660. in the Collegiate Church of Manchester) thus reflected( and was never yet thought guilty of apostasy) upon the late past Times and Actions: Oh( says he) what Pretences of Religion and Godliness hath there been in the late Mischiefs, that have been perpetrated? Calling upon God; appealing unto God to decide the controversy, nay, perpetrating Villainy upon Impulses pretended from the Spirit of God, Security of Religion, Liberty for Tender Consciences, &c. This hath been cried up, as their Good Old Cause, that had the Blood of Kings and Prophets at the bottom of it, like that Mic. 2. 10, 11. Nay, their Unheard of villainies are made the fulfilling of their Vows: No return for their Deliverances and Victories so proper, as to raise our Foundations, murder our King, pull down the Ministry, &c. as no doubt it was in design, yet all along to advance Religion too.  
Mr. Humphreys did not think himself guilty of apostasy, when he wrote himself A comforming Parishioner, tho he were a Nonconforming Minister.  
It's a good Observation of Mr. Wells in his Practical Sabbatarian, That the Sabbath is not duly sanctified without our Attendance upon God's public Worship. Keeping the Sabbath, and reverencing the Sanctuary, being inseparably conjoined.  
You who are so afraid of apostasy, as you call it, red the Story of Penry, the Separatist( in Mr. Cotton against Williams, pag. 117.) executed in Queen Elizabeths Reign, who at the Place of Execution  told the World, That he had grievously offended the Queens Majesty, and drawn away many of her Loyal Subjects into Separation, from the public Assemblies; and, tho he did see his Error, and begged Pardon, yet, because he could not recall those whom he had lead away, therefore he acknowledgeth, that their Blood might justly be required at his Hands.  
Mr. Fox, who compiled The Book of Martyrs, did not think it apostasy to complain of the factious turbulent Spirits which had possessed the rigid Separatists in his Time; and he saith, They despised him, because he would not rail against Bishops as they did: And therefore, he advised Governours to look narrowly after those Men, whose hypocrisy was more pernicious than that of the Old Monks: For under a Pretence of greater Purity, they will never give over, until they have brought us under a Jewish Slavery— See his Letter in Dr. Fuller's Church History, Lib. 9. p. 106.  
Mr. Brown, from whom the Brownists first took their Name, did not think it apostasy, and a building the things he once destroyed, for to renounce the Principles and practise of Separation, and take a Parsonage called a Church. God in a strange and wise Providence so ordering it, that he, who had utterly renounced all Churches in England, as no Churches, should afterwards accept of one Parish Church among them called a Church. Have not many amongst us, who cry out against apostasy, apostatised from their former Principles, and turned independents; and so built the things they once destroyed, to comply with a politic Interest.  
Honest Mr. Parker, the Old Nonconformist, could say to the last( as may be seen in his Book, called, The profane Schism of the Brownist, Chap. 12.) It grieves me to think that I, who have written so much against the Separatists, should have the Dung of that Sect flung in my Face, which with all my Power I have resisted in the whole Course of my Ministry in England. And tho I think many of them fear God; yet I must apply our Lords Words to them, Father, forgiveM them, for they know not what they do. 
Luk. 23. 24.   
To Conclude, did Dr. Reynolds apostatise, when on his Death-Bed he desired to receive Absolution according to the Liturgy of the Church o● England; and protest●● to Dr. Holland, that he did not argue before King James against the Ceremonies as things unlawful, but only as things Inconvenient?  
Let us therefore follow rather that wholesome Counsel given us by Mr. Pagett in his Arrow against Separation, and endeavour to keep Faith and a good 
1 Tim. 1. 19.  Conscience, and not scar ourselves and others, from Communion with the Church, with fears of apostasy. Let us be afraid rather of falling from the Favour of God, by lapsing into Sin. And as for any Nick-named apostasies let them go.  
Well, But( says the Separatist) we have entered now into a Solemn League and Covenant to endeavour greater Reformation in the Church, and therefore these good men's Arguments against Separation does not reach our Case.  
But did one quarter of those that make this Objection ever take the Covenant? And are you obliged to keep it, who never took it?  
But suppose you did take that Covenant: By what Authority did you make it? No man can bind himself to that which is not in his Power. And an unlawful Oath is better broken than kept. Make a Covenant to Reform your own Lives and your own Families if you please; and keep it when you have done, and you'll do well: But do not think yourself engaged to do your Governours Work.  
There's no Covenant can oblige a man to be so Superstitious, to Judge that to be Sinful which is Lawful: Nor yet to be so Licentious, to Judge that to be Lawful which is Sinful. Wise-men think it as Glorious to become Martyrs for Peace, as Confessors for Truth: And will not suffer the pretence of Purity, to destroy Unity: But can Pray as hearty against Schisms as Heresies, notwithstanding any pretence to the contrary. Instead of making it a Question, Whether we may Lawfully hold Communion with the Parish Assembly, the Question ought to be, Whether we may Lawfully Separate from the public Worship of God, because of some different Circumstantial Modes of Administration. And I would gladly, then know, whether ever any Man took a Covenant not to inform his Understanding in that which is his apparent Duty. Doth the Obligations some Men have taken lay a Restraint upon Mens Judgments, so that they must not examine the Doctrines they hear from their Teachers? When they tell their People such and such Practices symbolise with the Church of Rome, may they not red such Discourses as show how far England's symbolizing with the Church of Rome is just Ground for Separation? If others say kneeling is unlawful at the Sacrament, surely Men are not so tied up by Covenant for Reformation as not to examine whether it be so or no, and to take all for Gospel which some Men deliver. The Bereans were commended 
Acts. 17. 11.  for examining the Doctrines they were taught.  
My Lord Bacon, indeed, tells us of some, in his time, who looked upon it as a tempting of God to red or hear what may be said against their Opinion. I fear we have many such in our times; and at this rate Men may scruple until they come to their Everlasting Rest.  
But I would fain know what sort of Men among us have taken such a Covenant for Reformation, as not to hear and red what may be said against their Opinions, as well as what may be said for them? And did not( I pray) they who took it oblige themselves not only against Sin but schism; and have they not broken the very Letter of it themselves?  
I 'm sure Mr. Watson( in his Anatomy of man's Heart pag. 13.)  told the Parliament that they had done so: And that Men act against God, when they act against that Order and Government which he hath set up in the World, and in the Church. God hath( says he) set up Kings, Nobles and Judges in a Descent, and this makes up the Harmony; and these Powers are of God. Magistracy is the Hedge of a Nation, he that breaks the hedge the Serpent will bite him. Here is just impeachment against the Religious Libertine who Pleads for Liberty of Conscience. Conscience! Must he have his Conscience, who hath sinned away his Conscience? Conscience must have a Rule; It binds only by Virtue of a Precept. Get Conscience better informed: The Conscience of a Sinner is defiled, being defiled may err, and erring may suggest that which is Sinful: There is nothing can bind a Man to sin. Again, pag. 17.' The Hypocrite( says he) is more Zealous against a Ceremony than against a known Sin: And have we not many in our Days Zealous against Popery? If they see a across, tho' in a Coat of Arms, they are much offended; but in the mean time, make no Conscience of other Sins. And( on the Beatitudes) O! how( says he) do heretics destroy the Truth of the Church by Error, and schismatics the Peace of it by Divisions! We have so many several Churches, God may justly unchurch us all, as he did Asta. The Sectary hath Sampson's Foxes United to set the Church on fire.  
To hold Communion( saith Mr. Baxter, being a full Answer to this Objection in his Defence of his Cure, &c.) in the Liturgy ordinarily, where we cannot have better; and extraordinarily where we cannot have better; and extraordinarily where we can have better, is a thing that we are bound to by the Covenant, and not at all bound against: And if there had been any word in it against Communion with the Churches that use the Liturgy, it had been Sin, and against our Duty, and therefore it could not bind. It is commonly agreed that if we vow a thing indifferent, it binds us not when the indifferency ceaseth; which may be by the Magistrates Command, or by another Man's Necessity, or by Change of Cases: else a man might before hand prevent most of the Magistrates Obligations, and his Parents, and Masters too, and escape Obedience, and then say with the Pharisee, it is Corban, or a devoted thing. We ought not to go to the Covenant to know what's our Duty in the Worship of God, but to the Scriptures, and if the Scripture make it not a Duty, the Magistrate's Law will make the doing of it a Sin; And if Scripture make it not a Sin, the Magistrates Command will make it a Duty. But when we know what is Duty or Sin, we may go to our Vowsnext, to prove that it is a double Duty, or an aggravated Sin, but not otherwise. The Covenant or Vow expressly binds us against schism, and the Renunciation of Communion is plain Schism. The Covenant binds us against all that's contrary to the Power of Godliness and sound Doctrine; but the Separation which I pled against, is certainly such. The Covenant binds us to Unity and the nearest uniformity we can attain; but as the World goeth now, this Communion is the nearest, and needful to express our Unity. The Covenant binds us to Reformation according to Gods Word, and the Example of the best Reformed Churches: But to prefer no public Worship or a worse before the Liturgy, is Deformation and profanation. It's greater Reformation to prefer the Liturgy before none, than to prefer extemporary public Worship before the Liturgy. All Reformed Churches in Chrystendom do commonly profess to hold Communion with the English Churches in the Liturgy if they come amongst us where it is used. Therefore it seems to me to be Perjury and Covenant breaking, either to prefer no public Worship before the Liturgy, or to refuse Communion with the Churches that use the Liturgy as a thing merely on that account unlawful.  
Nay, see the same Author's rejoicing for his keeping his own people from taking this Covenant, in his farewell Sermon to them of Kidderminster, lately published. pag. 37.  
Mr. Crofton, who was sent to the Tower for writing in the Defence of the Covenant, yet, confessed that he saw nothing in the Liturgy, but what, with a candid Interpretation, a good Christian might say Amen to.  
The Assembly of Divines, who framed the Covenant( and therefore best understood the extent of its Obligation) were against Separation, except five of them. And in their larger Catachism, they thought fit to prefix the Advice of the Scotish Divines. That at Family Worship care ought to be taken that each Family meet by themselves, lest it tend to the prejudice of the public Ministry, and cause schisms and Separations in the Church.  
Mr. Corbet, in his Plea for Lay Communion, tells the World, That the Covenant or any engagement for Reformation can lay no Obligation to any thing that is not in our Power: And that it obligeth us against Separation and not to it.  
And now let any Separatist but seriously consider, what the Wisest-men of his own Party hath here  told him, And he will sure be ashamed ever to urge his taking the Covenant as a sufficient Plea for his Separation.  
But let such who insist so much upon a Covenant remember that they have taken a sacred Covenant to keep all Gods Commands; one of which is, to obey their Superiors both in Church and State: And their Salvation depends upon it.  
But( still objects, now-a-days, our Separatist) If I comply with the Liturgy at this Time, I should gratify the Papists, and weaken the Protestant Interest, &c.  
This is so far from being true, that the quiter contrary is true: For all the Arguments of Bellarmine never did so much propagate Popery, as Division and Separation hath done. The jesuits stand and clap their Hands to see the peevish Sectary stand out, and oppose the Government for Trifles.  
Mr. Wood, Professor of Divinity at St. Andrews, writing against Lochier, tells the World, That the separating Principle and practise is like to prove of dangerous Consequence to the Church of God, a Disgrace to the Reformation, and will, in time, open a Door to Popery.  
The Learned Mr. Gataker, in his Defence of Bradshaw against can, saith plainly, That the way to prevent Popery, is to abhor Separation from the Parochial Assemblies.  
That Excellent Preacher, Dr. Harris( a Man in great Reputation with our Dissenting Brethren, freely declared, That he conceived the way of gathering Churches into private places, to be very prejudicial to the public Worship of God; and gave this Advice to his Children, to carry themselves dutifully towards Authority; to see God in the Magistrate, and to look upon Order as a precious thing; and neither be Authors, nor Fautors of any, either Faction, or Novelty. See his Life.  
Mr. Hildersham, in his Printed Letter about Communion with the Church of England, written to a Gentlewoman who was sent to Prison, because she would not go to Church; he tells her, That a private Christian may dislike the Corruptions that are in a Church; and may pray, and use all lawful means towards a Reformation; but he ought not to account all the Churches in a Nation as Heathens and Publicans, that is, such as with whom they may not lawfully communicate, and join in the public Service of God. And Mr. Cotton in his Epistle to Mr. Hildersham's Letters upon John, particularly mentions that Letter, and saith, It hath so strongly and clearly convinced the Iniquity of that way of Separation, that I could not( saith he) but aclowledge in it, both the Wisdom of God, and the Weakness of the Separatist's Arguments, who, endeavouring to answer it, hath given himself, and his Cause such a deadly Wound in open View, as neither himself, nor all his Associates can be able to heal.  
Dr. Bates, in his farewell Sermon, presses to Peace and Unity, upon the consideration of the great Improvement the Romanists made of our Animosities and Divisions; they warming themselves at our Flames.  
If ever Popery come into England, it must be at 
Dr. Barlow Bishop of Lincoln.  the Breaches made by Division and Separation( as a Learned Prelate of our Church observes) There is a Necessity of maintaining the present established Religion, in order to the prevention of Popery, whatever idle Men dream to the contrary. red the Discourse, called Foxes and Firebrands, and then let any man be of another Opinion if he can, and keep his Reason at the same time.  
The most Reverend Archbishop Usher( as you may see in his Life) did, the last time he was in London, with great Thoughts of Heart, lament our woeful Divisions and Separations, and the Animosities kindled amongst Christians upon the account of their several Opinions in matters of Religion. And observing how some opposed the public Ministry and Sacraments, and others spread Heresies and Blasphemy, he said, He was confident the Enemy which had sowed these Tares up and down the Nation were Popish Agents, sent out of their Seminaries in sundry Disguises; which, if not suppressed, would Issue in an Inundation of Popery, And accordingly that Passage is observable of monsieur de l' Angle's( Minister of the Protestant Church at Roven in France) in his Book, written in the Year 1660, containing an excellent character of his Majesty, the Present King of England( whom God long Preserve!) Thus concluding, by way of Letter to his Friend. Sir, This Prince is no such Person as the Jesuits report him. For his re-establishment is not a thing they hope for, but fear as a Thunderbolt; because they know, if he be once restored, he will rectify those Disorders those Persons have fomented, who push on the Jesuits Designs, and help them to fish in troubled Waters, as hitherto they have done.  
Nay, It hath constantly been the sense of many other Sagacious and Wise Men, when once they saw Faction to grow bold and sturdy, greatly to fear, that the Protestant Interest would be sadly wounded by it; and they have, as it were by a prophetic Spirit,  told us to this Purpose; that if ever Popery did return into this Nation, it ought to be laid chiefly at the schismatics door. And 'tis a Rule among the Jesuits themselves, Dissensiones errantiumalet, &c. That the dissensions 
Contzen. Politic. l. 2. c. 19.§. 6.  among Protestants do serve the Interest of the Roman Cause. So that this very Objection which the Separatist here uses as an Argument for his Separation, doth fly back into his own face to Upbraid him for it, and persuade him strongly against it.  
Such( I 'm confident) was Mr. Hildersham's Sentiment; who was so far from thinking Communion with our Church an Encouragement to Papists in their Idolatry, that he himself( as some now living can witness) took the Sacrament kneeling. And an Informer once swore, that he saw two of his Congregation who did not Kneel, for which they were Fin●●: From whence it likewise appears, that himself and the rest did Kneel. So necessary do all good men( yea as even our Saviour himself did) think Union, to preserve the Peace and Purity of our Church. Every Kingdom divided against itself, is brought to Desolation and every City or House divided against itself, shall not stand. Mat, 12. 25.  
But notwithstanding all this, I cannot( Objects f●ll the Separatist) hold Communion with Railers and Persecutors; and such Scandalous Persons, as are most, both Ministers and People in the public Assemblies now.  
Are not you one yourself, whilst you say so of others? I 'm sure Dr. Manton in his Sermons on the 119th Psalm, much condemns this Antichristian Spirit, that prevails amongst Protestants, in censuring one another upon the account of different Apprehensions in lesser Matters, when they agree in the Foundation; it being a great fault to cause Factions and Divisions in the Church, and then not endure to hear of it. And, as Mr. Baxter well observes, in his Cure of Church Divisions, pag. 256. Little do many Censorious Separatists, who cry out against a Spirit of Persecution, think that the same Spirit is in themselves. For to think and speak evil of others is Persecution. And do not our Red-hot Sectaries do so, of truly catholic and Sober Christians, who have more latitude than themselves? Calling them Carnal gospelers, Formal Professors, and mere Moral men? Nay, it may be Time-servers, Turn-Coats, Apostates, and what not? Was it not Persecution, when the Separatists made such Work in Cromwel's time? When so many were turned out of the Universities, and out of the Ministry for not engaging? And out of the Magistracy and Corporations because they would not pray for success to their Wars, and give God thanks for their Victories, where the blood of thousands of confessedly Good men was  shed?  
But I pray tell me, what do you call Persecution? I doubt, if the Truth were known, you call Legal Prosecution, Persecution. If you break the Laws, and disturb the Civil Peace, must not the Penalty be exacted, but presently you cry out of Persecution?  
But it may be you think Ministers are Persecutors and Railers, if they in their pulpits condemn Faction in the State, and Schism in the Church. Let me tell you, if they should not do it, they were unfaithful to their Office. For never was there more need of Ministers lifting up their Voices like a Trumpet to show the People their Transgression, upon that account. For we have a Generation of men among us of Antimonarchial and Antiepiscopal Principles, who have declared their Sin as Sodom, and endeavoured if possible to blot out the very Name of Protestant from under Heaven: And like Jews, have made use of such barbarous means to keep out the Romans, which, if God does not wonderfully prevent, will infallibly bring them in. I 'm confident that no Loyal English man, nor true catholic Christian, will be prejudiced at his Minister, and say he's of a Persecuting Spirit, if he exposeth the Pragmatical Republican, and the Schismatical Separatist; That others may hear and fear, and do no more so wickedly.  
Mr. Wilson of Boston could tell his Hearers, that the Cause why God had brought such Dreadful Calamities upon that Country of New-England, was Choraism and Separation.  
Peter Sterry, the Independent, was not afraid to meddle with what, some thought, he had nothing to do with, when he  told the little Parliament, That God's Deliverance of the English Nation from Northern Presbytery, was a greater Deliverance, than that of the Gun-powder Treason from the Roman Papacy.  
Mr. Hearle could discourse of the independency of independent Churches upon Scripture, and it could be taken patiently.  
And Dr. Hill, at St. Paul's,  told them, that Independency was little better than Blasphemy, a Word not fit for Creatures, who are all dependant upon God.  
These Men's Hearers did not run away from them, and call them Tongue-Persecutors. Nay, I'm sure, should but the Nonconforming Ministers own words( in these few Passages which are in these Papers, and in the many more which might, and have elsewhere been referred to) be repeated by any comforming Divines, for their own Opinion, out of the pulpit, they would presently be branded, with( what the first Broachers themselves must not yet be thought deserving of) the Name of Persecutor, Railor, and the like.  
But were our Ministers really such, as their Exclamations falsely represent; yet is even this no sufficient Plea for Separation.  
Mr. Reiner of Lincoln, in his Resolution of that Question, Whether Grace be essentially necessary to a Minister of the Gospel? Answers Negatively, and tells you, that Demas his Ministry was not to be rejected, notwithstanding he had forsaken St. Paul. And 1. He saith, God gives Ministerial abilities to many men( such as Illumination, Utterance and Tongues) to whom he gives not saving Grace. 2. We have Examples of some such, who have been allowed Ministers, and Preachers of God's Word, who had Gifts, but no Grace, as Judas, Demas, and such who Preach Christ out of Envy and Strife, and the Scribes and Pharisees.  
Mr. Perkins, in his Exposition upon Christ's Sermon on the Mount, says, We may lawfully attend upon the Ministry of those men, whose Lives and Conversations are Evil and Offensive, if their Doctrines be sound and Good. For the efficacy of the Word and Sacraments, administered by Man, is not from the Minister but from God. A Letter is not the worse because brought by a Dishonest Carrier.  
Mr. Pemble, in his Discourse on the Nature and Properties of Grace. pag. 125. saith, God sometimes makes use of the common gifts of Unregenerate Men for the good of the Church; as Solomon made use of the canaanites and Strangers in the building of the Temple, &c.  
And Mr. Samuel Hieron, in his Treatise called, The Preachers Plea, saith, That A Minister's Life is no sufficient Argument against his Doctrine, or a just Plea for neglecting his Ministry. Put Case that all Preachers did confute their Sermons with their Evil Lives; and had Esau's Hands with Jacob's Voice; and were like a File, which smooths other things, yet itself remaining rough; this could not make against their Preaching. Is physic and Law the worse, because some men are Lawless and Intemperate?  
Mr. Fenner, in his Sermon, called, Christ's Alarum to drowsy Saints, says, He dare not assert that God cannot make use of an Unregenerate Preacher to Convert Souls. Experience hath found this to be true. Some Godly Souls have confessed this very thing, that such as now they find to be palpably Carnal, have been the Means of their Conversion. God may make the Crowing of a Cock a Means to awaken St. Peter's Conscience.  
Mr. Anthony burgess in his Treatise of Faith and Assurance, pag. 503. saith likewise, That A Corrupt Minister may be used by God for Conversion of Souls.  
And Mr. Baxter  told Bagshaw, That he should not scruple to hold Communion with him notwithstanding he was a Railer, because the Apostle forbids only Civil eating, not Religious. 1 Cor. 5. 11.  
And is it not fit then, every English Man should submit rather to the Laws of his Country which are not contrary to the Laws of God? And are we not commanded to keep the King's Commandment, and that 
Eccl. 8. 2.  in Regard of the Oath of God? Which is not( as Mr. pool hath observed upon this Text, in his late English Annotations) to be understood Universally, as if the King should have commanded them to deny or Blaspheme God, or to Worship Idols, in which Case every Christian man, who reads and believes the Bible, must needs confess that the Israelites especially were obliged to obey God rather than Man, but only of such Commands as are not contrary to the Will of God. Either 1. Because of that Oath which thou hast taken to keep all God's Laws, whereof this of Obedience to Superiors is one. Or 2. Because of that Covenant or Oath of Fealty and Allegiance whereby thou hast engaged thyself to him. Thus he.  
Another Modern Objection that some Men make against Communion with the public Assemblies of the Church of England, as by Law now established, is this:  
The way of Preaching is now quiter altered, and the Doctrines that are generally Preached are very corrupt; either mere Morality, or else thorow-paced Arminianism and contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England.  
This Objection is vain and trifling, and never made but by Persons that never, I'm confident, understood either what Morality or Arminianism means.  
Our Blessed Saviour comprehends the Loving of God with all the Heart, Soul, and Strength, as the substance of the Moral Law. And Wise and Good men, who have thoroughly studied the Arminian Controversies are inclined to think that the Difference is more in Words than Things; and a Man may be a very Pious Christian that practices the Sermon of a Calvinist, or an Arminian, because they agree, if not in their Doctrine, yet in their Application. It is an easier thing to believe in Christ as our Saviour meant it, than to understand the Definition of Faith, as the Schools expound it. Those doctrines are most likely to be true, which most promote the Honour of the Creator and the Diligence of the Creature. There are many Speculative Points controverted amongst Learned Men, of which a Man may believe either Proposition, and yet be a very good Christian. As for Instance. Suppose a Man believe the Predestinarian Doctrine, and that which moves him to it is, because he judgeth Free-grace best celebrated by believing it so irresistible, that to whomsoever it's intended, he will certainly be happy: Or, Suppose a Man questions those Doctirnes, if this be his Reason, because he thinks Divine Goodness most magnified by supposing it so Universal that it will make every man happy, if it be not his own fault.— See Mr. Boyle's seraphic Love. pag. 104.  
He that believes the apostles Creed, and leads his Life answerable thereunto, need not doubt of acceptance with Almighty God through Jesus Christ. The World was never all of one mind, since there was but one Man in it; nor ever will be again, so long as there are two; especially in such Points which are not necessary to Salvation. It's a very great fault, for men to charge the Doctrines they hear, with such odious Consequences which the Preacher never intended. Suppose a Minister Preach up the necessity of Personal Righteousness according to the Doctrine of the Apostle. 1 John 3. 7. He that doth Righteousness is Righteous; why must the Hearer run away and say that he denied the imputed Righteousness of Christ, when he only  told them, that for men to depend upon the imputed Righteousness of Christ, without labouring to be inwardly and really Holy, could never save them? Must not a Minister condemn the Antinomian Doctrine, but presently all the Parish must be  told, he's a Corrupt man; thereby rendering his Ministry ineffectual? I fear this is one of the Temptations of the Devil, to steal away the Good Seed when it is sown.  
Do not all Ministers agree in that great Truth delivered by our Saviour. viz. He that believeth shall be saved, 
Mark 16. 16.  and he that believeth not shall be damned? It may be you take their Doctrines to be different, merely from a different way of expressing themselves: But I would know, whether by the same way of excepting against Ministers Doctrines as unsound, you may not also refuse to hear many Nonconformists; who are called Arminians, Free Willers, and I know not what; who have been abused by some of yourselves, when their Discourses concerning Divine prescience, &c. have not been presently understood? Those are, certainly, the best Principles which regulate Mens Practices; and they are the best men, who live the best Lives, and attribute all that's Good to God, and all that's Evil to Man. Doth your Minister own the merit of Christ in the point of Justification, and the Spirit of Christ in the Work of Sanctification? Do not quarrel with his Doctrine for you know not what, so long as he preacheth up Practical Christianity. Exceeding true is that Saying of Dr. Bolton, in his Arraignment of Error, viz. That A Scrupulous Conscience is not always a sign of a Broken Heart, but sometimes of a Broken Head. Some men do not understand the Doctrine they hear, and then they condemn the Preacher as erroneous. Be convinced that the great Design of Christianity is to make men good, and where it hath not that effect, it matters not much, what Church such a man is of; because a Bad man can be saved in none. Therefore never cry out against Preaching up Morality, until you find People mend their Manners. If Ministers, after the Example of St. John Baptist, call upon their Hearers to endeavour to Reform their Hearts and Lives, presently ignorant prejudicial Hearers cry out against them, that they Preach upon mere Morality. I pray red the Learned Sermons of several Eminent Episcopal Divines, and you will find excellent Discourses upon the Creed as well as upon the Ten Commandments. I fear we may attribute very much of our present Calamities to the Intricate Enthusiastick Comments of many men, who left the plain way of preaching Peace and Purity, and pretended great skill in unclasping the Sealed Book, and casting the Water of the seven Vials, upon whomsoever they were displeased with. Perhaps there are more good Preachers, than Judicious Hearers. We have many in England, who think every Husbandman qualified to Sow the Seed of the Word. And he that can tend Sheep, is abundantly furnished to have the oversight of God's Flock. Such Incompetent Judges are many People, of their Ministers Ability and Learning.  
But that this pretence of the Ministers Preaching Arminian Doctrine may appear but a vain Excuse, I pray consider: You have many public Preachers who never meddle with those Controversies in their Pulpits whatever their Judgments are: But they Prudently keep to Scripture Language, and, as near as may be, to the Terms, in which the Articles of our Church are expressed, on purpose to prevent that Plea for Separation. I am very confident, who ever with an Honest Mind attends the public Prayers and Sermons once a Month for a Year together, will think it his Duty to do it every Sunday. His vain Pretences will then vanish, when he finds the Prayers are so comprehensive, and the Sermons so Practical as generally they are.  
The things Necessary to Salvation are( as one well observes) Plain and Few and easy, not difficult, nor requiring much time to be Learned. As( 1) for Men to profess the Holy Trinity, as the Object of Worship.( 2) The Holy Scriptures, as the Rule of Worship.( 3) A Place of Eternal Blessedness, as the Reward of Worship, and( 4) the most Ancient and best Reformed Church, as the fittest Example of Worship.  
But( still goes on our Modern Separatist to Object) that which, notwithstanding all this, makes me think Communicating with your Church now more doubtful, is, Because our Nonconforming Ministers themselves will not go to Church, whereas formerly they did.  
It's very unreasonable to make the practise of the Nonconforming Ministers a Rule to the People. For it's well known, that one Reason why they are no more seen in the public Churches, is, because the Law permits them not to dwell within five Miles of a Corporation. So that while you are looking for them in our public Assemblies, they perhaps are retired into some obscure Country Village. They are in danger of being imprisoned, if they should be observed there, unless they have taken the Oxford-Oath, which very few have done.  
Besides what signifieth another Man's practise as a Rule to me? The Law of God and the Law of the Land ought to be my Rule, and no Particular Examples if they contradict that. But what if some Rigid Nonconformists will not come at our public Assemblies? Others that are more Moderate and Peaceable will do it, and do do it, especially in the Country, and before the Indulgence came forth: And they thought it their Duty to return to the Communion of the Church again, when that Liberty was prohibited by Authority. And so have many Private Christians, who think themselves bound in Conscience so to do. If Men will follow Examples, they ought to imitate those, who are most Humble and Prudent, rather than those, who are most Hot and Violent.  
Hath not Mr. Baxter, in his Defence of his Care, declared to the World, That he himself goeth to his Parish-Church and takes the Sacrament Kneeling, on purpose to convince People that he doth not think it unlawful so to do? And hath not Mr. Sam. clerk, in his own Life, written by himself, declared that, Although he could not comform as a Minister in the Year 1660. Yet he durst not Separate from the public Assemblies, and gather a Church out of a Church, because he judged the Church of England to be a True Church? And Mr. Pool in his Vox Clamantis in Deserto, advised his Nonconforming Brethren, many Years ago, To do all the good they could within the Compass of the Laws, and to encourage the Honest Conformists and strengthen their Hands.  
And Mr. Ash observed, That if Men deny to hold Communion with such a Church as ours is,( viz. The Church of England) there hath not been a Church in the World this thousand Years with which a Man might lawfully Communicate.  
Mr. Gouge that excellent Man, who went about doing good, and constantly attended the public Worship of God in the Parochial Assemblies,  told his Friends, He thought himself bound in Conscience so to do: And he also caused the Prayers of the Church to be translated into the welsh Language: See Dr. Tillotson's Sermon Preached at his Funeral,  
But it is likewise( I observe) Objected by our Dissenters, that if they should not still attend the Ministry of the Nonconforming Ministers, They must starve for want of Maintenance. They are Poor and Indigent, having lost their Livings, &c.  
A Private good, is not to be preferred before a public; and it is fitter for one man to Perish, than a whole Comonm-wealth. But however, it is evident they are not all so Poor, tho' they have lost their Livings; for many of them can subsist very comfortably without Preaching. And for those that are Poor, tho' the Laws oblige you not to hear them in numerous Auditories, yet they do not forbid your Charity. You may be as kind as you please to them and their Families. If, instead of setting up Separate Congregations, they had continued in Corporations, and not refused to take the Oxford-Oath, but by their Attendance upon the public Worship, and shewed a good Example to their former Hearers, had spent their time in Personal Conferencies and Instructions from House to House( the Law allowing four, besides the Family) they had more promoted the practise of Pieth and encouraged many conformable Persons to have been their Benefactors; by such a Prudent and Peaceable Carriage, which yet I hope is not to late too begin.  
Besides, for your Ministers to continue now their Preaching against Law, to procure a maintenance amongst you, is by no Means double, and consequently upon that account, you ought not to hear and maintain them separating from the Church Assemblies of England.  
It's true, the Apostle saith. He that provides not for his Family is worse than an Infidel: Yet the same Apostle observes, that we ought not to do Evil, that good may come, because the Damnation of such is just. Now tho' it be a Duty to Preach the Gospel, yet it's not the Duty of all Men, at all Times, and in all Places. At the first Plantation of Christianity, and Publishing of the Gospel, the Apostles had an immediate Call from God, and by Virtue of that Patent under the Broad Seal of Heaven had Authority to obey God rather than Man: So that they might well say, Wo to us if we Preach not the Gospel. And certainly when the Conversion of Souls is the chief Motive, it would carry Men into the most Ignorant and Barbarous Parts of the World, to open mens Eyes and turn them from Darkness to Light, and from the Power of Satan unto God, as did the Apostles.  
The Old Nonconformists did all the good they could in a Private Capacity, when they were silenced by the Bishops from preaching publicly. And they thought it their Duty to submit to their Suspensions, so long as their Diocesans did it by the Law of the Land: As Mr. Rathband observes in his grave Admonitions.( a Book written in the name of several of them.)  
And so Old Mr. Parker challenges the World to give an Instance, if they could, of any Unpeaceableness or Obstinacy of any of them; or of any Signs of Pride or Contempt of Authority. Do we( saith he) persuade any man to refuse the Ceremonies for which we suffer? Do we not stretch our Consciences to the utmost to comform? We do not willingly cast off our Ministry: But we submit to the Providence of God who calls us from it. See his Book of the across. Part 2, pag. 34.  
Mr. Geree in his Vindiciae Ecclesiae Anglicanae( the design of which is to show, that tho' there be need of Reformation in, yet not of Separation from the Churches of Christ in England) in the Epistle Dedicated to Learned Mr. Riohard Capel, he saith, That for men to Preach publicly against the Command of Authority, without an immediate Call from God, is a thing which he never thought excusable from Faction: Nor likely to be long tolerated. And he also makes this Observation, That of all the spiritual Converts that are in our Church, it may be truly affirmed, that not one of ten thousand hath been converted by a Separatist, whilst of that Opinion; They more minding the proselyting of the converted to their way, than the converting of the profane to the way of Truth. And concludes, That the Cure of Separation would further Reformation, as much as Reformation weakens Separation.  
Many of the Parliament Preachers, in the Late Times, we find frequently calling upon them to suppress Divisions in Religion, by their Civil Authority; as being the Keepers of Both Tables: And they tell them, The Omission of their Duty in that Particular would render them accessary thereunto. See Mr. Marshall's sermon and others.  
Dr. Seaman tells the Parliament that the Power of Magistrates in Matters of Religion is now struck at. And, saith he, Besides the profane and Scandalous Ministers, there are a new sort arisen amongst us, who thrust themselves into the Lord's Vineyard, and it's no less than Persecution( so they commonly give out( to Desire to have their Suspicious Opinions examined, and they commanded to forbear Publishing them. See his Sermon called the President for Kings and Princes.  
Thanks be to God, our Magistrates do not forbid the Preaching of the Gospel, nor the practisiing of that excellent Part of it, the relieving of the Indigent: They only restrain some particular Persons, whose Principles will not permit them to submit to the public Constitutions, from Preaching, but not from subsisting by your Benevolence. You may maintain them, I hope, without separating from Communion with us to hear them Preach, We having so many and so good Men of unspotted Lives, who Preach sound Doctrine, and are encouraged thereto by our Laws.  
But now the concluding Objection of all, which our Dissenters urge the most vehemently against their Communion with our Church, is this:  
There hath( say they) been so many Books written of late in Defence of Nonconformity, that I cannot be satisfied; but still remain in Doubt, Whether it be lawful to hold Communion with the Parochial Assemblies: I vehemently suspect it to be sinful, and whatsoever is not of Faith is Sin, and therefore there's an end of the controversy.  
There's not an End of the controversy for all that. I pray examine first, whether you do not make use of this Plea merely for a pretence: And in order to your own trial, I'll refer you to one of your own admired Ministers, for Directions how you may know the difference between Wilfulness and Tenderness of Conscience. It is Mr. Jer. Burroughs, in his Irenicum, pag. 36,& 37. If a man( says he) be proud and turbulent in his Carriage, and despise his Betters, and be apt to publish his mistakes, and not humbly and modestly conceal them; It's then a sign the Devil is in his Will, and not in his Conscience, when a man opposeth the Judgments of many more Godly and Learned than himself; and when he neglects the means of better Information, not studying what may be said against his Opinion as well as what may be said for it.  
The Reverend Mr. Bernard, in his counsels of Peace, hath given excellent Rules in Case of a doubting Conscience, and they are these very observable ones which follow. Be sure to maintain and uphold all that is manifestly good in Church or State. If there be manifest Evils, Labour in your Place, by the best means to have them amended in a peaceable way; and bear with lighter faults, for a time, until a fitter occasion be offered to redress them. As for likelihoods of Evil, make them not apparent Evil by ill Interpretation, where neither the State intends it nor maintains it. Take doubtful things ever in the best part. Judiciously distinguish between the abuse of a thing, and the use of it. Make a difference between public Establishments, and Personal Errors of some: Between Substance, and Circumstance: Between sound Doctrine, and bad Application. Again, never presume to Reform others until thou hast Reformed thyself. Do not disobey the evident Command of God, where there is nothing but probability of sinning in obeying the Precept of thy governor. Do not set Opinion before judgement. Set aside Fancy, and do not refuse to obey Authority, where it is not plain that you Sin against God in so doing. Be more afraid of offending a Lawful Magistrate, than many private Persons. Where thou canst not yield, there humbly beg pardon: Where thou canst not be tolerated, be contented with Correction for safety of Conscience: It's not enough, to excuse Obedience, to say it seems to me to be a Sin. I pray how doth it appear to be so? Is it simply so? show me the Prohibition: Or is it Accidentally so? Only in the abuse of it, or through Ignorance of its Lawfulness? Or dost thou only Conjecture it to be so? Consider, none of these things can Discharge from the neglect of a known Duty, as Obedience to Authority is.  
The Rational and Excellently Learned Casuist, Bishop Sanderson, in his Sermon upon that Text, whatsoever 
Rom. 14. 23.  is not of Faith is Sin, tells us to this purpose, that from hence some men take Occasion to tell us, that they cannot go against their own Conscience, for any Magistrates pleasure whatsoever. judge I pray you( saith he) what preverseness is this, when the Blessed Apostle commandeth us to Obey for Conscience 
Rom. 13. 5.  sake, that Men should disobey, and that for Conscience sake too. Thou sayest, It is against thy Conscience. I say in the Case of doubtfulness, it is not against thy Conscience. For doubting properly is, when the Mind is held in suspense between two ways: Uncertain whether of both to take. And in this Case the weight of Authority should cast the Scale: A repugnant Conscience, I confess, is another thing. If the Conscience have already passed a judgement upon a thing, and condemned it as simply Unlawful; In that case a man ought not to obey, although his Conscience hath pronounced a wrong Sentence; and erred in that judgement: Yet he sins in disobeying the Magistrate; from which Sin the following of the judgement of his own Conscience cannot acquit him. Such is the Perplexity men cast themselves into by Error, Ignorance and Obstinacy, that they can neither go with their Consciences, nor against them, but they shall Sin. But you will yet say, It's safer to forbear in a doubtful Case; I say so too: Only let the Case be rightly stated. As for Example: Suppose a man doubt whether it be Lawful to Kneel at the Communion, thou thinkest it safer for thee perhaps not to kneel. So should I too, If thou wert left merely to thine own Liberty. But if Authority Command thee to kneel, which whether it be Lawful for thee to do, or not, thou doubtest; est; thou cannot choose but thou must needs doubt also, whether thou mayest lawfully disobey or not. Now then here apply the Rule( of taking the safer way in a doubtful Case) and see what will come of it. judge, since thou canst not but doubt in both Cases, whether it be not the safer of the two, to obey doubtingly, than to disobey doubtingly. Hold to the certainty, and let the uncertain go. It's certain, thou ought to obey the Magistrate in things not contrary to the Will of God; but whether the thing now commanded is contrary to the Will of God is uncertain to thee, because thou doubtest. Act safely, therefore, and obey.  
And the Reverend Mr. Paul Baines tells us, in the Letter he wrote to his Friend to resolve the doubt concerning kneeling at the Sacrament. If( says he) twenty Scruples should arise in my mind about it, I should yet believe the Gesture Lawful, for the Reasons before name, which you may see in his Book at large.  
Mr. Baxter, likewise, very well observes in his Reasons for the Christian Religion that, A tender Conscience is as tender of being Guilty of Divisions, schism, and Separation, as of Drunkenness, whoredom or any other Enormous Sins.  
So that you may, by this time I doubt not, see hence enough to convince you of the insufficiency of this mighty Objection to excuse your Separation from the Parochial Assemblies of our Church.  
Let not therefore the Pretence of greater Purity, destroy Unity; Nor the tithing of Mint, Anise and Cummin, make us neglect the greater and more weighty Matters of the Law. Let us Labour after those Divine Qualifications which give the Essential form, and Genuine Complexion to Christianity, such as Love and Goodness, Truth and Mercy, Peace and Holiness: And shun those malignant Epidemical Distempers which wound the Vitals of Religion, such as Anger, Wrath, Clamour, Rebellion, Faction and Sedition, &c. And let us remember that all the parts of Instituted Worship, are but designed to bring the Mind and Manners of men into a nearer Correspondence with the Divine likeness; and more exact Resemblance of that Pure and Holy Being who is the Object of our Worship: Vesture, Gesture, Time and Place, Forms of Devotion and Modes of Expression being but the Appendages of Religion, and therefore unbecoming wise and good Men to disturb the Peace of the Church about them, if they do not in all things svit with their private Humours. Let us wisely therefore( to conclude) observe the Apostles most excellent Directions. With all Lowlyness and Meekness, 
Ephes. 4, 2. 3.  with long suffering forbearing one another in Love. Endeavouring to keep the Unity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace.  
FINIS.